Wikipedia

Talk:Asian Americans/Archive 5

< Talk:Asian Americans
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Balisong5 in topic Poverty rate and personal income of Asian-Americans
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7→Archive 10

Ang Lee

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

The article mentions director Ang Lee. Is he Asian-American? I always thought he was just from Taiwan. There is no mention of him living in America or adopting American citizenship? Can someone clarify this?Pwordisony (talk) 20:59, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

May I refer you to the Ang Lee page. It is well cited that he is a naturalized citizen.--207.114.206.48 (talk) 10:58, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I did not know that.Pwordisony (talk) 21:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

I did not know this, either. I had watched his hit movie, Lust, Caution, and I just thought he was born, raised, and still living in Taiwan. ★Dasani★ 21:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Tila Nguyen

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Her US Citizenship/legal residency/US National status has been disputed in the past, and was never verified or cited. Until citable verification can be provided, I request that her image be removed from the info box.--207.114.206.48 (talk) 10:58, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Tila Tequila on the "notable Asian Americans" list, along side soldiers and public servants?

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Tila Tequila is on the list of notable "notable" Asian Americans?! You've gotta be kidding me? Yes, I know that she's notable under Wikipedia guidelines, but, still, it's not appropriate to include her on a list that contains soldiers and public servants. C,mon, people! I know that there are better candidates for that list than Tila Tequila! ask123 (talk) 17:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

If you replace her with another Vietnamese American I have no problem, but the whole idea is that the infobox has proper representation of all Asian American groups. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 02:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The image File:Haing S. Ngor.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:30, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

This article is incomplete

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It makes no mention of economics at all. While asians are the most educated they only make around $50,000 on average. That's higher than the other races but it's still something worth mentioning. 75.6.149.95 (talk) 19:48, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Economics

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I noticed this article does not mention the income of asians at all. I think it's fairly notable to mention how much money all those degrees are worth YVNP (talk) 06:52, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Model Minority Sterotype

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

That whole model minority sterotype doesn't really apply to SouthEast Asians. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.154.59 (talk) 20:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Politics section

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It needs to be completely revised or removed. It's just a section about who Asian Americans tend to vote for based on the results of the last 5 presidential elections. No analysis showing that it's statistically significant, which is extremely doubtful as it is.

It's like collecting data on how many red haired individuals voted for Obama in 2008, and seeing a 58% result, state that redheads as a whole tend to vote democrat. No credible encyclopedia would publish something like that! What a joke of an article!

If a section on politics is to be included, it should be a discussion on political activism, cases and influences by Asian Americans. Things like the Vincent Chin case/resulting political activism, the background behind the achievement of Asian American voting rights etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.121.143.86 (talk) 11:06, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

How is tim lincecum

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Asian? Get some reality. He is white, not Asian. 97.124.255.168 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC).

He is half Filipino.
  • Medina, Jun (16 November 2008). "Fil-Am major league pitcher wins baseball's top award". The Manila Times. The Manila Times Publishing Corp. Retrieved 5 September 2009. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  • Gutierrez, Paul (23 August 2007). "Lincecum played, prayed for Grandpa". Sacramento Bee. Retrieved 5 September 2009. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  • Lopez, Dyna (23 April 2009). "Pacquiao wows fans in Filipino Heritage Night". INQUIRER.net. Retrieved 5 September 2009. (Lincecum is half Filipino and 2008 recipient of the Cy Young award, an annual baseball award given to the best pitcher in the leagues.) {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  • "'Pitcher' Pacquiao creates uproar at Giants game". ABS-CBN Interactive. 22 April 2009. Retrieved 5 September 2009. His catcher was Giants Cy Young Award winner Tim Lincecum, who is half-Filipino. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  • Hayes, A.J. (24 November 2008). "Giant Adds Historical APA Spin to Cy Young Award". AsianWeek. Retrieved 5 September 2009. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
Do I need additional references to support his ethnicity? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:28, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Good enough. I was just asking. Good for me. Happy editing. 97.124.255.168 (talk) 21:22, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Introduction Paragraph

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

A recent IP editor and a new named editor have recently attempted to add Nepalese Americans to the introduction paragraph. Although they fall within the subject of the article they are by no means a sizeable group to be included in the introductory sentance.

As of the 2000 census there are less than 8 thousand Americans of Nepalese ethnicity in the United States. If we are to keep with the previous unwritten consensus that 200,000 persons are the number of persons needed within an ethnicity to be included in the introductory paragraph than Pakistani Americans would be on the bottom end of the cut off per the 2007 ACS estimates (thus why I added Cambodian Americans to the introductory sentence).

If we are to include the Nepalese in the into paragraph then all ethnicities that fall into the Asian American grouping with greater than 7 thousand persons should be included as well. That is not to say that they don't have a place in this article, it's just that they should not be given undue weight given their population size incomparison to the total size of the group. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 12:32, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

A few things.
1. Epicanthic eyelids citations have problems. The Cash & Pruzinsky citation is mis-attributed, since p. 245 of this book is a chapter by Kathleen Kawamura. This sloppiness is reflected in the footnote, as well, since the chapter specifically includes Indians in the definition of 'Asian' (see p. 243), contradicting the footnote. The McFerson citation seems just as sloppy, since p. 223 is a chapter by Christine Iijima-Hall, "African American and Asian women." If nothing else, it would be good if someone with access to a library can check this page and the chapter to see whether similar errors have occurred.
2. I also don't think it's necessary to list so many ethnic groups in the second sentence of the article--especially since the word 'American' is repeated ten times across 40 words in two sentences. I think it's bad writing for one word to make up 25% of the first two sentences when, instead, we can just let Asia stand in at the beginning. In the very next sentence, that's where the article begins to discuss various meanings of 'Asian'. That would also avoid the discussion of which groups and how many to list in the second sentence. Due to time constraints, I'm not going to make any changes, just suggestions. --Ishu (talk) 05:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I've fixed the attribution problem. I agree that this level of detail does not belong in the WP:Lead section. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:15, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I have moved the section that was called into question into the Terminology section, perhaps more of the introduction "section" belongs in there, and the lead be written to give brief pieces of information from through out the article. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:46, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Sikhism removal

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

This question is directed at User:Thegreyanomaly, regarding the following reversion.

