Talk:Asian Americans/Archive 2

message: Many other Wikipedia articles state that Asian Americans are one of the most/the most economically well-off racial group in the United States (such as the model minority article). Additionally, the income section of this article does not have a source. Chilledsunshine 03:37, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Average Income discrepancies  

message: I've archived the Talk page - Talk:Asian American/Archive 1.  You can access past discussions on the Archive box at the top right of the page.  Hong Qi Gong 21:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive 

message: I've edited out this line:
Asian women as TV newscasters has reached the point of parody as a character in Family Guy.
I know what the point of that statement is.  It's trying to say that there are a lot of Asian American woman TV newscasters.  But this is possibly inaccurate.  Do we have any studies to show how well Asian American women are represented as TV newscasters?  Without a reliable source, for all we know, they could still be underrepresented.  So the statement above is not appropriate.  Just because the writers of Family Guy chose to parody Asian women as TV newscasters doesn't say anything about how well they are represented as TV newscasters.  Family Guy is an animated TV show.  It's not a reliable source on media representation of Asian Americans.  Hong Qi Gong 19:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asian American women as TV newscasters 

message: Specifically, the first paragraph:
The life expectancy for Asian Americans was 83, compared to 79 in Japan in 1996, and 76 for Americans of European descent. For most diseases and cancers, and indicators such as infant mortality that afflict African American at worse rates than whites, Asians have lower rates. Rates of AIDS were 3 times lower than national average in the 1990s, though they are getting closer to parity. In NYC, no births to babies expose to cocaine were recorded. In Massachusetts, the rate of pregnant smoking was only one-quarter the average. In California, the rate of heart disease was onle one-third average. Infant mortality in CA was only half the average rate. Most health studies simply omit figures on Asians rather than publicize health outcomes that are better for Asians, or state that data is insufficient to establish accurates rates for AIDS, even though Asians are a majority or the 2nd largest minority in some states.
Do we have a source for these statements and numbers?
Hong Qi Gong 19:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additions to Health section 

message: The article needs only one good map and caption.  It now has two maps, and both maps and their captions disagree.  The caption--if used--should match the article, and both captions do not.  I think the map should include all of Asia for reference.  The article already discusses why certain parts of Asia are included in "Asian American" and why other parts are not (although the Middle Eastern section is awaiting rewrite by Technajunky per previous discussion).  It goes back to an earlier discussion of "redefining" Asia on Talk.  The article should not focus only on self-identification as one map definition does.  As I've mentioned previously, the definition of Asian American should consider (1) formal usage; (2) common usage by people who consider themselves to be "Asian American" (aka self-identification); and (3) common usage by "people in general."  
--ishu 17:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. This article needs cleanup... --Lukobe 17:21, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I restored and rewrote the Middle Eastern section and changed the map to the Asia map to illustrate all of Asia.  The article now discusses which parts of Asia are typically included and excluded.  Based on the Asia redefinition talk discussion, it's probably better not to say "Asia really means..." Instead, it's better use the formal geographic definitions as the reference, and then explain what's included/excluded when discussing Asian American.  I think we should drop the other map, but I'm putting it to Talk first. --ishu 03:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maps and captions 

