Talk:Monterey Park, California

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In decline?[edit]

Has anyone noticed that Monterey Park is undergoing decline? Abandoned Chinese stores, fewer new Chinese restaurants being opened anymore, grassy lots undeveloped. In the 1980s, it used to be active into the night. Theories?


Well, consider these excerpts from the current article:

  • By the late 1980s, however, immigrants from Mainland China and Vietnam have moved into Monterey Park as well.
  • Since early 1990s, the Taiwanese have been no longer dominant in the city and Cantonese Chinese is now widely spoken and heard in most Chinese businesses of Monterey Park. The construction boom of shopping centers has declined. ... Furthermore, most established, wealthy Taiwanese immigrants have since relocated out of Monterey Park and northward on to wealthier suburbs of San Marino, Arcadia, Temple City, South Pasadena and eastward to Rowland Heights (called the "new Little Taipei" by a local Chinese-language newspaper), Diamond Bar, Hacienda Heights, and Walnut with many Chinese-speaking businesses started in those suburbs to accommodate this particular movement. Nevertheless, there are still countless Chinese-oriented businesses in Monterey Park.
  • Interestingly, as the activity of Taiwanese immigrant activity shifted to San Gabriel, Arcadia and Rowland Heights in the 1980s and 1990s, very few trendy Taiwanese restaurants have opened in Monterey Park.

So one feasible explanation would be that immigrants from Mainland China and Vietnam are somehow causing the Taiwanese (who put the "Taipei" in "little Taipei") to leave Monterey Park and take their businesses with them.


I would have to challenge the feasibility of that argument. The Taiwanese are hardly the only business-oriented Chinese group, and as made evident by Valley Boulevard in neighboring Alhambra. The business opportunities proffered by more recent Hong Kong, Mainland China and Southeast Asian immigrants seem more than adequate to fill Valley Blvd with banks and a variety of other businesses. Your assertion, that somehow "immigrants from Mainland China and Vietnam" are causing Taiwanese to leave Monterey Park is little more than a suggestion that such immigrants are driving Taiwanese away. Any such movement would be a result of possibly biased views of those who are moving out of Monterey Park in the first place, and in any case Wikipedia is hardly the place to be promoting a cultural group. Please refrain. April.s 06:47, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • If there is a reliable source that discusses the "decline," then it would be okay to discuss. Otherwise what we have is original research. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's racist to say that a lower-income group is "driving away" a higher income group. It's impossible. The higher income group is choosing to move away. They have more options, and can choose to stay, but they do not, because they see an opportunity to move to a more expensive neighborhood. Perhaps the opportunity is due to easier access to credit, because access to credit is the main determinant of how much house you can afford. What I see is "ghettofication" of some parts of MPK, where someone will move away and become a long-distance abstentee landlord. You can see this trend across the area, when you look at property ownership data. You know it's going ghetto when a property is owned by someone in San Marino. Living in San Marino is expensive, and the way they manage it is by extracting high rents from people in the southern part of the West SGV. We get ghettoized while they get rich. The solution is simple: clamp down on their property rights. Make it easier for locals to buy property. 99.59.96.65 (talk) 02:14, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have been pondering your "racist" comment. Since everyone referred to is Asian, how could that be racist? There IS a sociological shift in M.P. BTW, I really believe almost nothing is impossible ;-) Shalom! DocOfSoc (talk) 14:09, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Conflict between Chinese immigrants and Japanese Americans are known to occurred in the San Gabriel Valley of the Los Angeles area in the 1980s. Then came the Taiwanese and Koreans, and now the current movement of Vietnamese and mainland Chinese into Monterey Park. It's part of the ever-growing, changing and present Asian-American influence of the San Gabriel valley including Montebello and Covina to some extent. 71.102.12.48 (talk) 19:08, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

History[edit]

I think the history isn't accurate.

In the 1970s to the mid 1980s, Chinese were still a minority. The city was a three way split between ethnic whites, Asians, and Mexican Americans. The Asians were of all ethnicities, with large Japanese and Cantonese speaking (or not) Chinese populations, often not immigrant. In the 1980s, there was an influx of Chinese immigrants, and many were from Hong Kong, and Cantonese was commonly spoken. Also, there were many ethnic Chinese from other countries besides Taiwan and Hong Kong.

Another thing that's not really recognized in the article is that older generations of Chinese Americans really paved the way for the new immigrants to come over, and this older generation were largely from Canton. As I remember it, the people I knew who were Chinese largely spoke some Cantonese, and sometimes one other Chinese language.

Also, it would be good to note that the interracial conflicts of the mid 1980s eventually led to launching the political careers of Judy Chu, and later, Mike Eng, who both worked to resolve the conflicts between immigrants and natives.

The sign issue was an effort to eliminate Chinese from signs. The compromise reached was to add English to signs, so they would be bilingual. That's why signs in Monterey Park have English, while signs in Los Angeles might be only in Spanish, Korean, or another language, without an English translation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.59.96.65 (talk) 02:04, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will be glad to correct any inaccuracies in the history. If you will provide reliable sources, I will change or integrate the information you have outlined. I am more familiar with the Monterey Park of the '60's, but that is personal information and I have yet had the time to research. Any assistance is welcomed. DocOfSoc (talk) 12:07, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Locus[edit]

"locus" The word locus (plural loci) is Latin for "place" or location. They switched locations, not their business focus. TY for your efforts. Happy Editing! Shalom DocOfSoc (talk) 06:49, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New citations[edit]

I am having some difficulty finding cites that are not mirror images directly out of WP. I will continue the search but so far have found just one,[1] which simply won't do for WP standards is my understanding. The City of Monterey Park seems to be also doing some WP imaging, but is a good source, yes/no? [2]Any assistance would be appreciated. Shalom DocOfSoc (talk) 00:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[3] seems to be a relatively good source for the entire block of Asian influenced cities I am researching] DocOfSoc (talk) 00:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[4] DocOfSoc (talk) 08:13, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