If you don't mind me asking, why has the edit by an IP user been reverted which mentions expansion of Sikhism into non-asian american populations, as mentioned in the Sikh article, which is clearly referenced there? Thank you in advance.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I didn't realize that, my bad. It was uncited (on this page) edit made by an IP, so I incorrectly automatically viewed it as vandalism and rolledback it. (Rollback does not allow edit summaries) Thegreyanomaly (talk) 03:24, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Info Box Notables

Latest comment: 14 years ago183 comments15 people in discussion

There have been recent edits, including myself, on whom should be in this box, and how many of each specific ethnic group. Since Asian American is a larger group category rather then the specific ethnic groups that it is composed of, it is my opinion that number of those from each ethnic group be proportionate to the total group population, OR as a compramise, there should only be one person of each ethnic group, as nominated by that ethnic group. Ideas? Comments? Alternative Suggestions? Leave as is?--207.114.206.48 (talk) 06:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

May I suggest we reach consensus on what ethnicities should be included in the infor box rather then the edits wars that we have seen in the past. I propose that the number of individuals from each ethnicity within this overall racial group be fixed to how large their population is. That being said I propose that there be 3 Chinese Americans; 2 each of Filipino and Asian Indian Americans; and 1 each from Vietnamese, Koreans, Japanese American ethnicities. Presently the individuals pictured in the picture box do not best represent the make up of the ethnicities that are within this group as a whole. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Since I am not hearing objections, the following individuals are those whom I believe should be in the info Box:

--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:58, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

New count provided on article, with citation, has adjusted Filipino Americans up to over 3 million, number of pictures to be included accordingly. Roughly 1 per million, round down. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 12:32, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Done --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Bruce Lee

A second attempt by an IP user has attempted to remove Bruce Lee from the InfoBox, giving the reason "Bruce Lee was not even in the list of Chinese American"; this is blattently false. He can be found in the Entertainment section of List of Chinese Americans, furthermore, his picture and name was listed in the Chinese American infobox as recently as 6 July 09 but was removed by another IP user on 25 August 09 without giving a reason for the edit, then replaced by Anna May Wong on 29 August 09.

All this being said, I do not see a reason why Bruce Lee shouldn't be one of the three representatives of the 3.5 million plus Chinese Americans. He is a historic and highly recongnized individual of the Chinese American community. However, if those active editors of the Chinese American article beleive that there is a more representative individual then I don't see why that person cannot replace Bruce Lee. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 11:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Last three IP editors who attempted to remove Bruce Lee are listed as being from Hong Kong, via whois. I understand that Bruce Lee may have some controversy surrounding him, but I have not seen in the edit summaries a sufficient reason to remove him, or a proposal to replace him with another notable Chinese American. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 15:53, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

It's probably the same user. Both IP's geolocate to the same place (Hong Kong) under the same provider, and from experience, these types of situations are usually the same person. Moving on, I have no complaints right now about the infobox. Everything you listed seems reasonable. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 20:32, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The fact that Bruce Lee returned to Hong Kong for good in 1971, and he was classified as Hong Kong people.

That was a good reason for (he wasn’t a Chinese American), although his US citizenship under which he lived for about 12 years only.

Those active editors of the Chinese American article believes that there is a more representative individual, and that was the reason Bruce Lee was replaced by Anna May Wong

His picture and name was only listed in the Asian American infobox as recently as of 31 August 09 by user (RightCowLeftCoast) Realwarrior (talk) 14:26, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

He is both someone from Hong Kong, AND by his residency, citizenship, and final resting place, a Chinese American. There is nothing to say that an individual cannot meet both definitions and be part of both groups. After reading the pertinent talk section of Chinese American article there is only one editor who insist that Bruce Lee cannot be a Chinese American as well as an someone from Hong Kong.
Furthermore if you look at the Bruce Lee talk page, there is an ongoing debate on whether he should be one or the other, so there is still no consensus. References support facts, and facts remain he was born a US Citizen, retained that citizenship, and at age of majority chose to retain it. US Law does not prohibit individuals from carrying dual citizenship. I am not one to argue that he is one or the other but is both, as we can see by the multiple categories Bruce Lee the subject of the article and the picture Realwarrior is debating should be removed. Since consensus in the past has been more for inclusion rather then inclusion of individuals into groups, given the very loose definition used for both Asian and Chinese American, should we not continue to use the more inclusive definitions used? Also, even if the stricter definition limiting Chinese Americans to Citizens only it's been clearly references that he is a Citizen and thus an American.
As for his recent addition to the article; his name has been within it for a considerable amount of time, since May 2006 when he was added by Myasuda, in the arts and entertainment section, but his picture was not. Therefore, he has been included in this article far longer then his picture, so only the picture is a recent addition.
Do we have any reliable sourced references showing him renouncing his American Citizenship?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:36, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the citizenship question, there's no evidence I'm aware of him having renounced or even intending to renounce his US citizenship. In fact, various statements in Linda Lee's biographical The Bruce Lee Story show that Lee and his family had no desire to loosen their connection to the United States. For example, on page 188, Linda states about Bruce "He was happiest when he lived in the Pacific Northwest and we often talked about having a home there in the future." On page 178, one can see that Lee took full advantage of his US Citizenship not long before his death: "Bruce's mother, Grace, came to live in the United States in the early 1970s when Bruce was able to help her enter this country because of his U.S. citizenship." Per pages 178-179, other siblings of Bruce (e.g., Robert, Phoebe, and Agnes) also made the United States their home. Regarding Lee's appropriateness over others in the infobox, I don't have much opinion. — Myasuda (talk) 23:02, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I did some additional re-reading of
  • Lee, Linda (1989). The Bruce Lee Story. Ohara Publications. ISBN 0897501217.
and found some rather definitive quotes that should settle any argument on whether Lee intended to give up his U.S. citizenship (answer: no). On 146, Linda writes "He had visions of leaving Hong Kong and returning to the United States where he could truly carry out his dreams of being an international star and provide better living conditions and educational opportunities for his children." And on page 154, Linda writes (regarding the point in time about three months prior to Bruce's death) "It was about this time that Bruce decided that we would return to live in the United States where life was easier and there were more opportunities. He would return perhaps twice a year to Hong Kong to make a picture because there he would be afforded the added control and freedom necessary to pursue specialized film projects." — Myasuda (talk) 13:29, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Let us not begin edit waring. Let us reach consensus. Let us have a civil conversation regarding this possibly contentious issue.
If we are to replace Bruce Lee in the infobox, rather then having an edit war let us reach a consensus as to whom it shall be, although I am of the opinion he should remain. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:55, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
The notion that Bruce Lee should not be considered an Asian American or Chinese American has been thoroughly discussed and refuted on Talk:Bruce_Lee#Arbitrary_break.
Bruce Lee has long been an icon of Asian Americans and Chinese Americans, as evident in Asian American studies programs and academic and scholarly books and papers. I can cite books, articles, and even plays about the issue. Bruce Lee's own alma mater, the University of Washington, even has a page describing Bruce Lee as an accomplished Asian American alum.
Chan, Jachinson (2001). Chinese American Masculinities: From Fu Manchu to Bruce Lee. Routledge . p. 196. ISBN 081534029X. (google books preview link [1])
University of Washington 100 Alumni of the Century - Alumni from J through O
Asia Pacific Arts, UCLA Asia Institute Choppy Water
AsianWeek - The Voice of Asian America Chinese American Hero: Bruce Lee
US Asians BRUCE LEE A Legend that Never Dies! Shaolin Samurai (talk) 17:40, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
So far the consensus has been for inclusion rather than exclusion. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:38, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Jackie Chan

