Talk:Indian Americans/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Median household income

There are two figures - one in the Introduction, and one in the Economics section. I removed the one in the Economics section because it has no citation. The other figure is from the IHT article

Its Maithili

Its funny when people edit these pages without even taking the trouble to google. Maithili was spelled Methli; no wonder the alienation of an uprooted people, who cannot recall the kingdom of Mithila where Goddess Sita came from. It really is funny.

Demographic and Cultural Profile

Why does somebody delete my statement that Indian Americans are also well represented as taxi cab drivers? Anybody who lives in U.S. know that Indians are highly represented as cab drivers. Is it because it does not sound as fancy as being doctors and computer engineers?

I heard it was mostly paks that drive the taxis. Gujus mostly to the shops and hotels. --Dangerous-Boy

---

Do you have evidence? The plural of anecdote is not data, but the majority of taxi drivers I've taken rides with (in the Boston area, in the Philadelphia area, and in the San Francisco Bay Area, are of Indian origin, mostly Sikh (many of them clean shaven).

But for some data, here are some sources: Also, 60% of the members of the New York Taxi Workers Alliance are from [1]

From another source: "It is estimated that 65-80% of New York City's 25,000 taxi drivers are Sikhs." [2]

I'm adding back the statement that Indian Americans are also well represented as taxi cab drivers.

Arun 08:33, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Population Figure

"Numbering at least 2.5 million, Indian Americans account for slightly less than 1% of the total population of the United States"

2.5 million is the wrong number. According to the 2000 census, there were 1.6 million Asian Indians in United States or about 0.6% of the total population. July 25, 2005

---

Footnote 7 links to a population distribution map among all 50 states. I found it on the Indian Embassy webpage and the data from which it is complied comes from the U.S. census bureau and India Abroad Center for Political Awareness.....so you know it's credible. OhioDesi 19:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Asian Group

"the official stance became to classify Indians as Asian despite acknowledging that many anthropologists classify Indians as Caucasian and not as Mongoloid."

What does the term "Asian" has to do with being "Caucasion" or "Mongoloid". Not all Indians are classified as "caucasion" by Antropologists. Only the North Indians are classified as "caucasion". Besides, the term "caucasion" does not mean anyhting. Indians are not considered "caucasion" in Western countries. Caucasion in America only refers to European Americans. 27 July, 2005.

According to U.S. courts and census bureau, Middle Easterners (not Indians) are considered Caucasian, so your assertion that "Caucasian in America only refers to European Americans" is invalid.

---

American Indians, Pakistanis, and Bangalis refer to themselves as Desi (meaning "country men"), and usually forget about the political strife between the three countries which share very similiar cultures.

article is about indian americans, not paks and bangladeshis. There is already a pak american article.

---

"What does the term "Asian" has to do with being "Caucasion" or "Mongoloid". Not all Indians are classified as "caucasion" by Antropologists. Only the North Indians are classified as "caucasion". Besides, the term "caucasion" does not mean anyhting. Indians are not considered "caucasion" in Western countries. Caucasion in America only refers to European Americans."

No actually South Indians are classified as Caucasion as well. Theo only difference is skin color (being closer to the equator). 97% of all Indians (both North and South) belong to a caucasoid race of the mediterranean sub-branch. Also in America Russians, and Southwest Asians (Middle Easterners) are classified as caucasion, despite being Asian themselves. So race classifications often contradict themselves. Zachorious 03:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Bend it like Beckham?

Should Bend it like Beckham be included in the films sections even though it's british? --Dangerous-Boy

First of all, paks and bangladeshis are not desi. Desi is a name we indians give to greet other indians. Pakkis just want to be included. Let them find themself some other urdu word. Bend it like Beckhams should be included as it covers all the indian american sentiments. Location is less important than the subject. In this case the subject is universal and applies to indians everywhere(out side of india).

 Finally i end with a message to all the pakkis and bangladeshi's.  Stop identifying yourself with US!!!!

-You are so ignorant. We Pakistanis are the closest thing to you Indians, other than your fellow Indians. Our languge is the same as Hindi, just an overemphasis of Persian and Arabic vocabulary, as you guys overemphasize Sanskrit, (after independence). Our culture, customs, sentiments (for the most part) and languages are the same. We Pakistanis are majority Panjabis and Sindhis (i persoanlly am a Pathan but I feel proud of Punjabi ancestry as well). We are as much desi as others. Remember, a bloody violent partition is not enough to cut us off from each other. We are as tied together as Syrians and Lebanese are tied to each other. -User: Afghan Historian

I disgree. If you wanted to be apart us, you would have stayed. I have nothing incommon with a paki. Go join the arabs. that's what you center your culture around.--Dangerous-Boy 09:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a place to stir up nationalistic rhetoric. This page is starting to sound ominously like Talk:Aryan_invasion_theory. While YOU may feel you have nothing in common with people from Pakistan (I think Paki is a slur like brownie, coolie, etc, btw!), at my Uni, and many other Unis around the country, communities from all of the greater Indian subcontinent are very tightly bonded. Vvuppala 10:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

To each his own. ALthough I don't agree with your statement.--Dangerous-Boy 17:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I think "Indian" should encompass any South Asian who feels Indian. There are thousands of years of Hindu history and Indus Valley history buried beneath Pakistan. True, modern-day Pakistani curriculum discards any evidence of a pre-Islamic civilization, but the same was true between the Christian Holy Roman Empire which all but denied that it was once a pagan Roman civilization, and the Eastern Byzantine empire which continued the literature, technology, and values of the original Romans. 80% of Pakistanis will probably rather never remember that they share anything with India, but 20% are quite aware that Pakistan is a modern creation and in antiquity it was Indian, and in even earlier antiquity it was Hindu. - Thoreaulylazy 05:13, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Bend It Like Beckham is a film whose main protagonist is a British Asian. 65% of the film is about Jess's family (her, her sister and her sister's boyfriend, etc.), and in addition, the film was co-written by and directed by yet another British Asian. So, yes, I think that this film deserves to be in that category. No question. -- Jalabi99 06:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Classification

As for scientific classification, an Indian can be classified as causasian or mongoloid depending on which part of India you go to. There is even some negro. Most Indians probably put down asian American on surveys. Not causasian. --Dangerous-Boy

See United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind and Luce-Celler Act of 1946 for opinions of the Unites States govt. regarding the classification of Indians. While anthropologists may classify many Indians as Caucasian, the US govt, for legislative and census purposes, classify Indians as Asian. This is important because many laws and quotas are race-based. Thus, Indians are counted as Asian when tallying the Asian quota of UC (University of California) schools, as well as when tallying minorities to ensure large corps are diverse. The U.S. census is "self-described" affiliation, so a blue-eyed blonde of Nordic descent can check "African American"; however, many census-style forms explicitly mention "Asian (including Indian sub-continent)" to reduce doubts. --thoreaulylazy

You should add that info into the section. --Dangerous-Boy

Somebody added this, which I have removed: The Supreme Court determined that to be part of the White Race a region needed to be 2 out of 3 things: white-skinned, Caucasian, and from the West -- the 2/3 White Race Rule. The Indian Subcontinent was determined to neither be white-skinned nor from the West, being only (1)Caucasian, so they were determined to not be part of the White Race. Similarly, the Far East was determined to be neither Caucasian nor from the West, only being (1)white-skinned, so they were determined to not be part of the White Race. The Supreme Court case's name was (Ozawa v. United States 1922). Therefore, people from the Indian Subcontinent are Asian because they’re Asian “from the East”. In this sense, "from the East" and "from the West" refers to the 2 major religious groups of Eurasia. The "from the West" group: Jewish, Bahai, Christian, and Islamic religions are all similar to each other. In contrast, the "from the East" group, Hindu, Jain, Shinto, Daoist, Confucist, and Buddhist, are all similar to each other. The Middle East, unlike the Indian Subcontinent and the Far East, passed the 2/3 White Race rule. They are White because they are (1)Caucasian and (2)“from the West”, lacking only being "white-skinned". They are “from the West” because it was argued that the Arabs were historically the roots of Western civilization and they're Muslim. This Supreme Court case's name was (Ex parte Mohriez). There was no cite and I couldn't find any evidence of this when I searched. I put more reasons for the remove in United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind since the same person added this content there as well. Moreover, the results I found for Ex parte Mohriez seemed to all show that Arabians were found to be not White, contrary to what the original poster had mentioned - and, it was a 1944 verdict, which has nothing to do with the 1923 US v Thind case. To clear up the mess of classification once and for all, I've added a timetable of United States classification of Indians. --thoreaulylazy

It was done by User:Dark Tichondrias. I can't tell if he's a vandal. ----Dangerous-Boy

US paki's don't identify ourselves as Indians thus the name PAKI

what else needs work?

