Current Events > Really Wikipedia ? (racist term for impoverished Chinese)

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1894_Hong_Kong_plague

End of second paragraph. I cannot believe I read this in wikipedia.

---

Huh. Never heard of that before.

---

So fix it.

---

Not saying it's good, but that slur for a day laborer has been around a long time. In almost any old movie from the 40s and earlier set in China, it's unfortunately used.

---

The only time I remember hearing that word before was in an old martial arts movie from about 50 years ago.

Wtf that's such a neat sounding word though dammit @racism

---

that used to also mean sunglasses and alcoholic beverage wraps/containers, too.

also, TC is one of these cancel culture snobs who probably speaks out against cancel culture when in a group setting

Wait. Second paragraph ? You mean in origins? What does the word start with

---

Which one? C****es?

---

The word he's talking about is literally a link, to a page about it as a slur.

---

jon1012 posted...

Wait. Second paragraph ? You mean in origins? What does the word start with

third paragraph overall, 2nd in the origins section. starts with a c

---

IIRC, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan played roles where they were referred to by that slur. Not new at all.

---

The citation they link uses that term.

I changed it tho. Mostly just to see if I could.

---

Its been cleaned up now.

---

brestugo posted...

Not saying it's good, but that slur for a day laborer has been around a long time. In almost any old movie from the 40s and earlier set in China, it's unfortunately used.

Slurs being used before doesn't mean the Wikipedia article should use them.

brestugo posted...

IIRC, Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan played roles where they were referred to by that slur. Not new at all.

Did I miss someone saying it was new?

---

Oh somebody changed it.

Never heard of that. What makes it racist?

---

joe40001 posted...

What makes it racist?

Racists, presumably.

---

Ive never heard of this, it seems to be edited out, I think I found out what it is by googling around

Bad thread

Wjat was the word? >_>

Never mind I found it. I thought it was the more famous slur that begins with c. I've never heard this other one before.
---

Mr_Rian posted...

Slurs being used before doesn't mean the Wikipedia article should use them.

Did I miss someone saying it was new?

I'm no fan of slurs either but wikipedia also uses and explains the n-word. As this thread shows, people didn't know the meaning of the word and/or context. It was new to them. That's why the c-word was hyperlinked.

---

spanky1 posted...

Wjat was the word? >_>

Check edit history.

---

joe40001 posted...

Oh somebody changed it.

Never heard of that. What makes it racist?

It was used to label/create a stereotype of an Asian day laborer.

---

brestugo posted...

I'm no fan of slurs either but wikipedia also uses and explains the n-word. As this thread shows, people didn't know the meaning of the word and/or context. It was new to them. That's why the c-word was hyperlinked.

Was going to say about the N-word wiki and wonder if these snowflakes were going to edit that too. They are basically wanting to erase history.

---

pegusus123456 posted...

The citation they link uses that term.

I changed it tho. Mostly just to see if I could.

Stop vandalizing Wikipedia.

---

Ah, found it.

---

Blade_Trinity posted...

Was going to say about the N-word wiki and wonder if these snowflakes were going to edit that too. They are basically wanting to erase history.

So far the 2008 Oscars wikipedia still indicates that "_____ Page" was nominated for Best Actress for Juno with an asterisk explaining. Though that has gone back and forth.

Wikipedia seems fairly reasonable, trying to represent history truthfully while also being sensitive where possible.

Edit: To be safe though it shouldn't be necessary

---

Kinda weird the person who created the article knew to hyperlink to the article on the word to Wikipedia itself but didn't think they probably shouldn't use it. With the way it was done it just straight-up looks like some random throw-in.

It is in the cited source (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/
articles/PMC2081002/pdf/pubhealthreporig03876-0001.pdf), but that of course is from 1906.
---

joe40001 posted...

So far the 2008 Oscars wikipedia still indicates that "_____ Page" was nominated for Best Actress for Juno with an asterisk explaining. Though that has gone back and forth.