An IP user has suggested Jackie Chan, but no where his article do I find reference of that individual residing in the United States, other than for travelling for business, or being a US Citizen. Therefore, I have requested a reference supporting the minimum requirement, on the list and on the subjects talk page, for inclusion as an Asian American or Chinese American as set forth by those articles introductions. If such reference is not provided I propose that he is de-listed, and placed on the proper list, and the pertinent category removed. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 16:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Utada

Very well. I'll post my objection here. Hikaru Utada is not a very inspired choice for the infobox, as there are dozens of more appropriate choices. But, better yet, just remove the entry. There are too many infobox entries already. And I don't think using an affirmative action criteria for the population and ordering of the infobox was a very good idea either. — Myasuda (talk) 13:23, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Previously there wasn't an appropriate balance of individuals who were Japanese Americans in the infobox, disproportionate to their total population in comparisan to Asian Americans as a whole. The original edit was an attempt to correct that. Although I am not a supporter of affirmative action in all cases, in this case I thought it was appropriate way of balancing who was in the info box. Another possible solution to the problem is to limit each ethnicity within the Asian American Group only one person.
However, as I said below, if Utada is not to be the representative of Japanese Americans, she should be replaced by another rather than removed all together, with my preference being a female, again as stated below. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:33, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I should first apologize for not participating in the discussion when you first asked for responses regarding the infobox update. In the past, there have been numerous debates / edits to the entries in the infobox and I've always found the end-results to be an acceptable compromise from the different sides. So, I once again ignored the request for input. But having seen the result, I'll mention two issues I have to the new infobox layout.
First, I feel that the tiering in the current infobox layout (grouping distinct ethnicities together by row) overemphasizes the Asian American subgroups. In this article, I'd prefer that Asian Americans present a more "unified" face rather than one that is fragmented by different cultural and ethnic backgrounds. Previous infoboxes mixed up the entries, and I recommend that be done here, even if quotas are retained.
Second, as you might have suspected, I would prefer that entries be based more on merit than population quotas. For example, maybe one entry each from the following categories: Art, Science, Business, Politics, Military, Art, Literature, Cinema / Television. If need be, we can establish a floor to guarantee at least one of the major groups is represented. But I personally wouldn't mind if they were all of one group as long as they were all quality entries.
By the way, I should clarify that my comment above wasn't intended to dismiss Hikaru Utada's international success and popularity. The main objection I have to her entry in the infobox is that her biggest successes appear to have come from her career in Japan and this is why I feel that she is a rather unrepresentative example of an Asian American. — Myasuda (talk) 02:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
I am sorry if it comes off tiered, I didn't mean it to come off that way. However, Asian American isn't an ethnicity in an of itself as much as the "white" grouping isn't an specific ethnicity either, rather it's more of a meta-grouping of several like ethnicities. Therefore each of the ethnicities within this group should be equally, or at least proportionately represented. I too think that all categories of notableness should be represented as well, and did attempt to do so in the edit I had done, while also trying to include historic individuals within the proportional set up that I started with. Yet as I stated before, certain ethnicities were being over represented and politically it was unbalanced for politicians, being more left than right.
As for Utada she isn't as famous in the States, as she is in Japan, but does remain internationally recognizable. As I had said I would be up for her being replaced by another Japanese American. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 12:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

In a recent change by Mysada the image of Hikaru Utada was removed. The reason given for removal was that she was "not an very inspired choice for the infobox". As discussed in the change of those in the infobox, her picture is the sole representative of Japanese Americans based on proportional population. Of those I suggested she is the most internationally recognized Japanese American female due to her status as an entertainer. If she is to be removed, she should be replaced by another Japanese American, and preferably female as the infobox has an imbalance towards men. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Myasuda, you wrote that there are dozens more appropriate choices. Could you list a few that you would consider more appropriate? As RightCowLeftCoast stated, removing Utada would leave no Japanese representation. Japanese Americans still consists of a big part of Asian Americans, population wise and influential wise. So there should at least be one person that is Japanese in the infobox. If you think that there's too many people in this infobox notables entry, try this article English people. If too many people in the infobox is the concern, perhaps limiting the amount of people to 1 per group for the groups currently in the infobox? Or maybe, how about including other smaller groups as well such as Thai Americans or Pakistani Americans as well? Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 01:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
I have no problem with one person from each ethnicity, as well as including smaller population groups, as it would be more inclusive. As Myasuda had said, each notable category should be included as well. Since that would mean only one politician would be included, because it would be bias by only having one party represented, it should be excluded so there is no possibility to claim bias towards one side of the political spectrum or another. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 12:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
This proposal sounds fine. — Myasuda (talk) 13:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