I think the article still needs to be fleshed out more. I want to make it even better than the chinese and filipino ones. What else do u guys think do we need to work on? --Dangerous-Boy

• I see sentences about politics, voting, affliations etc are spead out throughout the article. Bringing all of them under one section would be good --Vyzasatya 01:53, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Go ahead. Dangerous-Boy 05:14, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

age bias

the article shows clear age bias. the focus seems to be entirely on people 21+, who have emigrated to the US for jobs. many indian-americans are of my generation, and grew up in america. i realize there is already and article for the so-called "ABCD", however, at least some of that information needs to make its way into this article. also, i don't identify as ABCD, because I was born in India and still speak and read/write telugu. there are plenty of things that can be added to make this article more well rounded.

Vvuppala 02:19, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Swadhyaya Pariwar

I saw that the edit that added Swadhyay Pariwar to the list of cultural establishments. When that edit was removed on charge of vandalism, I looked on Google- Swadhyay Pariwar actually does exist, and does have centers in the US. I have reverted to the edit that includes the Swadyay Pariwar amongst the list of institutions.

Vvuppala 18:59, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes they are quite big among Gujarati people.Bakaman 18:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Voting/Discussion for Merge ABCD into Indian American as a section

I think the whole article should be moved over here. Having a whole entry on ABCD seems more like a Wiktionary thing to me. -Joshuapaquin 08:26, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I support the Joshua's idea. That is apt --Vyzasatya 14:48, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't think it article should be merged. ABCD deals with a lot more issues to all south asian people, not jsut Indian Americans. --Dangerous-Boy 01:15, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

I dont foresee ABCD article growing more than what it is at present. With slight changes it will perfectly fit into Indian American as a section. If you look at what links to it you only see Indian related articles only. So none of the other relevant parties seems to be concerned about it --Vyzasatya 06:31, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

To remove ABCD as a separate article is akin to removing pages like Jewish-American Princess, Fresh off the boat, and others that occupy a similar social use and position in language. It would display Eurocentric bias to remove it, imo, and additionally serve no purpose. --Saurav

Saurav, merging the two articles serves the purpose of keeping Wikipedia separate from Wiktionary. A simple definition of the term "ABCD" does not need its own article. Please do keep in mind that the subject matter is not disappearing, it is moving to a location that gives it context. ABCD is an integral part of the Indian American identity. If you feel as though Indian American and American-Born Confused Desi are such separate topics, please do elaborate that. Also, I don't see how merging the two articles represents "Eurocentrism"? Vvuppala 09:12, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Jook-sing for the chinese is not merged with the chinese american article. --Dangerous-Boy 21:36, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Thats because Jook-sing has enough written to be a seperate article and ABCD not. Dangerous-Boy I respect your opinions but consensus seems to be for merger. --Vyzasatya 21:11, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

merger complete. I made ABCD a section in this article --Vyzasatya 21:20, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Race-based laws

In the "classification" section it says that classification of Indian Americans as "Asian" has consequences because many laws and quotas are race-based. Well, clearly many quotas are race-based, but are there really any state or federal laws that could be described as "race-based"? If so, which ones? Babajobu 11:40, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Indian Voting Patterns

The article is showing signs of bias in discussing Indian Republicans. The article says

"Also, many Indian-Americans are extremely wealthy, and thus tend to vote Republican, while others identify as minorities and tend to vote Democrat. This, in turn has lessened the effectiveness of lobbying for Indian-American causes."

This sentence is rife with unsupported assumptions. It implies that only wealthy Indians vote Republican, being wealthy leads people to vote Republican and that those who consider themselves to be minorities vote Democrat instead of Republican.

A similar sentence is found in another part of the article:

"Indian Americans as a whole tend to vote in U.S. elections for Democratic candidates. However, because of the number of extremely successful and wealthy Indian professionals and entrepreneurs, there is also a sizable Indian Republican vote."

Many Indians vote Republicans not because they are are wealthy but because they have conservative moral values. Others vote Republicans because they are business-owners and find Republicans to be business-friendly. Remember most business owners are not rich - they are middle class. In addition many Indians are wealthy ABCDs who vote Democratic because they are socially liberal. I suggest deleting these explanations for why Indians vote Republican (unless someone offers evidence-based explanations) and replacing them with a sentence such as:

"The majority of Indian Americans vote Democratic in national elections, however a substantial minority of Indian Americans vote Republican."

What do you guys think?

It would be interesting if we could find a source that discussed why different segments of the Indian-American population vote differently. Do Americans born in India more frequently vote Republican? Do their American-born children more frequently vote Democrat? Do business owners more frequently vote Republican? Et cetera. But unless we can find an actual source, maybe it would be better to remove the sweeping generalities, yeah. Babajobu 16:21, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

The only poll of Indian American voting patterns, indicated that in 2004, South Asians (which is a reasonable proxy for Indians in this context), went 90-9 for Kerry against Bush- Asian "Natural Republicans" vote 75% Democratic Arun 10:02, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

It was still there. So I removed it and added some things about political clout. Superdosh 21:23, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I believe that the article Asian "Natural Republicans" vote 75% Democratic is using a survey of the Indian-American voting of the Bush vs. Kerry Presidential Election of 2004. This does not show preference for a political party. It only shows preference for candidate. The second problem is that it uses a sample size of 99 voters. This sample size is too small. Therefore any conclusions built on this data is an extrapolation.

There is also another link that Vote Getters seems like it charges to see the article.

I suggest that we try to find better sources and delete these links. -Emmadi 12:05, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree that 99 voters is too small of a sample size, but it seems to be the best survey out there. Also preference for a presidential candidate can be a proxy for party preference . If you can also find some national data on party registration, congressional/state/local candidate voting patterns, better presidential election surveys, endorsement by various Indian American associations, that would be great. But you should add them to the existing data, until we get too much concrete data that we have to remove the less noteworthy sources. Arun 16:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Intro

I reverted User:Dangerous-Boy's revert as:

Asian Indian is the current US Census term for Indian Americans, not "East Indian". East Indian was formerly used colloquially, though not as a US Census term for people from the Indian subcontinent. Speculation about the total South Asian American population should go in the South Asian American article. This article is strictly about the Indian American population.

Arun 10:16, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

sorry. I thought the user was vandalizing by deleting so much stuff.--Dangerous-Boy 19:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Edited out Zogby report

Edited out: "See external link for a comparative media portrayal: [http://www.niaf.org/research/report_zogby.asp"

(1)Is this a peer reviewed study? (2)"People from India" are not in the report. For many Americans, "Asian American" or "Asiatic" refers to Chinese. For example, see the Wikipedia article Asian in other English-speaking countries. (Remember, the Zogby report was asking teenagers, not United States government officials. 4.228.90.84 03:31, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Flawed Population Figures

The population figures, seeming quoted from the US Census of 2000 are highly incorrect. The 1.6 million figure is apparently taken from the the census where it is denoted for "Asian in combination with one or more other races" and NOT Indian American. It should be further noted that the same 1.6 million is further divided 5 sub-groups including Asian White, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, and even Asian Black. Not all of these can be categorized as "Indian American". Now I am not here to tell you that there aren't so many Indians in America, just that the source of are quoting does not match up with what is being said in the article. So either find a better source, or remove the 1.6 million figure.

Reference: http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/c2kbr01-16.pdf

--H2d2 22:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

No, the number is correct. Go to the following US government website http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFIteratedFacts?_event=&geo_id=01000US&_geoContext=01000US&_street=&_county=&_cityTown=&_state=&_zip=&_lang=en&_sse=on&ActiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph&pgsl=010&_submenuId=factsheet_2&ds_name=DEC_2000_SAFF&_ci_nbr=013&qr_name=DEC_2000_SAFF_R1010&reg=DEC_2000_SAFF_R1010%3A013&_keyword=&_industry= The exact figure for "Asian Indian alone" is 1678765. For "Asian Indian alone or in combination with other races" the figure is 1899599.

Asok the intern

This character was introduced way, way earlier than 2003 -- he was around at least as early as 1996.

areas that still need work

• Cultural establishments
• Entertainment

citations

• Disunity
• Assimilation

--Dangerous-Boy 20:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, moving out the racial classification into another article. Arun 07:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Image of "an Indian American boy"

Is this really necessary? I mean it seems bit silly. Not every article needs an image. In this case, I find it both funny and sad. That image can be of anyone anywhere in the world. I can't think of the words but it looks rather ridiculous. --Blacksun 04:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Some cleanup

Got rid of the not very relevant Indian American image, some unfounded speculation, made some corrections (people want to keep removing the fact that many Indians are cab drivers. Also added a few "Citation needed" tags, where they would be useful.

Arun 07:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I kind of liked that image. Also, we might need to clean out some of the links section.--Dangerous-Boy 18:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

LoL "not very relevant" is rather diplomatic :P --Blacksun 19:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Disunity

There is a clear unified Indian-American voice in the U.S. political system. Indian-Americans have a PAC (Political Action Committee), the US India PAC (www.usinpac.com). Their goal is to represent Indian-Americans and offer a clear unified voice for the Indian-American community in American politics. They do offer bipartisan support to candidates while representing the community.

