Category talk:American Chinese
- Discussion moved from User talk:Suzukaze-c#American Chinese categories and labels.
Hello Suzukaze-c, you recently created labels for pre- and post-1980 American Chinese at Module:labels/data/subvarieties and the related categories Category:American (1980–) Chinese and Category:American (–1980) Chinese. Would you approve of a renaming of the categories to something along the lines of Category:Pre-1980 American Chinese and Category:Post-1980 American Chinese and renaming of the labels to something like "American (pre-1980)" and "American (post-1980)"? Separately, based on my reading of this chapter published by The Immigrant Learning Center, specifically page 85, the reason for the split before and after 1980 is related to the normalization of relations between the PRC and the United States in 1979. If this is accurate, can it be added to the descriptions for the categories? Also, if relations were normalized in 1979 shouldn't the split be pre- and post-1979 American Chinese? Thanks and take care. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 23:30, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
- @The Editor's Apprentice: I don't have a particular opinion. As long as the two (painfully different) social classes are delineated. I'm not a historian, and I almost named it after 2000 before finding the WP page. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 00:12, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
- Cool. It is interesting to know that the distinction in really a social class one which is trying to be captured using information regarding immigration patterns during different time periods. The aforementioned chapter, on page 86, describes "uptown, high-tech" Chinese and "downtown, low-tech" Chinese groups as separable. I also find a different, time based distinction centered on 1965 in this paper by Rubén G. Rumbaut (republished in this book). Specifically, it states:
- For example, while 31% of adult immigrants from China have college degrees, 16% have less than a fifth-grade education; this bimodal distribution in part reflects different patterns of Chinese immigration and enterprise between the pre-1965 Lo Wa Kiu ("old overseas Chinese") and the post-1965 San Yi Man ("new immigrants"; Wong, 1987).
- Given all the apparent complexity together with the fact that neither of us are experts, I'm thinking it would be worthwhile to get more input by starting a discussion at Wiktionary:Information desk. Do you agree? Thanks and take care. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 01:53, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
- That's fine with me. Will you start the discussion, or do you want me to write it? —Suzukaze-c (talk) 02:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
- @The Editor's Apprentice: And while we're on the topic, Category:Australian Chinese could also do with the same split, although it doesn't seem like we have any meaningful content for "old" immigrants yet. —Suzukaze-c (talk) 02:04, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
- That's fine with me. Will you start the discussion, or do you want me to write it? —Suzukaze-c (talk) 02:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
- Cool. It is interesting to know that the distinction in really a social class one which is trying to be captured using information regarding immigration patterns during different time periods. The aforementioned chapter, on page 86, describes "uptown, high-tech" Chinese and "downtown, low-tech" Chinese groups as separable. I also find a different, time based distinction centered on 1965 in this paper by Rubén G. Rumbaut (republished in this book). Specifically, it states:
- I would appreciate you creating the discussion at the Information Desk since you are more familiar with the Chinese. I think including Austalian Chinese and any other regional Chineses in the discussion is a good idea. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 02:47, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
(→Wiktionary:Information desk/2021/December —Fish bowl (talk) 01:49, 10 February 2022 (UTC))