In this task, you're given an article, a question which often contains a blank, four options (associated with "A", "B", "C", "D") and the answer to that question. Your task is to classify whether the given answer is correct or not by providing "Yes" or "No", based on the article.

Ex Input:
Article: To Chinese immigrants, in the mid-1800s, California was "The Land of the Golden Mountain." In their homeland they had heard the words, "There's gold in California." They sailed 7,000miles to join the gold rush and strike it rich. Between 1849 and 1882, more than 30,000 Chinese came to California. Most were men. They had been farmers in China. They came here to be miners and laborers. They ended up doing many other jobs, too. Like many other immigrants, they did not plan to stay in America. They came because of their ties to their homeland and their families. They planned to return to China with their fortunes and help their families. Only a few Chinese gold miners struck it rich. Most picked over the areas that had been mined already. But still, white miners _ the Chinese. Slowly, they drove the "yellow peril" from the mining camps. By the end of the 1850s, many Chinese returned home. Those who stayed found other jobs. Few women had come west in the gold rush. The Chinese saw a good business opportunity. They began doing the jobs women would have done. Many became house servants. Many more opened laundries. The Chinese opened restaurants. Chop suey and show mein are popular Chinese-American dishes. The Chinese probably created these dishes to serve to the white miners. Other Chinese became fishermen, farmers, and even cigar makers.
Question: Why did Chinese go to America in the mid-1800s?
Options: (A) Because they could find good jobs there. (B) Because they had found gold there. (C) Because they could open laundries and restaurants there. (D) Because they heard there was gold there.
Asnwer: B

Ex Output:
No

Ex Input:
Article: Ban Fur? Then Why Not Leather? Much to the displeasure of some local businesses, the City Council in West Hollywood, California, voted without opposition last week to ban the sale of fur products. Should laws be involved in this issue? Is it unfair to ban sales of fur, but not sales of leather and hides ? Animals Do Not Have Rights By Tibor R. Machan My view is that animals do not have basic rights. It is a matter of ethics and not of the laws of human societies. If animals had such rights as human beings do, they would have to be held responsible for killing fellow animals in the wild. That way of thinking about animals makes a category mistake. Using animals, including their fur or organs, to improve people's lives is acceptable. A Small Step Against Cruelty By Kate Carter Both fur and leather are the skins of dead animals. Why should we think that the lovable furry ones deserve more of a life than the less pleasing ones? Some say leather is less cruel because it's a byproduct of the meat industry. But this isn't really true. Some cheap leather may be a byproduct of the meat industry, but often it's the other way round. In South Africa, where there is a developing market for ostrich farms, the skins account for roughly 80 percent of the slaughtered birds' value, a mere 20 percent of which comes from the meat. "Who" Are You Wearing? By Marc Bekoff West Hollywood's ban is a move in the right direction. However, we must work to ban the sales of leather and hides, too. Furs come from animals who are attacked to become clothing, while some leather and hides come from slaughterhouse animals. We must remember that when people choose to wear fur, leather and hides, they are wearing formering conscious beings. So it's a matter of who they are wearing, not what they are wearing because these animals must be referred to as who and not what or that.
Question: What is the passage mainly about?
Options: (A) West Hollywood's ban on fur products. (B) Differences between fur and leather sales. (C) The government's role in protecting animals. (D) The ecological imbalance in West Hollywood.
Asnwer: B

Ex Output:
No

Ex Input:
Article: John Blanchard stood up from the bench, straightened his Army uniform, and studied the crowd of people making their way through Grand Central Station. He looked for the girl whose heart he knew, but whose face he didn't, the girl with the rose. His interest in her had begun thirteen months before in a Florida library. Taking a book off the shelf he found himself intrigued, not with the words of the book, but with the notes penciled in the margin. The soft handwriting reflected a thoughtful soul and insightful mind. In the front of the book, he discovered the previous owner's name, Miss Hollis Maynell. With time and effort he located her address. She lived in New York City. He wrote her a letter introducing himself and inviting her to correspond. The next day he was shipped overseas for service in World War II. During the next year and one month the two grew to know each other through the mail. Each letter was a seed falling on a fertile heart. A romance was starting Blanchard requested a photograph, but she refused. She felt that if he really cared, it wouldn't matter what she looked like. When the day finally came for him to return from Europe, they scheduled their first meeting --7:00 PM at the Grand Central Station in New York. "You'll recognize me," she wrote, "by the red rose I'll be wearing on my lapel." So at 7:00 he was in the station looking for a girl whose heart he loved, but whose face he'd never seen. I'll let Mr. Blanchard tell you what happened: A young woman was coming toward me, her figure long and slim. Her blonde hair lay back in curls from her delicate ears; her eyes were blue as flowers. Her lips and chin had a gentle firmness, and in her pale green suit she was like springtime come alive. I stared at her, entirely forgetting to notice that she was not wearing a rose. As I moved, a small, attractive smile curved her lips. "Going my way , sailor?" she murmured. Almost uncontrollably I made one step closer to her, and then I saw Hollis Maynell. She was standing almost directly behind the girl. A woman well past 40, she had graying hair tucked under a worn hat. She was more than plump, her thick-ankled feet thrust into low-heeled shoes. The girl in the green suit was walking quickly away. I felt as though I was split in two, so keen was my desire to follow her, and yet so deep was my longing for the woman whose spirit had truly companioned me and upheld my own. And there she stood. Her pale, plump face was gentle and sensible, her gray eyes had a warm and kindly twinkle. I did not hesitate. My fingers gripped the small worn blue leather copy of the book that was to identify me to her. This would not be love, but it would be something precious, something perhaps even better than love, a friendship for which I had been and must ever be grateful. I squared my shoulders and saluted and held out the book to the woman, even though while I spoke I felt choked by the bitterness of my disappointment. "I'm Lieutenant John Blanchard, and you must be Miss Maynell. I am so glad you could meet me; may I take you to dinner?" The woman's face broadened into a tolerant smile. "I don't know what this is about, son," she answered, "but the young lady in the green suit who just went by, she begged me to wear this rose on my coat. And she said if you were to ask me out to dinner, I should go and tell you that she is waiting for you in the big restaurant across the street. She said it was some kind of test!" It's not difficult to understand and admire Miss Maynell's wisdom. The true nature of a heart is seen in its response to the unattractive. "Tell me whom you love," Houssaye wrote, "And I will tell you who you are. "
Question: How did John Blanchard get to know Miss Hollis Maynell?
Options: (A) They lived in the same city. (B) They were both interested in literature. (C) John knew Hollis's name from a library book. (D) John came across Hollis in a Florida library.
Asnwer: D

Ex Output:
No