It is true that Indians vote for different parties just as Caucasians and Hispanics but it does not mean that there is not a clear voice for the Indian-Americans in American politics. I believe that there is confusion as how sub-communities differ on opinions on issues such as culture, language and traditions with politics.

I suggest that there be two categories one that shows that there is disunion between the regional communities and one that shows that there is a clear voice for Indian-Americans in the US political system while showing that the Indian-American community shows support for both the Right and Left wing.

Hello anonymous user. It will be easier to participate in conversations if you create an account and sign your messages, by placing ~~~~ at the end of all of your messages. I have a couple points about your last comment. First, how prominent is this group? The following article Vote Getters seems to indicate that there are several other groups. Also, there are several industry groups which additionally have political platforms like the Asian American Hoteliers Association. This statement is a bit sweeping.

Arun 15:55, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, www.usinpac.com seems to have a broken webpage.

Arun 15:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I have heard of US India PAC. It is new but fairly prominent group. The link www.usinpac.com seems to work for me. Annonymous has a point. I don't think that industry groups like hotel really attempt to represent the whole indian-american community. US India pac does have a presence in lobying [3]. --72.193.109.15 09:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

get rid of disunity section?

The politics section seems to cover it.--Dangerous-Boy 07:18, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree, I believe that it should be deleted. I would also like to suggest a clean-up of Politics. -Emmadi 11:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Spelling bee competition

Is it worth noting that spelling bee competitions regularly have Indian Americans in the top 10. They were also past winners. In 2006, that was shown live on ABC yesterday, Rajeev came 4th. - Ganeshk (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

He didn't try hard enough! should have made first!--Dangerous-Boy 17:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Hate crimes

I'ver heard of a couple.[4]

another one had a hindu temple in minnasota vandalized.--Dangerous-Boy 20:09, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Famous indians

Are there any notable indians that could be added to this page? for example, the Asian American article talks about various people who have made in impact in the arts, sports, science etc. There has to be a least one or two notable indian americans...right? Wangster 15:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure there are scientists.--Dangerous-Boy 18:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

There's a complete list at List of Indian Americans. How about Nobel Prize winners Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar and Har Gobind Khorana? --Musicpvm 21:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

My Space accounts marking the "East Indian" category

A lot of My Space accounts mark "East Indian" who do not look like people with original origins from India. Living Dead Girl has marked the "East Indian" category, but does not look Indian. She looks like she has original origins from northern Europeans. She has also listed a ficticious height of 1'1" and the improbable hobby of being a body builder. Another account, Geometric has facial features (person on left) which look too European to possibly be a North Indian marked "East Indian" but said she was also a "taxi cab driver" and in high school which would not seem both likely to be true. I do not know what to make of the self-identification of these people as "East Indian". Do some people who do not have origins from India self-identify as Indian Americans? Another interpretation is that these two people do not really identify as Indian, but are marking categories as jokes. I would like to hear what other users think.--Dark Tichondrias 03:10, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow, so everything you read on the Internet, isn't true ?

Seriously though, 'East Indian' as an identifier kinda obscure in terms of American ethno-racial classification system, unlike Black, White, Asian and Hispanic classifications the term 'East Indian' is largely unpoliticized. Which is probably why non-Indian Americans are comfortable with using it as a gag identity.

Regardless, I fail to see how what teens say about themselves on 'myspace' is relevant to an encyclopedia article. VirafPatel 18:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

"Macaca" and general article quality

Does anyone else think there needs to be an entry for or passing reference to "Macaca" in the discrimination section of the main article? Granted, it's not really that important, but the media seems abuzz with it. Also, the list of famous Indian-Americans in the main article is paltry and the choice of using Rep. Jindal (R-LA) for a portrait picture is suspect, in my opinion. Once I get time to spend, I'll try to clean up the main article some, but if others want to try, there's a better chronicle of Indian American heroes/accomplishments at somebody's blog. The blog itself seems to be a sort of retort to the recent macaca-incident (however important/unimportant it is), but it seems to do a better job of conveying the essense of being Indian-American (emphasizing the -American part in terms of how Indian-Americans have improved America) than the main wiki article for Indian-Americans. Also, it does a better job of not totally focussing on Indian Americans since post-1990s lest readers think the '90s were the birth of us. My 2 cents. -- Thoreaulylazy 05:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Those two pics should be removed. put Upendra J. Chivukula in instead. Macaca should be mentioned.--D-Boy 21:54, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

ABCD origin

From my recollection, isn't ABCD a description created by particular sects of desi people (i.e. Indians born in india and living in american, of whom characterized American born Indian people who have "lost their ethnic ways")? From this article, one would assume that the term ABCD was created by ethnicities other than east indians.

66.182.249.211 03:49, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Added to cultural establishment on Indian American Churches

Added to cultural establishment, a portion on indian american churches representing various indian ethnicities, with link to Indian american Churches Directory site[5]. Also added malayalis as part of recent indian ethnicities coming to america.--71.30.188.223 04:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

xtianity didn't come from india. it came from the middle east. xtianity was already etablished before indians came to america.--D-Boy 21:55, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

D-Boy, your statement is a little confusing. You might have been too quick to read my statement, read it again and consider what you said. Nothing in the previous statement or the additions made make any historical claims for the origins of Christianity or geography. I am hoping you are not initiating any attack or confrontation. I am taking good faith in that you aren't and have misread statement. Please have a good day --71.30.188.223 04:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I think you read my statement too quick.--D-Boy 08:07, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, thats a very mature comeback. If you have a anti-indian christian POV please keep it to yourself. No ones bothering you, so don't bother others. From what I've seen most people just want to contribute here in wiki, take their example, and keep at that. Have a good day--71.30.188.223 02:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

D-Boy definitely isnt anti-Indian. He wants to remove the link to some nn church only because he's a desi.Bakaman _Bakatalk 23:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Beg your pardon, who are you? What does it matters if he's desi or not? More importantly what business is this of yours?And it was anti-indian christian POV, not anti-indian, please read more carefully, thanks, have a good day--71.30.177.228 04:27, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I've been working on this article since it was a stub. What you are doing is putting religious proganda. This article was pretty secular. You make it sound that there are more xtians than muslims from india. --D-Boy 23:32, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I practically created Category:Indian Americans (I added over 100+ ppl to that category). Anyways there are more Indian Muslims than Indian Christians in the US, and every nn church doesnt deserve a spot on the article.The majority of Japanese American (per this article: Japanese_American#Religion) are Chirstian so they et a para of recogntion in the article. Christians are nowhere near the majority, or even a burgeoning minority among Indian Americans. Indian Christians rarely set up their own churches, they are usually absorbed into mainstream churches anyways. Bakaman _Bakatalk 16:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

This is true.--D-Boy 23:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, everything you have said is irrevelant. It has nothing to do with the subject I'm addressing. A very prejudiced opposition to my subject is shown by your statements. On top of that this has nothing do to with you. Baka you have no proprietary rights here, get over it, D-boy, stop your harassment, and stop spreading nonsense. This article is far from secular if only one religion is allowed to be heard. Your behavior is very discriminatory and has nothing to do with improving this article. Think about your actions carefully, ganging up on people for your kicks reveals your true selves.--71.30.177.228 03:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

If anyone is being harassed or discriminated against, it me by you. You accused me of being anti-indian and anti-xtian. I have not removed any of the content that you added. I suggest you apologize immediately and cease desist from your current actions. It's unfair to wikipedia that you are perscuting people on such biased claims. I think you should think about what you have done and how it has affected others in this matter. Also, you do not have proprietary rights here either. I also suggest you obtain a username.--D-Boy 00:17, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Good point IP. I'm goin to list out every Hindu organization in the Us, every IMuslim org, every Parsi org, every IBuddhist org etc. Wikipedia is not secular.Bakaman _Bakatalk 02:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Aren't you guys done talking nonsense yet? Have you nothing better to do other than gang up on people and patting each other on the back after? Heres let me help you out. Baka you actually have a pretty good suggestion about the listing of every religious organization. D-Boy help him with the research. Go find the diverse organizations of every Indian American faith, or you can just concentrate on your favorite, Hinduism. I totally would support that as it would make the article more interesting and indepth. Also it would give you something to do other than going around provoking people and making things up. Heres a suggestion, do some of the lesser known cultural organization of other parts of India, such as south indian Hindu societies(i.e., Nair Service Society, Sree Narayana Guru Society) These usually don't get enough mention. South indian hindu cultural institutions especially need more coverage. Why don't you guys go make yourselves useful and start on that. Bring it back to me if you still need some guidance. Happy hunting--71.30.177.228 03:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Baka(I'm assuming you're the one that made all the changes, correct me anyone if thats incorrect) thanks for taking my advice and channeling your energies into something productive. This is mostly the same thing I said on User:Deepujoseph talk page [[6]] , here it is again. I welcome the additions to the sections on the other faiths and ethnic organizations as we need to portray how diverse the Indian-american community is. I told you that was a good idea, you should come up with more without the sarcasm. I will probably add a couple more things to give a clearer and more indepth picture, but I must say you did some work there. I wish you added a little more diversity in some of the institutions(different regions, unique organizations, NSS SNDP, Mar Thoma, Aga Khan's), but we can work that in later. Oh and post next time you change a whole section that another person contributed to, as I know I would like to know any changes of my words, its the polite thing to do. I will do some more additions in the near future to help. Have a goodnite--71.30.177.228 04:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

If you make an account you would see the changes on your watchlist anyways. My edit summary is notification enough since you seem to view this page everyday, a task made easier by the watchlist function. The only time I explain edits is if im reverting or theres a dispute.Bakaman _Bakatalk 04:07, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Sexual Predators, Indian Americans

Whats the reason people want to hide the ugly details of this High-Achieving community?