One image per ethnicity proposal

Unless other editors have objection, we shall again reformat the infobox images, but not until there is a consensus on whom and why they should be included. Keeping with the previous discussion it appears that there is a consensus that due to objections of some active editors that the infobox should be reformated,
that in its reformating it should be inclusive rather than exclusive,
that it should not have a political bias one way or another,
that each ethnicity should have one and only one person included,
and that each notable category should be represented within the framework provided in previous clauses.
Does this proposal sound agreeable to everyone?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 10:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

If this is correct, I believe that the ethnicities list in the second demographics paragraph should be those given images

The largest ethnic subgroups are Chinese (3.53 million),[28] Filipinos (3.05 million),[29] Asian Indians (2.77 million),[30] Vietnamese (1.64 million),[31] Koreans (1.56 million),[32] and Japanese (1.22 million).[33] Other sizable groups are Cambodians/Khmers (206,000), Pakistanis (204,000), Laotians (198,000), Hmong (186,000), and Thais (150,000).[27]

Of course I would be up for it being more inclusive if suitable notable representatives with images can be found. These other ethnicities that could be included based on the 2000 census(the last non-estimate figure) are as follows: Bangladeshi (57,412), Bhutanese (212), Indo Chinese (199), Indonesian (63,073), Iwo Jiman (78), Malaysian (18,566), Maldivian (51), Nepalese (9,399), Okinawan (10,599), Singaporean (2,394), Sri Lankan (24,587), Taiwanese (144,795), and other Asians (369,430). --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 12:09, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't have any objections to the criteria listed. I agree that we should also just do the ethnicities that you listed were the largest unless there are any other notable people who people would consider notable. Any more and the infobox would probably be too big. Let me think of some suggestions for people in the meanwhile. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 22:39, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I propose that the order which they are listed are by order of size of population, that we attempt to equalize the male to female ratio. This proposal is in addition to the others I have already proposed.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:00, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Representatives

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Received nominations for all categories except Laotian American female category. Began approval process.

I propose that for Chinese Americans the notable person be Anna May Wong. she was the first notable Asian American actress in motion pictures and the roles she were casted in strongly influenced what later generations thought of Asian American women. She would fill the category of notable Asian American actor/actress. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:00, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I propose that for Filipino American the notable person be Jose Calugas. He is chronologically the third Asian American to be awarded the Medal of Honor, and the first which a picture is available of. He would fill the category of notable Asian American military servicemember. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:00, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I propose that for Indian American the notable person be Kalpana Chawla. She is the second Asian Indian, and the first Asian Indian American to have gone into space. She would fill the category of Notable Asian American Scientist. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:00, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I am seeking proposals for Vietnamese Americans, preferably male; Dat Phan, Cung Lee are possibilities, but I wouldn't endorse either of them. There are also Tran Bich San, Ngô Quang Trưởng, and Nguyễn Ngọc Loan however the two latter fall into the military category and the former is notable, but not someone I woulc endorse as well. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:00, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I suggest that we do not make the "notable representative" suggestions on this page, but rather we let the various ethnic group talk pages come up with their own candidates and vote for them. That is, set up the conversation on Talk:Chinese American, Talk:Korean American, Talk:Filipino American, Talk:Indian American, Talk:Vietnamese American, Talk:Japanese American, etc rather than making your own nominations for the other groups and presuming that editors of these other talk pages also follow Talk:Asian American. Have these groups complete their "votes" on their respective discussion pages rather than carrying the various debates on this page. Only in the unusual situation where no input is provided on one of these other talk pages should we continue the representative discussion here. — Myasuda (talk) 05:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

That's going to take some time, as not all talk pages have active participants, but I get what you are saying and agree that it would a more fair way of doing things. Or rather, we could invite each page's active editors to join our conversation here, so that way conversations about the improvement of this article remains in the appropriate talk page, here.
If this is the case, I will create subsections where each ethnicities representative can be discussed. Also, just a reminder Wikipedia discourges voting, but incourages consensus.
One other thing though, not all active editors of those pages maybe of that ethnicity. Therefore, we cannot, nor should we, limit where people can join discussion as to improvement of the infobox based on someone's ethinicty.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:26, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
The reason for the alternative talk page suggestion was obviously not to restrict participation to a particular ethnicity, but to take the discussion where people would be most engaged in the debate. As you'll recall, the last time you requested infobox input, you received no input here. You can invite others to discuss the matter here, but at the very least you need to actively seek out a wider audience.
In the representative selection, since gender balance is one of the goals, I would suggest that each of the Asian American ethnic groups select one male and one female representative. And then, since other editors don't appear to have the qualms I did about too many entries in the infobox, have each Asian American ethnic group be represented by one male and one female notable. Otherwise, there will be continued debates over which groups are to assume which genders for representation (unless a gender balanced outcome is arrived at naturally). — Myasuda (talk) 11:00, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
I agree on more input, more input is always a good thing. However, you realize that 11 ethnicities (that is Chinese to Thai) with 2 persons each are 22 people in the info box, and wasn't one of your initial worries about having the infobox being overcrowded? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 15:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I personally don't like to see a cluttered up infobox. However, User:Elockid did point out above that the English people infobox has 21 entries so having 22 is not completely out of the question. The rationale for the M/F proposal is to avoid potential problems down the road. Let's assume that gender balance is a tight constraint, since that's one of your proposals. And let's also assume that the consensus picks are chosen independently (that is, a choice for group A is made without any consideration for what group B chooses). Then if, hypothetically, 95% of consensus representatives turn out to be one gender (I doubt it will be skewed so much, but it's possible), by what means is this group going to go about determining which representatives stay and which need to be changed? You're likely setting yourself up for potential conflict, because certain groups may appear to be favored some groups over others by respecting the consensus of some groups and overriding the consensus of others. Selecting a M/F pair for each group avoids this scenario. Alternatively, we can defer this infobox composition issue until after a list of candidates is compiled (but I would still suggest that each group have a male and female candidate to make it easier to establish balance later). — Myasuda (talk) 19:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for providing a clear reason. If we increase the width of the infobox, to allow for say 6 persons a row, it will only need 4 rows, which is a lot, but can be done. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 08:46, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Sounds like good ideas Myasada and RightCowLeftCoast. As a suggestion, when all the people have been decided, would it be a good idea to combine all those pictures into one picture like on English people, with the same pic size of each representative as the pic size of each person on the English people article? (So that it won't be too big). It makes the amount of pictures and stuff less confusing and cluttered when putting it in the article especially for 22 people. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 01:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I see nothing wrong with that suggestion.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:44, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
You don't need to combine the pics into one. Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans have 12 pics, Puerto_Rican military personnel has 20, and none of them combine all the pictures. The advantage not combining the pictures is that you can title each individual pic, and so when you cursor over it you get the title. Also, perhaps more importantly, if you click on an individual pic you get a full res picture.--Work permit (talk) 05:42, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

