Talk:Chinese Canadians in British Columbia/Archive 6

comment about Nanaimo's Chinatown
There's far more and far better resources and sources about Nanaimo's Chinatown than Lai and Wilmott; see the Nanaimo Chinatowns Project and note the plural form used in that title; Chinatowns in Nanaimo could warrant an article of its own rather than Chinatowns_in_Canada (where it needs to be added and a template/list for the contents of Category:Historical Chinatowns in British Columbia and Category:Chinatowns in Canada; and see existing wiki-content on Nanaimo; whose content I will quote here to remind of the need to integrate this general CCinBC page with existing content and not POV-fork it with disconnected sources and not lack of context:

"Nanaimo has had a succession of four distinct Chinatowns. The first, founded during the gold rush years of the 1860s, was the third largest in British Columbia. In 1884, because of mounting racial tensions related to the Dunsmuir coal company's hiring of Chinese strikebreakers, the company helped move Chinatown to a location outside city limits.  In 1908, when two Chinese entrepreneurs bought the site and tried to raise rents, in response, and with the help of 4000 shareholders from across Canada, the community combined forces and bought the site for the third Chinatown at a new location, focused on Pine Street.  That third Chinatown, by then mostly derelict, burned down on September 30, 1960.  A fourth Chinatown, also called Lower Chinatown or "new town", boomed for a while in the 1920s on Machleary Street."

the material added to this page on this is from two low-quality sources; sources that give the detail and authenticity required start at  the Bibliography page of the Nanaimo Chinatowns Project website while Wilmott, obscure as he is as far as BC historiography goes (and inaccurate/incomplete in his listings of 20th C Chinatowns in BC per Mission, Lillooet and others), isn't on it.

Instead of adding to this article by the seat of one's pants, extensive research on web sources as to what's out there beyond the narrow lens of POV academicism is needed; and it would help if informative contributions and direction to sources and links were not rejected, or patronizingly commented on about "properly citing them" as a "responsible Wikipedian" etc yada yada. A responsible Wikipedian wouldn't be building an article by note-taking/bulletin-boarding random data trivia without having an idea of the context; and wouldn't be ignoring input and corrections from someone informed on the topic who is a" responsible Wikipedian" who knows the material and where to look for what sources.

Adding to this material from the same old small pack of sources that has produced so much junk/POV "random" points without even knowing the full context because not enough has been read yet by that editor by his (her?) own admission as a "good way to start". No, it's not, and there is existing Wikipedia content and available sources that are out there that the editor in question has not referenced or investigated what their sources are, or what's available online re BC history and society in general far beyond the cloistered purview of "social sciences" academicism that likewise seems disconnected with the broader range of writings on BC history, general and urban and historical and more.

This is becoming an omnibus article; and is out of step with other Chinese Canadian articles in style, sourcing and sophistication.Skookum1 (talk) 17:19, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Nanaimo's Chinatown content has since been split to Chinatowns in Nanaimo and the source portfolio has expanded. It can be further discussed at Talk:Chinatowns in Nanaimo WhisperToMe (talk) 05:40, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Flight information needs to be included in the economy section
The removal of the flight information was inappropriate considering the following factors:
 * Chinese Canadians in British Columbia by necessity also covers Chinese citizens and Hong Kong permanent residents with other citizenships who reside in the province.
 * Mainland Chinese resident in Vancouver do travel back and forth between Vancouver and China.
 * Flights do consider local ethnic groups:
 * Continental Airlines's flight to Lagos: "Delta Air Lines flies daily from its Atlanta hub to Lagos, but Houston's large Nigerian community and energy companies that operate in the African nation have long sought nonstop service from Houston."
 * When Air China began services to Houston - "Consul General Xu emphasized the business ties, saying more Chinese corporations will come to Houston. Xu also said it "means a lot" to the city's growing Chinese-American population."

Replies need to be short and discuss exactly this issue. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:11, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The rationale to remove the flight info would have been correct if this was an ethnic group that was entirely "settled" and no longer had significant contact with the home country. This is not the case for Vancouver's Chinese community. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:12, 15 February 2015 (UTC)


 * "Chinese Canadians in British Columbia by necessity also covers Chinese citizens and Hong Kong permanent residents with other citizenships who reside in the province."