Is there some rationale for RV this??
- 	==Crime== 	 
- 		 
- 	==Sexual Predators== 	 
- 	As of Nov, 2006, Dateline program aired on MSNBC, in their sting operation on adults who try to make illegal-contact 	 
- 	with children for crimes including underage-sex, caught 7 Indians, among the total 29. 	 
- 	People include, 	 
- 		 
- 	# Jaswinder Cheema, 30, San Jose, Bose Electronics manager, 	 
- 	# Pulkit Mathur, 25, Sunnyvale, executive, 	 
- 	# Chandrashekhar Nonna, 31, Oakland, S3 Tech Solutions engineer, 	 
- 	# Gopichand Pai, 25, Sunnyvale, TCS software engineer. 	 
- 		 
- 	The complete list can be accessed from ''Argus Courier'' local newspaper of Petaluma, 	 
- 	where the operation was held. See ''Argus Courier'' website [http://www1.arguscourier.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060906/NEWS01/60905007]. 	 
- 		 
- 	The ''MSNBC Dateline'' Video of the operation can be viewed at, [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15130487/page/6/ | MSNBC Dateline Video of the Petaluma, Child Predators Operation].

BTW a new google search on these names shows up this: http://www.india-forum.com/forums/index.php?s=2a2ff779e0d8da69615ce8c33c3384bf&showtopic=1297&pid=61219&st=60&#entry61219, and as for the lame excuse that these guys arent Indians, well nobody in the whole world has names like these, which is a fact, and in the Video @ MSNBC (listed in ref) the anchor clearly mentions these guys being Indians. Well, if the person who RV'ed it is blind, I dont think Wikipedia should overlook FACTS.

--பராசக்தி 20:05, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

First, how about giving WP:NPA a read? Second, the article does not mention Indians, and even if it did, information about this one program definitely does not belong in the Indian American article. This is just POV to the extreme. You even added a list of names. It is ridiculous. What does this have to do with Indian Americans as a whole? Absolutely nothing. --musicpvm 21:20, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

The only Indians I heard up that raped kids were some indian xtians priests in NYC. I don't this belongs in the article since the american articles don't have it.--D-Boy 03:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Well WP:NPA!! Was I attacking anyone saying it was a lame argument? Anyway, we can all uncomfortably stomach the details, that Indian-Americans donot have any criminal activity. I mean, its just a fact right? I was just pointing out whats happening, and I dont know how it becomes POV. Please explain that. And Please see the video on MSNBC, and donot argue that they dont mention Indians at all. Anyway.. you can decide, its noway on the top of my list... and Im thinking twice before I run into anyones toes here... great to know how this article works.—Preceding unsigned comment added by MuthuKutty (talk • contribs) 02:43, November 25, 2006

Anatomy section?

The anatomy section is laughable. I have edited it to separate the assertions of racial similarity and penis size, and included requests for references.

24.7.67.118 11:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)Concerned Indian American

I removed the anatomy section. Is there an anatomy section for other American immigrants? --BostonMA ^talk 13:34, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite required

The Economics section needs a rewrite. The wording in the following paragraph is off and the highlighted sentence is either superfluous or incomplete.

Indian Americans own 50% of all economy lodges and 35% of all hotels in the United States, which have a combined market value of almost $40 billion. (Source: Little India Magazine). A University of California, Berkeley, study reported that one-third of the engineers in Silicon Valley are of Indian descent, while 7% of valley high-tech firms are led by Indian CEOs. (Source: Silicon India Readership Survey) According to Technology Review 35, the technical journal of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In 2002, there were over 223,000 Asian Indian-owned firms in the U.S., employing more than 610,000 workers, and generating more than $88 billion in revenue.[7]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.61.98.24 (talk) 17:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

States & Cities

The lists of states and cities where Indians reside keeps on changing and is becoming more meaningless. States such as North Carolina, Georgia, etc are coming up on the lists even though the last census statistics show that these states do not have significant amount of Indian Americans. Similarly cities like Charlotte are appearing on this list. Lets uniformly decide to only have a certain number of states or cities on these lists based on the highest population (indian embassy statistics) to about 5-7.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.151.22.14 (talk) 15:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Millionaires

The article says: Merrill Lynch recently revealed that there are nearly 200,000 Indian American millionaires. One in every nine Indians in the United States is a millionaire It also says there are 2,319,000 Indian Americans. That doesn't equate 1 in 9. I realize the study was in 2003. Is there a more recent study? Akubhai 17:19, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Discrepancy with population figures in South Asian American

There is an issue I would like to raise in regard to the population figures. In this article, it says there are some ~2.4 million "Indian Americans". However, the South Asian American article says there are some ~1.9 million South Asian Americans. This does not make sense to me. Correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't the term "South Asian American" include ALL Indian Americans? If so, then one of the two population figures would have to be wrong, no? Thanks for the help! JeffreyN 20:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Median Household Income for 2004

Why are there two figures for median household income in 2004? Can someone please resolve this? 89.243.78.232 16:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Picture

Is the picture of Kalpana Chawla really necessary? I don't think this article really needs a picture, at least not of a person. Insertclevernamehere 22:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

me too.--D-Boy 20:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, no pics would be best, especially if there are always disagreements about them--Kathanar 19:17, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I think a picture could be helpful. What if someone didn't know what an Indian American looked like (I doubt that would be the case, but isn't that the point of an encyclopedia)? Akubhai 21:09, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Hotels

Here is an article from USA Today if anyone thinks the article needs any more hotel stuff in it. [7]Akubhai 15:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

No merging

The merge proposal disturbs the convenience of browsing the articles in an encyclopaedic form. The content in the NRI-PIO site is brief and doesn't warrant a merger. Thanking You, Altruism^{To talk} 08:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Politics

There is a section saying Indians tend to be more liberal that had a fact tag since April. I'm going to remove the lines from the page assuming there is no source for it. Someone recently added a line about "exit polls" with no source. How can you have an "exit" poll before an election? Akubhai 12:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Removal of Link

I noticed a link was removed by User:Satori Son. Please specify why this link did not meet WP:EL. I could be wrong and not have read it right but haven't seen anything that would prevent the link. Thank you--Kathanar 20:18, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I would be happy to discuss this. I did remove a link to the mapsofworld.com website for several reasons. First of all, it was provided as an inline citation for a fact that already had two other references of better quality, so it was redundant and unnecessary.

As far as the WP:External links#Links normally to be avoided guideline, the link did not meet the following criteria for inclusion:

• No. 1: "Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article."
• No. 5: "Links to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising."

Also, this link has been added as part of a concerted linkspam campaign; see the reports at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#Indian spam and Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/59.144.165.88. Thus, is also violates WP:EL criteria No. 5, "Links mainly intended to promote a website", as well as the provisions of WP:Conflict of interest and WP:LINKSPAM.

I hope this addresses your concerns. -- Satori Son 22:17, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Sartori, that clears it up for me, I appreciate you responding. Have a good day--Kathanar 15:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Citations and Cite-needed tags

As a suggestion: For uniformity, when placing citations, can people please use ref-tags like instead of [8] -- also, place citations and ((cite-needed)) after punctuations like this.‹The template Talkfact is being considered for merging.›  Thanks; alternate suggestions for consistency are welcomed. -- Thoreaulylazy 21:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Well not all Indian Americans are Elite White Collar Workers.

As inspired by reading a talk dicussion from The Thai American Page, that to say as from expiernce and Smart logical thinking, that not all Indian Americans are like what the tile says so, As I had known a subtitue Teacher's aide Who's from India, and as I felt in the first place after I read in the economics section that the Indian Americans I had look around in my life are not wealthy upper class like people. So as as a result I think things had to be cleared out a bit so to be more accurate in a sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.248.237.146 (talk) 01:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Sanjaya?!?!?!

I mean i'm not a hater, but is he really a notable indian-american?

I mean i don't see William Hung at the top of the Chinese American wiki

His picture/name could be replaced by many other potentials such as M. Night Shyamalan or Kal Penn or Sanjay Gupta etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.35.27 (talk) 01:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, defnitely. There are more noticable Indian Americans and Sanjaya's mother is not Indian. There is nothing wrong with that of course, but there are many famous Indian American's who have parents that are both Indian. If you're going to put Sanjaya's picture, you might as well add Norah Jones too. 76.119.25.226 (talk) 01:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:ChandraNobel.png

The image Image:ChandraNobel.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

• File:Apu.png

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Malayalam is spoken by about 20 percent of the Indian American population which is a significant amount. This must be noted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.89.84.86 (talk) 16:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thinkinkg of adding....

