Talk:List of Asian American astronauts

Flags

Will change flags of nation to appropriate flag at time of birth. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 06:45, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Removal of Flags discussion

Recently an IP editor removed the flags relating to the ancestry of the Asian American astronauts, this was reverted, only to be removed again. The IP editor gave the removal reasons for the following reasons:

It's inappropriate to use a politcal symbol, ie a national flag, to represent a person's ethnicity specially for American born in the US.

and

Undid revision 418113756. The use of a national flag is a form of political allegiance and you can't arbitrarily assign foreign allegiance to someone born in the US base on their surname.

These flags have been in the article since it was created. Only recently did I change the flags to match the flag of that nation at the time of the individual's birth. This kept with MOS:FLAG#Historical considerations.

It is my contention, holding an opposing view of the IP editor that the listing, and inclusion of a flag, is not meant to indicate the individual holds any allegiance to the nation in question, but as the table indicates it is the country of origin of the individual's ethnicity.

Rather than this developing into an WP:EW, I would like to reach a consensus as to whether the article should include flags or not. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 10:33, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

The article is very explicit that the flags refer to country of ancestry. Nothing is said about "political allegiance", and the IP editor's opinion that using such flags is "arbitrarily assign[ing] foreign allegiance" is baseless. Flags are used to refer to lots of things, not just politics, but also culture, ethnicity, and geography. Does the editor really think that an Italian restaurant that flies the Flag of Italy has a "foreign allegiance"?RandomCritic (talk) 15:07, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

• While naturally I am opposed to flags being in articles like that, I think that it works and is acceptable here. I agree that they should be kept and work well here.--NavyBlue84 17:15, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm the IP editor that removed the PRC flags as symbol of Chinese ancestry. I apologize for the controversies but I strongly object to the use of the PRC flag as a representation of people of Chinese ancestry. PRC is a single party authoritarian state so there is very little distinction between the state and the party. I don't have anything against the communist party, however, I do object to authoritarian state regardless of party affiliations. It would be like an American flag with a picture of a donkey or an elephant substituting the 50 white stars, and outlawing the other parties. PRC flag, represents the single party rule of China, rather than China, and much less its people. Quoting wikipedia's entry on the PRC flag, "The red represents revolution; the five stars and their relationship represent the unity of the Chinese people under the leadership of the Communist Party of China."

Bringing this back to the greater Asian American representation, question arises when we expand beyond just the "Han" Chinese. Should we represent Dalai Lama's ancestry using the PRC flag or the Tibetan flag? Furthermore, what's the criteria for using the PRC flag on someone whose Chinese ancestry predates that of the PRC? Take astronaut Franklin Chang-Diaz, how is he related to PRC?

I don't mind mentioning someone's ethnicity, but I do object to using political flags to identify an individual without a clear set of criteria. I understand the intention of using the flag is not to represent political affiliation, but national flags are political symbols regardless of our intentions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.194.233.98 (talk) 10:08, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Although we may have our own opinions, we must also adhere to WP:NPOV; therefore the use of th PRC flag for China after 1950 or 1979 is not due to our own opinions but are keeping with the previously stated guideline of MOS:FLAG#Historical considerations. However, if we cannot come to a consensus which benchmark to use per aforementioned guideline, then the use of flags for nation of ancestry, should be avoided to maintain aforementioned NPOV.

