 | This is a user sandbox of
Lfountain. You can use it for testing or practicing edits. This is not the sandbox where you should draft your assigned article for a dashboard.wikiedu.org course. To find the right sandbox for your assignment, visit your Dashboard course page and follow the Sandbox Draft link for your assigned article in the My Articles section. |
Welcome to my user page. I am a student at California State University East Bay pursuing a Bachelor of Science in Health Science, Administration and Management. I am an older student and I decided to complete my college education while helping my children through their college selection process. When I am not studying, I enjoy spending time with my family and friends, and I especially enjoy cooking for them.
Is everything in the article relevant to the article? Is there anything that distracted you?
I’m not sure if everything in the article is relevant, such as the descriptions of the methods for making conventional documentary films. I was distracted by the numerous direct quotes, inconsistent use of quotation marks, italics and brackets for film titles. Some of the sentences were difficult to understand. The sections titled “Poetry” and “Writings” could be combined.
Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
In many instances, the article is written in essay style. The quotes are used to convey Riggs’ personal views on racism and homosexuality. Although they offer insight into Riggs’ beliefs, I’m not sure if that is the purpose of Wikipedia. The section titled “Controversy” is long and it seems to be more about the political battle between Pat Buchannan and George H.W. Bush, and the American Family Association’s intent to discredit PBS and the National Endowment for the Arts.
Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or underrepresented?
His personal family life is underrepresented. The awards section does not include the Marlon Riggs Award, which is awarded by the San Francisco Film Critics Circle to honor Bay Area filmmakers who courage and innovation in the world of cinema. His academic achievements are vague.
Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
Most of the citations do not contain links, but the citations that do have links work. However, the New York Times obituary contains information about his college degrees that conflicts with the Wikipedia article. For example, the article states he graduated magna cum laude in 1978 from Harvard where he studied history, and that he received a master’s degree in journalism with a specialization on documentary film in 1981. The NY Times obituary states that he received a master’s degree from Harvard in 1981.
Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
A lot of sentences are not cited; most paragraphs only have one citation. The New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Washington Post and USA Today make up 7 of the 18 total citations. Interviews with Marlon Riggs, his writings and films, books and websites made up the balance of the sources. No bias was noted in the article.
Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
Since the information is about events that occurred at least 20 years ago, it is still relevant, and the facts should not change. More information about Riggs’ childhood, family and religious influences, if any, would be interesting.
Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
The Talk page does not have very much on it, but Athomas001 and I are both interested in Marlon Riggs’ family life and the role religion played in his life.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
The article is not rated. The article is part of WikiProject LGBT studies, WikiProject African diaspora, WikiProject United States, WikiProject Biography/Actors and Filmmakers/Politics and Government. The article has also been the subject of Wiki Education Foundation supported course assignments at Hunter College, Santa Clara University and California State University, East Bay.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
Much of the writing is not supported by citations. A synopsis of each of the films is provided.
For this assignment, I plan to write about the differences in how Asian, European, and Americans were treated as they were routed to Angel Island as they arrived by ship to San Francisco. I also plan to write about the physical examinations immigrants were required to endure and the general living conditions on the island. This information will be added to the Quarantine station section of the article. My sources are:
The Public Health Service on Angel Island. (1996). Public Health Reports (1974-), 111(1), 92-94. http://www.jstor.org.proxylib.csueastbay.edu/stable/4597972?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Markel, H. (1999). Which face? Whose nation?: Immigration, public health, and the construction of disease at America's ports and borders, 1891-1928. The American Behavioral Scientist, 42(9), 1314-1331. https://search-proquest-com.proxylib.csueastbay.edu/docview/214779862?accountid=28458&rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo
~~~~
Notes for Quarantine from PHS: The quarantine station was built in 1890 at a cost of approximately $98,000. Among other buildings, the facilities included a disinfecting house, two detention barracks, a leper's house, and a convalescent building. Sick passengers and their belongings were sent to the leper's house. Chinese and Japanese passengers were held in quarantine for fourteen days. Caucasians had their belongings fumigated with chlorine gas or sulfur dioxide, and then allowed to continue traveling.
Notes for Quarantine from Markel: Inadequate space, cleanliness and staffing.
Notes for Immigration from PHS: 175,000 Chinese people immigrated through Angel Island during the period of 1910-1940.