I am thinking of adding to this page some of the stereotypes that Asian Indian people face in America. Though it may seem trivial to some, I think that this is a significant part of anyone who fits this racial category (such as myself) live's. What do you guys think> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sidmsuri (talk • contribs) 03:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Modern day people of India

I replaced the incorrect statement that the US Census classifies any of the inhabitants of "modern-day" India as racially Asian. The US Census repeats the phrase "origins in any of the original peoples" to indicate indigenous status. The US Census ancestry code listing says that write-ins of "Aryan" or "Parsi" gets you classified as part of the white race, because they originate from Iran. They are not included as the original people of the Indian Subcontinent even though many people in India are of Aryan descent and some are Parsi.----^DarkTea© 01:59, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Not hard facts, opinion

The part that talks about discrimination is based on people's opinions. Look at the sources. I mean, come on, saying that it happens all of the time but it is not reported, this is opinion.

Also, backlash is not the same as racial prejudice. It is well documented how much outsourcing there is, and ACTUAL racism (like how it used to be against African-Americans) is not based on facts. Contralya (talk) 09:38, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Politics of Picture Politics

Theres been some disagreement on whose pics to show for the politics section. Religion seems to be the dividing line. Religion shouldn't come into play as no one religion defines the Indian American identity. The highest ranking indian right now in politics is Bobby Jindal. Due to him being a christian, especially one who has voluntarily become a christian, not being born as such, there has been opposition and attempts to remove his picture (very childish). On the other hand there is support for a pretty much unknown politician's picture Upendra Chivukula(an Assemblyman from New Jersey?) to be put up for the only thing I can see is that somehow is more identifiably Hindu. Anyway someone removed his pic, which is also very childish, but I have another solution. Why don't we just put up the pics of the highest ranking, most identifiable indian politicians, one of which is Bobby Jindal. I've also added a pic of Kumar P. Barve (a Hindu) who is the Head Legislator of the Maryland House which I feel is the next highest. Plus I think he has the distinction being the first state legislator of Indian origin. I've put the pics on a equal level on the left and right so no one thinks ones being favored. When religion is relevant it should be discussed or cited, but in this case its ridiculous.--Kathanar 14:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

No picture is better.--D-Boy 08:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

How about Vikram Pandit —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niku1980 (talk • contribs) 09:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Whichever picture is used in the end it is a fairly minor issue. I would prefer one and don't really care as long as they are Indian American and notable. If there is a politician that stands out more than the rest, I suggest adding a photo that person. Religion should have nothing to do with who's chosen. After all, the article is called Indian American, not Hindu American or Indian Christian American. I hope that when each section has a pic, it would reflect the wide range of religions present in India. It is a shame that there aren't as many images floating around for notable people in areas other than politics. Gizza^{Chat ©} 06:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I put a muslim indian in the poltics sections but someone removed it.--D-Boy 06:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

How about Dalip Singh Saund, Nikki Haley or Zach Zacharias?Bakaman 16:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm cool with it.--D-Boy 17:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Dalip seems to be the most notable because he was the first Indian to be elected onto the U.S. Congress. Gizza^{Chat ©} 21:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thats a good idea, I have no problem with that. It was childish to remove Jindal's pic, a more than legitimate pic for that section, and replace it with some minor almost unknown politician Upendra Chivukula who is only a Assemblyman for his state. It was obvious from some of the statements made, it was Jindal's religion that seemed to cause these actions. I am re-adding Jindal's pic, but will leave Kumar Barve's pic to be fair, until someone can replace both with a decent pic of Dalip Saund. Until the replacement do not remove Jindal's pic, you can remove Barve's if you really only want one pic. Thanks--Kathanar 02:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me but where do you go off stating it was religion that had to do with the removal of bobby's picture. I didn't state that. you did. Dalip is the most notable since he's the first. Dalip shall be the only be pic there. From there, we should have a concensus on which should be there.--D-Boy 03:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Discrimination

The article says: "On April 5, 2006, the Hindu Mandir of Minnesota was vandalised on the basis of religious discrimination"

But the sources cited with it say:

"Maple Grove police said there were no suspects and the vandalism, which occurred last Wednesday and caused several thousand dollars' damage, does not appear to be a hate crime."

and

"Police Capt. Tracy Stille said the vandalism was not classified as a hate crime because police and temple officials agreed it appeared to be random."

Is there any proof it was vandalized based on "religious discrimination"? I've added a fact tag but if there is no proof, it needs to be removed from the article. Akubhai 13:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

{{edit semiprotected}} Suggested edit under the linking of the murder of Abhijit Mahato as proof of ethnic targeting or discrimination: The suspects in the Mahato case (Lawrence Lovette and Demario Atwater) also are suspects in the murder of UNC student Eve Carson (http://www.newsobserver.com/2811/story/998319.html). The evidence clearly indicates that Mahato was robbed of his iPod and other valuables. Thus this was not a case the occurred due to discrimination or for unknown reasons as the article currently suggests. It was a result of robbery and generally targeting a college student, similar to the Carson case. Mahato was not targeted because he was an Indian American. It is suggested that the Mahato case be removed from mentioning in this article altogether as a result. Cparris (talk) 18:22, 11 April 2009 (UTC) User: cparris 14:20PM, 11 April 2009 (EST)

Indian American VS. American Indian

"American Indian has fallen out of favor and Native American is more commonly used to refer to the Indigenous peoples of North America". Since When? Most American Indians still call themself Indian. It is mostly just media that says "Native American". Many of us, when we want to differentiate refer to people from India as East Indian, and we will call ourselves American Indian. Thanks Iamanadam (talk) 03:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I second that heartily. I'm an American Indian & invariably call myself an Indian or American Indian. I have never heard an American Indian call themself a 'Native American' ; it would sound pretty pompous, pretentious, & politically correct. If I'm at an international site, such as wikipedia, & I'm broaching the subject, then I might follow my use of 'American Indian' with the explicatory 'one of the native peoples of the US, aka, Native Americans' or some such explanation ; otherwise, it's just Indian or American Indian for me. Home essentials (talk) 12:42, 4 November 2009 (GMT)

Angel Island

{{editsemiprotected}}

Please replace [[Angel Island]] with [[Angel Island (California)|Angel Island]] (because Angel Island is a dab page). Thanks. 58.8.6.116 (talk) 12:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Done Celestra (talk) 14:50, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. 58.8.1.144 (talk) 17:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Largley un-reported?

Saying that something happens all of the time but is not reported?

This statement does not belong in the article, as it is opinion and not proven fact.:

"Due to various socio-cultural reasons, implicit racial discrimination against Indian Americans largely go unreported by the Indian American community"

Without actual data backing it up, this is just an opinion, and only facts should be present in the article. Contralya (talk) 17:30, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to discussion

Active editors of this article are invited to join the discussion regarding the change in Asian American article's infobox. Specifically we are looking to get nominations for individuals who would fall under this article, nominations shall remain open until 9 November 2009. Comments are also welcomed. Thank you in advance --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:19, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

FYI, the nomination process is now over, and the voting period has began. Due to lack of nominations the slot for Laotian female representative is vacant, and will need further discussion sometime after voting has been concluded. The voting period will last until 4 December 2009. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Anjani Jain

no wikipedia article, he's an adjunct and vice dean so I don't think notability is established--Work permit (talk) 02:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Rajan Zed in infobox

Rajan Zed appeared relatively obscure, so I removed him from the infobox. The editor who added it may have a wp:coi--Work permit (talk) 04:01, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Assistance requested

I am looking for assistance in finding references regarding Asian Indian Americans during World War II. During the 1940 US Census "Hindu Americans" were the fourth largest group of Asian Americans after the Japanese, Chinese, and Filipinos. So far I have not found significant sources which to create a paragraph for Indian Americans in the article Military History of Asian Americans. If anyone would like to assist, they can place references they find on the article's talk page. Thank you in advance. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup of lists - listing of famous personalities, media, etc.

I would like to suggest that we move lists of famous personalities (in different fields) to some place like List of famous Indian Americans. Also lists in the "Media" section would soon grow large, and it seems like moving that to a different page and linking it from the media portrayal sub-section (in current social issues) would be more relevant. What say? ImmortallyTranquil 22:25, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

go for it.--D-Boy 07:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. I moved some of the lists (politicians, media references, and sports personalities) over to other pages and linked them here. Hope it helps. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ImmortallyTranquil (talk • contribs) 00:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

shouldn't there be something about the scripps howard national spelling bee, considering a large group of the contestants, winners, and finalists are indians? just a suggestion.