 * Chinese citizens and Hong Kong permanent residents are not Chinese Canadians, unless they hold dual citizenship or have landed immigrant status in Canada. Your rationale claiming that they are not "settled" is very much why the reason for their inclusion that they give means the opposite of what it says.  Your claims that airline service to China are relevant to this article and in need of a large amount of copy is nonsensical; there are transport and economy articles and sections out there on other articles, which no doubt as with all else you have not even bothered to look at.  Trade with China is intrinsic to BC's economy and has been since the mainland colony's founding; and Chinese commerce by citizens and landed immigrants can not be separated from that of the province and city as a whole; your claims otherwise are just more arrogant ignorance on the part of someone asserting a thesis and using articlespace to whiteboard your note-taking on; while rejecting all other input and maintaining very odd rationales for your inclusion of UNDUE and off-topic materials and your ongoing WP:SOAPBOX focussing only on Chinese-flavoured views while being dismissive of all other sources but you own.Skookum1 (talk) 07:54, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Replies, whether short or long, must be rational and not field SYNTH/OR claims about context or conflations of guidelines. You break so many guidelines in the same breath it's...breathtaking, as well as hypocritical given your own claims of original research against me on the grounds that I am simply from the place whose history you are trying to overwrite in your own culture's image and full of the biases and prejudice of same.Skookum1 (talk) 07:54, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

New Westminster's Chinatown integration with existing content and re sources and other articles.
I won't bother fixing the addition of the material on the Chinatown in New West with a few obvious additions (it was the Great Fire of 1898; there is no article as yet that I'm aware of on the Great Fire of New Westminster which is another possible title; Vancouver's Great Fire is on History of Vancouver and the main Vancouver article's History section and the Gastown page. It should really one day have its own article, and New West's Great Fire its own section on the New West page.

Copy-pasting the content of New Westminster, which is long-standing content covered by numerous general books sources; nobody's ever demanded page-cites on that, or on much of what's on the other pages when not provided; it's only this article and its "cousins" where the page-cite issue has been raised so imperiously. All of what's in the following is in general histories of all kinds, in histories of New Westminster and accepted as a given in terms of BC history; much as each mention of the construction of the CPR being completed doesn't need a slurry of cites, never mind page-cites. Between the refs and external links on that article, all that's on it is sourced but without WP:OVERKILL of cluttery-citations, or cite-needed templates; collaborative discussion took place on the talkpage.

"New Westminster's Chinatown was one of the earliest established in the mainland colony and also one the second-largest after Vancouver's became larger; and had been until that time the largest on the mainland following Barkerville's wane as a centre of population.

Originally located along Front Street, it was relocated to an area known as "The Swamp" at the southwest end of downtown, bounded roughly by Royal Avenue, Columbia Street, and 8th and 12th Streets.

The "Swamp" name comes from the area being then boggy ground of low value for the stone and brick buildings of the main part of downtown up Columbia Street to the northeast

Chinatown was destroyed in the Great Fire of 1898 and only partly rebuilt afterwards, with a church and cultural and community events hall the first to be started."

This could be added but I have no cite for it; not a direct one, it's from observations about Vancouver in Peter MacDonald'a Historical Geography of Vancouver as applied to New West; the same applies to the service industry and the mills and waterfronts of Victoria's Chinatown; location was everything.


 *  and also close to the river and the railway and places of work such as the canneries and mills of the waterfront, market gardens along the river and the stores and upscale homes on the hillside above for service employment like houseboys, gardeners, cooks and maids as was also the case with Vancouver's Chinatown when Strathcona and northern Mount Pleasant were first built as the city's first suburbs beyond the Granville townsite (Granville, B.I. = Gastown as surveyed c. 1870) and the CPR townsite; the West End was the other formal suburb, and then Kitsilano, on the west.

Thats' all I'm gonna do for now, rather than fix/expand it myself.

Wikipedia content should be integrated across related/connected articles; there's much in what's in Category:Historical Chinatowns in British Columbia that should have been read before essay note-taking about them here.