Notes for Immigration from Markel: In the first decade of the 20th century, approximately 60,000 Chinese passed through Angel Island, about 10,000 (about 17%) were deported. Asian immigrants were subjected to invasive inspections for diseases such as the bubonic and pneumonic plagues, tuberculosis and sexually transmitted diseases; and parasites such as threadworm, hookworm and liver fluke. To rule out parasites, Asian immigrants were required to submit stool samples, often on demand.Linda Fountain 05:57, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Quarantine Station Section from article:
Prior to the National Quarantine Act of 1893 tThe bubonic plague posed such a threat to the U.S. that Angel iIsland opened as a quarantine station in 1891 to screen Asian passengers and their baggage prior to landing on U.S. soil (Risse, pg 102). Construction of a federally funded quarantine station on Angel Island was completed in 1890 at a cost of approximately $98,000. The compound contained many separate buildings including detention barracks, disinfection facilities, convalescence quarters, and a an isolation hospital that was known as the "leper's house" (PHS). Even with the new construction, the facilities were lacking in cleanliness, staffing and adequate space (Markel). Move the [] section to follow the first sentence of this paragraph and link bubonic plague.
In response to a person's the death of Wong Chut King, a Chinese immigrant who worked in a rat-infested lumberyard in Chinatown, the San Francisco Health Board quickly quarantined the local area to neutralize possible disease-causing agents. and searched for p Persons suspected of having any contact with sickness. If they were suspected of it, they would be were sent to isolation facilities. The Cchinese were confused about an by the idea of separating the entire region to control the spread of the disease . They believed that individuals did not convey this scourge; rather because they believed it emerged from toxic vapors created in the dirt via season changes. (Risse, pg 114).
In response to more deaths, tissue samples were sent to Angel Island for testing to determine if they harbored
Yersinia pestis, the bacteria responsible for spreading the suspected bubonic plague. At that time, the bubonic plague was difficult to diagnose due to other diseases, some of which could mask the presence of plague.
Bacteriologist [Joseph Kinyuon] who was stationed at Angel Island in 1899, believed that the plague would spread throughout San Francisco's China Town Chinatown after the bubonic plague bacteria was confirmed from one of the deaths. The samples were discovered by Frank Wilson, an assistant city health officer, and Wilfred Kellog, another bacteriologist (Risse, pg 121). Move this so it becomes the second paragraph.
Even with a vaccine to inoculate and protect the residents of Chinatown, the Chinese believed that the vaccine was experimental and did not want to receive it. City officials tried to explain that it was not particularly aimed at the Chinese and that other San Francisco residents were receiving it too as a preventative measure to ensure that people do not get quarantined (Risse, pg 122). Not sure this paragraph is relevant to this article.
~~~~
Main article: United States Immigration Station, Angel Island Camp Reynolds (West Garrison) on Angel Island. The construction of the Angel Island immigration station began in 1905 but was not used until 1910. This zone was known as China Cove. It was built for controlling Chinese entry into the United States. From 1910 to 1940, Angel Island served as an immigration station processing immigrants from 84 different countries, approximately one million being Chinese immigrants.The purpose of the immigration station was to investigate Chinese who had been denied entry from the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Immigrants had to prove that they had husbands or fathers who were U.S. citizens in order not to be deported.The immigration station at Angel Island was predominantly used to inspect, disinfect and detain Chinese, Japanese and other Asian immigrants who sailed across the Pacific Ocean. (Markel) In addition to standard medical examinations, Chinese immigrants were inspected for parasitic diseases, and the tests for intestinal parasites required a stool specimen (Markel). Immigrants described the examination and disinfection processes as brutal, indecent, humiliating, and indecent (Risse). Passengers who were found to be sick were sent to the hospital on the island until could pass a medical examination and an immigration hearing (Lucaccini). Investigation processes determined the length of time an immigrant would stay at the station. Chinese immigrants could be detained for a period of two weeks to as long as two years. The intensity of the screenings was determined by social class, resulting in fewer inspections of white Europeans and other American citizens, and when they were subject to inspection, doctors were diligent about following proper sanitation practices (Markel).
A fire destroyed the administration building in 1940, and subsequent immigration processing took place in San Francisco. On November fifth of 1940, the last gathering of around 200 immigrants, including around 150 Chinese, were exchanged from Angel Island to brief quarters in San Francisco. The "Chinese Exclusion Act", initially proposed to keep going for 10 years, was broadened and extended, and not canceled until the point that 1943 when China turned into our partner in World War II.