Bobby Jindhal isn't even popular amongst Indian Americans. In fact I would say most Indian Americans are against him. Please take him off the pictures. I think protecting this page was not a smart idea, with so many errors on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.234.149.102 (talk) 20:03, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Indian American or Americans of Indian descent

Shouldn't the category for Americans of Indian origin be 'Indian American' than 'Americans of Indian descent'? All other categories that concern foreign origin Americans have the category as hyphenated American. Shouldn't that be the case here too?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.18.118.70 (talk) 08:24, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

New York

New York and the surrounding states do not count as a metro area, thus San Francisco Bay Area should be named to be the Metro area with the largest Indian American population.

I have stated this many times, yet no one has bothered to argue or even listen to what I say. Watch what happens. Where is the source that proves that 17 little indias have sprung in New York city metro area? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.255.250.9 (talk) 23:45, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Protection

Can somebody please unprotect this page. there are so many errors and no one is bothering to change them. NY, NJ, Conneticut, and Pennsylvania is NOT A METRO AREA therefore it is not the METRO AREA WITH LARGEST INDIAN POPULATION! San Francisco Bay Area is the largest Indian American Metro Area.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.255.250.9 (talk) 19:48, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

UN PROTECT THIS PAGE !!!!! THERE IS NO REASON TO PROTECT THIS PAGE!!

SAN FRANCISCO METRO AREA HAS THE LARGEST INDIAN AMERICAN POPULATION NOT NEW YORK!!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.255.250.9 (talk) 15:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Illegal immigration

Why hasn't the issue of illegal immigration been brought up in this article? Indians make up the fastest growing illegal immigrants in the US with numbers as high as 270,000 according to [9] and several other websites yet this has even to be discussed? Its even on the Asian American article and not this one. the article seems to be locked so i can't edit it so if anyone can it would be appreciated. Sh79 (talk) 03:17, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

population figure

The population should be the latter figure of 2.whatever million. The first figure is just of the Indian-born population and does not include American-born descendants who are still Indian-American. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.194.23.76 (talk) 08:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

do you have any citations? the two million figure includes multiracial indians.Archiviveer (talk) 22:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Languages

I listed the three major Indian languages amongst Indian-Americans as per the 2000 census. Various people keeping adding other major languages that are not listed amongst the most populous languages in America. I understand they are major Indian languages, but the census does not show them as major IA languages Thegreyanomaly (talk) 03:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The reference in question See page 4 does not say that Hindi, Urdu, and Gujarati are the three most common languages spoken by Indian Americans in the US. It merely lists the 20 most frequently spoken native languages, listing (among languages spoken in India), Hindi, Urdu, and Gujarati in that order. In fact, a large number of the Urdu native speakers are likely to identify themselves as Pakistani American.

I do agree that it is inappropriate to add in other languages until references can be found.

Arun (talk) 19:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Language information in the census is voluntary, so the communities most organized or politically aware have mobilized as such to record their languages, others just record English and other, its strange to assume that South Indian languages or Punjabi are not significant in Indian American Diaspora when in certain regions they form majority of Indian-Americans. There are no absolute numbers being cited here so citing the census is meaningless and omitting other languages doesnot make sense. If there are Tamil, Telugu and Punjabi associations in almost every state won't they speak the language? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.145.76.44 (talk) 08:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I updated the info box with language information from the American Community Survey 2006, Indian immigrants in the US, which lists percentages of languages spoken by the Indian immigrants in America (as opposed to just languages listed on the census form, tabulated amongst Indian, and other South Asian communities in total), which lists Urdu as the 8th most popular language spoken by Indian immigrants in America (who make up 75% of the Indian American population).

Arun (talk) 17:30, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't see this edit. It still says Hindi, Gujurati,Urdu. If anything I had actually been under the impression that the majority of Indian immigrants are Telugus seeings as how majority of the Indian diaspora is centered around white collar professions. The computer industry is with out a doubt centered in Bangalore and is made up of majority Telugus (as far as my knowledge).Anyway changing these languages spoken would be much appreciated considering that Muslims are a minority. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.233.210.209 (talk) 08:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Can you please change the languages? How many Indians do you know that speak Urdu? Even the Kashmiri Family that lives next to me speaks Punjabi and Hindi. Not only that, but I don't even see Hindi on the list. And Hindi is most spoken language? Give me a break, it's either Gujarati or Punjabi. The statistics from that survey are wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.234.149.102 (talk) 20:02, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

The survey does list Hindi, it is the first language mentioned if you read the paragraph. Also, I have removed Urdu from the list per the survey results. We have listed the top two Indian languages in the US (Hindi and Gujarati) as well as English and "other Indian languages". I hope this settles the matter. I would like to avoid having a list of all the different languages. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 23:14, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Sumantra Sarkar, 7 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

Please add the following which I think has been inadvertently missed - a celebrated Indian whom we have missed in this Wiki. This should be put in the "timeline" section...

• 1999 - Rono Dutta (http://www.state.il.us/agency/idol/wm/2001/Book/dutta.htm) was the President of United Airlines(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines) from 1999 to 2002.

Sumantra Sarkar

Done Tim Pierce (talk) 18:44, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

We should mention the good role of Police in helping keeping faith in the Solid Principles, this Country was founded. Nobody can take away that from America. Law and Order is the one and only thing which remains Numero Uno compared to other countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniash007 (talk • contribs) 20:43, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Second Largest Asian ethic group in USA(not third)

It said that Indian Americans are the third largest Asian group in the US on the main article of this page, but I went to the link and it clearly states that right after Chinese Amercans it's Indian American, not Filipino Americans. If you don't believe me go to the link yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmumman (talk • contribs) 01:10, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

What link are you talking about? Third largest is correct which supported by multiple sources including the Census bureau. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 01:43, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Found the link. It's a bit misleading actually. The link is for one race categories, not in any combination. Under the criteria with alone and in any combination, Indian Americans are the third largest:

From the US census estimates:

• Chinese: 3,538,407
• Filipino: 3,053,179
• Indian: 2,765,815

I've found a more recent US Census ACS estimate, this one says...

• Chinese 3,204,379 1.o%
• Indian 2,602,676 0.8%
• Filipino 2,475,794 0.8%

(I guess the Asian population decreased in the United States) Can we get this data on the main article? --Jmumman (talk) 01:11, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 01:57, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

CAUCASIAN AND DRAVIDIAN

Really, while a great part of Northern Indians are Caucasians (with an East Asian minority), most Southern Indians are Dravidian (black)--88.23.26.26 (talk) 02:30, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

The same way as Spaniards in many Latinamerican countries mixed with earliear inhabitans, Indo-Aryans mixed too with earlier inhabitants of dark complexion when they arrived to the Indian Subcontinent. That´s why now most Indians and Latinos are really "Multiracial" even if the mixture took place centuries (Latinamerica) or thousands (India) of years ago. Through different caste systems Indo-Aryans and White Latinamericdans tried to prevent miscegenation...but after hundreds of years it took place anyway.--88.23.26.26 (talk) 02:30, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Number of doctors of Indian Origin

The Article cites the number as 35,000 doctors...

An NEJM article has reliable data and states that the number is 40,838 doctors of Indian Origin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.201.41.126 (talk) 10:58, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Gsangha, 22 August 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} I would like to add Fresno, California to the list of massive populations in the US because there are many Indians around this area.

Gsangha (talk) 22:49, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs)

 Delisted Salvio ^{Let's talk 'bout it!} 00:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Millbourne, Pennsylvania

I found this borough near Philadelphia called Millbourne. According to the US Census 2000, this borough is 40.2% Indian. I strongly feel this borough should be included, but I know there should be a discussion first. here's the link --Jmumman (talk) 05:00, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Indian states of origin

Is there any sourced information available on the state of origin of Indian immigrants? Or even general regions like North, South and West India? —Preceding unsigned comment added by K. the Surveyor (talk • contribs) 00:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Not to be picky about one word but...

Why is the word "among" used in the following sentence: "[Indian Americans] are among the most highly educated in American demographics." If you look at the statistics referenced for that sentence, Indian Americans are THE most highly educated in american demographics. 64% have a college degree, where as the next highest is the chinese with 46%. 12% have an advanced degree, whereas the next highest is once again the chinese with 8.5%. A simple removal of the word "among" would be nice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.58.68.150 (talk) 23:47, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect "Asian Indians (80 percent) had the highest percentage of college completers. A higher percentage of Chinese (71 percent) completed college than all other Asian subgroups with the exception of Asian Indians and Koreans. " http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/minoritytrends/ind_7_26.asp

76.230.236.161 (talk) 03:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC)Dakota

Nikki Haley won the Gubernatorial Race in South Carolina

Please change the article to reflect that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.173.194.214 (talk) 05:46, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Addition to "Arrival to US" section under "History" section

{{Edit semi-protected}} The following should be added to accurately reflect the history of immigration of Indians to the United States:

In 1965, alongside much of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights legislation of 1964-6, President Lyndon Johnson signed the INS Act of 1965 into law, eliminating per-country immigration quotas and introducing immigration on the basis of professional experience and education. The elimination of these quotas paved the way for the surge of Indian immigrants that came during the late 1900s into the 21st century. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Before Being (talk • contribs)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Bility (talk) 22:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Editing unsourced material

I am removing redundant and unsourced material from the page. For example, the page states the brain drain topic twice.

