Jump to content

Talk:Hispanic and Latino (ethnic categories)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Hispanic/Latino naming dispute

Voilà, I created this article and merged most of the Criticism of the term Latino. I hope you guys will find it more balanced than the previous one.--Scandza (talk) 15:08, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Who is a Latino or Hispanic?

In The Empire (The Netherlands) we consider our princess a Latina, she has blond hair and a pale skin-tone, in the United States she would not be considered a Latina. I know a man from the Fang tribe of Equatorial-Geinea who is considered black in The Empire (The Netherlands), but when he traveled to the U.S. they referred to him as a Hispanic due to his name. So does the term differ per country? --82.134.154.25 (talk) 10:42, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

US-centric

How about putting up a sentence or something that explains to the reader that this article is only about the usage in the US, with nothign to do with the historical uses and the word's meanings in other countries, especially where they originated? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.199.31.52 (talk) 19:00, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thank you. SamEV (talk) 19:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

First use

I am slightly adjusting the sentence, "It was first used officially in the 1970 Census..." to "It was first used officially by the U.S. government in the 1970 Census..." to bring it into agreement with the Hispanic and Latino Americans article. The term was already in use in academia since the beginning of the 20th century at the at the latest.The Original Historygeek (talk) 18:37, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Officially, maybe, but there are example of "hispanic/latino" people using the terms for social organization in US universities way before that, for example the Secret Society; Union Hispano Americana (UHΑ) founded in 1898 and the Union Latino Americana was established in 1932, having Regions in Cuba, US, Mexico and Puerto Rico. Know this might not add much to the article, that's the reason I wrote it here and did not directly add it to the article. Your thoughts?El Johnson (talk) 14:17, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Cinco de Mayo

The learned scholar of Latspanic Studies who wrote this article might note that "widespread" is an adjective, not a verb.

Also, many of the arguments presented are not to be taken seriously. A category need not be "homogenous" to be a category. For example, there is great variety among rocks but that is not grounds to abolish the term "rock." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.125.50.69 (talk) 10:16, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved (by Huh direction (talk · contribs) Breawycker (talk to me!) 00:30, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

-Breawycker (talk to me!) 00:30, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Hispanic/Latino naming dispute → Hispanic–Latino naming dispute – WP:SLASH. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:38, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Latino portuguese view

"Latino" in Portugal has a differente meaning (and i'm almost sure in other countries like Spain and Italy). We usually call latino anyone who he is from Southern Europe and speaks a romance language (Portuguese, Spanish, Italian, French, etc). It is also a matter of race and personality. We don't call people from South America "latinos" although they have great influences from "latino" coutries. We also call the irish the latinos from "northern europe" because of their bad temperment more typical to southern europeans than northern or central europeans. Acting like a latino is being very impulsive and losing your temperament and composure easily. --viriatus (talk) 19:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Number of Spanish persons listed in lead

Patapsco913 raises a valid point about the number of Spanish Americans listed in the lead. It had been previously listed as 85,000, based on this table from the Census Bureau: [1]. Patapsco913 pointed out that the cited census bureau table only listed persons born in Spain, but not people born in the United States with Spanish ancestry. Patapsco913 has changed the lead to list 717,287 as the number of Spanish-Americans, based on this table from the census bureau of persons who listed "Spaniard" as their ancestry, [2]. The problem is that it looks like something weird is going on with the data on Spaniards. It looks like this table seems to be picking many Latin Americans (or descendants of Latin Americans) who, for whatever reason, chose to list themselves as being Spaniard (for example, if you look at the breakdown of foreign-born Spaniards on this table, [3], only 66% list Europe as their region of origin). Furthermore, in the 2000 census, only 299,948 people self-reported as being Spaniard (see this table: [4]), and this number was a decline from 1990 (it was 360,858 in 1990). It seems highly unlikely to me that the number of Spaniards in the United States has more than double in the space of 10 years from 2000 to 2010. How do you all think we should resolve this? I propose that we list numbers of foreign-born persons in the United States from Brazil and from Spain, since that would seem most likely to give us accurate numbers to compare. Any other ideas?Goodsdrew (talk) 23:51, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