Wikipedia seems fairly reasonable, trying to represent history truthfully while also being sensitive where possible.

Edit: To be safe though it shouldn't be necessary

Thats insane, like, just say elliot in the article and link to their bio

Like how do we handle p diddy links?

UndefeatedGOAT posted...

Thats insane, like, just say elliot in the article and link to their bio

Like how do we handle p diddy links?

Considering it's best actress and it's what you would have seen had you watched the 2008 oscars I think what they did makes sense.

The name as it was displayed with a clickable asterisk.

---

joe40001 posted...

Considering it's best actress and it's what you would have seen had you watched the 2008 oscars I think what they did makes sense.

The name as it was displayed with a clickable asterisk.

Ohhhh was the underlines you censoring it?

Thats the thing, idc left won the culture war, people can feel how they want

But with words being moddable, and history being rewritten discussions like this are confusing

so is maplestory racist? check out the zombie name.



---

ModLogic posted...

so is maplestory racist? check out the zombie name.

holy shit i never knew that and i played maple for a decade

er i mean i knew this thing was called a c***** but i never knew it was racist

that said nexon/wizet are korean, and i dont know if they historically harbor ill will towards china or not, but now knowing that that term is racist, i do see it as a possibility. maybe when translated it holds up but idk

---

the edit that someone (itt probably) made appears to have not just replaced the terminology, but also removed a link to an entire wikipedia article on the subject

---

IHeartRadiation posted...

Check edit history.

Wow... never heard that word before.

---

Looks like it's going to keep getting changed back and forth >.>

---

TheMikh posted...

the edit that someone (itt probably) made appears to have not just replaced the terminology, but also removed a link to an entire wikipedia article on the subject

Millenials and younger can be so depressing. On the level of boomers with failure to know or acknowledge history. Not just in lack of knowledge but misunderstanding of the consequence of ignorance.

The number of people ITT who had no knowledge of the term, its history or consequences was astonishing.

Yet some wanted to make it harder still to know what happened. Like Tulsa, or Rosewood, or Juneteenth and so on.

---

I didn't read the source citation, but changing this to neutral language could potentially make it harder to connect to the source. As demonstrated in this thread it is a less known slur and someone checking the article against the source may not be able to make the connection.

Given the sensitive language they should have attempted a better citation to show that it was the language of the source and not the author.

White people trying to erase history ITT
---

Huh no shit. My Jamaican grandmother (and other relatives apparently) always referred to me as "that word" because of my mixed background of Indian, I was told. Never mentioned it was a derogatory slur to that degree. Like, my mother would always say "Stop calling him that" but being a kid, I never thought of anything of it. Goddamnit grandma! >_<

---

realnifty1 posted...

I didn't read the source citation, but changing this to neutral language could potentially make it harder to connect to the source. As demonstrated in this thread it is a less known slur and someone checking the article against the source may not be able to make the connection.

Given the sensitive language they should have attempted a better citation to show that it was the language of the source and not the author.

Yeah I don't know why it doesn't just have a cite/reference note attached to it. Leave it at "labourers" and then have a note on it about how the people are actually referred to in the cited material with a link to the actual Wiki article on the term.
---

UndefeatedGOAT posted...

Ohhhh was the underlines you censoring it?

Thats the thing, idc left won the culture war, people can feel how they want

But with words being moddable, and history being rewritten discussions like this are confusing

Yeah sorry, my bad. lol. I originally had the name, because I was quoting them I think "surely it should be ok to post it as a quote of somebody else".

But for some reason even as a quote of something else people have gotten modded. So because I have a few moderations on my account I wasn't going to risk it. Normally I would say it, because it's absurd you can't literally say "X person's name used to be Y and is currently listed as Y on this page on wikipedia"

But I think that might be the case these days.

---

Honestly, even though that word is a slur, I'm not sure people know it's a slur. I've seen the word in older writing (George Orwell's "Shooting an Elephant" comes to mind). It seems more like an old-timey word than a slur. The fact that people don't use it today makes it seem archaic.

---