:::You've been in Wikipedia since April 2008 and you STILL don't get some basic editing concepts? What is it about WP:NOR, WP:V, and WP:PSTS you're having a hard time understanding? Struck as banned editor. --CrohnieGalTalk 10:15, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What I wonder is why an IP editor who is using a cell phone to edit here for the very first time through that IP and through Verizon Wireless, would know enough to comment on how long that editor has been active here, spout off about no original research, verifiability and repeat things a second time from NOR, as if this anonymous and new editor had been on DocofSoc's tail before or why the IP would even care enough to hunt that out, and make personal attacks on someone whom a noted and indefinitely banned editor harassed and hounded from day one? Smells like dirty socks, yeah? Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What makes you think that IP editor is a new editor? After all, you have claimed to "accidentally" (yeah, right) edited as an IP yourself, haven't you? As someone who has a sockpuppet history yourself, do you really, really want to go down the sockpuppet road, Wildhartlivie? Because if you do, I'm sure I and others can and will be happy to bring up your own "dirty socks". 70.208.40.112 (talk) 23:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC) Struck banned editor. --CrohnieGalTalk 10:15, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

please - stop commenting on editors, and keep your comments focused on edits and content. Commenting on editors is not productive, commenting on content and edits is. --SkagitRiverQueen (talk) 15:24, 15 February 2010 DocOfSoc (talk) 23:07, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

::LOL! What a bunch of idiots. And Doc of Soc, if you think your new "friends" are paying attnetion to you because they think you're a good editor you're fooling yourself. Wake up and realize they are just using you. Like I said, complete idiots. LOL! <|8~P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.51.52.120 (talk) 23:29, 21 June 2010 (UTC) Struck banned editor. --CrohnieGalTalk 10:15, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Skag, give it up. You are making a fool of yourself and no one is fooled a tiny little bit. Please go away and get a life, as suggested in Wiki-Gripe. TY for your attention.DocOfSoc (talk) 00:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

:Like I said, complete idiots (and you're the biggest idiot of all of them, redhead). <|8~P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.196.192.33 (talk) 00:50, 22 June 2010 (UTC) Struck banned editor. --CrohnieGalTalk 10:15, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, it is foolish to try to engage you in meaningful dialogue. DocOfSoc (talk) 01:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't correspond with her. She is not to be editing here per her ban. Please just either remove it, preferred, or strike it. When an editor is banned you are allowed to remove their edits immediately, I suggest this be used here. Conversations is apparently giving her a warped sense of fun with all the attacks above. I struck through this time because of the discussion that went on. Thanks, if you have any questions don't hesitate. --CrohnieGalTalk 10:15, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Updating article[edit]

REF:http://www.the-tidings.com/2006/0217/aquinasside_text.htm

lots of wiki-clone citations (too many)[edit]

famouschinese.com, the montereypark wiki, and other "citations" here are reflexive and not independent sourcesSkookum1 (talk) 04:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

also reference.com which is heavily used, among other wiki-clones. Legitimate citations from Asian Week and P. Fong's book are scattered through teh narrative; but I'm of a mind that the whole so-callec Chinatown section should be deleted (and NB one author labelling this "Chinatown" does not make it one).Skookum1 (talk) 04:33, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: I have not edited this article since August. I did not categorize it a Chinatown, the Asian Wikiproject did. I did not use any wikiclones. So I do not understand what your point is by scooting over here.DocOfSoc (talk) 05:41, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok the two of you got off to a bad start at a different article. Let's not start it here too. Why don't the two of you start over again and stop the attacks? I think assuming good faith is needed now by both of you. Please calm down and go do something different for awhile. Thanks, --CrohnieGalTalk 11:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Research[edit]

As a degreed Sociologist, growing up and living in in the San Gabriel Valley for 50 years, that any one would deny the existence of "Suburban Chinatowns" Is a mystery to me. Extensive research is available for study. " "Suburban China" is a term universally used in the North Americas. It is very frustrating for 2 editors simply deny the existence of "Suburban Chinatowns", being egged on and denigrated by my banned sockpuppet Stalker, SRQ. This violates every principle of Wikipedia. No editor has the right to "just " say no" and delete a well researched and referenced section with further discussion and a consensus.

Monterey Park, California, only eight miles east of downtown Los Angeles, was dubbed by the media as the "First Suburban Chinatown." The city was a predominantly white middle-class bedroom community in the 1970s when large numbers of Chinese immigrants transformed it into a bustling international boomtown. It is now the only city in the United States with a majority Asian American population. Timothy P. Fong examines the demographic, economic, social, and cultural changes taking place there, and the political reactions to the change. Fong, a former journalist, reports on how pervasive anti-Asian sentiment fueled a series of initiatives intended to strengthen "community control," including a movement to make English the official language. Recounting the internal strife and the beginnings of recovery, Fong explores how race and ethnicity issues are used as political organizing tools and weapons.
  • http://www.amazon.com/First-Suburban-Chinatown-Remarking-California/dp/1566391237
  • [6]
Discussing Professor Susie Ling’s research on the history of Monterey Park, America’s first suburban Chinatown
Not in the standard tourist guide, Monterey Park is nevertheless recognized by Chinese the world over as America's first "suburban Chinatown",

Recent research suggests that members of these Chinese communities aren't getting dispersed and lost in the 'burbs. Rather, they're 'reconstituting' their Chinatowns in suburban settings...In the face of gentrification, America's Chinatowns set up shop in the suburbs. Chinatown, Suburban Style. Kelsey,Eric. Utne.com - The Utne Reader, September 13, 2007

The Greater Toronto Area in Ontario, Canada, has at least seven Chinatowns (Chinese: 多倫多唐人街/duo lun duo tang ren jie') — four are located within the city's boundaries, while the other three are located in adjacent suburbs.