message: I've noticed that this article is very inconsistent in its use of single and double quotes. I'm of the opinion that single quotes are never used unless inside another quotation. I was going to replace all of the single quotes with double quotes, but I have also noticed that many of the quoted words are words used as terms, which should apparently be italicized according to Wiki's format. Does anyone else feel up to determining what's being used as a term and what isn't? I certainly don't.
--Natalie 20:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For what it's worth, I encourage you to clean up what you can.  If nothing else, that'll move this article along.  You may have noticed that use of quotes isn't the only inconsistency.  --ishu 20:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, the quotes aren't the only inconsistency. That's just what I notice  because I'm a copy-editing type of person. So I guess I'll just replace all of the single quotes and leave the whole italicizing thing to someone else.  That said, I also see that there are at least 3 different percentages given for the Asian American population in the US. Yargh. Natalie 21:03, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have just gone through and copy-edited this article. On top of changes to spelling and grammar, I have italicised the first usage of Asian American (other than the bolded one at the beginning) to show the reader that it is a term with a specific meaning. I have then removed all other term-designating things because the capitalisation is enough to tell the reader that we are still talking about the same term. It is actually harder to read if it is italicised or "" all the time. Similarly I have removed the "" for Asian and American as these are like normal adjectives rather than technical terms. In terms of the other instances of "" I have left them there because they are not technical terms as such, which is what would usually get italicised, but they do require emphasis. Also even though Wikipedia does specify using "" for quotes only and using italics for terms, it also often says just go with the original usage and be consistent, which the article now is. I am also removing the copy-edit tag, because in terms of spelling and grammar, etc the article is fine. Other changes necessary come under the heading of clean-up. JenLouise 03:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good edits, Jen. I agree with your thoughts re: italicizing, etc. --Natalie 18:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  copy editing query 

message: I could not find it on dictionary.com, which is the only dictionary I have handy. Anyone mind if I change it to "apolitical nature"? --Natalie 02:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  is "apoliticality" a real word? 

message: Currently, the box on the left is placed in the article. Compare this to the following image from the article UN geoscheme. While one says the region including Russia is called "Northern Asia", the other says it's called "Eastern Europe". Now what's correct? --Abdull 20:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regions box 

message: Too many quotation marks are used here for something that is supposed to be encyclopedic IMO. For instance, "bar" and "nerd" (not to mention the usage of the word nerd here seems completely unnecessary. Any suggestions?
Decafpenguin 08:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  issues with the model minority section 

message: *Who is Larry Chrystal?  A    Google search of Chrystal+(anthropology or anthropologist) turns up no obvious matches, save for this page.
*Several of the footnotes don't seem to be relevant to the sentences.  For example, note 5.
*The section about the census definition essentially says that the census definitions follow self-identification.  This section is convoluted and heavily dependent on Chrystal's work, yet there are no citations.  Can anyone provide citations?
*The last sentence of the first paragraph ("Some people still advocate use of...") is dangerously close to use of weasel words, since the citation provided is a first-person statement ("My racial identity is...") with no attribution to others whatsoever.  
--ishu 21:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formal usage (definitions) 

message: Someone has created an article (poorly written at that) called Asian American culture.  The information contained theirin should be merged with this one and a redirect set up.  If someone involved with this particular wiki-project could see to this, that would be great.  I am not an expert in the area, I just noticed the page while doing some housekeeping.  --Jayron32 04:34, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Asian American culture]] 

message: According to the wiki information, "Asian Americans are extremely well represented in the education sector, especially in the college level with the highest average college graduates at around 52% and the whole Asian people constitutes around 20% of Ivy League colleges."
I'm not so sure if those numbers are accurate.  i believe that actual percentage of Asian Americans with college degrees is between 44 to 48%.  Also, Asians as a whole do not make up 20% of the student population of Ivy League schools.  Unless you count Russians and middle Eastern people in that percentage, I'm very sure that Asians DO NOT represent 20% of Ivy League colleges.
The only Ivy League school that meets and surpasses the 20% threshold is Penn, with approximately 22% of its undergraduates being Asian.  Harvard has 17%, same with Columbia and Cornell.  Yale has approximately 14%, Brown has around 15%, and Princeton and Dartmouth have about 12% Asian population.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by  204.52.215.94 (talk • contribs) 07:15, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Education attainment 

message: From the article:
:Asians continue to be overlooked [...] For example, in the 2006 animated film Cars, a low rider voiced by Hispanic actor and comedian Cheech Marin, but Marin's longtime partner Tommy Chong was not cast in his signature hippie role...
Given that we're talking about a Disney film, do you think that Chong's unabashed love and advocacy of marijuana might have had more to do with it than his ancestry? 209.92.136.131 18:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They hired his partner Cheech Marin, and Filmore was played by the "words you can't say on the radio" guy. --Sugarcaddy 21:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tommy Chong 

