Talk:Chink

This article was nominated for deletion on March 21, 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep.

Asian Americans Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asian Americans, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asian Americans on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Asian AmericansWikipedia:WikiProject Asian AmericansTemplate:WikiProject Asian AmericansAsian Americans articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Trim down

I cannot see any benefit to the article to trim down one of the meanings of chink to what we have now, from the original below. Improvements are possible, but to render less clear by removing contexts is surely not in the interests of clarity. Here is what was before:

Chink can also refer to a small gap, or by a small margin, with reference to the closeness of objects or debating positions. For example, the following phrases are commonplace in the UK:

"I can see a chink in his armour" with reference to someone who has the potential for a hole in an argument during a debate "There was a chink of light between the curtains" to describe a small gap between curtains allowing a shaft of light through --JRL 04:50, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

I think the current definition is clear and understandable. Your definition adds additional information at a heft cost. More importantly, your expansion is wrong or misleading. Chink does not refer to the closeness of debating positions, but rather, a fault in them -- as a crack would be in a wall. I would like clearer definition if you can come up with a compact one. Finally, the OED lists 6-10 different meanings of chink, all recent. I think we should define all of them, before focusing so much on one particular meaning. --Muchosucko 12:14, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Offensiveness

I'm not trying to POV this article by asserting the offensiveness of the term, I'm just trying to remove equivacatory pablam. I would argue the the offensiveness of the term doesn't have anything to do with everyone finding it offensive; it is clearly offensive to a great many people. If someone doesn't find it personally offensive, that doesn't mean it fails to offend a larger group. If there is a way to write this without a "considered" or "considered by many" nonsensical remark in front of it, I would think that would be fine, I just can't think of a way to do it without gutting the definition.--The Grza

Well, there are some East Asians who use the term among themselves.

I don't think it's insipid to state things in a full and complete manner; and furthermore I find it wrong to claim that a term can ever be 100% offensive, as there are many people, such as myself, who are never offended by simple words. As this entry somewhat resembles that of a dictionary, we must remember the rule to be descriptive and not prescriptive. I'm re-adding "considered," and if the term bothers you then we could simply remove "offensive" and let the reader form his own opinions on ethnic slurs. Citizen Premier 14:40, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, I decided to take out "highly offensive" instead. Citizen Premier 14:43, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From the page

"CHINK. A combination of abbreviations used to identify the Chinese Army and North Korean Army elements on US military maps during the Koran War. The abbreviation 'CHI" being placed over Chinese Army units and "NK" being placed over the symbols representing the North Korean Army units. Combined units were shown as "CHI/NK" and the enemy became knowns as "Chinks". The word was used throughout the Korean War and later to describe Asian enemies.^{[citation needed]}"

This seems dubious to me: can anyone provide a cite for this? -- The Anome 14:29, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citation is; Personal witness to the development of the abbreviation structure. Take it or leave it, that is the way it happened!.

I was in the U.S. Military at the time and saw the development of this word to describe the enemy in verbal communications.[Texrob]

We need more than that on wikipedia; evidence from personal experience is considered original research; other evidence is needed. See also [1], which shows that the term "chink" referred to "a Chinaman" long before the Korean War. Citizen Premier 21:32, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The citation states "chink' was used in 1901 but does not show the source. As I said, I was a witness, not an original researcher. I personally think a bunch of un-informed high schoolers are in control of this page and it does not deserve the title "Encyclopedia". Furthermore,It seems these high schoolers could care less about the truth. As I said, Take it or leave it but you damned well should consider it because it was the 1950s when the term came into general use. Think there might be aconnection? Idiots! Rob

I wouldn't care if God himself came in here claiming a new etymology for the term; I wouldn't believe him without a link to a creditable source.

In most cases, Wikipedia articles include material on the basis of verifiability, not truth. That is, we report what other reliable secondary sources have published, whether or not we regard the material as accurate. In order to avoid doing original research, and in order to help improve the quality of Wikipedia articles, it is essential that any primary-source material, as well as any generalization, analysis, synthesis, interpretation, or evaluation of information or data, has been published by a reputable third-party publication (that is, not self-published) that is available to readers either from a website (other than Wikipedia) or through a public library. It is very important to cite sources appropriately, so that readers can find your source and can satisfy themselves that Wikipedia has used the source correctly.

If you're right it shouldn't be too hard to find a source! Citizen Premier 20:18, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the term came from the Manchu name for their (Chinese) Empire   "Da Qing Guo"

i.e. Great Ching Country/Empire ; many Chinese emigrated to the USA towards the end of the Ching Dynasty (in the mid-1800's and early 1900's), so a Chinese of the period could answer " I am a Ching " (i.e. Ching-citizen) to describe his nationality . To white American ears of the day this could evolve into what would be seen as an 'appropriate' racial slur "Chink" in English . This would suggest the 1902 anecdote would be correct. The misuse would arise in the same way as the 'other' racial slur "Chinaman" which is a word-for word translation of the Chinese term 'Zhong Guo ren' (China- man) for a Chinese person. Foreign accents can be a target both of good-natured kidding and of mocking abuse.

The term is likely an amalglamation of a mangled version of the word ching and the word china, as well a reference to the actual word chink. In medieval times the small slots in the facemask of a helmet was referd to as a chink which is where we get the term "chink in the armour".

merge?

shouldn' that be part of List of ethnic slurs, like "gook"? (131.130.121.106 11:49, 3 July 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Shameful

This is shameful. You have a full-fledged articles about Nigger, and other crap I have never even heard of, but when it comes to something relating to asians, nobody cares. I guess it is ok to make fun of asians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.232.59.124 (talk • contribs) 2007-01-25 02:34:04 (UTC)

Then expand the article. Don't just bitch about it. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 02:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

every1 knows y asian men r so angry lol —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.88.22.238 (talk) 01:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

2007-02-1 Automated pywikipediabot message

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)
Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.
Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 03:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger with English Language names for Chinese people

Oppose Chink has a completely different history than other racial terms against Chinese people. Also, 'Chink' can refer to people from any East Asian country, including Vietnam and Korea, thus making it innapropriate to merge with an article exclusively about Chinese people.Zeus1234 16:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There's enough information about this particular term to garner its own article. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Easian

What about the term Easian which is short for East Asian? I have sometimes seen on forums the use of the term Easian to describe people of the Mongoloid Asian type. This term has no offensive drive behind it but has no mentioned on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.34.227.166 (talk) 15:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Caption

[[:Image:Ironchinkworker.png|thumb|right|The Iron Chink, ironically alongside a Chinese butcher, was racially marketed as a replacement for Chinese immigrants during the Chinese Exclusion Act]]. I haven't a clue what an "Iron Chink" is. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 21:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An "iron chink" is a machine that cleans salmon and readies it for canning. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Missed the point - I think

Cetitau 17:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC) cetitau[reply]

It seems there's a great sensitivity here about the improper use of the word "Chink" as it relates to Asians. And while I am as offended as the next when it comes to disparaging any group (disparaging individuals is perfectly ok). What I don't find here is any interest in a definition of the word as it is normally used in the language.

Chink: slit, crack, etc. In geology/petroleum ???? (which is what I'm looking for). I believe it means a crack or possibly a void in solid rock. Maybe some who knows how to do this could put a definition here that relates to the proper use of the word instead of all this ..... whatever about the incorrect use of it.

I STUFF CHINESE FOOD DOWN MY PANTS?

Someone made a sentence this page, were they just trying to be funny..? Well, im removing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitanoz (talk • contribs) 21:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]