I think the problem rests with how the census accounts for people. The numbers for all the "Latino/Hispanic" groups include people who are of full or partial descent. Hence if my mother was an Italian from Italy and my father a Mexican, I could check the Hispanic box, then tick the Mexican box, and then also list Italian under the ancestry section. Similarly, an Argentinian would check the Hispanic box, check Argentinian, but also pick German and Italian. If someone is from Latin America with full or partial Spanish (from Spain) descent they could check both their country of origin and Spaniard ancestry. The census used "Spaniard" because there seems to be some people who just pick Spanish or Spanish American as a generic term (just like many will pick "American" rather than an ethnicity) and we have to watch with prior comparisons since there is always movement between groups (e.g. many blacks and whites will just pick "American"). We had a similar thing before when there was a marked increase in native Americans due to the fact that many people started to rediscover their native American heritage. Given the high intermarriage rate between Latinos and Whites (reaching ~40% for American born Hispanics), this is likely to continue to increase. I don't think we should treat the Spaniard category any different from how we treat the Mexican category (which includes Mexicans born in the US and people of partial Mexican descent no matter how small if they self-identify as such). From what I hear, the next census will not include an "other" category hence all the Latinos will have to pick one or more races, this will shift the numbers for White and Native American dramatically. Anyhow, Pew uses the 717,000 number for Spaniards.Patapsco913 (talk)
from the Spanish language wiki [5] "Para el año de 2008, las estimaciones del American Community Survey dan un total de 625.562 estadounidenses clasificados como «españoles». De estos, 86% (538.746) eran nacidos en EE.UU. De los 86.816 nacidos en el extranjero, el 62,7% nacieron en Europa, 28,0% en América Latina, Un 7,8% en Asia, 0,7% en África y América del Norte cada uno, y el 0,1% en Oceanía. A 474.283 se estima que más se identifican como «españoles», y otros 57.554 como «español americano»."Patapsco913 (talk) 02:29, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
You raise some valid issues about how the census counts people. AFter thinking about it more, though, I am convinced that the best solution is to list the numbers for persons born in Brazil and born in Spain so that we have an apples to apples comparison. The thing is, the reason we are citing these numbers in the first place is in the context of comparing which groups are included only within the meaning of "Hispanic" and which are only within "Latino." Latin Americans of Spanish-speaking heritage fall within BOTH Latino and Hispanic. Brazilians fall only within Latino, and people with origins in Spain fall only within Hispanic. Citing a figure for Spaniards that also includes Latin Americans has little relevance at this point in the article, because we are trying to compare the number of people who are ONLY Latino (IE Brazilians) with the number of people who are ONLY Hispanic (IE Spaniards with no Latin American heritage). I'm going to switch both numbers to only list the number born in the US.Goodsdrew (talk) 15:15, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

A proper explanation would be useful

I am still confused as to what the terms Hispanic and Latino mean. Are both terms interchangeable? I mean is an Argentinian person both Hispanic and Latino? And is a Brazilian also considered so even though they're Portuguese-speaking rather than Spanish? And what about people who are actually from Spain? What category do they fall into in the USA? And would the same include others who speak Romance languages like Italians, French and Romanians? The article needs to do more to explain the situation because we don't all live in the USA. The terms you use are alien to us - another example is Americans talking about African Americans whereas in other countries we'd simply say black - yet, apparently, that may cause offence in the US.--Xania talk 07:28, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Looking for a bit of common sense? Don't expect to find across the Atlantic anything that even remotely resembles it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.16.30.195 (talk) 00:43, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
The intention of the term is to identify a race, the problem however is that Latino and Hispanic are not races. The proper terms would be Mulatto and Mestizo which are races and the usage of these terms would end the whole dispute. Mestizo being a person of European(Mostly Spanish and Portuguese) and Native American(All Native Americans being from Canada to Chile) and Mulatto being a person Afro-European (Mostly Spanish, Portuguese and African slaves brought to the new world(And the reason the majority of mulattos are in the Caribbean region)) Examples of Mestizo would be the people from Mexico in general, Bolivia and Guatemala, their body type is in general shorter and have straight hair. Contrary to Mulattos which you can find in Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Panama, Venezuela and Cuba. They are generally taller, their hair can be curly. Mulattos and Mestizos have been there for more than 400 years. Exceptions to this are Argentina, Uruguay and parts of Chile, where many are directly European(Either Western or Eastern European) mostly due to migration in the WWII era. Hope this facts are taken into consideration to end the dispute. 76.90.157.206 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:18, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Conflation from source

"Hispanic, from the Latin word for "Spain,"" (Answers.com)

The translation would be from the Latin word for Iberia, not the nation of Spain. Spain is named thereafter, Hispannia. I read all that crap about Portuguese Brazilians not being Hispanic. Guess what, Hispannia includes Portugal.

Therefore, I conclude descendants of Portuguese have Hispanic ancestry.76.105.131.18 (talk) 07:56, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hispanic_and_Latino_(ethnic_categories)/Archive_1&oldid=1074321460"