Markham's experience as a "suburban Chinatown" in similar to that of neighbouring Richmond Hill. The most well-known Chinese mall in Markham is the Pacific Mall, at Kennedy ...

Article from:The Oral History Review Article date:June 22, 1997 Author:Chen, Yong
In the depths of the worst recession in decades, one of Canada's richest men is taking a $1 billion gamble on 'suburban Chinatown' with plans for a massive mall and luxury hotel/condominium complex in the heart of Markham's shopping district.

With a little bit of reading, rather than undocumented personal opinion, anyone can document the use of the term "Suburban Chinatown" and those towns very existence, especially in Los Angeles County...= DocOfSoc (talk) 02:45, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is exactly what Skookum and I are talking about. Synthesis of sources and then flat out original research. You are taking your sources far too literally and as definite fact; "suburban Chinatown" was a personal perspective from an editor of the LA Times. To show you from another perspective; is a neighborhood with a high Latino population and many Mexican businesses automatically considered a "Latinotown" or "Mexicotown"? …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 19:10, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Read WP:SYNTH again, a+b= ab, the same exact conclusion as *Many* sources. There is no Mexican town , you are talking apples and oranges. My sources are excellent. You should try reading them. DocOfSoc (talk) 19:38, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strawman argument. It is still synthesis and/or a neologism at best. If Monterey Park is commonly referred to as a suburban Chinatown, there would be more than just the blog-esque posts, one LA times article from 1987, and then a book which, judging from the Amazon "Look Inside" pages, is one person's perspective on the city.
A Chinatown is a specific ethnic enclave that everyone can identify. Monterey Park is just a Chinese neighborhood; that fact alone does not automatically make it become a Chinatown. Aside from that, 4 of your 'excellent' sources are listing for the same exact book. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 19:54, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
and four of them aren't. I will not argue or "war" with you. You just don't seem to understand the concept, and I saw what my favorite sockpuppet wrote to you. If you believe that crap no wonder we are on different pages. enJoy, the three of you! DocOfSoc (talk) 20:26, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not agreeing to viewpoints that break numerous guidelines is considered not "understanding the concept"? Also please remind me when or where I have ever agreed with the sock. Your behavior is becoming borderline disruptive as you are refusing to get the point. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 20:35, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me join in to say that I do not reject the concept of "suburban Chinatown", which is a new concept that may yet have to be defined or explored. However, a suburban Chinatown is not a Chinatown, and therefore the category is inappropriate. You simply cannot call any whole San Gabriel Valley city "Chinatown". If you create an article for the Valley Boulevard vicinity of Alhambra, San Gabriel and Rosemead, then maybe. HkCaGu (talk) 07:05, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on whether you wish to see the article deleted or keep, should go on this linked page:
[[7]]
Clarification The article will be rewritten to make clear it is parts of Cities referred to, not whole cities ( Maybe a title change?) DocOfSoc (talk) 09:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested reading[edit]

  • The History of the First Suburban Chinatown[8]
  • History of Asians in the San Gabriel Valley[9]
  • Race and Politics: Asian Americans, Latinos, and Whites in a Los Angeles Suburb (Asian American Experience) [Paperback][http://www.amazon.com/Race-Politics-Americans-American-Experience/dp/0252067207/ref=pd_sim_b_5]
  • The Politics of Diversity Immigration, Resistance, and Change in Monterey Park, California, John Horton, [http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=John+Horton&x=0&y=0#%2Fref%3Dnb_sb_noss%3Furl%3Dsearch-alias%253Dstripbooks%26field-keywords%3DThe%2BPolitics%2Bof%2BDiversity%2BImmigration%252C%2BResistance%252C%2Band%2BChange%2Bin%2BMonterey%2BPark%252C%2BCalifornia%26rh%3Dn%253A283155%252Ck%253AThe%2BPolitics%2Bof%2BDiversity%2BImmigration%255Cc%2BResistance%255Cc%2Band%2BChange%2Bin%2BMonterey%2BPark%255Cc%2BCalifornia&enc=1]
  • Asian Americans: Contemporary Trends and Issues [Paperback]

Dr. Pyong Gap Min (Editor)http://www.amazon.com/Asian-Americans-Contemporary-Trends-Issues/[<nowiki>http://www.amazon.com/Asian-Americans-Contemporary-Trends-Issues/dp/1412905567/ref=sr_1_9?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1288213913&sr=1-9</nowiki>]

  • Envisioning America: New Chinese Americans and the Politics of Belonging (Asian America) [Paperback] Tritia Toyota (Author)[http://www.amazon.com/Envisioning-America-Americans-Politics-Belonging/dp/0804762422/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1288214731&sr=1-5]
  • Bridging the Centuries: History of Chinese Americans in Southern California [Hardcover] Susie Ling (Author)

Susie Ling is an associate professor of Asian American studies at Pasadena City College.

[[10]] Consensus! DocOfSoc (talk) 20:53, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Besides the fact that probably only one of those books reference anything close to a "suburban Chinatown", you've repeated similar things over and over again on various talk pages and AFDs. Other than giving me a "suggested reading" list which doesn't convince me of anything, you'll have to prove that "suburban Chinatown" is a commonly used and notable term, and not some neologism you picked up from one page in a book. I could care less whether or not the author of that last book is an associate professor at a community college. WP:RS/AC, WP:REDFLAG and WP:SYNTH are just a few guidelines that your claims do not meet. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 02:56, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tired of this now[edit]

This discussion does not belong on this page.