Unsourced material include attributes to why fewer Indians are emigrating here. I also removed a statement that Indians have highest higher educational attainment compared to other ethnic groups. I do not deny this is a fact but I question its neutrality (it sounds like race promotion than anything else) and it was not sourced. If someone sources this statement and rewrites it in a neutral manner then I think it would be more appropriate. Otherwise it adds nothing of value to the page.

In the discrimination page I've removed statements regarding the murders of Indian students. Neither of the murders were found to be racially motivated and the evidence is not presented. Just because the Indian embassy investigated them or that they occured "near" Bobby Jindal does not mean these are race based murders (though I am not denying they could be).

 I will update this page as I edit.Surag198 (talk) 20:26, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Contradiction-inline tag

Please see the discussion that I started regarding a recent tag that has been added. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 14:58, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

A new discussion has been started regarding a new tag that has been added to contradictory content. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:20, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Conflict & contradiction re population ranking

I have placed {{contradict}} and {{contradict other}} tags in this article.

The contradict tag

This article appears to contain an internal contradiction re population ranking, as follows:

• The Demographics section of this article asserts, "According to the results of the 2010 census, Asian Indians surpassed Filipino Americans as the second largest ethnic group to identify themselves as Asian Americans." A number of supporting sources are cited, and the statement is tagged with a {{contradict-inline}} tag.
• The Statistics on Indians in the US section says, "Indian Americans are the third largest Asian American ethnic group today, following Chinese Americans and Filipino Americans.[2][3][4]" A number of supporting sources are cited.

I have not examined the information in the supporting sources but, regarding that, please consider WP:DUE.

The Contradict other tag.

This tag, unlike the Contradict -inline tag supports placement in two separate articles in which contradictions are seen, and identification of a discussion venue in either of the two articles. As there was already a discussion uderway there, I have identified Talk:Filipino American#June 2011 as the discussion venue for this contradiction. Please discuss a solution to resolve the contradiction there.

I came upon this when I stumbled across the contradiction discussion in the Filipino American article mentioned above. I am trying to be helpful by getting interested editors on both articles together to discuss and resolve these problems. As it happens, I am in travel mode myself, and I'm posting this from a hotel room. I probably will not have the time to get involved in extended discussion regarding this, but I'll comment that it seems to me from some superficial reading that resolution would grow out of attention to WP:DUE by editors of both articles. Please see some comments I made about that in the discussion section at Talk:Filipino American#June 2011. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:11, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

References

Where are the references ?? 76.218.92.239 (talk) 09:29, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Indian Americans/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Under the hedding Immigration it is written that " A major wave of immigration to California from the soon-to-be Indian state of Punjab and the surrounding region took place in the first decade of the 20th century. Another significant wave followed in the 1950s, mainly students and professionals, including engineers." I think I misunderstood what you guys want to explain or you guys are making a huge mistake. Punjab is a state of India, I don't think THE SOON TO BE INDIAN STATE OF PUNJAB is a correct phrase and I think it needs to be corrected. Thanks, Viral

Last edited at 00:47, 2 October 2015 (UTC). Substituted at 15:02, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Fareed Zakaria

Why is Fareed not a featured Indian American? He is certainly the most prominent and visible Indian working in mainstream media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.59.151.115 (talk) 16:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure. I think this article is seriously crippled if we don't include people who were born in India but are now American citizens. It doesn't make sense. They are Indian Americans. Chinese-born Americans are included in the Chinese Americans article. Philippines-born Americans are included in the Filipino Americans article. Japanese-born Americans are included in the Japanese Americans article. In addition, all of the demographic data cited in this article refer to all people of Indian ancestry, including those who were born in India. We can't limit the article to focus just on America-born Indian-Americans if we include demographic data that is broader than that category. Someone please fix this article to be what it was before someone removed all Indian-born Americans. Beta.s2ph (talk) 07:41, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Fareed Zakaria and his two PIO CNN colleagues (Sanjay Gupta and Ali Velshi) are the three most prominent Indian American newsmen (hell they are overall the most well known Asian American newsmen), at least one of them should be pictured here. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 04:09, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

First Indian Americans

The following reference mentions that Indian Americans have been in what is now the United States since before the American Revolutionary War:

• Shirley Hune (April 2009). "Asian Americans in Washington State: Closing Their Hidden Achievement Gaps" (PDF). Commission on Asian Pacific American Affairs. State of Washington. Retrieved 9 February 2012. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

Hope this reference is useful to active users here. G'day! --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:30, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Infobox image discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Asian American#Infobox ethnicity representatives. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:29, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Immigration and progression timeline

Should the section Immigration and progression timeline be in the history section?

If there is no opposition by 18 May 2013, I will be boldy making it a subsection of history.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 14:05, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 24 September 2015

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: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 00:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

---

Indian American → Indian Americans – Shall we take either as precedents, Talk:Korean Americans/Talk:Chinese Americans or Talk:African American? George Ho (talk) 01:25, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

• Support as per WP:NOUN. "Indian American" is a adjectival WP:DICT type entry and presents an incomplete article title. GregKaye 08:05, 24 September 2015 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

"A recent study shows that 23% of Indian business school graduates take a job in United States" ?

I doubt that. Can some one please verify. ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.75.7.202 (talk) 11:41, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Indian Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061230114304/http://www.teachingaboutreligion.org:80/Backdrop&Context/hinduism.htm to http://www.teachingaboutreligion.org/Backdrop&Context/hinduism.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110714174029/http://www.newsindia-times.com/NewsIndiaTimes/20101217/5623719349238828816.htm to http://www.newsindia-times.com/NewsIndiaTimes/20101217/5623719349238828816.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:17, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on Indian Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110820065529/http://losangeles.pointslocal.com/news/2011/05/13/losangeles/320413/indian-american-population-is-fastest-growing-minority-group to http://losangeles.pointslocal.com/news/2011/05/13/losangeles/320413/indian-american-population-is-fastest-growing-minority-group
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060418072954/http://www.councilofhindutemples.org:80/index.html to http://www.councilofhindutemples.org/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061023010709/http://www.imc-usa.org/cgi-bin/cfm/index.cfm to http://www.imc-usa.org/cgi-bin/cfm/index.cfm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070929084035/http://wcco.com/local/local_story_103095026.html to http://wcco.com/local/local_story_103095026.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070205201337/http://www.indianexpress.com:80/iep/sunday/story/2081.html to http://www.indianexpress.com/iep/sunday/story/2081.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090815205910/http://economictimes.indiatimes.com:80/News/News-By-Industry/Services/Travel/Visa-Power/Indians-fastest-growing-illegal-immigrant-group-in-US/articleshow/4880276.cms to http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/services/travel/visa-power/Indians-fastest-growing-illegal-immigrant-group-in-US/articleshow/4880276.cms
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071023063536/http://news.yahoo.com:80/s/ap/20071021/ap_po/louisiana_governor to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071021/ap_po/louisiana_governor

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Oldest Indian-American communities

Although not stated in the article, one can read about Indian-American communities going back a century (1915?) in California, centered in San Joaquin (Stockton and Lodi), Sutter (Yuba City-Marysville), San Gabriel Valley from Alhambra to West Covina near Los Angeles, and Imperial counties (a.k.a the Imperial Valley). The small but evident Indian immigrants were processed in Angel Island off San Francisco, but came regulations of all Asians in the 1920s which lasted until the 1965 Immigration Reform Act ended racial restrictions. The first arrivals (see Punjabi American) were from the Punjab region (now states) in British India (now India and Pakistan), consists of Hindus, Muslims and some Sikhs (the US' oldest Hindu and Sikh temples can be found in Stockton and Yuba City areas), under farm labor contracts to work in farmlands in these areas. Over time, the mostly male farm workers found local Hispanic/Mexican-American women to marry and have children with (see Punjabi Mexican American). 2605:E000:FDCA:4200:1FA:3A88:955:CACC (talk) 07:01, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Indian Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120325003837/http://www.voiceofasiaonline.com/(A(CgXW2R5OzAEkAAAANzRkZDE5M2ItMmYzMC00YjI1LWE5Y2MtYWYyODk1MTE1MWIwGblNoq9V0WEB79YFyHqmpsxcE1A1)S(zs3q4w55basplt55ivfoh245))/ShowArticle.aspx?ID=372&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1 to http://www.voiceofasiaonline.com/(A(CgXW2R5OzAEkAAAANzRkZDE5M2ItMmYzMC00YjI1LWE5Y2MtYWYyODk1MTE1MWIwGblNoq9V0WEB79YFyHqmpsxcE1A1)S(zs3q4w55basplt55ivfoh245))/ShowArticle.aspx?ID=372&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060711223743/http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=express&s=kurlantzick052604 to http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=express&s=kurlantzick052604

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:01, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Indian Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive {newarchive} to http://www.thendral.com/AboutThendral.shtml

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:23, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Indian Americans. 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:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141224151538/http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/twps0056.html to http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/twps0056.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130217034041/http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/WaitingListItem.pdf to http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/WaitingListItem.pdf

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) 11:24, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Evaluation of this article

The Image of the Census of the Percentage of Asian Indians in the United States is a tad outdated as the last U.S. census was in 2010 and the image presented is from the 2010 U.S. Census.

