Jump to content

Talk:Afghan Canadians

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

how many are there?

[edit]

how many Afghan-Canadians are there in Canada?

On 17 January 2008, AmericanAnthropologist01, a sockpuppet of banned editor Beh-nam, added, and StevenLeClark restored a citation for the 26,000 (25,230) Afghan Canadians population figure to the StatCan site at [1]. The only detailed figures on StatCan for Afghan Canadians, is a 2001 census figure of 235 who marked Afghan as at least one ethnic origin, out of 150,385 total urban respondents in Sherbrooke, Quebec. "Population by selected ethnic origins, by census metropolitan areas (Sherbrooke)" StatCan It is noteworthy that of the metropolitan areas surveyed, only Sherbrooke reported Afghans, or at least only the Sherbrooke page displayed the data. For example, neither Quebec City "Population by selected ethnic origins, by census metropolitan areas (Québec)" StatCan nor Montreal "Population by selected ethnic origins, by census metropolitan areas (Montréal)" StatCan reported (displayed) any Afghan ethnic origin. Neither did Toronto "Population by selected ethnic origins, by census metropolitan areas (Toronto)" StatCan nor Hamilton "Population by selected ethnic origins, by census metropolitan areas (Hamilton)" StatCan. --Bejnar (talk) 20:55, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
However, the site Diverse Hamilton Online says: "The Afghani population in Canada is over 120,000. There are about 3,000 estimated Afghan Canadians in Hamilton." No source for their figure was provided. --Bejnar (talk) 20:55, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Canadian Foreign Minister Bill Graham was quoted on 5 September 2003 as saying that he learned that morning that there were "some 80,000 Afghan Canadians in Canada". "Canadian FM arrives in Afghanistan to discuss security" Afghanistan News September 5, 2003. No source for Graham's figure was provided. --Bejnar (talk) 20:55, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

26,000 is too little and 120,000 is too much. 80,000 sounds right and its from a reliable source. StevenLeClark (talk) 21:44, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

[edit]

I have assessed this as a Stub Class, as it only a few sentences long, and of low importance, as it is a highly specific topic within Canada. Cheers, CP 23:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

changing to Afghan Canadian

[edit]

There are zero google hits for "Afghanistani Canadian" -wikipedia and 11,000 hits for "Afghan Canadian" -wikipedia. Kingturtle (talk) 13:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I fully support the move. Afghan is the proper adjective, not Afghanistani. Wachowich (talk) 03:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite, for more details see Demography of Afghanistan. Dupree3 (talk) 03:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ignore Dupree3 he was a sock puppet of banned editor Beh-nam. --Bejnar (talk) 07:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Today there were six google hits for "Afghanistani Canadian" -wikipedia and 3600 google hits for "Afghan Canadian" -wikipedia. I am changing the name back to Afghan Canadian. Kingturtle (talk) 12:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistani Pashtuns are Afghan Canadians , please add a "Stan" to Afghan , ffs!!!! --108.173.174.134 (talk) 04:10, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since when are Pakistani Pashtuns considered Afghan Canadians? Wikipedia is to educate individuals not to spread propaganda, which you and Beh-nam's sock puppets seem to be doing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.16.65 (talk) 06:43, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The same old Pashtun nationalists on wikipedia that try to make afghan mean pashtun. Read Durrand line and it will make alot more sense why they are urging pakistani pashtuns to be afghan canadian instead of pakistani canadian.... it is pathetic bs they propogate thinking every pashtun belongs to afghanistan no matter where they are .... --2001:1970:5E5D:A200:1DAB:198B:5FE:B3E4 (talk) 23:36, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Afghani Canadaian

[edit]

On Google there is 860 hits. Some links with the term "Afghani Canadian":

AmericanAnthropologist01 (talk) 18:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 April 2015

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No moves made per thoughts of GregKaye at end of this RM discussion Mike Cline (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