This is the City of New Westminster's history overview page; and here is the New West City Archives search page. The many sources/links I came up with after only the first several pages of the BC sources available there have much more. Oh, the other source mentioned that says more about the nature of the New West Chinatown is in a diary-travelogue from c. 1899 (in the Nos Racines/Our Roots website and source-archive, which includes an account of the Great Fire as well as a visit to Chinatown and a wedding, a funeral described in [sympathetic] detail and bios of certain individuals, and the bit that Head Tax payers could leave Canada for up to six months and return; and more.

The city's links and the mosracines.ca site will be added to what's on the New West page in the next few days; and I know on that site there's some in Howay and Scholefield and other online sources beyond nosracines also. it's all there for those who take the time to look; if they knew where to look and listened to the people who do.Skookum1 (talk) 09:44, 15 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Mid-20th Century means what? Lillooet's Chinatown ended  during World War II, though Chinese merchants and families stayed on with many families in teh area having Chinese relations, and not just among the natives there; Mission's was built in the wake of the Great flood of 1894 and lasted until it, too, burned down in 1926.  Penticton's lasted into the 30s, I seem to recall from a visit to the Penticton Museum where there's a large display on it.


 * If something's not in GoogleBooks that's hardly an excuse to not look elsewhere.Skookum1 (talk) 09:52, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

New Westminster as of writing is completely unsourced. An unsourced paragraph isn't likely to be translated or moved. Nos Racines has two books about the Chinese. There is one general short book called "Coming to Gum San", and one book about the Chinese of Ontario, The Chinese of Ontario. There's also "National conference on urban renewal as it affects Chinatown" but that's for Alberta. -- Gum San may have a little bit to add to this article, and there are some general history books related to BC and its communities on there. The quickest way to get relevant content may be to just Google site search. WhisperToMe (talk) 06:57, 19 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Everything that's on New Westmster's Chinatown section is sourced from the cites in "References" and the Ext Links, and also born out by the sites that are easy to find on google for those who bother to look. Most BC articles are not phrase-cited or page-cited but drawn from the references listed on them - and I'm not the only one who wrote and collaborated on such pages, with nobody ever throwing pompous hissy-fits about "verifiability' because they were't WP:OVERKILLed with page-cites.


 * As for your comment that nosracines.ca has only two sources about Chinese, there's a big difference between sources that have "Chinese" in the title and those that have passages and certain chapters about them; I've already provided a few dozen of those, and have pointed you to the travelogue with the intimate details of family life in New West's Chinatown(s), you're just being lazy IMO and looking for yet more reasons to denigrate other content that you didn't even look at until I drew your attention to it.


 * You seem like an amateur as far as knowing how to look around the internet; Google isn't the whole world and doesn't index sites of certain kinds. A google site search also won't work for nosracines.ca, you have to search the site's own search engine and got 7,105 hits for search terms "Chinese, Chinaman, Chinamen, Chinatown", wasn't another field for "China".


 * You should really take the narrow focus lens off and listen to someone who knows his way around the relevant sources better than you do, instead of constantly challenging sources and information like you so passionately and relentlessly do. A mind is like a box, if it's closed, nothing gets put in it, if it's left open, valuable things might find their way into it that were unlooked for.


