Talk:Mexican Repatriation/Archive 2

Structural issues

While this article is amply sourced and useful, it contains far too many references to sources (in lieu of footnotes) and also excessive details and subsections. I'll try to work on this when I can, but I hope editors with access to offline sources can take a crack at it first. Coretheapple (talk) 15:19, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

@Coretheapple: I've tracked down most of the sources (through my library for articles and through Google Books) and started a cleanup, so hopefully things should be in much better shape than they were when you gave it a shot. If you want to help out with the main section, that'd be great. —Luis (talk) 06:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

I'll look at it, thanks. Been a while since I've approached this article, and frankly I forgot all about it. Appreciate the ping. Coretheapple (talk) 18:11, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Potential image

Not really very encyclopedic, so I haven't put it in yet, but this might be something to think about in the future. Putting it here so I don't lose it.—Luis (talk) 18:54, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Now used in the article. —Luis (talk) 00:30, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Things to be done

I ran out of time today, but there is still a lot that could be done. Some notes for myself or whoever stumbles across this:

1. voluntary repatriation: a bunch of the sources mention that the first wave of repatriations were somewhat voluntary, since there were no jobs (on top of the usual racism). The article about Michigan is particularly good on this. Deserves to get mentioned somehow.
2. de-focus on LA: there is a lot in here about LA, since that is so well-documented. But that wasn't the whole story. Should replace some LA anecdotes and statistics with others where appropriate, either national or from the Indiana/Michigan articles (or Texas if someone can find that article!)
3. Trim down: there is a lot in the body that is accurate and cited, but not very encyclopedic: too much detail, not enough big picture.
4. new sources: the "additional readings" should have a lot of good stuff; I've elevated one or two articles out of there today but suspect there is more.
5. images: I tried to find provenance for the infamous "mexicans go home" billboard but it appears to be a fake. (Compare fonts in first two images in that search.) I've asked Wikiproject California for an image of the plaque in LA, but otherwise I'm all out of ideas for illustrations. So if anyone has suggestions, go for it.

Also, I can send article pdfs to anyone who wants them. —Luis (talk) 07:49, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Potential thought re the LA focus: maybe, per WP:Summary, that should be broken into a separate article? There's a lot of good information there, just not at the right level of detail for this article, it seems to me. —Luis (talk) 02:31, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

And to follow up on that, this revision has the LA stuff before I started to pare it back and integrate other information. Recording it here in case it is useful later.—Luis (talk) 06:36, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Update: Tackled point #1 (though could still stand to be fleshed out); started doing #2 but still needs more work; doing #3 throughout as I go; no luck on #4 or #5 yet. —Luis (talk)