And your resources Are? Haven't seen one yet. And please stop with the Wikipedia stuff already, I have already read them all and you are full of ****( pick-a-nice-word)! I am so not impressed with your baloney directed at me. "Probably" means you didn't bother to check... Perhaps you missed the part wherein, Wik'si main stance/Pillar/rule is respect one another. You came out with guns blazing. And why did you cruise over to Monterey Park.? This article was just beyond a good stubby starter article, until I rewrote it last August ... As a retired prof, I am throwing you out of my class for disrespect LOL

asssigned reading[edit]

You have in no way attempted to, or proved your "null hypotheisis". In statistical hypothesis testing two hypotheses are compared, which are called the null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis. The null hypothesis is the hypothesis that states that there is no relation between the phenomena whose relation is under investigation, or at least not of the form given by the alternative hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis, as the name suggests, is the alternative to the null hypothesis: it states that there is some kind of relation. The alternative hypothesis may take several forms, depending on the nature of the hypothesized relation; in particular, it can be two-sided (for example: there is some effect, in a yet unknown direction) or one-sided (the direction of the hypothesized relation, positive or negative, is fixed in advance).DocOfSoc (talk) 06:42, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

""*[[http://www.amazon.com/American-Chinatown-Peoples-History-Neighborhoods/dp/1416557245/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1288410779&sr=1-8 "]]American Chinatown: A People's History of Five Neighborhoods"

  • {[http://www.amazon.com/Chinese-America-Untold-Americas-Community/dp/1595581197/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpi_2]]Chinese America: The Untold Story of America's Oldest New Community [Paperback], Peter Kwong (Author)
  • [[http://www.amazon.com/Sacramentos-Chinatown-Images-America-Lawrence/dp/073858066X/ref=sr_1_26?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1288411655&sr=1-26]]Sacramento's Chinatown (Images of America) [Paperback] Lawrence Tom (Author)
BTW
Timothy P. Fong was awarded
Donald H. Pflueger Local History Award, Historical Society of Southern California, 1999
Outstanding Book Award in the Social Sciences, Association for Asian American Studies, 1995 [[11]] DocOfSoc (talk) 07
50, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

BuBye DocOfSoc (talk) 04:30, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a respected NATIONAL award. DocOfSoc (talk) 21:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

:I still fail to see any acceptance among any group of the "suburban Chinatown" theory. I couldn't care less about what some professor with a local history award thinks. Stop pushing your minority viewpoint; it's neither widely accepted nor well-sourced. I'm also tired of you thinking that you're free to ignore Wikipedia guidelines because you received a PhD in sociology. It doesn't work that way. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 17:34, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Refs[edit]

Chinese America: The Untold Story of America's Oldest New Community [Paperback] Peter Kwong (Author), Dusanka Miscevic (Author) "A magisterial history of the Chinese experience in America, hailed by Howard Zinn as "a wonderful book" that "fills an enormous gap in our history." Described by the Washington Post Book World upon its initial release as "shocking, depressing but ultimately uplifting," Chinese America is award-winning author Peter Kwong and Dusanka Miscevic's definitive portrait of one of the oldest immigrant groups and fastest-growing communities in the United States. Drawing on years of original research and firsthand reporting across the United States and Asia, it charts 150 years of American history from the Chinese frontiersmen of the Wild West to the high-tech transnationals of today's booming Chinese American "ethnoburbs." Kwong and Miscevic apply new thinking to an immigrant story too often told as a simple tale of triumph over adversity. This paradigm-shifting book gives us an entirely original and fresh examination of the new immigrant communities that are transforming present-day America. Chinese America offers a new picture of America's development and the complex connections between immigration, globalization, and foreign policy that exist within our history."


'Contemporary Chinese America "is the most comprehensive sociological investigation of the experiences of Chinese immigrants to the United States—and of their offspring—in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. The author, Min Zhou, is a well-known sociologist of the Chinese American experience. In this volume she collects her original research on a range of subjects, including the causes and consequences of emigration from China, demographic trends of Chinese Americans, patterns of residential mobility in the U.S., Chinese American “ethnoburbs,” immigrant entrepreneurship, ethnic enclave economies, gender and work, Chinese language media, Chinese schools, and intergenerational relations. The concluding chapter, “Rethinking Assimilation,” ponders the future for Chinese Americans. Also included are an extensive bibliography and a list of recommended documentary films." Min Zhou is Professor of Sociology and Asian American Studies at the University of California, Los Angeles. She is the author of Chinatown (Temple) and The Transformation of Chinese America, co-author of Growing Up American, and co-editor of Asian American Youth and Contemporary Asian America.

Ethnoburb: The New Ethnic Community in Urban America [Hardcover] Li Wei (Author) [http://www.amazon.com/Ethnoburb-Ethnic-Community-Urban-America/dp/0824830652/ref=pd_sim_b_6]

Since you seem to ignore all references except those of Dr. Wong,here are a couple more for you to ignore. Do your homework. DocOfSoc (talk) 21:53, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me where any of that mentions "suburban Chinatown". Go ahead, point it out. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 20:11, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have given you several instances of the term. Go read. I don't know where you live now, but i dare you to drive down the "Valley Blvd. Corridor" and tell us you are NOT in a part of the various cities that are Chinatowns. Try Alhambra ->> to El Monte, as I did last night. I know OR, but I would like you to just SEE! DocOfSoc (talk) 21:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've had plenty of experience with the San Gabriel Valley. That still does not automatically make the place a "suburban Chinatown". …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 23:50, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suburban or not, there are reliable sources that refer to Monterey Park as a Chinatown. Is there any dispute that it is a Chinatown?   Will Beback  talk  00:54, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Oh DEAR Will, see: [[12]] DocOfSoc (talk) 01:30, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Chinatown" excerpts[edit]