 * My gleaning of page-cited mentions of "Chinese" from Howay and Scholefield and other nosracines.ca sources is on this page, you seem to have looked at one of them and said you might find it "useful". No doubt it's another isolated comment about "White" bias like your other excerptions from general histories that you have not ever read, and likely never will.Skookum1 (talk) 10:51, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Removed Everything Will Be
Hi. I had attempted to add the documentary Everything Will Be to this article, hoping that it would not be judged too 'random'. Main articles like this should not just be a collection of stuff, we all agree. Skookum's left a note on my User talk page suggesting that the film doesn't necessarily fit, at least not where I'd added it, so I've removed it. It's adequately linked from other articles, anyway. I appreciate that work is underway to make this main article more encyclopedic and adding tangential links doesn't help that process. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:33, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * [first answer, relocated from below by user using same indent]:
 * As I said, it's more than welcome on the Golden Village (Richmond, British Columbia) page and maybe is there already; but in this case a summary of it with a link to it could be used as a footnote to verify for people who've never been to Vancouver who are places like Texas that it really IS a very very very Chinese area; the most Chinese area, of the newcomer sort, in the whole of Canada, to be sure. So for now it could be used as a footnote, until a more direct citations for a description of its Chinese-dominated commerce/society can be found.  Whether that area is the highest percentage of Chinese in Richmond I can't say; I don't go to Ditchland much when I'm in the Lower Mainland and being mostly a maze of suburban subdivisions without local shopping areas, it's hard to say who lives where; I suspect areas west of No. 3 and south of Westminster Highway are likely more Chinese in composition population-wise, and also Bridgeport; where the remaining Anglo-Saxon old-era population remains is a good question; I'd guess older subdivisions as most would be older pre-influx non-Chinese families, or so it would seem from people I know who were from Richmond themselves.Skookum1 (talk) 16:33, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * No, that's fine. It really is about the original Chinatown, not the Golden Village. It has decent number of incoming links. thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:07, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * [second answer, inserted between my first answer with the same indent; effect was to bury mine, and Shawn's answer]
 * Shawn, I believe the end result shouldn't be a "collection of stuff." Now in the beginning I think it's reasonable for in-progress articles to look like a "collection of stuff". What happens is this: When you do more and more research, especially on a big topic like this, everything naturally ties in together and things that seem random in fact no longer are. If you have a one liner about a certain thing that seems random, if you do more research you'll get another source explaining its significance/purpose/role in things.
 * Honestly I think it's a good thing for beginning articles to look like a "collection of stuff" because it tells other editors that these may be key words/people/organizations/phrases that will show up again and again. Also people need to be careful to ensure content is reflected by the sources they use. When they start off with a few sources, you will get stray sentences of "random" facts that turn out not to be random later.
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 06:56, 15 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Indeed they don't when it turns out they're already in the article and in other articles that you don't seem to have read at all that have better detail and are more well-known in the field of BC and Canadian history than nearly anything you've done; the Nootka Sound matter is now in the article in three places - one of them being your crib from that book on the "Coolie Trade". They weren't coolies, they were master carpenters as more than one mainstream source explains; some are on Nootka Crisis, with or without page-cites I don't know; User:Pfly (who's from Seattle but not taking part in Wikipedia anymore, though we're in touch in the "real" part of the web outside of Wikipedia) did a lot of that, and has many books on the subject.


 * Your excuses for writing this "new" article (on a very complex and large subject already covered by a number of other Wikipedia articles, and with better sourcing too) as you go. Justifying random points that will tie together later once "everything naturally ties together...if you do more research explaining its significance/purpose/role in things'' is another demonstration that you didn't read through the many articles in Wikipedia on Chinese history and biographies and more in Wikipedia; the Head Tax article, the History of Chinese immigration in Canada, the gold rush articles, bios like Alexander Won Cumyow and David Lam and so on.


 * Wikipedia coverage of the field was already large before your started compiling allegedly-random points like a bulletin board in your office; I say allegedly because they're not random; they're consistently biased agenda-driven sources, or when not, formed of selected bits of works like Berton and now Morton to "fit" the bias you are regularly indulging in. But that's note-taking in public, and not readable or even coherent - and very badly written in terms of English composition; about which more I won't say but have fixed some so far, and made notes on this talkpage of others that I will move into the text in a further edit after more grammar fixes and rendering your stilted composition into readable, natural English.


 * And there have been some incredibly bad gaffes like Victoria Island instead of Vancouver Island or identifying a Vancouver councillor as the first Chinese American in the city government; as if there weren't Chinese women in the city's bureaucracy or workforce by that time. If those faults are not your own but what's in your sources, it speaks all the more to the problems with your type of sources; those are both common American mistakes, as with Native American instead of First Nations (the current "proper" usage btw is not to use that essentially racial though legal term but use the actual name of the people mentioned e.g. Snuneymuxw, Tshilqot'in, Haida, Nlaka'pamux and so on).  Noting in respect to that re the "Asian Indians" matter, you used an American source by non-Canadians to justify, or seek to, an overturning of Canadian English norms.