NOMINATION IS NOW CLOSED. A consensus shall now be built regarding whom shall be in the infobox. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Chinese American representatives proposals
See also: List of Chinese Americans

Place you nominations for Chinese Americans in the infobox here, with a reason why you nominate the individual. We are looking for one male, and one female Chinese American to be included in a compiled image. Nominations will remain open until 9 November 2009.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Comment. May I remind you that we had agreed that no politicians would be nominated. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:57, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm nominating him as a scientist, and I don't think many people regard him as a politician. But whatever. If you want to disregard him because of his current position, feel free. — Myasuda (talk) 02:53, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I understand why he is notable, and he is a good candidate; however, as not to get into a political parity question as well, I will not be supporting him when it comes time to reach consensus on those nominateed under this group. I would also not support Elaine Chao under the same grounds. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 08:13, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Bruce Lee was not a naturalized US citizen. He was a US citizen by birth. — Myasuda (talk) 03:00, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I stand corrected, and shall correct entry. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 08:19, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Minor correction -- youngest male to with the French Open, as Monica Seles was younger. — Myasuda (talk) 03:03, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I stand corrected, and shall correct entry. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 08:19, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Note -- Yang was not an American at the time he received the Nobel Prize (but, of course, he did a lot of first rate work after he naturalized in 1964). — Myasuda (talk) 13:07, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Filipino American representatives proposals
See also: List of Filipino Americans

Place you nominations for Filipino Americans in the infobox here, with a reason why you nominate the individual. We are looking for one male, and one female Filipino American to be included in a compiled image. Nominations will remain open until 9 November 2009.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Asian Indians American representatives proposals
See also: List of Indian Americans

Place you nominations for Asian Indian Americans in the infobox here, with a reason why you nominate the individual. We are looking for one male, and one female Asian Indian American to be included in a compiled image. Nominations will remain open until 9 November 2009.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Would oppose nomination due to individual being a political appointee. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:48, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Individual needs a valid image which can be legally downloaded into wikicommons. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:48, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Vietnamese American representatives proposals
See also: List of Vietnamese Americans

Place you nominations for Vietnamese Americans in the infobox here, with a reason why you nominate the individual. We are looking for one male, and one female Vietnamese American to be included in a compiled image. Nominations will remain open until 9 November 2009.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

  • Nguyễn Ngọc Loan. Former Brigadier General of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam; subject of the prize winning Eddie Adams photo. In many ways he encapsulates the tragic past of the Vietnamese people and their history with the United States. Vilified and hated by some, seen as a professional doing his duty for his country by others, he came to the US by landing a plane on a departing carrier when his efforts to escape the fall of the Republic of Vietnam with his family were rebuked by US officials. Afterwards he attempted to build a new life here in the States, only to have his past haunt him. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:18, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I think other natural-born American of Vietnamese descent is much better since Mr Loan had no much contribute to US after he immigrated.--AM (talk) 12:44, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
I think he's a notable individual, and more contemporary; we'd need a photo, but as a government official, there have to be free images. Here is one. --Ishu
He is a very notable individual; however, we had reached a consensus in the past (see above (last three comments)), that politicians would not be nominated as to keep the infobox politically neutral. As his position was a political appointee, I would not be supporting the nomination. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:00, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Korean American representatives proposals
See also: List of Korean Americans

Place you nominations for Korean Americans in the infobox here, with a reason why you nominate the individual. We are looking for one male, and one female Korean American to be included in a compiled image. Nominations will remain open until 9 November 2009.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Japanese American representatives proposals
See also: List of Japanese Americans

Place you nominations for Japanese Americans in the infobox here, with a reason why you nominate the individual. We are looking for one male, and one female Japanese American to be included in a compiled image. Nominations will remain open until 9 November 2009.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Cambodian/Khmer American representatives proposals
See also: List of Cambodian Americans

Place you nominations for Cambodian/Khmer Americans in the infobox here, with a reason why you nominate the individual. We are looking for one male, and one female Cambodian/Khmer American to be included in a compiled image. Nominations will remain open until 9 November 2009.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Pakistani American representatives proposal
See also: Category:Pakistani Americans

Place you nominations for Pakistani Americans in the infobox here, with a reason why you nominate the individual. We are looking for one male, and one female Pakistani American to be included in a compiled image. Nominations will remain open until 9 November 2009.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

  • Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi, Texas born Pakistani American, received a doctorate in philosophy from Yale, and teaches islam on Peace TV in the United States, and Islam channel internationally. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Asma Gull Hasan, Chicago born Pakistani American, one of three female Pakistani Americans with an available image, seen as controversial due to her opinions on the hijab. Provides a counter to the Saudi Arabian educated Abu Amaar Yasir Qadhi.
  • [M.J. Khan]], M.J. Khan was the first Pakistani-American to be elected to higher office in a major city. He was elected to the Houston City Council and served two full terms. He then ran for City Comptroller narrowly losing in a run-off election. The above choices are little known. Better choices are M.J. Khan or alternatively we Iqbal Theba (currently on Glee) or Kamran Pasha (Sleeper Cell) 98.20.64.51 (talk) 21:40, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Laotian American representatives proposals
See also: List of Laotian Americans

