Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HongCouver


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was delete. Add a passing reference in Demographics of Vancouver if you wish. – Avi 04:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

HongCouver
Delete: Non-notable - The nickname HongCouver is too trivial to be worthy of an encyclopedia entry. Anything useful currently in the article more properly belongs elsewhere. HongCouver is no more significant than the many other nicknames for Vancouver: Terminal City, Hollywood North, NoFunCouver, etc. The talk page indicates not only a lack of consensus on the meaning of the term (and it appears doubtful that one could be reached), but also that others have noted their dislike of this term's inclusion as it's own article, while support for it is not apparent. Bobanny 20:10, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Seems to be a non-notable term and should be deleted under WP:NEO. Tarret 20:21, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete (and maybe Merge) I can find some evidence for this on Google, but its hard to sort through it all. I'd say just delete it and make it a redirect to Vancouver; perhaps there should be a section in the Vancouver article to address the "Hongcouver" nickname. EVula 20:50, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete The article itself says, in the first paragraph, that " it is not in common public use by residents, non-residents, media, and politicians." So... why is there an article? Eron 21:17, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and merge. The article's citations give some notability and verifiability to this nickname that not all nicknames have.  (Its past, minor use is proven &mdash; verifiability is there.  Its meaning is debated and too speculative and less important anyways.)  Still, not enough for an article itself.  But reference to the nickname need not be lost. --Ds13 21:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and merge. It was popular with Toronto-based media types about 10 to 20 years ago when Hong Kong residents were flocking to Vancouver and pushing up the property values. Nobody used it in Vancouver and nobody at all uses it now, but it has some historical interest. As Ds13 says, the term would best be noted in the main Vancouver page. --Charlene.fic 22:03, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Although I would consider it to be an offensive term, I personally know people who still use it. The article needs work but I don't see why it needs to be deleted. There is a history of use, and supplied references. It's not that important of a topic, but then neither are the Pokémons. (BTW, Hollywood North is an article as well.)--Bookandcoffee 22:17, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge (very lightly) and redirect to Vancouver - this is, near as I can tell, not in common use today. It used to be, and was indeed a derogatory term, but these days it's very limited in its usage. Hollywood North is by far the most regularly used nickname for Vancouver these days, so I can understand its having an article. (WP:POKEMON doesn't really work well for arguments like this, by the way.) Tony Fox (arf!) 22:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure which is weaker - the argument or the essay. :)--Bookandcoffee 00:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep as per Bookandcoffee--Hooperbloob 22:43, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge If someone wanted to write an article on Chinese immigration to Vancouver, mention the name Hongcouver, and redirect Hongcouver there, that would be a little more reasonable topic. As it is, I don't think it deserves a whole article. -- TheMightyQuill 04:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I live in Vancouver, but I have never heard the city refered to as "Hongcouver" -- Selmo  (talk) 17:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge The content would go better, I think, in the article Demographics of Vancouver in the #Asian_immigration section. As far as the name "Hongcouver", it might merit mention in that article and the main Vancouver article. Mang 04:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete the origins of the name come from the same racist undertones as 'bad chinese drivers' etc. from the time when there was a great imigration of people from HK over to Canada. Born in Canada, my parents are Asian and I still find the term offensive. I see very little reason to support such a slang and racist term. Article falls under WP:NEO and lacks notability to result in its own article. Mkdw 06:44, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Mkdw. Can you provide a reliable source for your theory of the name's origin? If so, it can support the article. (Potential offensiveness is not a good reason to delete an article.)  I agree with your link to WP:NEO though. So IF the article or its contents are kept or merged, the reason is given there: "Support for article contents, including the use and meaning of neologisms, must come from reliable sources." More sources like the New York Times article are probably necessary. --Ds13 14:03, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't have any sources I can cite though I do know for a fact that CBC Radio One, in September/early October, aired a program about the origins of the phrase 'bad chinese drivers'. The stereotype came from the time when many Hong Kong imigrants were able to come to B.C. and illegally purchase driver's licences. The program briefly listed some other negative stereotypes of the time including HongCouver. I can also from my own experiences, have only heard the term used a couple times and in a degratory manner. I'm not strongly passionate about this article, but I do believe in Wikipedia's NPOV and the quality of articles. We could spend all day trying to find out whether the term has negative or descriptive properties. I suggest we follow the evidence and look more to its validity. If any notable sources: City of Vancouver, Mayor's Office, B.C. Government, Federal Government, recognize the name, it should stay, otherwise it is a slang term and WP:NEO prevails. Mkdw 01:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * LOL. ROTFL.  More fake mythology about "racist undertones" which, as we all know, is what lies underneath white skin, at least as far as anybody who doesn't have white skin sees it.  "Bad Chinese drivers" was a common phrase in Vancouver LONG before the 1980s-era influx, and is not a stereotype except insofar as many people seem intent on fulfilling it.  No kidding.  And we had other kinds of bad drivers, too - people from the land of yellow licence plates (Alberta), Fraser Valley farmers, Sunday drivers, people from Montreal/Ontario who assume BC's driving laws are the same as their own; bad Alberta drivers, bad Ontario drivers, bad greyhair drivers, pig-headed Fraser Valley farmers, the advent of the Greeks in Kitsilano in the '70s, and much more; feeling singled out by equating people's complaints about ACTUAL BAD DRIVING by hiding behind the endless whine about white racism against the Chinese don't matter piffle as far as the truth of the situation goes.  It's not about race, it's about culture and actual driving habits/customs; one reason other than the simple absence of driving regulations/driver testing in some countries explains why "yield" and "stop" signs were ignored (and continue to be), and help "the rest of us" understand why the Chinese politicos/SUCCESS were so hot-to-trot to stop the prosecution of the 150,000-300,000 cases of bribing public officials that were ensuant upon the influx, where "cultural differences" were cited as the reason why Chinese immigrants thought that bribing officials was OK, and having a bought-and-paid-for drivers' license was also OK, but there was NO WAY it was OK to prosecute the perpetrators because, since 98% of them were Chinese, "it would have been racist" to proceed.  But oh, wait, I should be talking about before the influx, as promised: blind/rude Chinese drivers have been a fact of life on Vancouver's East Side since immigration was opened up again in the 1950s; and it's not because they're racially Chinese, it's because they're still driving in an Asian context; multiculturalism on the roads has been a disaster.  And to hear someone trot out yet another bit of fake history that this term was created as a result of the influx shows just how far in denial people are about owning up to things, instead of pretending it's someone else's fault/wrongdoing.  How do I know this?  Hmm.  Probably by having been run down by a Chinese driver who didn't like me riding my bicycle in his way, and by being witnesses to accidents where, frankly, you have to wonder what the person was thinking (two in recent months) and where clearly "bad driving" - disrespectful, dangerous driving - was clearly the cause.  And the perpetrators were clearly Chinese (and I do know the difference between Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, Filipinos and others; and "bad Chinese drivers" is apparently a phrase known in the local argot in Manila, Bangkok, and elsewhere.  So grow up and get over it, and get your parents to realize that, while they may drive sanely, a lot of people show up here from HK and Mainland China with no regard for local laws or customs, on the road or otherwise.Skookum1 05:04, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Lets keep this civil please. I noticed several warnings on your user talk page and so we needn't remind you again. Mkdw 00:35, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * the bulk of those "warnings" were from axe-grinding revisionists, and I recall that the majority of the "several" were from the same person (HongQiGong); their own insults and personal attacks on me I didn't bother citing wikipolicy on them the way they did on me, but theirs were far worse. So much easier to make an allegation and consider it a conviction, I suppose.  I'm polemical by style and inclination but not as "personal attack"; only in calling spades spades, and familiar enough with my own history and culture to know when it's being slandered by somebody who has an agenda against it (as with HongQiGong) or, as in your case, somebody who's been here for twenty years who doesn't know the whole situation/history and has been propagandized by "official media"; or as in Yuje's case (someone else from the pages where HongQiGong and I have crossed paths), someone who knows a lot about Chinese immigration/life in the US, and is insistent/incredulous that it is any different here.  As for the CBC airing that sow on "bad Chinese drivers", the CBC is hardly an impartial source; Calling what people racist for observing that new-Chinese immigrants drive differently/badly "racist" is one of those over-reaches of current p.c.prejudicialism that, while they may be all very earnest and self-righteous, are entirely misplaced.  My apologies for any personal slight towards you - had I known you were a WikiGod I might have stepped a little more carefully; or not.  I'm getting tired of the rewrite of BC's history and culture to flatter the various new elements, whether they're from TO or HK.  My First Nations friends know what I'm talking about, and sympathize; but of course in any arena where someone else has power over what can or can't be said it's easy enough to shut someone down, as you've just threatened to do.  Fine - Wiki would lose a major contributor on BC historical and geograpical articles, with dozens of articles on the backburner yet more to go, and someone who knows the early history of the province to sort out the mumble-jumble that's too common about it; no point in giving you examples; just examine my edit history; don't just judge me on HongQiGong's endless whining (I've given up on edplaining to him why he's wrong, as he'd just call me a white racist - and in a mocking tone, as if I was stupid, which obviously I'm not).  Anyway, I know an AfD page isn't the place for an exegesis like this so I'll leave this off; further dialogue on issues raised welcome via email or on my talk page.Skookum1 06:16, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