For example:

  • In fact, much of the eastern San Gabriel Valley has more in common with Taipei, Beijing or Shanghai than it does with neighboring Los Angeles. Here, Asian-immigrant entrepreneurs have transformed once-sleepy suburbia into a Chinatown like no other. They are far from struggling newcomers trying to achieve the American Dream in other Chinese enclaves such as Monterey Park and San Gabriel farther to the west. [..] It's a lifestyle that requires few jaunts outside their "new Chinatown" enclave, save for shopping runs to South Coast Plaza in Costa Mesa or a chance to race Mike Tsai's Lamborghini, Porsche or Ferrari at Crystal Cove.
    • COLUMN ONE; Close to L.A. but closer to Beijing; In the eastern San Gabriel Valley, wealthy ethnic Chinese with close economic ties to Asia are thriving. Call it the third Chinatown. David Pierson. Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Calif.: Jun 19, 2008. pg. A.1
  • Researchers putting together an exhibit chronicling the transformation of Monterey Park from a sleepy bedroom community to a thriving modern Chinatown ran into a problem.
    • Frank Girardot: Monterey Park an icon of change. Whittier Daily News. Whittier, Calif.: Nov 30, 2009.
  • The San Gabriel Valley's growth from sleepy suburban towns to vibrant sprawling engines of economy is the focus of the upcoming Esotouric bus tour, "The New Chinatowns." Current residents might not be aware that small-town San Gabriel was the birthplace of the Hula Hoop and Frisbee or that Laura Scudder potato chips were made and packaged in Monterey Park. With such insightful and potentially useful trivia information on hand, the Feb. 20 tour will try to examine what the circumstances were that caused certain valley cities, especially Monterey Park, to be come a "new Chinatown," said Richard Schave, co-founder of Esotouric.
    • New Chinatowns tour set for Feb. 20 Caroline An. San Gabriel Valley Tribune. West Covina, Calif.: Feb 6, 2010.
  • Meanwhile, Monterey Park was undergoing a profound transformation. By the 1980s, a huge influx of Asian immigrants had turned my Southern California Mayberry into America's first suburban Chinatown.
    • Raul Reyes: Hometown, native all grown up Raul Reyes. San Gabriel Valley Tribune. West Covina, Calif.: Jun 8, 2007.
  • In the early '80s, taking advantage of liberalized immigration policies, a great influx of Taiwanese turned Monterey Park into the nation's first suburban Chinatown.
    • SPECIAL ISSUE / YEAR OF THE PIG / HISTORY; RESTAURANT HISTORY; From chop suey to Chiu Chow; [HOME EDITION] Charles Perry. Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Calif.: Feb 21, 2007. pg. F.1
  • Alhambra, neighboring Monterey Park and the surrounding suburbs, home to the nation's oldest and largest suburban Chinatown, were once known as Little Taipei and Chinese Beverly Hills for the Taiwan and Hong Kong natives who streamed in with enough cash to buy a house and a Mercedes.
    • Ministering To New Face Of Migrants From China Cindy Chang. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: May 31, 2006. pg. A.14
  • I would have bet that the nexus of Gardena and Torrance was on the verge of becoming the next Monterey Park, which is in itself either the next Chinatown, or the next Hong Kong, depending on how global your vision is.
    • EATING * Feasting at the Sea Empress MERRILL SHINDLER. Daily Breeze. Torrance, Calif.: Nov 3, 2006. pg. R.38
  • Timothy Fong, a professor and director of Asian-American studies at Cal State Sacramento, said many of the complaints are similar to those heard during the '80s, when an influx of Asian-oriented businesses in Monterey Park, the first "suburban Chinatown," caused an uproar and the City Council attempted to pass English-only ordinances but failed.
    • Some in Chino Hills nervous about ethnic shift exemplified by Asian supermarket Douglas Quan. McClatchy - Tribune Business News. Washington: Feb 7, 2007. pg. 1
  • . This road runs through the San Gabriel Valley, straight east from downtown, all the way to Jacksonville, Fla. (to the west, it runs only 10 miles, to Santa Monica). And for its first 50 miles or so, from Los Angeles to San Bernardino, it is a modern-day Chinatown, a string of multiethnic communities that all have a large, dynamic Chinese population.
    • The East Is West: The Best Chinese Restaurants Mark Bittman. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Dec 3, 2006. pg. 5.8
  • With its trendy boutiques, warehouse-size Asian supermarkets and seemingly endless dining options representing all corners of Chinese cuisine, many say San Gabriel has become what Monterey Park and Alhambra used to be: the prime destination for local and visiting Chinese. "San Gabriel is the epicenter of where the Chinese community is today," said Carl Chu, a Taiwanese American and author of "Finding Chinese Food in Los Angeles," who insists that the only place to find authentic Peking duck -- not deep-fried -- in Southern California is in San Gabriel. Chu said San Gabriel's rising profile has supplanted the San Gabriel Valley's traditional Chinese powerhouses of Monterey Park and Alhambra. More than a generation ago, Chinese, Taiwanese and Hong Kong immigrants transformed the strip malls of those two suburbs into Chinatown east. [..] "I love [San Gabriel Square], it's like a new Chinatown," said Jack Ha, 24, as he stepped out of Media King, a CD and DVD store that brings to mind the Virgin Megastore if it sold nothing but Asian films and music. "When I think of Monterey Park, I think of it being an old Chinatown," Ha said. "San Gabriel is hip. It's a happening place."
    • Dragon Roars in San Gabriel; The city has evolved into the region's new center for the Chinese community, and now even has a mayor who shares its cultural heritage.; [HOME EDITION] David Pierson. Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Calif.: Mar 31, 2006. pg. B.1