 * It seems you have done so here with the Victoria Island and Chinese American gaffes, and likely there's more; I've only just begun weeding your "random note-taking that may one day make sense when I learn a lot more and have read more sources" [paraphrase] ethnopolitical manifesto, written in isolation from extant Wikipedia content; POV-fork ESSAYism built by admission as "random note-taking that may one day make sense". While, at the same time, disabusing and patronizing and making AGF demands of, and also seeking official allies against me efforts to inform the discussion with more sources and facts; all of which you continue to seek to challenge and discredit and find hurdles to require the one person on Wikipedia who knows a lot about the books and sources you should be reading, and has also helped and/or started a great deal of the articles named above, and adding Chinese history to local articles on a regular basis because of its importance in BC history.  Above you say you have a lot more sources to learn from; yet you reject me as a source of informed direction on that; if you're so interested in the subject you should have welcomed me and collaborated with me, not made my life difficult and also kept my energies from time to fix your "random note-talking" goodness; no, it's not goodness, and in spots is atrociously bad in grammar and composition and includes one-line WP:DUHs like "The Victoria Chinatown is in Chinatown".


 * The Canadian usage, by the way, as corrected by me "Victoria's Chinatown"; that's not the only example of "bald redundancy" I've seen; you did the same with Vancouver's Chinatown - I don't know where you got the idea to contrive that instead of the more natural "The Chinatown in Victoria" or "Victoria's Chinatown".


 * there's a lot to go, including all the repetitive material already in the narrative; some of this is because some of it was already there when I transferred the lede/background/opening from the History of Chinese immigration in Canada article, but much seems to be in the new massive stream of content you added since the New Year.


 * Using article-space to draft an article so randomly when you haven't even researched existing Wikipedia coverage of the subject that already exists when if anything you should be sandboxing this and, on such a major topic, using an Articles for Creation procedure to enlist support and help in writing it. NOT rejecting another experienced Wikipedian from the region who's worked on nearly all other related articles in Wikipedia from the start and knows the field, and what's alreaduy on Wikipedia about British Columbia and Chinese history in Columbia, and more and more now on mining content related to the Chinese (I edit mining articles also, especially famous historical ones, many of which involved Chinese companies; and keep an eye on the newer mines owned by China or Chinese investors).


 * I have moved my original post above yours and corrected the indenting, as your post came after mine but was inserted out of chronological sequence - using the same indenting so as to bury the presence of my reply. That's against guidelines but I won't pursue procedural claims against you, but doesn't seem accidental given all I've experienced thus far.  Butting in - cutting me off and getting in front of me - is what that amounts to, no further comment; if it's a mistake fine, but if you're No. 34 on the world Wikipedians list you should know a lot better by now.


 * You can also learn a lot from me by watching the improvements I make to your clunky style and "bald" composition style - the result of your random note-taking in public - while also incorporating your sources into the existing narrative which is in proper historical narrative style; not a collection of data points strung together in "A is B because N said X in his Q" style, on a very driven, single-minded pejorative and ethnocentric theme, but readable natural English with the full context of the pointillisms you are throwing up against your wiki-dartboard.


 * Familiarize yourself with all other articles to do with the Chinese and their history in BC, and also the general history and geography of the province before you presume to say that you are adding what you see as useful tidbits in trivia form while you learn what they all mean. Others do, and they and I wrote a lot of other articles directly about all this, which you are presenting in a decidedly POV and POV-fork essay without regard to other articles, or to the individual who could help you learn about what you claim you want to know; if it's so important to you, start kissing up to me as much as you have to the authority figures you have sought help and support from - because you just don't like the facts you're hearing, don't want to believe someone trying to help you with useful information and sources, and are ignoring the cites I have provided on this page and researching other material than is on GoogleBooks.  Is that the only place you look, and university theses and journals indexes??  There's lots on-line; again you don't even know what resources they're are, and have been fighting off and insulting and seeking others to harass the one person who knows where they all are.