message: Is it really necessary to have a reference in the first sentence? And why is this page so long? I think this article needs some chopping. I ain't copyeditin' it till it's had some choppin'. 
On a brief examination, I noticed many paragraphs have this form: X did this. Y did that. Z did this...Rintrah 14:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I think there are definitely people mentioned in this article that could be moved to List of notable Asian Americans instead.  Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:43, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Some concerns I have:
#The introductory section probably should be removed.  The referenced work by Sharon Lee does not provide any evidence for the claim that "non-Asian Americans" equate the term with Chinese and Japanese.  The rest of this section is basically redundant with other parts of this section and article.  
#This section is laden with weasel words such as many and some without any references.  The references tag has been on this section for several months now and no support has been provided.  Statements with weasel words should be rewritten or removed.   
#The section combines self-definition by Asian Americans with usage by non-Asians.  While intertwined, these two usages need to be differentiated.  
I will edit along these lines, but comments and assistance would be welcome.  --ishu 23:12, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Even though Asian American is now a very widely used term in the United States, it is mostly the younger generation of Asian Americans who refer to themselves this way. A simple analogy would be the use of terms Irish American and Italian American. The double allegiance represented in such denominations (Asian and American) was largely discouraged in the early twentieth century. Ford Motor Company, for instance, encouraged all recent immigrants to think of themselves as American and not as Irish American. The American Civil Rights Movement of the 50s and 60s reintroduced the use of such dual-identifier terms of ethnicity. Today, many younger Asian Americans speak of Asian pride. 
The first sentence ("younger generation") and last sentence ("Asian pride") have been unsourced despite a reference template on the entire section for months.  For the "younger generation" statement to be true (as written), two things must be true:  (1) that older generations do not refer to themselves as Asian American and (2) that younger generations do refer to themselves this way.  We can restore the claim with adequate references.  The "Asian pride" statement also is covered in its own section. 
The term double-allegiance is highly misleading, and should be avoided, especially due to the misplaced allegations of disloyalty throughout Asian American history--and immigrant history in general.  This entire section may be appropriate if expanded, but it is redundant as-is, and probably more appropriate for an article-length treatment of its own.  Without enough context, it just doesn't fit here, and it needs a lot more context. --ishu 15:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Some people consider it offensive to label an Asian person with a specific nationality without certainty. For example, labeling someone who looks South Asian as an "Indian" may be offensive to Pakistani Americans and other South Asians who do not consider themselves to be of Indian origin. Likewise, calling an East Asian "Chinese" without knowing his specific national origin can be offensive to Japanese Americans, Korean Americans, and other East Asians who consider themselves ethnically and culturally separate from the Chinese. If one is using racial or ethnic terms, it is more politically correct to use "South Asian," "Southeast Asian," "East Asian," or simply "Asian."
This etiquette lesson is, at best, arguably encyclopedic.  --Ishu 04:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology: Informal usage 

message: Three photos (Wie, Yamaguchi, Kwan) is too many for the size of the section.  Do we have suggestions for which one to keep?  --ishu 21:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: An amalgam of the three (similar to the four pictures in the lead info box) would be nice since each "represents" a different Asian ethnicity.  If any of the three needs to be dropped, however, it should be Wie since she has not achieved a truly 'significant' victory (yet).  Myasuda 02:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If we drop the widths down to 120 px, the result isn't much better (see below).  We shouldn't make the photos smaller.  We need to keep only one with the amount of copy we have. --ishu 04:47, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm fine with either Yamaguchi or Kwan (or no picture).  Yamaguchi has won at all levels in the sport; Kwan has more overall titles.  As far as I'm concerned, they're both reasonable choices.  Anyone else care to voice an opinion?  Myasuda 03:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos in Sports 