And so on. There's no question that Monterey Park, and to a lesser extent its neighbors, have been called a "Chinatown".   Will Beback  talk  01:33, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No. Monterey Park and many other surrounding cities may each have a Chinatown (or two, or three, etc.), but they are not Chinatowns. Articles may call something a Chinatown to illustrate a point, but in everyday life it is not called a Chinatown. To anyone living in the SGV, Chinatown means north of Downtown L.A. and nothing else. Chinatown in most people's minds means a small neighborhood of overwhelming Chinese population, not a large area of high concentration of Chinese population and multiple clusters of Chinese businesses. With no such traditional concentration, nothing fits the widely-accepted definitions of Chinatown and no suburban cities define them so. Chinatown is businesses and residences. The so-called "suburban Chinatowns" are simply businesses as Chinese don't concentrate in certain residential neighborhoods. HkCaGu (talk) 03:23, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It may not be "the Chinatown" in the L.A. area, but it is undoubtedly "a Chinatown" based on these sources. We don't remove material simply because we decide it doesn't fit our own definition.   Will Beback  talk  03:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What? A few sources trumps common use? (Or more accurately, common disuse?) HkCaGu (talk) 04:22, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In a word, yes. And it's ten sources. Do you have any sources that contradict them?   Will Beback  talk  04:26, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The sources compare suburban settlements to Chinatowns. They do not define the word Chinatown. HkCaGu (talk) 04:35, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The sources, some at least, say that Monterey Park is is a Chinatown. If this were an article about the definition of "Chinatown", then definitions from sources would be helpful. But the question here is simply whether there are reliable sources that call Monterey Park a Chinatown, and the answer seems clear.   Will Beback  talk  04:50, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They don't. Note the many modifiers to the word Chinatown, such as "new", "suburban", "like a" and even the quotation marks, which means it doesn't fit the original definition and understanding of Chinatown. The modifying and the quoting mean the authors are more illustrating the area than calling the area "Chinatown". And beside all these, "Monterey Park has been called a Chinatown" is not equivalent to "Monterey Park is a Chinatown". HkCaGu (talk) 06:38, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ..the transformation of Monterey Park from a sleepy bedroom community to a thriving modern Chinatown ..
  • it is a modern-day Chinatown
Is the Chinatown category limited to non-modern Chinatowns?
  • turned Monterey Park into the nation's first suburban Chinatown.
  • Alhambra, neighboring Monterey Park and the surrounding suburbs, home to the nation's oldest and largest suburban Chinatown,
  • Monterey Park, the first "suburban Chinatown,"
  • turned my Southern California Mayberry into America's first suburban Chinatown.
Are suburban Chinatowns excluded from the category?
Which sources say that Chinatowns have to be old and urban? If it's just an agreement among Wikipedia editors then that's not sufficient to exclude sourced information.   Will Beback  talk  06:56, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you still don't get it--if it is a Chinatown, you don't need a modifier/adjective (new, suburban, modern) before the word Chinatown. HkCaGu (talk) 07:50, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Chinatown north of Los Angeles is still called "new Chinatown" in some sources because it was was moved in the 1930s to make way for Union Station.   Will Beback  talk  07:55, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You can highlight "transformed once-sleepy suburbia into a Chinatown" but the whole phrase is "transformed once-sleepy suburbia into a Chinatown like no other". The word "Chinatown" still don't have two legs to stand on without the help of some modifiers like "suburban", "new", "modern", or even "like no other"! HkCaGu (talk) 04:41, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The 'Burb[edit]

