Talk:Museum of Chinese in America

Chinese name

Where did the Chinese name come from--what is the source? Badagnani (talk) 18:47, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like somebody just took it from the seal that is shown in the MOCA logo - see bottom of official website[1]. But I found a Chinese-language official form for submitting personal stories and pictures to the museum, and the name is translated as 華美博物館 instead[2]. I'll edit the article. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

• Your argument is flawed. The logo or seal is the official Chinese title of the organization. It was presented in a different type (old seal) style. In the official form you cited shows four places where the official Chinese name (美洲華人博物館) is listed on pages 1 and 3, including "美洲華人博物館(MOCA)" on page 3. Where as "華人美洲博物館" is mentioned on page 2. Only on page 1 that "華美博物館" is used twice in a shortened form . A fair person can conclude that the latter is a short form of the official Chinese name, just like "United States of America" is sometimes shortened to "United States". Additionally, "華美博物館" is the correct name for the museum in Los Angeles, Chinese American Museum (about the Chinese-American people). "華美" doesn't really translate as "Chinese in the Americas", and has the meaning "magnificent; resplendent; gorgeous" per NJStar. But "美洲華人" can be translated to Americas' Chinese or Chinese in Americas or "America" "ethnic Chinese person or people" per NJStar. 71.130.212.213 (talk) 21:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok you are correct. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Connected contributor?

@MOCAPRESS: Are you, in any way, affiliated with the Museum of Chinese in America? If so, I must add the {{Connected contributor}} template to this page and kindly ask you to abide by our conflict of interest guidelines. epicgenius (talk) 21:38, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Museum of Chinese in America. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090116053942/http://carnegie.org/sub/news/anon2005.html to http://carnegie.org/sub/news/anon2005.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:44, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Advertising tag

@Morgan695: Since you put the advertising tag, I was wondering what specific portions of this article may be seen as advertising. I definitely agree some sections have this problem, but not the entire page (for example, the History section is relatively neutral). epicgenius (talk) 23:56, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

The Collections and Legacy Awards Gala sections are the most glaringly obvious examples. The article in general is written in prose more akin to a promotional brochure than an encyclopedia, with multiple passages written in indirect and lofty prose that doesn't actually explain the subject of the article plainly ("the iconic family-owned Asian emporium", "cultural institution that presents the living history", "exhibitions on thematic, historic, and artistic subjects", etc) Morgan695 (talk) 00:32, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Morgan695, thanks, that is very useful. epicgenius (talk) 00:39, 26 January 2020 (UTC)