Place you nominations for Laotian Americans in the infobox here, with a reason why you nominate the individual. We are looking for one male, and one female Laotian American to be included in a compiled image. Nominations will remain open until 9 November 2009.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmong American representatives proposals
See also: List of Hmong Americans

Place you nominations for Hmong Americans in the infobox here, with a reason why you nominate the individual. We are looking for one male, and one female Hmong American to be included in a compiled image. Nominations will remain open until 9 November 2009.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Thai American representatives proposals
See also: Category:Thai Americans

Place you nominations for Thai Americans in the infobox here, with a reason why you nominate the individual. We are looking for one male, and one female Thai American to be included in a compiled image. Nominations will remain open until 9 November 2009.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Of course, Woods is a professional golfer -- not a professional tennis player. — Myasuda (talk) 12:56, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Haha, opps, lol, my bad. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:15, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Infobox formating

In anticipation of changing the pictures in the infobox, I have reformatted them to show a better way of formatting. Specifically, scale to a constant HEIGHT rather then a constant WIDTH. For each image in a row, use the same scaling factor of "x##px". Then scale each row so that the width of the row lines up with the others. I just did a rough pass on the existing infobox to demonstrate the effect.--Work permit (talk) 03:05, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

shrink

Best to keep rows the same width, so i undid the shrink--Work permit (talk) 04:25, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

why did you undo the shrink??? South Bay (talk) 04:31, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
To keep the left and right edge of the bottom row lined up with the other rows in the box. It looks haphazard the other way. Did you think it looked better not lined up? I would have added a third picture to that row, but since there is a ongoing debate I didn't think it would be appropriate.--Work permit (talk) 02:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

list

The following list at the The College World Reporter may be a useful starting point for discussion?--Work permit (talk) 23:22, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

InfoBox Political Neutrality

Keeping with previous agreed consensus in regards to political neutralilty, can we agree that politicians and political appointees are not included in the infobox? However, if it the previous consensus is not kept (which is my preference), can we agree that the infobox will at least be politically balanced in regards to politicians and political appointees, as in an equal number from each major party of the U.S., of relatively equal positions? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:21, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Representative approval

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Bruce Lee has been approved as the Chinese American male representative
Anna May Wong has been approved as the Chinese American female representative
Eleanor Mariano has been approved as the Filipino American female representative
A run off shall occur between Jose Calugas and Allan Pineda for the Filipino American male representative
Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar has been approved as the Asian Indian American male representative
Kalpana Chawla has been approved as the Asian Indian American female representative
Seo Jae-pil has been approved as the Korean American male representative
Sarah Chang has been approved as the Korean American female representative
Ellison Onizuka has been approved as the Japanese American male representative
A run off shall occur between Kristi Yamaguchi and Miyoshi Umeki for the Japanese American female representative
Loung Ung has been approved as the Cambodian/Khmer American female representative
Haing S. Ngor has been approved as the Cambodian/Khmer American male representative
Nominations shall be taken for the Pakistani American male representative
Asma Gull Hasan has been approved for the Pakistani American female representative
Nominations shall be taken for the Laotian American female representative
Nominations shall be taken for the Laotian American male representative
Nominations shall be taken for the Hmong American female representative
Vang Pao has been approved as the Hmong American male representative
Areeya Chumsai has been approved as the Thai American female representative
Tiger Woods has been approved as the Thai American male representative <result>

Keeping with similar processes such as coordinator election, we shall bring about consensus about who of the proposed shall be in the infobox.

  • Nomination period: It has past, as it was open for one month from 8 October 2009 until 9 November 2009.
  • Consensus period: Starts immediately and shall last until 4 December 2009.
  • The consensus shall be discovered conducted using simple approval voting. Any editor may show their support for a nominee by placing the following in the appropriate section:
     # '''support''' ~~~~
    Any editor may support as many of the nominees as they wish. The candidate in each section with the highest number of supporters will be chosen, with possible future adjustment to meet political neutrality.

Chinese American male representative

Votes in support of Steven Chu
Votes in support of Bruce Lee
  1. support Work permit (talk) 23:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
  2. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:56, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
  3. support Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 23:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Votes in support of Steve Chen
Votes in support of Michael Chang
Votes in support of Chen Ning Yang
Votes in support of Roger Y. Tsien

Chinese American female representative

Votes in support of Anna May Wong
  1. support Work permit (talk) 23:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
  2. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Filipino American female representative

Votes in support of Natalie Coughlin
Votes in support of Eleanor Mariano
  1. support Myasuda (talk) 00:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
  2. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
  3. support Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 23:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Votes in support of Vanessa Hudgens

Filipino American male representative

Votes in support of Jose Calugas
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Votes in support of Allan Pineda
  1. support Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 23:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Asian Indian American male representative

Votes in support of Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar
  1. support Work permit (talk) 23:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
  2. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:00, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Votes in support of Vinod Khosla
  1. support Work permit (talk) 23:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Votes in support of Kal Penn

Asian Indian American female representative

Votes in support of Kalpana Chawla
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Votes in support of Jhumpa Lahiri
Votes in support of Norah Jones

Korean American male representative

Votes in support of Seo Jae-pil
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Korean American female representative

Votes in support of Margaret Cho
Votes in support of Sarah Chang
  1. support Myasuda (talk) 00:02, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
  2. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Japanese American male representative

Votes in support of Ellison Onizuka
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Japanese American female representative

Votes in support of Kristi Yamaguchi
  1. support Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 23:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Votes in support of Miyoshi Umeki
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Cambodian/Khmer American female representative

Votes in support of Loung Ung
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:09, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Cambodian/Khmer American male representative

Votes in support of Haing S. Ngor
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:11, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Pakistani American male representative

Votes in support of Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhi

Pakistani American female representative

Votes in support of Asma Gull Hasan
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Laotian American male representative

Note: no Laotian American female representative was nominated

Votes in support of Jerry Yang

Hmong American female representative

Votes in support of Brenda Song

Hmong American male representative

Votes in support of Vang Pao
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thai American female representative

Votes in support of Areeya Chumsai
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thai American male representative

Votes in support of Chang and Eng Bunker
Votes in support of Tiger Woods
  1. support Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 23:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Run off representative approval

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the Run off representative approval. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Keeping with similar processes such as coordinator election, we shall bring about consensus about who of the proposed shall be in the infobox. As no consensus was reached in two categories, a run off consensus period shall occur.

