Talk:Asian Australians/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Rjjiii (talk · contribs) 06:46, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a. (reference section):
Looks good. Also, I like the notes in their own section.

b. (citations to reliable sources):
See source review below.

c. (OR):
Primary sources are fine for straight facts and data. Several sections are using only primary sources and going beyond that.

d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
I checked 10 sources and did not notice close paraphrasing. The highest ranking matches on earwig are two properly cited quotations.
It is broad in its coverage.
a. (major aspects):

b. (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
Normal editing and healthy discussion.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
Look good:

File:Sharma RG19 (11) (48199055287).jpg [CC licensed public photo]

File:20180601 FIFA Friendly Match Czech Republic vs. Australia Massimo Luongo 850 0218.jpg [CC licensed public photo]

File:Secretary Blinken Meets with Foreign Minister Wong (52095791921).jpg [public domain photo]

File:Asian Australian map.svg [CC licensed original work]

File:"Afghan" cameleers with visitors, Australia, c 1891.jpeg [public domain, published before 1928]

File:(공식영상) C-CLOWN 데뷔 100일 축하영상 44s (cropped).jpg [screenshot of video; original video is CC by creators]

File:Natalie Tran at Australia Paper Towns Premiere.jpg [public photo; original from Flickr by photographer]

Questions:

File:Chinese Encampment Guildford.jpg ["The person who associated a work with this deed has dedicated the work to the public domain", from 1861? this should be public domain but the rationale given cannot be true]

File:Num Pon Soon Melbourne.jpg [The copyright info is fine but the caption needs a reference.]

File:Podgy the Indian Hawker, Goulburn Valley, Victoria.jpg [this also should be public domain, but the rationale looks wrong]

File:Lao family reunited at Melbourne Airport.jpg [private photo of a family; unknown author; no justification for CC license or permission to use]

b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Many captions are abstract and not entirely clear how they relate to the topic without reading the whole article, especially the name-only captions and "Cameleers with visitors, c.1891". The Chinatown caption either needs a source, or the material should be discussed in the body text with the caption offered a shorter summary
Overall:
Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Source review

Information relating to the racial composition of the population was collected for the first time at the Census of 1911. The following were classified as "Asiatic": The reference for this in the article is a primary source from 1911.
At censuses prior to 1966 the instructions relating to race were insufficient to enable respondents to classify themselves according to the degree of racial mixture. This is cited to a primary source from 1966/1971. Primary sources are great for statements of fact. Wikipedia policy prohibits using them for analysis on Wikipedia. See: WP:PRIMARY
The Terminology section is quite large and cited only to primary sources.
Chinese immigration to Australia increased significantly during the Victorian gold rush in the 1850s and 1860s. While some Chinese arrived in Australia as early as 1818, Chinese immigration increased dramatically during the gold rush. Conflict arose between Chinese and Australian communities due to prejudice and misunderstanding, leading to riots at Lambing Flat and Buckland. Anti-Chinese laws enacted by Australian colonies were the precursor to the White Australia policy in 1901-1973. No in-line citations for this section of general citations for the article. The next citation does not discuss China
The union movement was critical of Asian workers, especially Chinese workers, who did not join unions and were willing to work for lower wages and conditions. I could plausibly read this sentence in two ways. One is that Asian workers "were willing to work for lower wages" and the other is that Chinese workers "were willing to work for lower wages". I don't really see either reading being supported by the article. The article talks in terms of "exploitation". It also doesn't use the framework of willingness to joine a union. On page 346 it says, For [the working class], racial exclusion was an extension of exclusionist policies that maintained high wages and favorable working conditions by restricting etnry to the rade or calling. And if it is about the Chinese immigrants in particular, on page 350 it says Chinese wages were on a par with Europenas'. Early on in the article there are a couple sentences that I think really summarize it's position: e. Wherever white and nonwhite labor jointly participated in the labor force, they rarely directly competed for the same jobs in the market. Whites usually occupied positions of higher status and skill, with which higher rewards were associated.
The Repatriation after WWII section is all sourced to lovedayproject.com self-published by Christine Piper. Self-published secondary sources are acceptable if they come from experts in the field. If Piper is an expert, you might consider working in a solid quote from her somewhere into the article's body text or mention of her project. If she's not considered an expert, she's made this really great bibliography available so that you could follow the rabbit hole down to her source: https://lovedayproject.com/resources/
This bit has four sources: There are social and economic disparities among Asian Australians. While Asian Australians are over-represented in high-performing schools and university courses, some ethnic groups face challenges. The Daily Telegraph can't be used as a secondary source on Wikipedia. (Citing the quote in the other Telegraph reference should be fine.) I would recommend clipping the Telegraph reference. The other three sources appear high quality.
moderndiplomacy.eu is not accepted on Wikipedia as a secondary source because they don't exercise editorial oversight ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_389#Modern_Diplomacy_.eu ). According to their about us page, they "provide shared experiences, honestly told opinions, and unique takes" which falls more onto the side of editorials. The statements in the Wikipedia article seem like hard facts that could be cited from elsewhere though. Maybe Dr. Nguyen Anh Tuan has published something on this in a peer reviewed journal, or in a newspaper?
The production on the series began in November 2009 in her home town of Adelaide. The source is from prior to November 2009, so it can't verify something in the future. Some things near production and fall apart.
The series was aired from 10 February 2010. This sentence construction is bizarre. Maybe began airing, started airing, or aired from x to y? Also does the source give the date? I didn't see it, but the source is from 11 February so I'm thinking there must be something like "last night" or "yesterday" that I overlooked.

Due to issues in the sources that I checked, I can't pass this. Let me know if you have any questions or want me to look over anything in particular. You are welcome to renominate the article at any time. I hope these comments will aid you in your future editing. Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 07:20, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]