keep: hongcouver is a very accurate description of vancouver, there is a 30% asian population and its only increasing, they might as well rename the city hongcouver there probally will be hardley a white anglo saxon left there in 50 years
 * Delete This article resulted from the lengthy (and similarly irrelevant) section about it that at one time existed on the Vancouver page. Its content has been trimmed back recently, but expanded and tends toward discussing various aspects of the HK-annexation era influx to Vancouver; content that could/should be on History of Chinese immigration to Canada or Chinatown (Vancouver); I actually  think, given the special nature of Chinese society in Vancouver, that the History of Chinese immigration to Canada article needs complementing by a History of Chinese people in British Columbia or something of that kind; that where some of this latter-day content could go, as well as the discussion (unresolvable) as to whether HongCouver is derogatory or not (see Talk:Chinaman and Talk:The Orient for more on doublespeak/denial and the re-tooling of vernacular English to suit politically-correct biases).  HongCouver is not in common use - an earlier version of this article omitted the "not" from that opening sentence; I inserted it - and does not deserve an article, except perhaps one discussing the various claims against it; on the one hand, as claimed/presumed by some new immigrants, it's a flattering term alluding to Vancouver's synthesis/transfer of HK's culture and population, to long-time Vancouverites it's an uncomfortable reminder that the city we knew is no more, to the resentful types it's proof that the people who find it uncomfortable are racist, er, white, er, racist, er, white.... (they have a problem telling the difference).Skookum1 05:11, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.