  • Consensus period: Starts immediately and shall last until 24 December 2009.
  • The consensus shall be discovered conducted using simple approval voting. Any editor may show their support for a nominee by placing the following in the appropriate section:
     # '''support''' ~~~~
    Any editor may support as many of the nominees as they wish. The candidate in each section with the highest number of supporters will be chosen.

Filipino American male representative

Votes in support of Jose Calugas
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 14:19, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
  2. support Myasuda (talk) 00:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

# support 124.104.35.224 (talk) 03:06, 16 December 2009 (UTC) Blatantly an IP sock of 23prootie. See crossed out vote below
# support 124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:28, 6 December 2009 (UTC) Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

Votes in support of Allan Pineda
  1. support JL 09 q?c 13:03, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
  2. support Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 00:04, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Japanese American female representative

Votes in support of Kristi Yamaguchi
Votes in support of Miyoshi Umeki
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 14:19, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

# support 124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:28, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

Representative approval 1.5

I am sorry, but I completely forgot to add the the Vietnamese Americans to the approval process. I appologize for this action, and therefore am openning up an approval period for the two representative categories.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:14, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Keeping with similar processes such as coordinator election, we shall bring about consensus about who of the proposed shall be in the infobox. As no consensus was reached in two categories, a run off consensus period shall occur.

  • Nomination period: It has past, as it was open for one month from 8 October 2009 until 9 November 2009.
  • Consensus period: Starts immediately and shall last until 25 December 2009.
  • The consensus shall be discovered conducted using simple approval voting. Any editor may show their support for a nominee by placing the following in the appropriate section:
     # '''support''' ~~~~
    Any editor may support as many of the nominees as they wish. The candidate in each section with the highest number of supporters will be chosen.

Vietnamese American male representative

Votes in support of Nguyễn Ngọc Loan

# support 124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:29, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Vietnamese American female representative

Votes in support of Maggie Q

# support 124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:29, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie
# support 124.104.35.224 (talk) 03:05, 16 December 2009 (UTC) Blatant sock of 23prootie. See above comment

Votes in support of Mimi Tran
  1. support RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Representative proposal (2nd round)

Due to lack of support of consensus during the previous consensus period, or lack of nomination all together a new period of time shall be openned up for nomination for those categories that did not already have a nominee, or woes nominiee did not receive support. This new nomination period shall be open immediatly and last until 24 December 2009. If only one individual is nominated in a category, their nomination will stand as having received consensus of active editors and will be approved. If more than one individual is nominated in a category, a consensus period shall be opened for that category. All nominees should be politically neutral as has been previously agreed to.


Nomination(s) for Pakistani American male representative

* Saqib Ali, Maryland politician. --124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:30, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

Please note, that nominations of politicians and political appointees are frowned upon, and there was a previous consensus to that extent. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:02, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination(s) for Laotian American female representative

Nomination(s) for Laotian American male representative

Nomination(s) for Hmong American female representative

Nomination(s) for Taiwanese American female representative

* Elaine Chao, Bush-era cabinet secretary. --124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

Please note, that nominations of politicians and political appointees are frowned upon, and there was a previous consensus to that extent. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:02, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
This category was not agreed to in the past, please open a new discussion, regarding it prior to starting this section. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination(s) for Taiwanese American male representative

* Vanness Wu, International popstar, F4 member. --124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

This category was not agreed to in the past, please open a new discussion, regarding it prior to starting this section. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination(s) for Bengali/Bangladeshi American female representative

* Norah Jones, multi-Grammy-winning jazz musician (no female Bangladeshi-origin available). --124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

This category was not agreed to in the past, please open a new discussion, regarding it prior to starting this section. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

# support 124.104.35.224 (talk) 03:06, 16 December 2009 (UTC) Blatant sock of 23prootie. See above comment

Nomination(s) for Bengali/Bangladeshi American male representative

* Jawed Karim, Co-founder of Youtube. --124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

This category was not agreed to in the past, please open a new discussion, regarding it prior to starting this section. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination(s) for Sri Lankan American female representative

* Thushari Jayasekera, entertainer. --124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

This category was not agreed to in the past, please open a new discussion, regarding it prior to starting this section. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination(s) for Sri Lankan American male representative

* DeLon, Record producer. --124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

This category was not agreed to in the past, please open a new discussion, regarding it prior to starting this section. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination(s) for Indonesian American female representative

* Michelle Branch, Grammy-winning pop singer. --124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

This category was not agreed to in the past, please open a new discussion, regarding it prior to starting this section. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

# support 124.104.35.224 (talk) 03:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC) Blatant sock of 23prootie. See above comment

Nomination(s) for Indonesian American male representative

* Tom Mastny, Baseball player. --124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

This category was not agreed to in the past, please open a new discussion, regarding it prior to starting this section. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination(s) for Tibetan American male representative

* Chögyam Trungpa, Originator of the Shambhala vision. --124.104.34.236 (talk) 22:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Vote crossed out as a duck/sock of 23prootie

This category was not agreed to in the past, please open a new discussion, regarding it prior to starting this section. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Run off representative proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Proposal to include smaller populations in Infobox

In a recent effort by 124.104.34.236 there was an effort to include nominations for ethnicities that did not have a consensus to being represented in the infobox. The previous consensus, which can be found here, and that began this process, was that ethnicities that fall under the Asian American Grouping, with over 150,000 persons counted in the 2000 census will be those represented in the infobox, with one male and one female for each. This did not include Tibetan Americans, Indonesian Americans, Sri Lankan Americans, Bengali/Bangladeshi American, or Taiwanese Americans. The Taiwanese were the closest to meeting the 150 thousand threshold, but did not meet it.

Unless a new consensus is formed to include these smaller populations in the infobox, the previous consensus stands.