– There is an article on Canadians which has an article content that encompasses all types of "Canadians" as well as giving comment on such facets of Canadian people/s such as pertaining to culture and religion. As sub-sets of the Canadian people there can naturally be articles of types of Canadians such as are described by the existing articles: Arab Canadians, Black Canadians, Eritrean Canadians, Greek Canadians, Hungarian Canadians, Italian Canadians, Japanese Canadians, Korean Canadians, Nigerian Canadians, Polish Canadians, Serbian Canadians, Somali Canadians, Sri Lankan Canadians, Syrian Canadians and Trinidadian and Tobagonian Canadians.
This kind of move is typically endorsed by WP:PLURAL which includes the text: "Articles on people groups. Canadians, French people and Koreans in Japan are all acceptable titles. Titles like Belgian should be recast in the plural, i.e., Belgians. If a plural title without the word "people" is available, it is almost invariably chosen; e.g., Bangladeshis is consistently preferred to Bangladeshi people."
The current titles are also typically infringements of WP:NOUN which presents the guideline: "Use nouns: Nouns and noun phrases are normally preferred over titles using other parts of speech;..." The perceived problem is that, if a title word Canadian is used to describe more than one Canadian then it is used as an adjective. If then such a use of the word Canadian is placed after another adjective like Afghan then the result is that we are left with two "coordinate adjectives" in sequence and a question may be naturally raised: Afghan Canadian what?
As alternatives, other titles might be perfectly acceptable and, as an example, a title such as Afghan Canadian ethnic group could be used.
Another option would be to use an ".. in Canada" format and examples of this type of use are: Assyrians in Canada, Belarusians in Canada, Berbers in Canada, Georgians in Canada, Kazakhs in Canada, Kurds in Canada, Moldovans in Canada, Romani people in Canada, Singaporeans in Canada, Tajiks in Canada and Tatars in Canada.
Other related articles are: Canadians of Danish descent, Canadians of Dutch descent, Canadians of German ethnicity, Canadians of Laotian descent and List of people of Korean descent in Canada.
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes) Presents the possibility of singular articles such as African American but I think that this is contrary to the content of a number of Wikipedia articles starting "African Americans ...". At this stage, until other moves are proposed, I think that the simple thing would just be to apply WP:PLURAL and add and "s" to the titles.
This would bring commonality to articles such as French Canadians in the Political Life of the Province of Alberta, Chinese Canadians in British Columbia, Indo-Canadians in British Columbia, Japanese Canadians in the Greater Toronto Area, Indo-Canadians in Greater Vancouver and Vietnamese Canadians in the Greater Toronto Area. GregKaye 22:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC) Greg[[User talk:|Kaye]] 22:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

oppose. We just had a long discussion of the same topic at talk:Korean American. The guidelines that apply to this topic are at WP:ETHNICGROUP & specifically provide a model form African American in the singular. In the present case the guideline gives Afghan Canadian in the singular. The guideline does not recommend the plural form which in this case would be Afghan Canadians as proposed here. The guideline at wP:plural talks about peoples, not ethnic groups. "peoples" and "ethnic groups" are different concepts, as the bibliographies make clear. The Afghan, Korean etc people (article = "Korean" for language and "Koreans" for people) are a historic people (like "Germans", "Russians" etc) with a history going back many centuries or thousands of years. Ethnic groups are recently constructed communities when immigrants have recently moved to a DIFFERENT country, in this case Afghans in Canada in 20-21st century. In many cases, such as German, the entry German deals only with the German language and Germans deals only with the German people. Two articles obviously are necessary for them. However in this example "Afghan" is not a language, therefore our Wikipedia article on the Afghan people is simply Afghan, in the singular. We should follow the standard practice of hundreds of Wikipedia editors covering dozens of articles rather than a new proposal that rejects that policy, rejects Wiki's guidelines, and is not in harmony with the great majority of the published reliable sources. Rjensen (talk) 23:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Commonality would have to come across the board for every article of nationality, not only pertaining to Canadians. While this would be a start, I believe it would be far simpler to just remove plurality in certain instances. There is nothing wrong with lets says "Irish Americans in New York City" to be a completely separate article from "Irish American" which is far more broad and can simply imply term usage, common language in multicultural areas. The problem with " Assyrians in Canada" etc., it does not imply citizenship especially in cases where this ethnic group may be born in a country with jus soli laws, that would be granted automatic citizenship. "Assyrian Canadian" would imply both ethnicity and citizenship making the extra two words "...ethnic group" as an ending really redundant. My thoughts on the following articles mentioned are:

I just cannot see this making a significant improvement over the article names existing. Savvyjack23 (talk) 23:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Savvyjack23 there is no other source other than a dictionary that will present a definition such as "Afghan Canadian". This RM is presented in thinking that it supports the view that "Wikipedia is not a dictionary" and that there is merit in title consistency. Its also fair to consider whether this type would work consistently across Canadian culture.

Comment In the context of the content presented above I think it would be beneficial to work out a way forward on the issue of the presentation of ethnic groups and my thinking has been that a multiple move would be an appropriate way to bring a range of inputs together. However I see that there has been objection to multiple moves as have been presented regarding national groups (many of which are classed as ethnicities). While I think that the content of the move is appropriate and think that its content should be considered on its own merits, I am also open to a moratorium proposal on multiple moves as suggested by Andrewa and for this RM to be closed if considered necessary if it is considered that other routes forward are more appropriate. GregKaye 05:17, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Afghan Canadians. 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, 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 03:16, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Afghan Canadians. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 15:13, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I want to immigrate to Canada

[edit]

I want to immigrate to Canada, help me 46.52.107.138 (talk) 23:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Afghan_Canadians&oldid=1209652978"