Dear HkCaGu, I see in your extensive and impressive list of travels, that you have only lived in Arcadia, in SGV. I don't don't where you live now but you are invited to drive down the "Valley Boulevard Corridor" and still claim that you are not in a "Suburban Chinatown" I will buy you the best bowl of noodle soup anywwhere, including our traditional Chinatown. Arcadia may as well be on a different planet and if you are like my many friends there you simply didn't drive down south of Temple City. Rosemead, San Gabriel and Alhambra, not to mention Monterey Park have "pockets" there are certainly enclaves of the Asian community. I am truly sorry you disagree, I live here,I know what it feels like, a lot like when I was in Korea--a definite cultural difference. If you are willing to read, I have some excellent resources written by respected Asian scholars. TY for you time. DocOfSoc (talk) 04:55, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm there on Valley (west of Rosemead) every week. If you call it a "Suburban Chinatown", I'd agree. I wouldn't call it that way except maybe to someone who doesn't understand the concept. (Like the term "private car" in public-transport dominated cities.) But it's not a Chinatown, and each city is not a Chinatown, and unfortunately you can't define any part of any of these cities as a Chinatown. HkCaGu (talk) 06:26, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to whom is Monterey Park not a Chinatown? You're just asserting that as a fact without providing any sources to support it.   Will Beback  talk  06:37, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK HK, you are confusing me;-) You agree that we have " Suburban Chinatowns. We agree that the entire city is not a "Chinatown." y Hypothesis is that we we have puzzle pieces of Chinatown all over the San Gabriel Valley. If they were all connected, which they do not, they would be another Chinatown. They are "pockets" or again puzzle pieces, and yes we can define parts of these cities as like " Chinatowns" Wanna do lunch? ;-) I live just east of Valley and Rosemead. Respectfully, DocOfSoc (talk) 06:52, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You said it, "like Chinatown". To me that's not Chinatown. I don't use the term Chinatown to describe these areas, and the local population (SGV or metropolitan LA) do not use that term either. As shown by the sources, it is only for illustrative purposes to people outside metro LA or unfamiliar with the modern development. HkCaGu (talk) 07:48, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A Chinatown is an ethnic enclave of overseas Chinese people. If that's a good definition, then Monterey Park qualifies, as the sources also indicate, because it is an ethnic enclave of overseas Chinese people.   Will Beback  talk  08:01, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but that is just a completely ridiculous assertion. We don't call places with large Hispanic populations "suburban Mexicotowns" simply because there's some Mexican grocery stores and restaurants around the corner. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 21:37, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A) I've never heard of any place called "Mexicotown". If this is a legitimate comparison please tell me more about "Mexicotowns". B) Are you asserting that the only Chinese presence in Monterey Park is a few businesses?   Will Beback  talk  01:15, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just because Chinese people make up a somewhat large amount of the population, it makes it a Chinatown? Think about that for a moment. Applying this logic, there would "[x ethnicity]towns" all over the US. It does not matter if there is or is not such a thing as a Mexicotown; claims such as these are simply founded in ignorance based on ethnicity. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 21:53, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If a Chinatown isn't an ethnic enclave of overseas Chinese people, then what is it? Aside from the name, what makes a "Chinatown" a "Chinatown" if not Chinese people?   Will Beback  talk  10:00, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is a fundamental difference in population distribution between the new suburban phenomenon and the old ghetto/bario pattern. Monterey Park is not an ethnic enclave of any race. HkCaGu (talk) 20:18, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So you're saying that a Chinatown must be a ghetto? As for "enclave", here are sources that call the city one:
  • They are far from struggling newcomers trying to achieve the American Dream in other Chinese enclaves such as Monterey Park and San Gabriel farther to the west.
    • COLUMN ONE; Close to L.A. but closer to Beijing; In the eastern San Gabriel Valley, wealthy ethnic Chinese with close economic ties to Asia are thriving. Call it the third Chinatown. David Pierson. Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Calif.: Jun 19, 2008. pg. A.1
  • Southern California has numerous ethnic enclaves where speaking English is not a necessity, including parts of the San Gabriel Valley, Little Saigon, East L.A. and Koreatown. And some residents there say the lack of English hasn't diminished their lives. Michael Yang said through an interpreter that he left Taiwan for the U.S. in 1984 and still barely speaks any English. The 58-year- old signed up for classes last year, but quit soon after because he was too embarrassed to learn alongside students a third his age. Not surprising to some, his lack of English has not hindered his everyday life in the heavily Chinese San Gabriel Valley, he says. Yang owns a popular video store filled with the latest hits from Asia that serves Chinese speakers almost exclusively. His everyday needs like dining and shopping are done in Chinese businesses and all the websites and newspapers he reads are in Chinese.
    • The State; Not at home with English; A new census report says 43% in the state and 53% in L.A. speak a different language in their private lives.; [HOME EDITION] Anna Gorman, David Pierson. Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Calif.: Sep 13, 2007. pg. A.1
  • Jews will be pulling out the chopsticks at eateries in Chinatown and in such San Gabriel Valley Chinese enclaves as Monterey Park and Alhambra as well, following a custom that many believe started in New York in an era when Chinese restaurants were the only ones open on Christmas.
    • Two Worlds at One Table; Shanghai Diamond Garden Restaurant is both Chinese and kosher. Melding two very different culinary traditions was difficult but is paying off.; [HOME EDITION] David Pierson. Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles, Calif.: Dec 24, 2005. pg. B.1
  • That's because the concept -- which Liu is taking in almost cookie-cutter fashion from thousands of other similar minimalls across the country -- has proved wildly successful in markets as diverse as the Chinese American enclave of Monterey Park, Calif., to the predominantly white community of Oklahoma City.
    • Novice aims for ethnic market Angie Chuang. Knight Ridder Tribune Business News. Washington: Jul 25, 2005. pg. 1
Reliable sources call Monterey Park a Chinese enclave.   Will Beback  talk  22:04, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
See, that's WP:SYNTH right there. You're saying that since Monterey Park has a large Chinese population, and Chinatowns are places with high Chinese populations, then Monterey Park is a Chinatown. Besides that, there are many other factors that make a Chinatown a Chinatown. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 23:17, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't answer, so I'll ask again. If a Chinatown isn't an ethnic enclave of overseas Chinese people, then what is it? Aside from the name, what makes a "Chinatown" a "Chinatown" if not Chinese people?   Will Beback  talk  23:21, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A place should only be called a Chinatown where the term is commonly accepted. According to the Wikipedia, an ethnic enclave is "a neighbourhood, district, or suburb which retains some cultural distinction from a larger, surrounding area." I would like you to show me any special cultural distinction for Monterey Park besides that there are some Chinese people here and there. Are there any unique building designs or scenes reminiscent of a city in mainland China? …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 00:18, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're asking me to do original research. That's not how Wikipedia works. I've shown you numerous sources that call MP an enclave and a Chinatown. You haven't provided a single source that contradicts them. Based on the overwhelming evidence from sources, I'm going to restore the "Chinatown" category to the article.   Will Beback  talk  00:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
However many sources you quote doesn't change the fact that Monterey Park is not known as a Chinatown, period. All the sources you quoted compared it to a Chinatown, but they provide no proofs (because it isn't true) that people call it Chinatown every day. Monterey Park is not a Chinese enclave. It has Chinese enclaves (of malls and maybe apartment buildings) that do not individually compose a Chinatown. In Chinatown you can walk into any business and speak Chinese. In Monterey Park or San Gabriel, you can't. HkCaGu (talk) 11:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If it is already called a Chinatown, why would L.A. Times say "Call it the third Chinatown"? And things haven't changed since 2008. HkCaGu (talk) 11:22, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are what we're about. Our job, as Wikipedia editors, is to verifiably summarize reliable sources using the neutral point of view. If sources say that "X is Y", then that's what we report. There are many sources, both journalists and scholars, who call this city a Chinatown. If there are sources with different views we can report those too.   Will Beback  talk  12:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If your only source about "Chinatown" is "Call it the third Chinatown", then it has been misinterpreted. "Call it the third Chinatown" obviously means it is not already called Chinatown. For a parallel example, people often say "Call it the 51st state". Does that prove it is a state? No! HkCaGu (talk) 18:04, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, that isn't the only source. I've posted many sources on this page. (they're easy to spot- all in italics). As for your comparison, people say that Hawaii is the 50th state, which is correct even though it's called "Hawaii" and not "State #50".   Will Beback  talk  21:27, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
People call Hawaii the 50th state because it IS the 50th state that was admitted to the US and accepted as such. On the other hand, a WP:SYNTH-y skewing of words to produce the equation Monterey Park = city with high Chinese population = Chinese ethnic enclave = Chinatown is most likely accepted by 2 or 3 people on Wikipedia and not credited by any major, reliable source. In addition, most of those sources you've posted refer to it as a "suburban Chinatown" in a metaphorical form and is not meant to be taken literally. The rest say it would become the "next Chinatown", which wouldn't abide to WP:CRYSTALBALL. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 21:37, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You misunderstand my assertions. I'm not saying that Monterey is a Chinatown because of its population or its businesses. I'm saying it's a Chinatown because reliable sources call it a Chinatown. That's the opposite of original research.   Will Beback  talk  22:52, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WP:UNDUE - "If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it does not belong in Wikipedia regardless of whether it is true or not and regardless of whether you can prove it or not, except perhaps in some ancillary article." It is a fringe assertion at best and there are many fallacies to calling the city a Chinatown. It simply isn't one and is not accepted as one by the general public. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 23:12, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to whom is this a fringe view? Show me sources that dispute it. While I respect you as a Wikipedia editor, our mere opinions don't really have weight here. It's what the sources say that matters. So who says that MP isn't an ethnic enclave?   Will Beback  talk  00:00, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here's another quotation from WP:UNDUE:
  • Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public.
So we can only judge weight by reference to reliable sources. I've provided many, you've provided none. Therefore you seem to be the one promoting a minority view.   Will Beback  talk  00:13, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do tell me how you can source an almost non-existent usage of a neologism. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 21:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If it's almost non-existent, then that'd be a sign that it's a fringe view. But if there are multiple sources then that indicates it probably isn't a fringe view. Especially if there are no sources that have a conflicting view. We haven't seen even a single source that says Monterey Park is not a Chinatown. So, it would appear that that is the fringe view, not the other way around.   Will Beback  talk  22:50, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
By that logic, you could argue that Pluto is inhabited with aliens because you haven't proven it to be false. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 20:33, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If there were multiple reliable sources which said there are aliens on Pluto, then yes, that's what we'd report.   Will Beback  talk  21:49, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But what you are saying is that in the absence of sources that claim something is false, we should automatically believe something to be true. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 20:56, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suburban Chinatown II[edit]

