User:JaysanMaolinbay/sandbox


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * It seems everything in the article is relevant to the topic. Even if the information doesn't fall 100% under the topic at hand, it has a high relevance/correlation to the topic(i.e. How Nomadic movements differ from migration).
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear biased toward a particular position?
 * Yes, the article is neutral, there does not seem to be any bias towards an particular group, as the information presented is mostly factual.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * That does not seem to be the case.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Yes, the links do work. The sources come from factual reference such as the world bank.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * The sources are neutral and reliable. A lot of the information comes from graphs and charts.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Most of the information is up to date, coming from the most recent data.
 * Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * The conversations discuss the sources cited, duplicated paragraphs, and some errors on the page.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Yes, it is part of many WikiProjects, Human Rights, Economics, Ethnic Groups, Genetic History, etc.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Wikipedia discusses this topic based of references and sources cited, limiting the amount of information presented on the page. In class, we can have subjective viewpoints on the topic.

Article improvements. History of Chinese Americans

Original Statement: The history of Chinese Americans or the history of ethnic Chinese in the United States relates to the three major waves of Chinese immigration to the United States with the first beginning in the 19th century.

Revision: There were 2 major waves of Chinese immigration into America(not 3), 1850's was the first wave, 1965 was the second wave (when the Immigration and Nationality act was passed).

Things to add: 1882 The United States government passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, barring all Chinese immigrants from coming to the United States, thus ending the first wave of Chinese immigration.

Things to add: 1943 the Chinese exclusion act was repealed, on the basis that the US and China were wartime allies during WWII. Was meant to try and improve wartime morale. The second wave of Chinese immigration to the United States followed.

Original Statement: Their propaganda branded the Chinese migrants as "perpetual foreigners" whose work caused wage dumping and thereby prevented American men from "gaining work". After the 1893 economic downturn, measures adopted in the severe depression included anti-Chinese riots that eventually spread throughout the West from which came racist violence and massacres. Most of the Chinese farm workers, which by 1890 comprised 75% of all Californian agricultural workers, were expelled.

Revision: The anti-Chinese propaganda stems from 2 major sources; political campaigns, and church movements. Combine both with public outrage, out comes the Chinese exclusion act.

Things to add: Many Chinese workers had to send money back to China(called remittance) to support their families. However, once the Chinese exclusion act was passed many Chinese men were forced to endure additional suffering as they could not travel back home to see their families.

Things to add: All of the outrage and violence were directed towards the Chinese immigrants during this time, however these Employers decided to employ predominately Chinese immigrants for labor, leaving very little openings for the white, working male.