In 1964, the Chinese American community successfully lobbied the State of California to designate the immigration station as a State Landmark. Today, the Angel Island Immigration Station is a federally designated National Historic Landmark. It was renovated by the California State Parks, which re-opened February 16, 2009. Docent tours for school groups can be made by appointment.
| This is a user sandbox of
Lfountain. You can use it for testing or practicing edits. This is not the sandbox where you should draft your assigned article for a dashboard.wikiedu.org course. To find the right sandbox for your assignment, visit your Dashboard course page and follow the Sandbox Draft link for your assigned article in the My Articles section. |
Welcome to my user page. I am a student at California State University East Bay pursuing a Bachelor of Science in Health Science, Administration and Management. I am an older student and I decided to complete my college education while helping my children through their college selection process. When I am not studying, I enjoy spending time with my family and friends, and I especially enjoy cooking for them.
Is everything in the article relevant to the article? Is there anything that distracted you?
I’m not sure if everything in the article is relevant, such as the descriptions of the methods for making conventional documentary films. I was distracted by the numerous direct quotes, inconsistent use of quotation marks, italics and brackets for film titles. Some of the sentences were difficult to understand. The sections titled “Poetry” and “Writings” could be combined.
Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
In many instances, the article is written in essay style. The quotes are used to convey Riggs’ personal views on racism and homosexuality. Although they offer insight into Riggs’ beliefs, I’m not sure if that is the purpose of Wikipedia. The section titled “Controversy” is long and it seems to be more about the political battle between Pat Buchannan and George H.W. Bush, and the American Family Association’s intent to discredit PBS and the National Endowment for the Arts.
Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or underrepresented?
His personal family life is underrepresented. The awards section does not include the Marlon Riggs Award, which is awarded by the San Francisco Film Critics Circle to honor Bay Area filmmakers who courage and innovation in the world of cinema. His academic achievements are vague.
Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
Most of the citations do not contain links, but the citations that do have links work. However, the New York Times obituary contains information about his college degrees that conflicts with the Wikipedia article. For example, the article states he graduated magna cum laude in 1978 from Harvard where he studied history, and that he received a master’s degree in journalism with a specialization on documentary film in 1981. The NY Times obituary states that he received a master’s degree from Harvard in 1981.
Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
A lot of sentences are not cited; most paragraphs only have one citation. The New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Washington Post and USA Today make up 7 of the 18 total citations. Interviews with Marlon Riggs, his writings and films, books and websites made up the balance of the sources. No bias was noted in the article.
Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
Since the information is about events that occurred at least 20 years ago, it is still relevant, and the facts should not change. More information about Riggs’ childhood, family and religious influences, if any, would be interesting.
Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
The Talk page does not have very much on it, but Athomas001 and I are both interested in Marlon Riggs’ family life and the role religion played in his life.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
The article is not rated. The article is part of WikiProject LGBT studies, WikiProject African diaspora, WikiProject United States, WikiProject Biography/Actors and Filmmakers/Politics and Government. The article has also been the subject of Wiki Education Foundation supported course assignments at Hunter College, Santa Clara University and California State University, East Bay.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
Much of the writing is not supported by citations. A synopsis of each of the films is provided.
For this assignment, I plan to write about the differences in how Asian, European, and Americans were treated as they were routed to Angel Island as they arrived by ship to San Francisco. I also plan to write about the physical examinations immigrants were required to endure and the general living conditions on the island. This information will be added to the Quarantine station section of the article. My sources are:
The Public Health Service on Angel Island. (1996). Public Health Reports (1974-), 111(1), 92-94. http://www.jstor.org.proxylib.csueastbay.edu/stable/4597972?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Markel, H. (1999). Which face? Whose nation?: Immigration, public health, and the construction of disease at America's ports and borders, 1891-1928. The American Behavioral Scientist, 42(9), 1314-1331. https://search-proquest-com.proxylib.csueastbay.edu/docview/214779862?accountid=28458&rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo
~~~~
Notes for Quarantine from PHS: The quarantine station was built in 1890 at a cost of approximately $98,000. Among other buildings, the facilities included a disinfecting house, two detention barracks, a leper's house, and a convalescent building. Sick passengers and their belongings were sent to the leper's house. Chinese and Japanese passengers were held in quarantine for fourteen days. Caucasians had their belongings fumigated with chlorine gas or sulfur dioxide, and then allowed to continue traveling.
Notes for Quarantine from Markel: Inadequate space, cleanliness and staffing.
Notes for Immigration from PHS: 175,000 Chinese people immigrated through Angel Island during the period of 1910-1940.
