Talk:Uncle Sam Kicks Out Chinaman
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Rosguill in topic Original Research
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Original Research edit
I'm having a hard time deciphering what constitutes original research. What on here needs to be fixed? Hannahgraines (talk) 06:00, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- The problem is that all analysis of the actual iconography of "Uncle Sam Kicks Out Chinaman", whether interpreted as the one specific work described in the lead or as a broader genre of anti-Chinese artwork, is original. The cited sources describe anti-Chinese xenophobia in the US but do not delve into the specifics of anti-Chinese cartoons other than to (sometimes) mention that they exist. There's a lot of well-written encyclopedic information here about Anti-Chinese sentiment in the United States...but in the absence of sources that actually analyze the comics and posters in detail, there's no license for the creation of this separate article. To give an example of the kind of source we should be looking for, this would be a good source for an equivalent article about anti-Jewish visual propaganda in the occupied Netherlands,signed, Rosguill talk 06:16, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- That is helpful. Thank you! I'm also wondering about the notability. Does this stem from issues with original research? Hannahgraines (talk) 06:38, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- It's sort of the other side of the same coin--if sources that describe the subject in detail don't exist, then we fall short of meeting notability guidelines. Now, based on a brief Google Scholar search, my sense is that specifically establishing the notability of the original "Uncle Sam Kicks Out Chinaman" cartoon, or even the general genre of cartoons of Uncle Sam degrading Chinese caricatures, is going to be quite difficult--while sources may exist, finding them is going to be a bit of a needle in a haystack. I think you'll have a much easier time establishing the notability of Anti-Chinese cartoons or Anti-Chinese cartoons in the United States. Alternatively, the existing article on Uncle Sam, while providing an overview of the history of the character, is lacking on analysis of its iconography, which could be added as a new section and discuss the various uses of Uncle Sam, whether racist, anti-racist, expansionist, etc. signed, Rosguill talk 06:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- scope_creep, thoughts on the concerns above? signed, Rosguill talk 17:18, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- I thought there might be a conversation. I thought it was likely notable due to the both to the uniqueness of the poster and it age. I suspect sources probably exist due its age, there just been insufficient time to discover them yet. I know there is not much in the way of analysis, but at the same time, unless there is standard volume of these types of posters, its requires real in-depth research which is very difficult and requires a lot time. I think Wikipedia should have an article on this poster, because it opens a windows into events in a time, that is not covered particularly well. As a Wiki-ed it might be case that the university may be able to do some research on our behalf. I did spend a couple of hours on it, but couldn't find anything of worth, but that is Google. I think it was probably controversial back in the day. scope_creepTalk 17:44, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- My further concern is that, as-written, none of the cited sources say anything about this specific poster. I am skeptical of the specific notability of the poster, as it is hardly unique in terms of its content, given the other examples of very similar anti-Chinese propaganda identified throughout the rest of the article. Information about the original poster in question seems to be pulled from Commons metadata, and I am uncertain that Uncle Sam Kicks Out Chinaman is even the correct title for the poster--from a library cataloging perspective, its title should be The Magic Washer. As far as providing insights to the time period, I think Wikipedia would be much better served by an article on Anti-Chinese propaganda or Anti-Chinese cartoons, subjects for which there is no shortage of academic coverage. signed, Rosguill talk 18:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- I thought there might be a conversation. I thought it was likely notable due to the both to the uniqueness of the poster and it age. I suspect sources probably exist due its age, there just been insufficient time to discover them yet. I know there is not much in the way of analysis, but at the same time, unless there is standard volume of these types of posters, its requires real in-depth research which is very difficult and requires a lot time. I think Wikipedia should have an article on this poster, because it opens a windows into events in a time, that is not covered particularly well. As a Wiki-ed it might be case that the university may be able to do some research on our behalf. I did spend a couple of hours on it, but couldn't find anything of worth, but that is Google. I think it was probably controversial back in the day. scope_creepTalk 17:44, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- scope_creep, thoughts on the concerns above? signed, Rosguill talk 17:18, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's sort of the other side of the same coin--if sources that describe the subject in detail don't exist, then we fall short of meeting notability guidelines. Now, based on a brief Google Scholar search, my sense is that specifically establishing the notability of the original "Uncle Sam Kicks Out Chinaman" cartoon, or even the general genre of cartoons of Uncle Sam degrading Chinese caricatures, is going to be quite difficult--while sources may exist, finding them is going to be a bit of a needle in a haystack. I think you'll have a much easier time establishing the notability of Anti-Chinese cartoons or Anti-Chinese cartoons in the United States. Alternatively, the existing article on Uncle Sam, while providing an overview of the history of the character, is lacking on analysis of its iconography, which could be added as a new section and discuss the various uses of Uncle Sam, whether racist, anti-racist, expansionist, etc. signed, Rosguill talk 06:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- That is helpful. Thank you! I'm also wondering about the notability. Does this stem from issues with original research? Hannahgraines (talk) 06:38, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Feedback from New Page Review process edit
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: I like this article. I added a commons cat so it links to your commons category at Shober, instead of the illegal link in the lede..
scope_creepTalk 09:55, 2 December 2022 (UTC)