 * There are none so blind as those who will not see. Or hear, or think.Skookum1 (talk) 08:43, 15 February 2015 (UTC)


 * "Victoria Island" was a mistake on my end, not from the source. I do appreciate the correction of that. Re: "The Victoria Chinatown is in Victoria" (corrected) it's only written that way so I can link to Victoria Chinatown and Victoria in two separate bluelinks. Honestly that and a lot of stylistic points you bring up above are minor and are trivial issues. The writing can always be polished later.
 * I think you need to refer back to the discussion with Viriditas and think about what he said.
 * People will be receptive to advice if they feel welcomed and encouraged. As for... "yet you reject me as a source of informed direction on that; "I can't - It doesn't work that way. While we have our own knowledge it needs to be supported by published sources.
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 09:19, 15 February 2015 (UTC)


 * My "own knowledge DOES come from published sources, and not just all those sources you have sought to argue away, against what the NPOV policy says about such exclusions re biased sources and biased content; but also years of familiarity with media coverage; that you would say this AGAIN is just more Against-Good-Faith posturing on your part to preserve your POV agenda here, which is blatant, as is your cherry-picking of tidbits supporting your SYNTH/POV thesis; I've said this before, but it has never been listened to, rather the AGF has been thrown up as if valid, implying that the sources and content I raise are not to be believed, or that they are "only" my "own knowledge". My own knowledge comes from broad as well as deep experience with sources and media; which you have precious little of outside your own choice of sources....biased and often incredibly obscure as they are (grad theses etc) while disdaining local histories and websites and other histories and articles simply because they're local''; and/or not written on the same ethnopolitical agenda/beliefs that your work so obviously is.Skookum1 (talk) 09:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

more research out there on "First Nations policies against the Chinese"
Got this from Tom Swanky, the Victoria historian whose book on the Great Smallpox of 1862 implicates it as an act of deliberate genocide and is the guy who led the charge on the apology for t he Tsilhqot'in Chiefs being hung in the Chilcotin War...he's doing a follow-up on the nuxalk and another on the Comox

_____________

I've come across a ton of stuff on Chinese in the Interior during my research but have not compiled it systematically. Someone contacted me who was doing a book about Chinese along the Cariboo Wagon Road.

There was something of a war between chinese miners and the St'at'imc at Fountain.

And in the second Chilcotn War, which began after the Colony broke the treaty of 1872, included Chief Nemiah killing Chinese miners and being sentenced to death for it. Though the sentence was reduced to life eventually. it was around that time t hat Hunter Jack drove them off of Tyaughton Creek, the headwaters of which verge on Nemiah territory... (same bad that Klatsassine was from)..... "Fountain" may mean Lower Fountain i.e. the Bridge River Rapids; and the chief of the Bridge River Band was controlling hydraulic mining on that river...though that conflict could have had to do with a Chinese flume built from the Fountain Valley to benches opposite Lillooet what First Nations policies were there against Chinese? The death penalty, that's what for disturbing stream beds...(or in the case of the "Fountain war", if it was about the flume which transits the area of the Fountain FN village, about trespassing on native lands).

The previous mention of Chinese being run off streambeds by natives is in Irene Edwards' books; it may refer to the Fountain "war" and seems to have been before the Cayoosh Gold Rush which was years later.

Why all this isn't in the confabulist analyses put forward by academics in their quest to indict "white" British Columbia and paint Chinese as innocent of any wrongdoing is a good question, but I'm not expecting a [rational] answer.Skookum1 (talk) 04:20, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

transferred inline comments re POV/SYNTH, sloppy/inaccurate sources and comments on missing context
In the course of fixing the awkward and often not-grammaticalwriting of the mass of confused, disordered information that was dumped on this page while the war to exclude sources that do not concur with the claims of the "scholarly" sources this page was largely built from, I made a large number of inline comments which I am now transferring here, along with the passages that prompted them. Some may repeat others already transferred and commented upon in sections above.


 * ''During the gold rush, settlements of Chinese grew in Victoria and New Westminster and the "capital of the Cariboo" Barkerville and numerous other towns.
 * "and Vancouver" was taken out as Vancouver wasn't yet established


 * ''It is unclear what became of them but likely that some returned to China while others were put to work in a nearby mine
 * pure speculation by an author in a field not connected to BC history; there are countless in-the-field cites about these events and some are already in use on other pages


 * ''The next year, Meares had another 70 Chinese craftsmen brought from Canton but, shortly after arrival of this second group, the settlement was seized by the Spanish in what became known as the Nootka Crisis, with the Chinese being imprisoned by the Spanish in the course of their seizure of Meares' property, which brought Britain and Spain to the brink of global war.
 * cites on the Nootka Crisis page, some of which will mention this batch of Chinese, who were skilled shipbuilders and master craftsmen, not "coolies" per the source used, which is clearly POV on this subject by such an omission; Meares himself does not use the term "coolies", to my knowledge.


