Talk:Tong (organization)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mei001, MichaelSegura.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
I did an extensive rewrite of the piece and the history of the Tongs. I cited "Tongs, Gangs and Triads" as I am familiar with that work the best although I have read much elsewhere.

The piece as I rewrote it does focus mostly on the historical role of the tongs in the USA but if necessary people can expand it. Bobbee.girl (talk) 00:26, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * And undone. See below. hateless 23:45, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

This article should be split into one about the secret societies, and another for the snurnames. --Yuje 16:32, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * Done.--Yuje 15:23, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Tong / Triad
Should "tong" and "triad" be capitalized in these articles? That seems wrong to me. -grant 15:56, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Seems it shouldn't to me, since they're both generic terms. I've down-cased them. hateless 18:51, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Tongs are not gangs
From the San Francisco Chronicle:
 * "With any organization, you have a certain percentage of people who may go sideways on you and become organized into criminal activity," said Nelson Lowe, a senior FBI agent and expert in Asian organized crime.


 * "Although they are associated with a tong, they are not representative of what a tong stands for."

And from my own research from when I was in college, tongs should be considered mutual protection first, organized criminal activity second, especially for the modern tongs. They aren't the mob, they don't flaunt the law as a part of their mission statement, but they do go astray. I've edited out as much of the bias as I can from the first paragraph, although I think we need a new title, I can't think of a good succinct one right now. "Tong (clandestine society)" doesn't work for me right now... hateless 18:51, 8 April 2006 (UTC)


 * How about "Tong (Chinese social organization)"? airphloo 18:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


 * "Tong (Chinese mutual protection societies)" Vlag (talk) 13:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)Vlag


 * what a joke. that's what ALL gangs say -- they offer "protection".   69.110.46.179 (talk) 04:10, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Tong (Chinese society) is the most appropriate title there can be.86.42.135.239 (talk) 11:32, 17 October 2009 (UTC)Si Lapu Lapu

Tongs are far from dead
Why does it say the tongs stopped really running their businesses? Chinese people have been immigrating to the U.S. for a long time and still are, and there is still tongs running Chinatowns all over the U.S. and Canada. There can be a lot written about the leaders of powerful tongs in San Francisco, New York, and Toronto.

Re: Tongs
Here in San Francisco, tongs are still around. But have pretty much gone from criminal organizations to philanthropic organzations and organizations assisting newly arriving Chinese immigrants.

I have changed the heading from 'Scottish Tongs' to 'Glasgow Tongs' as the Tongs only operate in the Glasgow area

_______________________________________________________________________________________ It should also be noted that Tongs are not simply "immigrant organizations." They have historically existed in China for several hundred years (the famed Boxers were a non-criminal tong). A good resource from the U.S. State Department: http://usinfo.state.gov/eap/Archive_Index/Chinese_Criminal_Enterprises.html
 * I think this page should stay as is. I don't believe that the word "tong", especially in its English-transliterated-from-Cantonese form, is a good descriptor for all Chinese secret societies. Tongs and triads are descended from Tiandihui, all of which has their own articles. An article about Chinese secret societies in general may be warranted. hateless 02:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Glasgow Tongs
Can I suggest the Glasgow Tongs section should be split off into a separate entry as these teenage Glasgow street gangs have nothing to do with Chinese Tongs racially, historically, organisationally or socially - they just adopted the word 'Tongs' presumably because it sounded good. User:Thejohnfleming 10:11, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've deleted the section instead. The section wasn't well sourced anyway and a new page doesn't seem warranted for something without any. hateless 02:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. Having a bunch of knackers or neds or whatever you call them in Scotland, take the name of 'tongs' for their 'organizations' is just the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. How do they even deserve a Wikipedia article?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.43.146.240 (talk) 10:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

The inaccuracy of the term 'Chinese-American'
Why is the introduction to this article include it being a 'Chinese-American' establishment? It is not uniquely Chinese-American. Tongs are found all over the world where ever there is a significant Chinese community. Is the author of this article not that well informed or do I need to change it myself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Si lapu lapu (talk • contribs) 17:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Because they go by a variety of names, see hongmen, triads, tiandihui, hui, kongsi, etc. The ones established in America are known in America as tongs, which is why this article is about the American variant. As for being "well-informed", cite your sources: I have come across none that state that all Chinese secret societies ([tiandihui and its offshoots) are universally known as tongs. hateless 23:45, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I already pointed this one out too (see above). Si lapu lapu is right. Tongs are found worldwide, not just America. I can't go any further in 'citing sources' apart from the fact that I am IN one as my family and relatives is practically in such a 'tong' found in the Philippines. If you want some 'evidence', here it is: http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/9053/liongtaktong4rw2.jpg There.. It is 'Liong Tek Tong' in Hokkien Chinese. The word 'Tong' is also used in Hokkien and there are countless numbers of tongs and kongsis (Kongsi being another Hokkien term) here in the philippines. Hui is also another Hokkien term and the men in the above picture are also in 'Hia Ti Hui' which is a 'Brotherhood of chinese'. If that's not enough "evidence" then I don't know what is. This is just like arguing about 'was Bulgaria in the Axis alliance in world war II or not' and people having to cite evidence upon evidence that they were just so to satisfy some people who don't believe in something simply straightforward enough. There are just some things where you have to take people's word. So there, I agree with OP to change it from 'Chinese American' to 'Chinese' because it is not a uniquely Chinese-American establishment! Vlag (talk) 21:24, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Vlag
 * Let me reiterate: I don't deny that Chinese secret societies exist worldwide. What I like to see is proof that they are called "tongs" (堂) as a generic term worldwide. Your pics don't prove that at all, in fact, the first picture you present doesn't have the character for tong anywhere, but hui (會) is present. Also, your word (or any other type of hearsay) is not enough for Wikipedia. As it states in WP:V, a core policy on Wikipedia, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". Remember that Chinese secret societies worldwide are covered in other articles like triad society and tiandihui. hateless 22:10, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi again. I would not be able to prove it to you because it isn't like we have a website for our society or members have myspace profiles or academic articles are written about it. So I will say that you should ask around in real life especially if you have Singaporean or Malaysian chinese friends or contacts and ask them of tongs in those countries. I am sure at least one of them will know as their grandfathers (or whatever relation) will have most likely been in a tong. I will try and get 'evidence' and show you Philippine-Chinese tongs.. and they exist. The character you showed (堂).. Is it meant to be simplified or traditional? Vlag (talk) 01:14, 8 February 2008 (UTC) Vlag
 * I removed the first link to the picture above as I do not want it to be seen by any more people. It is not a good idea for me to be putting up pics of the society up on the net. Vlag (talk) 13:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)Vlag