message: Wataru Misaka became the first Asian American player in the NBA when he played for the New York Knicks in the 1947–48 season. Misaka also played a key role in the Utah's NCAA and NIT basketball championships in 1944 and 1947.
Asian Americans first made an impact in Olympic sports in the late 1940s and in the 1950s. Korean American Sammy Lee became the first Asian American to earn an Olympic Gold Medal, winning in platform diving in both 1948 and 1952. 
Asian Americans have been prominent in figure skating. Tiffany Chin won the US Championship in 1985. Kristi Yamaguchi won three national championships (one individual, two in pairs), two world titles, and the 1992 Olympic Gold medal. Michelle Kwan has won nine national championships and five world titles, as well as two Olympic medals (silver in 1998, bronze in 2002). 
Norm Chow is the current offensive coordinator for the NFL's Tennessee Titans, after helping lead USC's offense to several NCAA championships. Korean American wide receiver Hines Ward was the MVP of Super Bowl XL while playing for the Pittsburgh Steelers. 
Michael Chang won the French Open in 1989 and was a top-ranked tennis player for most of his career.
</div>
:::I'm fine with either Yamaguchi or Kwan (or no picture).  Yamaguchi has won at all levels in the sport; Kwan has more overall titles.  As far as I'm concerned, they're both reasonable choices.  Anyone else care to voice an opinion?  Myasuda 03:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: In sports

message: I'm not sure what these sections add, or how the existing copy can be expanded.  As I see it, the sections can spin out to encompass all of the various subgroups, or these sections will be a hopeless, misrepresentative aggregation of data on different groups.  I would appreciate comments from others.  --ishu 21:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I say remove both sections.  The first paragraph of crime can be moved to the "Asians as a model minority" section.  Health can be removed altogether. Myasuda 03:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I deleted both sections and reworked the crime stat, but the Model Minority section is a mess, so it didn't fit in well at all.  --ishu 22:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demographics:  Health & Crime 

message: I performed a major restructuring of the Terminology section.  After significant downsizing, the Informal usage section was combined with the rest of the section.  
The Formal usage section needs to be pared as well.  My ultimate goal is to have minimal sub-divisions in the Terminology section--possibly none at all.  I'll confess a fondness for the legal definitions paragraph (long-time editors already know this).  However, it belongs somewhere else--possibly not even in this article.  The Formal usage section should probably be restricted to a discussion of the evolution of the census categories and their effect on government programs, research, and policy development.  That would make a good jumping off point for discussions of the development of communities, I think.  
Input from others is welcome.  --Ishu 05:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Legal definitions of Asian American were developed in several key Supreme Court decisions that pertain to naturalized citizenship. Historically, the Naturalization Act of 1790 restricted naturalized citizenship to "free white persons". In the 1922 case Takao Ozawa v. United States, Mr. Ozawa, an immigrant from Japan, claimed to be eligible for naturalized citizenship on the logic that his skin complexion fit the definition of "white." The decision held that white referred exclusively to Caucasians, and so Japanese were not eligible for naturalized citizenship.Ozawa v. United States, reproduced at findlaw.com The next year, in United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, the court reversed this logic. Mr. Thind argued that South Asians should be eligible for naturalized citizenship because they were considered to be Caucasian, consistent with the Ozawa decision. Thind deployed a reverse logic in Thind, writing that "[I]t may be true that the blond Scandinavian and the brown Hindu have a common ancestor in the dim reaches of antiquity, but the average man knows perfectly well that there are unmistakable and profound differences between them to-day".  This decision interpreted the term white persons in the Naturalization Act to refer only to people of European descent.United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind, reproduced at findlaw.com
--Ishu 15:25, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I consider the major restructuring to be complete.  I'm going to move on to the Asian Americans today section, as it now needs more attention.  --Ishu 04:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology:  Restructuring