 * ''In Victoria, the first tax register for that city indicates that of the ten richest men in the city, eight were Chinese (with the Governor and James Dunsmuir only ahead of them on the list).
 * tons to be added between here and the onset of railway construction; more cites for all of the above already on other existing pages....Captain Stamp may have also been on that list, but it was dominantly Chinese....and should be indexed as "taxation" or the like in Morton. May have been a list of 20 rather than 10, also.  All Chinese names were given in full, not as "John Chinaman" or any other such claims as are made about US census practices/terminologies.  The notion that all Chinese were slave labour is complete fiction, but that's what you see when you only read "scholarly" and other ethno-politically driven works, and reject of disregard all others...and general history itself.


 * ''The use of Chinese labour in the clearing of the West End led to the winter riots of 1885 which saw Chinese residents flee to a refuge in a creek ravine around the then-southeast end of False Creek, thereafter known as China Creek.
 * the China Creek ravine is NW of the intersection of Clark & Broadway; location of the former China Creek Track (or Raceway or Racetrack or whatever), a velodrome, in later years, gone now; now part of the VCC campus.


 * ''It was not until the 1890s that Chinese businesses began to relocate back into the growing city, along Dupont Street (now East Pender Street), forming the nucleus of Chinatown.
 * much to be added here about the history of Chinese service people on the West Side, and the spread of Chinese residences and businesses into the East End/Grandview, and of course the Anti-Oriental Riots of 1907) and beyond. see talkpage for list of sources
 * more needed on Vancouver's Chinese community from this point until the influx of the 1980s-


 * ''Ah Hong verified that the gold rush was happening and stated this upon his May 1858 return.
 * as if the departure of 10s of thousands of miners from SanFran hadn't already told them that, likewise the city's many newspapers who hyped Douglas' shipment of gold to vaults in San Francisco that touched off the rush; it's not like a field scout was needed...or there was only one; there were 3000 men who arrived in Victoria in less than a month (er, week) and about 1/3 of them were Chinese; unless Ah Hong journeyed by horseback, he wasn't the only one, nor the first.


 * ''In the beginning British Columbians had more tolerance and had little fear of the Chinese and that this differed from California. The province had given the Chinese the same legal protections that other ethnic groups enjoyed.
 * this needs much more expansion, and interestingly Chung alludes to the judicial and licensing equality/protections I've raised before here but had irate demands for sources thrown at me for.


 * '' Chinese were viewed as contributing little to the local economy while taking from the land." and that the Chinese were preventing economic growth from occurring.
 * this is a grossly bigoted phrasing, they were not VIEWED that way, that was how it was; some material added to that effect since this inline comment was originally made.


 * ''Whites had committed violent acts against Chinese, and therefore Chinese had avoided areas where whites had newly discovered gold.
 * this is rubbish based on what seems to be transplanted experiences from California; as has often been the case on CC articles re labour/social conditions there, including the now-removed claim that the term Chinaman's chance originated in the Fraser Canyon CPR workings by white managers there; see that article for the real story and note the dual citations on 90% of the Fraser goldfields being Chinese by 1860, which the "scholarly" sources preferred by the creator of the SYNTH opus here for some reason just don't ever want to talk about or admit to....


 * ''The law prompted a strike of Chinese workers, which was the first Chinese civil rights action taken in the province.
 * there are better much sources for this - if this is even in Worden, which is used for a cite in the previous sentence; the quoted bit comes after that


 * ''In the same period the federal government, acting on direction from London,
 * it was London turning the taxes down and Ottawa following the imperial directive; more familiarity with Canadian and imperial history is, as always, recommended, before repeating pat statements from "scholarly" sources and ethno-politically driven articles and books.