I for one am presently OK with the previous consensus, and thus oppose the proposal, and am willing to wait until the 2010 Census results come out to reevaluate inclusion of other ethnicity representatives in the infobox. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I noticed that after the votes are done 21 representatives would be placed in the infobox with 11 males and 10 females. I doubt that is equal so for equality, I request the representatives for the next highest ethnic groups (Indonesian and Bengali, not Taiwanese, which is a Chinese sub-group) be included so that it remains neutral. I propose they be both the male and female representatives for Bengali and the female representative for Indonesian. [2].--124.104.35.224 (talk) 03:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
My opinion is unchanged from 7 December, I would not support the addition of other ethnicities, due to their lack of population. we can reassess things after the 2010 census results come out. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:40, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Then there would be an imbalance of males over females, contrary to the intention of the voting process. It's one guideline against another, either gender equality or the restriction on the number of ethnicities. I propose a middle-ground by adding relatively large ethnicities to balance out the images. There was no discussion when a particular gender outnumbers the other. I seek to remedy that by providing this solution.--124.104.45.106 (talk) 06:22, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Please note:
"I propose that the order which they are listed are by order of size of population, that we attempt to equalize the male to female ratio. This proposal is in addition to the others I have already proposed.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:00, 4 October 2009 (UTC)". When did 10 = 11? --124.104.45.106 (talk) 06:26, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
At present, when all is said and done there does appear to be an imbalance of males over females. That being said what is needed is for the open female slot to be filled by the ethnicity which is suppose to fill it, not the addition of new lower population ethincities. At this time the open female slot is for a Laotian American. There is a need to find a suitable Laotian American female to represent said ethnicity. I so far have been unable to find an image available for a Laotian American female, however if there is a notable Laotian American female (including multiracial females who are part Laotian) then by all means let us know. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 11:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Restart of infobox image discussion

Sorry all that I was gone, half way through the editing process; I had connectivity issues that I have since resolved. I am bringing this back up because Bruce Lee's image was removed once again, a historical issue with this page. Therefore, perhaps we should revisit this issue, and place individuals back in the infobox, as was originally intended. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Gay marriage

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

says Asians were against proposition 8 without any mention % figures, or mention that the data is supplied by an exit poll which isn't official. That and the % difference is within the margin of error. Pattidud (talk) 07:52, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Epicanthic eyefolds citation

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I removed the dubious tag. The source does acknowledge S,SE Asians as Asian, but the way it is written reinforces the stereotype that only people with epicanthic eyefolds are term-able "Asian" Thegreyanomaly (talk) 09:15, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Poverty Rate

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The article states that Asian-Americans have the lowest poverty rate. Yet the second citation used to verify this actually gives hard data to support that non hispanic whites rather than Asians have the lowest poverty rate. I've tried changing the error in the article to reflect what is being verified in the citation only but it continually gets reverted. If only someone else were to read the citation carefully for it's information this would never be an issue. Balisong5 (talk) 06:33, 18 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.67.50.234 (talk)

Re-verified. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 16:59, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

First Asian-American woman in college women's basketball

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The page Teiko Nishi claims that Nishi was the first Asian-American woman to start on an NCAA Division I women's basketball team, the UCLA Bruins in 1985. I have read all the newspaper articles mentioning Nishi I can find via ProQuest, Factiva, Lexis-Nexis, and Newspaper Source. None of them suggest that Nishi was the first Asian-American women's basketball starter. She was the only Asian-American woman playing NCAA ball in California 1987, but that's as close as I can come. I've also searched the NCAA archives, but can find no mention of the first Asian-American starter in women's basketball. If anyone has ideas about who was the first, or how we could find out, could you please comment at Talk:Teiko Nishi? Thanks, Cnilep (talk) 15:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Reversion re definition of "American"

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I'm reverting this edit, which had an edit summary saying, "American is not limited to American citizens Ex: the US census bureau counts citizen and non-citizen Asian as the same group." The United States Census article says that the census counts persons dwelling in U.S. residential structures, including citizens, non-citizen legal residents, non-citizen long-term visitors and illegal immigrants. I don't think that it makes much sense to consider all such persons to be "Americans". Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Maybe, but adding text like: "American, as in Korean-American, is not appropriate for those who are not American citizens" is not appropriate itself as it is personal opinion and POV . The main basis of the article including the section with illegal immigration is with the ethnic group in America not necessarily the ethnic groups in general themselves which is what is linked to now. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 00:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Oldboy is Asian-American?

Latest comment: 14 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

In the "Film" section, it states: "Major films have been based on Asian American novels, such as Jhumpa Lahiri's The Namesake (2007) and Amy Tan's The Joy Luck Club and a Japanese turned Korean movie "Oldboy". Others have been created on stories about Asian American communities."

Is Oldboy based on an Asian-American novel? I thought it was based on a Japanese manga. To avoid conflating Asian-American with simply Asian, any references to Oldboy should be removed, unless I am missing something here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.234.159 (talk) 02:13, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject, but rather a general discussion of improving the article. Western Pines (talk) 02:53, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


That comment was meant to improve the article, not to spark discussion. 98.210.234.159 (talk) 09:58, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Looks like you went ahead and removed the reference to Oldboy from the article . . . which appears to have been an appropriate action. — Myasuda (talk) 14:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Very incorrect header line removed

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I noticed that comment in the header paragraph. It has been around for months; it is extremely exclusionary minimizing Asians to three groups and it was uncited. I removed it and replaced with a cited comment (copied from the terminology section). Thegreyanomaly (talk) 08:49, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Poverty rate and personal income of Asian-Americans

Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I don't know where someone got the idea that Asian-Americans have the lowest poverty rate or the highest personal income. Has anyone cared to read the citation "Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2008"? Seriously, the article makes it clear as day that non-Hispanic Whites have the lowest poverty rate as well as the highest income per capita. So why is it still stated in the entry that Asian-Americans have the lowest poverty rate and highest personal income when the latest research shows that this is not the case. For the integrity of Wikipedia I hope that will get resolved ASAP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Balisong5 (talk • contribs) 03:59, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I've updated some info and cites in the article, including the final paragraph of the lede, and fixed a bunch of dead links. The article needs more work. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill)
  1. ^ United States Department of Justice. "USDOJ: Assistant Attorney General Viet D. Dinh". Retrieved 2004-02-16.
Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Asian_Americans/Archive_5&oldid=1256503930"