All this being said my preference is for the latter date rather than the former, as it would then be based on American withdrawal of recognition of the Republic of China. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 11:49, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I think it's appropriate to use PRC flag when denoting someone's citizenship or prior citizenship, but the term Asian American, or more specifically Chinese Americans, refers to someone's ethnicity, which I don't think can be denoted by the PRC flag, or any national flags. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.194.233.98 (talk) 09:23, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

In this case the flags are not denoting nationality or prior citizenship, but individual's ethnicity, and by no means describes the individual's political allegiance. As stated before, the use of the RoC or PRC flag is consistent with the MOS:FLAG#Historical considerations, and is irregardless of our (as editors) individual opinions regarding the controversy around the present disagreement between the two nations. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 10:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

That's my point. We are using national flags out of context when we equate it to a person's ethnicity. Are we stating for a fact that the PRC is representation of Chinese ancestry? because I see it assign to Franklin Chang-Diaz and Ed Lu whom we presume are of Chinese ancestry from their last name, do we know for certain their ancestors are all PRC citizens? we are sure none of the ancestors are from any other Asian ethnicity, ie Japanese, Korean, or Filipino. There are quite of intermarriage between the various Asian American ethnic groups. What's the criteria for using the PRC or any foreign national flag to denote a particular ethnicity?

MOS:FLAG#Historical considerations cautioned against rewriting history, which I think is what we are doing when we equate ethnicity to national flags.

Bigger concern

I don't have a problem with the flags, but I'm concerned about this list as a whole. In particular, without a source making a similar list, it appears to fail the notability critera WP:NLIST. Mlm42 (talk) 19:10, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Agreed - plus I really dislike these lists anyway, splitting up people with equal achievements purely based on race... Colds7ream (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Although it is was not done directly, one can see this as a split from the article Asian American. The notable contributions section is VERY large and is a big reason why that article falls under WP:TOOLONG. The individuals themselves are notable, as is the subject of the parent article if you agree with the idea that this is a split from that article. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:45, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not convinced the size of the Asian American article means that we should be creating "List of Asian American <profession>" for every profession. I see this article more related to List of space travelers by nationality, which isn't too long. Are there things in the present article which couldn't be incorporated into List of space travelers by nationality? If not, then I don't see a need for a separate article. Mlm42 (talk) 18:37, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

And List of Asian Americans isn't too big either. I really fail to see the need of this article, given that it doesn't satisfy WP:NLIST. Mlm42 (talk) 18:48, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Most of them are on List of Asian Americans anyway. Colds7ream (talk) 18:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Please expand on your thought. I don't see how this article does not meet NLIST. The individuals in this list pass WP:BIO, furthermore the topic of this article defines the scope, which all these individuals fall within. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:44, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Information in this list is unique, and it is not duplicated and should not be duplicated in List of space travelers by nationality. That article lists astronauts and other space travelers by their current nationality, not by ethnicity. All the astronauts and space travelers listed in this article are citizens of the United States of America. RandomCritic (talk) 11:51, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough; but why not include it in List of Asian Americans? It doesn't satisfy WP:LISTN (sorry, I may have made a typo, and linked to the wrong policy page), because we need a source, which considers this list as a group or set. Mlm42 (talk) 17:18, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Under that guideline, this article falls under "Lists of X of Y", being that it is a list of Asian American Astronauts, Astronauts are notable in and of themselves, Asian Americans (as a subject/group) is notable in and of itself, this is about a group of notables being seperated based on ethnicity & nationality. The term "Asian American astronaut" has been mentioned fifty four thousand nine hundred times on google. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:29, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not doubting whether the List of Asian Americans is notable.. but the point is, that list isn't big enough to warrant splitting off a dozen astronauts as a separate list.

Also, with so many google hits, maybe you can find a reliable source which discusses "Asian American astronauts" as a group or set? Mlm42 (talk) 16:18, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

(outdent) I too would see that there is no warrant for a separate list of American astronauts by ethnicity. It can be handled as a part of the list of astronauts by nationality, where I would suppose Asian ethnicity could also be noted if that aspect is separately notable and is supported by source citations by each entry. N2e (talk) 17:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

When I was talking about size, I was referring to the main Asian American article, not the List of Asian American list. The Asian American list, although long up and down, is still of appropriate size.

As for group set, there are a lot of hits with the term Asian American astronaut, but it gets harder to find when you add the s. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:57, 14 March 2011 (UTC)