Some of the citations do not seem to work (i.e. 92,96, 108) and another seems to lead to an attack page(69). Vic17indi (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Indian Americans. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110219012241/http://2010.census.gov/news/releases/operations/cb11-cn31.html to http://2010.census.gov/news/releases/operations/cb11-cn31.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/twps0056.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090206154901/http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/table-education-by-tradition.pdf to http://religions.pewforum.org/pdf/table-education-by-tradition.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thendral.com/AboutThendral.shtml
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.teachingaboutreligion.org/Backdrop%26Context/hinduism.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121127200048/http://www.indiacurrents.com/articles/2007/05/16/indian-slaves-in-colonial-america to http://www.indiacurrents.com/articles/2007/05/16/indian-slaves-in-colonial-america
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061007144304/http://www.despardes.com/articles/feb06/20060212-are-desis-white.asp to http://www.despardes.com/articles/feb06/20060212-are-desis-white.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110628183344/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FI16Aa01.html to http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FI16Aa01.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050108064134/http://www.mssu.edu/projectsouthasia/tsa/VIN1/Rosser.htm to http://www.mssu.edu/projectsouthasia/tsa/VIN1/Rosser.htm

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) 07:31, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Indian Americans. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141222152450/http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/immigration-statistics/yearbook/2012/LPR/immsuptable2d.xls to https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/immigration-statistics/yearbook/2012/LPR/immsuptable2d.xls
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140819102714/http://www.usindian.org/traditional-indian-churches-in-usa.html to http://www.usindian.org/traditional-indian-churches-in-usa.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140327095622/http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI125212.htm to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_RHI125212.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160317051738/http://newdelhi.usembassy.gov/acsdualnation.html to http://newdelhi.usembassy.gov/acsdualnation.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120115023007/http://www.jis.gov.jm/news/opm-news/26176-officePM-pm-golding-congratulates-kamala-harris-daughter-of-jamaican-on-appoint to http://www.jis.gov.jm/news/opm-news/26176-officePM-pm-golding-congratulates-kamala-harris-daughter-of-jamaican-on-appoint
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060415081310/http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11569225/site/newsweek/ to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11569225/site/newsweek/

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) 22:44, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Percentage of grads cannot be mathematically correct

There is a clear mathematical error in Section 5.1 Education: "39.1% of all Taiwanese in the United States possess a master's, doctorate or other professional degree, which is nearly four times the national average[53][54] compared with 40% of Indians who have a master's, doctorate or other professional degree, which is five times the national average.[47][48]"

If 39.1% is nearly (i.e., less than) 4x the national average, then 40% can clearly not be 5x the national average. Assuming that the primary sources are accurately cited, either the information from at least one of the primary sources is incorrect, or the statistic in question (i.e., "the national average") is not defined in the same manner across the primary sources.

Timothytsai (talk) 07:08, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

How do Sri Lankans fit in with Indians in the US?

Sri Lankans in Canada, Europe, South-East Asia, and Australia usually "merge" with the Indian community to the point that a lot of them don't identify as "Sri Lankan".

The "Sri Lankan Tamils" only really exists for political reasons relating to Tamil politics on the island, and is predominantly used by first generationers with direct interests in the country. The second generation usually merge with Indians/Hindus - in contrast to Pakistanis and often Bangladeshis. I would think that this needed to be pointed out.

I notice that they have similarly high economic status too: $73,856 for Sri Lankans. Lankandude2017 (talk) 22:09, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Indian Americans. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120328051336/http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/266 to http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/266/

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) 01:38, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Indian Americans. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140819083321/http://www.usindian.org/ to http://www.usindian.org/

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) 15:42, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Kamala Harris

Why is Kamala Harris identified in this article as an Indian-American? Her mother may be Indian, but her father is Afro-Jamaican and ethnic identity is passed on patrilinnealy. She also clearly self-identifies as African-American rather than Indian-American. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/kamala-harris-embraces-exclusive-blackness-at-the-expense-of-her-indian-heritage So I'd suggest removing her mention from this article. Nobody identifies Obama as Scots-Irish American because of his mother's ethnicity. You are either one or the other. I don't want to get into an edit war over this, so I'll leave it to others for reaching a consensus and doing the needful. Joyson Konkani 07:09, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Joyson Konkani: and ethnic identity is passed on patrilinnealy - what's your basis for this claim? Do you have a source? As a mixed-race person, I find that claim rather interesting. Guettarda (talk) 22:27, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

@Guettarda: Isn't this supposed to be general knowledge? That's how things are globally. Why? Because of patriarchy! We take our fathers surname, and so we assume his ethnicity as well. This is why Obama is seen as "black" and not "Scots-Irish". Your paternal lineage defines what you are. That's the general custom, barring exceptions like Jews and Tuaregs. I will leave it to others to arrive at a consensus on whether to remove mention of Kamala Harris from this page. On my part, I'm against her inclusion. Joyson Konkani 03:48, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

@Joyson Konkani: Again, you're making assertions without evidence. That's not the way it works in immigrant societies in particular. Obama isn't a good example anyway - white identities aren't really available to non-white people in America. Lenny Kravitz would a good counter-example - he's African American despite having a white father. Guettarda (talk) 14:32, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, it's a norm you learn about just by being alive. Lenny Kravitz's dad is an Ashkenazi Jew, and Jews are a rare exception to the norm, as according to Halakha, the Jewish identity is considered passed through the mother. I'm not pressing this further. I've made my case and position clear. I'll leave it to the others to have a consensus. Joyson Konkani 15:01, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

"Indians in Atlanta" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Indians in Atlanta. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:14, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Language box list

I've noticed for the last few months, there have been factual inaccuracies in the infobox's language list. The top three listed in the sources addressed are Hindi, Gujarati, and Punjabi. It would be superfluous to list every single included in the source, so the top three should be the primary ones to include. There is large percent decrease between 3 (Punjabi) and 4 (Telegu), so the top 3 is the best to suffice. Please don't include your own language just because you want to. This is a list of languages prominently spoken among Indian Americans; it is based on the languages spoken in America, not what is common in India. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 02:29, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough, but a number of readers seem offended by the short list which does not reflect the diversity of Indians in the US. Let us embrace diversity and show respect to all languages. Per Languages of the United States, I am going to add Bengali, Punjabi (which was replaced by Telugu), Tamil, and Urdu, and alphabetize the list rather than making it a popularity contest. In fact, an anonymous editor already added Tamil despite instructions to the contrary. Personally, I know some Tamils. I don't want to fight a Tamil guy. 2600:1015:B06E:9C96:58B8:76A9:C9AE:5BFC (talk) 05:22, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Yellapragada Subbarow

Is there a source for the claim that Subbarow was denied tenure at Harvard for being 'foreign'?

That's not mentioned on his page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellapragada_Subbarow

It's also not mentioned in this biography: https://www.ijdvl.com/article.asp?issn=0378-6323;year=2017;volume=83;issue=6;spage=733;epage=735;aulast=Bharti

It just says he was "denied a regular position" ; nothing about being 'Foreign.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.31.57 (talk) 20:04, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

The religious composition is incorrect

The link used, https://www.pewforum.org/2012/07/19/asian-americans-a-mosaic-of-faiths-overview/, shows a different tally than the graph in the section on religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.216.213.197 (talk) 19:24, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi. You were right. The source did indeed show a different tally. Only two values were different in the article. Have changed them. However, hope someone else can replace the existing religious composition data with something a bit newer. The Pew Forum data is from 2012. Thanks.Intellectualyo (talk) 20:59, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Vidya Vox Mad Dreams Album Shoot.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:32, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Request of adding slavery to intro

The United States enslaved Indian Americans for hundreds of years starting possibly as early as 1632 and continuing until the 1800s. Although most Indian Americans today are not descendants of these slaves, it would be beneficial to have this information in the lead of the article to give an accurate summary of Indian Americans and their history. Could the following be added:

Indian Americans have a long history in the United States, going back to when they were slaves in the U.S. starting in the 17th century.

If you are going to summarize their history on the lead, you should recap the main points of their history, the slavery of Asian Indians in the US forms a minor part of their history and it would be inaccurate to only mention that part of their history in the lead. Chariotrider555 (talk) 04:18, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

References

Hyphen?

Is it "Indian American" or "Indian-American"? The article should be consistent on this. There are 9 instances of "Indian-American" and 99 instances of "Indian American" including the title, so I assume the latter is correct. Cstanford.math (talk) 01:38, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

I went forward with this change and removed hyphenated instances for stylistic consistency. Caleb Stanford (talk) 14:45, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Vic17indi.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)