Notes for Immigration from Markel: In the first decade of the 20th century, approximately 60,000 Chinese passed through Angel Island, about 10,000 (about 17%) were deported. Asian immigrants were subjected to invasive inspections for diseases such as the bubonic and pneumonic plagues, tuberculosis and sexually transmitted diseases; and parasites such as threadworm, hookworm and liver fluke. To rule out parasites, Asian immigrants were required to submit stool samples, often on demand.Linda Fountain 05:57, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Quarantine Station Section from article:
Prior to the National Quarantine Act of 1893 tThe bubonic plague posed such a threat to the U.S. that Angel iIsland opened as a quarantine station in 1891 to screen Asian passengers and their baggage prior to landing on U.S. soil (Risse, pg 102). Construction of a federally funded quarantine station on Angel Island was completed in 1890 at a cost of approximately $98,000. The compound contained many separate buildings including detention barracks, disinfection facilities, convalescence quarters, and a an isolation hospital that was known as the "leper's house" (PHS). Even with the new construction, the facilities were lacking in cleanliness, staffing and adequate space (Markel). Move the [] section to follow the first sentence of this paragraph and link bubonic plague.
In response to a person's the death of Wong Chut King, a Chinese immigrant who worked in a rat-infested lumberyard in Chinatown, the San Francisco Health Board quickly quarantined the local area to neutralize possible disease-causing agents. and searched for p Persons suspected of having any contact with sickness. If they were suspected of it, they would be were sent to isolation facilities. The Cchinese were confused about an by the idea of separating the entire region to control the spread of the disease . They believed that individuals did not convey this scourge; rather because they believed it emerged from toxic vapors created in the dirt via season changes. (Risse, pg 114).
In response to more deaths, tissue samples were sent to Angel Island for testing to determine if they harbored
Yersinia pestis, the bacteria responsible for spreading the suspected bubonic plague. At that time, the bubonic plague was difficult to diagnose due to other diseases, some of which could mask the presence of plague.
Bacteriologist [Joseph Kinyuon] who was stationed at Angel Island in 1899, believed that the plague would spread throughout San Francisco's China Town Chinatown after the bubonic plague bacteria was confirmed from one of the deaths. The samples were discovered by Frank Wilson, an assistant city health officer, and Wilfred Kellog, another bacteriologist (Risse, pg 121). Move this so it becomes the second paragraph.
Even with a vaccine to inoculate and protect the residents of Chinatown, the Chinese believed that the vaccine was experimental and did not want to receive it. City officials tried to explain that it was not particularly aimed at the Chinese and that other San Francisco residents were receiving it too as a preventative measure to ensure that people do not get quarantined (Risse, pg 122). Not sure this paragraph is relevant to this article.
~~~~
Main article: United States Immigration Station, Angel Island Camp Reynolds (West Garrison) on Angel Island. The construction of the Angel Island immigration station began in 1905 but was not used until 1910. This zone was known as China Cove. It was built for controlling Chinese entry into the United States. From 1910 to 1940, Angel Island served as an immigration station processing immigrants from 84 different countries, approximately one million being Chinese immigrants.The purpose of the immigration station was to investigate Chinese who had been denied entry from the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Immigrants had to prove that they had husbands or fathers who were U.S. citizens in order not to be deported.The immigration station at Angel Island was predominantly used to inspect, disinfect and detain Chinese, Japanese and other Asian immigrants who sailed across the Pacific Ocean. (Markel) In addition to standard medical examinations, Chinese immigrants were inspected for parasitic diseases, and the tests for intestinal parasites required a stool specimen (Markel). Immigrants described the examination and disinfection processes as brutal, indecent, humiliating, and indecent (Risse). Passengers who were found to be sick were sent to the hospital on the island until could pass a medical examination and an immigration hearing (Lucaccini). Investigation processes determined the length of time an immigrant would stay at the station. Chinese immigrants could be detained for a period of two weeks to as long as two years. The intensity of the screenings was determined by social class, resulting in fewer inspections of white Europeans and other American citizens, and when they were subject to inspection, doctors were diligent about following proper sanitation practices (Markel).
A fire destroyed the administration building in 1940, and subsequent immigration processing took place in San Francisco. On November fifth of 1940, the last gathering of around 200 immigrants, including around 150 Chinese, were exchanged from Angel Island to brief quarters in San Francisco. The "Chinese Exclusion Act", initially proposed to keep going for 10 years, was broadened and extended, and not canceled until the point that 1943 when China turned into our partner in World War II.
In 1964, the Chinese American community successfully lobbied the State of California to designate the immigration station as a State Landmark. Today, the Angel Island Immigration Station is a federally designated National Historic Landmark. It was renovated by the California State Parks, which re-opened February 16, 2009. Docent tours for school groups can be made by appointment.