Hi Ya! I really enjoyed this resource. Please peruse. [[13]]History of Asians in the San Gabriel Valley. A historical overview of one of America's "most Asian" regions by Susie Ling PhD. DocOfSoc (talk) 07:10, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fong[edit]

Why does this sentence keep getting deleted? Scholarly sources are the best available. Deleting sourced, neutral material is disruptive, and should not be done without a good reason.   Will Beback  talk  22:49, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If there's nothing further I'll restore it.   Will Beback  talk  22:36, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's one person out of 310 million Americans. On top of that, he is hardly even notable. According to WP:UNDUE (and Jimbo Wales for that matter), "If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it does not belong in Wikipedia regardless of whether it is true or not and regardless of whether you can prove it or not, except perhaps in some ancillary article." …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 23:10, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is one, highly reliable source. Are you saying that we need 155 million sources for anything we add? I guess I don't understand your point. There are other sources that also call Monterey Park a "suburban Chinatown", so this isn't a singular view. Despite much discussion, I haven't seen anyone offer a single source that disputes the assertion. If this is a vastly limited minority view, then please provide sources showing the majority view.   Will Beback  talk  23:58, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh there have been many, many points by numerous editors. Monterey Park is not a Chinatown, plain and simple. It is not a widely accepted use of the term, and you're asking us to prove something that doesn't exist. The burden of proof lies on the editor who restores or adds material and exceptional claims require exceptional sourcing. Few of which have been offered so far, and still nothing on exceptional sources/mainstream coverage.
Fong can yell on top of Mt. Everest with a microphone and the loudest speakers ever constructed; it still doesn't make his fringe opinion any more noteworthy. …Grayshi talk ■ my contribs 21:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since we're not making any progress here, and since you are basing your opposition to this materal on WP:FRINGE, I've posted on a noticeboard asking for outside input. See Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard#Monterey Park, California.   Will Beback  talk  22:30, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's fair to say that the uninvolved editors at WP:FTN did not agree that this is a fringe theory which should be excluded from Wikipedia. Therefore I'm going to restore the deleted material.   Will Beback  talk  21:30, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Link in support of above for use later. — DocOfSoc • Talk • 03:16, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Monterey Park, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:22, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Elected officials update[edit]

The elected officials have changed due to their usual 9 1/2 month rotation. Would someone consider updating that section? New lineup is: Peter Chan, Mayor; Mitchell Ing, Mayor Pro Tem; Teresa Real Sebastian, Council Member; Stephen Lam, Council Member Hans Liang, Council Member; Vincent D. Chang, City Clerk; Joseph Leon, City Treasurer. Thanks. Cityofmpk-rishino (talk) 14:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC) Source [2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cityofmpk-rishino (talk • contribs) 14:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference temple.edu was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ http://www.montereypark.ca.gov/917/City-Council

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Monterey Park, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:21, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Monterey Park, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:28, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Monterey_Park,_California&oldid=1207288057"