 * ''For instance the 1878 law was nulled for constitutional reasons, similarly blocking another law in 1884.
 * when was it "nulled"? (strange wording; perhaps annulled is meant; "overruled" is what most good histories say? This is in Morton, and Howay & Scholefield have much more on each of these refusals; there were others; apparently Worden doesn't know about all of them
 * some of these were blocked by London, which was backed up by Ottawa; which you'd know of if you'd buy and read Morton; also it was pressure from Imperial China that partly led to the head taxes to stop the drain of citizens to BC/Canada; again, in Morton but not in the POV "academic" sources; unless the rendering of Worden here is SYNTH and he does cover the details as the sources named above do


 * ''The places of origin of the Chinese immigrants were not recorded on Canadian census records.
 * neither were those of other non-British immigrants; this is stated as though it were a sign of racist discrimination in record keeping


 * ''Of those from Guangdong, most came from Siyi (Sze-yap), a group of four counties.
 * that's off, unless that's the same as Toishan


 * ''In 1882 8,000 Chinese arrived in Canada.
 * Morton has better and very detailed arrival/departure data, and presented without attachment to the head tax issue


 * ''The Chinese Immigration Act of 1885, which included the head tax, was passed shortly after the railway construction cased. No other ethnic group had a tax levied on it during immigration.
 * this is false, there was a head tax on Americans originally, that was overruled by London for the same reason it overruled later attempts at a head tax on Chinese; the original wording here used the Americanism "Oriental Exclusion Act", I changed it to the proper'' Canadian act's name; more sloppy scholarship from the American side.....or because of an American editor who doesn't know any better.


 * ''At that time Quesnelle Forks was majority Chinese
 * like many other places that the low-quality source doesn't mention, or probably doesn't even know about


 * ''and there were also Chinese in Cumberland and Yale.
 * and Lillooet, Kamloops, Barkerville, Stanley and a few dozen other places; the cruddy wording of this phrasing I'll fix later on after transferrign the rest of the inline comments; and strikes me that this repeat of mentions of Cumberland and Yale, which are already elsewhere in the article, is yet more dross and mantra-like repetition of stray facts dumped here without thought of context or any useful, readable narrative.


 * ''In 1887 there were 124 Chinese who came to Canada, a sharp decrease.
 * from what/when? the year before? And what's Morton say about 1887? Seems to me this figure is grossly low; there was a regular net loss/gain from departures vs arrivals, this 124 may bev a net figure, glossed over by a sloppy source IMO


 * ''The numbers of Chinese began increasing around the year 1900
 * 2nd sentence might as well be "in the next decade" but this paragraph needs reworking for "flow" anyway so will deal with it later.


 * ''At the time some electoral districts in British Columbia were majority Chinese.
 * the cite may say that but does it mention which ones? That's a very big claim and to state it without actual data is invalid


 * re Roy, Patricia E. The Triumph of Citizenship: The Japanese and Chinese in Canada, 1941-67''. UBC Press, November 1, 2011. ISBN 0774840757, 978077484075012 p. 12 (with sources in English and Chinese)
 * but not Japanese??

There are more repeats of that last one in the footnotes, along with inline comments by the other editor re Chung.Skookum1 (talk) 07:11, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Plan to add a section on the Chinese Canadian Student Strike in Victoria, British Columbia (1922-1923)
I’m wanting to add a section to this Wikipedia page relating to the Chinese Canadian Student Strike in Victoria, British Columbia (1922-1923). I think that this section would benefit this page to people will be able to get a better understanding of what Chinese Canadians went through when Chinese racism was a huge part of Canada. This is a topic that hasn’t been talked about a whole lot with historians and I think it is something Wikipedia would benefit from having. These are a couple sources I have found that I will use to create the section.

Stanley, Timothy James. 2011. Contesting White Supremacy: School Segregation, Anti-racism, and the Making of Chinese Canadians. Vancouver: UBC Press.

Lai, Chuenyan David, and Inc ebrary. 2010. Chinese Community Leadership: Case Study of Victoria in Canada. Singapore: World Scientific. (pg. 1442-143)

Stanley, Timothy J. "Schooling, White Supremacy, and the Formation of a Chinese Merchant Public in British Columbia." BC Studies: The British Columbian Quarterly 107 (1995): 3-29. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikaylabetton (talk • contribs) 21:24, 24 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Looks good, but I encourage you to add some sources more generally related to the Chinese experience in BC. Patricia Roy's work, and Peter Ward's White Canada Forever will likely be useful and will make your references more diverse. If you try to only use Stanley, you won't be complying with the Wikipedia recommendation about breadth of sources. Cliomania (talk) 21:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)