 * The burden of proof lies on someone to reference that the term does refer only to Chinese American organisations, if you want it to say Chinese American. Until that it happens it should only read Chinese, as that does not imply either way. Leushenko (talk) 22:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * See the dictionary, point 2. Given that point 1, "Chinese association or political party", is a subject too broad for an encyclopedic article, I would suggest strongly that this article remain focused on Chinese American secret societies. hateless 08:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Language and Romanization
Could someone explain the source of the Roman spelling of these names? They are similar to modern spellings of Cantonese, but too far off for easy searching. For example, Wo Hop To = 和合桃 = wo4 hap6 tou4; "Hop" also occurs in Hop Sing Tong. The List of Triad Societies, Criminally Influenced Tongs and Chinese Gangs is useful, but doesn't explain the romanization. Wnt (talk) 06:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I think they are just manual transliteration made up on the spot like most romanizations during the old days. --Voidvector (talk) 12:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Secretive society
I don't think Tongs are secret society, as their existence and whereabouts are not exactly hard to find. Maybe the criminal aspects of their operations are secret, but they do have community support elements. It is probably better characterized as fraternal organizations as noted in this State Department report. --16:17, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
 * An organization does not need to be entirely hidden from public view to qualify as a secret society, they just need to have secretive elements. Given that fraternal organizations can also be secret societies, there isn't really a contradiction. See the definition of secret society. hateless 08:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

US?
Isn't this term also used in Canada ? And I remember seeing stuff about "tongs" in London at the end of the 19th century and opium dens, written by Brits. 76.66.200.21 (talk) 01:27, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Sanitized to be the point of useless.
Given the long and brutal history of criminal activity of the tongs, this article omits all mention of any criminal activity (except with the excuse of "it was legal in China but not here"). Where's the extortion, human trafficking, murder, drugs and prostitution? Where's the collusion with the railway companies to exploit Chinese immigrants? Why did they need "hatchet men" when apparently according to this article all they did was distribute candy and good cheer? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.145.13.34 (talk) 18:57, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Relation with pro-PRC chinese americans
I read this article, In Chinatown, Sound of the Future Is Mandarin, which says Chinese community everywhere are replaced by new comers from PRC. What is the relation between pro-PRC Chinese Americans and the pro-KMT organizations?111.243.155.167 (talk) 07:02, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Timeline
The opening states: one can find clearly marked tong halls, many of which have had affiliations with Chinese crime gangs, especially in the 1990s. I haven't read the source quoted, although the author himself posted in 2008 "...the book is seriously dated in many places and, especially since I've gone to graduate school and earned an MA in Asian Studies from Cornell, there are things I would now do differently were I to write it again." Surely, though, despite the handover of Hong Kong in 1997, the writer meant the 1890s.

Major edit ideas
I am thinking of making some major edits. I noticed that the "History" section contains a lot of information regarding tongs in America, so I think it would be best to add a "Tongs in America" section and transfer some of the content from the "History" section to the "Tongs in America" section. This would free up space in the "History" section to add more information regarding the origins and history of tongs in China. Additionally, I would like to create a "Chinatown, San Francisco" subsection under "Tongs in America." Within the "Chinatown, San Francisco" section, I would like to discuss the tongs in San Francisco and how those tongs were used by the Chinese during the San Francisco Chinatown Plague. I would appreciate any suggestions. Thanks.

So far, these are the sources I will be using:

Chang, Iris. The Chinese in America: a Narrative History. Penguin Books, 2003.

Zhao, Xiaojian, and Edward J. W. Park. “Tongs and Tong War.” Asian Americans: an Encyclopedia of Social, Cultural, Economic, and Political History, Greenwood, 2014, pp. 1118–1120.

--MichaelSegura (talk) 02:47, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Plan for some additions
Hello. I want to make some additions on how the "Bachelor Society" lead to how the tongs were involved with importing Chinese women to American for prostitution. In addition, I plan to make some additions on how tongs played a role in the plague outbreak of Chinatown and their responses to the vaccination during that period of time. Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks.

Below are the sources I am using to make the additions: May add more sources.

Chang, Iris. The Chinese in America: a Narrative History. Penguin Books, 2003.

Risse, Guenter B. Plague, Fear, and Politics in San Francisco's Chinatown. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012.

--Mei001 (talk) 03:23, 11 November 2017 (UTC)