Talk:White Colombians

Reliability of the National Administrative Department of Statistics

The article states that "more reliable sources" put a 37% of whites in Colombia. Why is this considered reliable? My anecdotal experience of a year in Colombia made me believe whites are a small minority. A Colombian person that is not even 100% "white" is even sometimes mistaken for being foreigner, and this happens in the richer areas that are supposed to be at least 50% "white" for the statistic to add up. Furthermore, there is shame involved in having indigenous or especially black ancestry. Persons that have for example clear indigenous features will act surprised or shocked when confronted with information about their non-European ancestry. This is a widespread phenomenon where people would just deny grand or grand grand parents that are not of 100% white origin. Since such factors can easily distort statistics that are from simple surveys, I think this is something that should be taken into consideration when citing sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipedagog (talk • contribs) 23:35, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Wikipedagog, you are right, if you see the actual article, the 37% are now attributed to the FRD, not the census (who never do the difference of "non ethnic" population. I understand your subjective assumptions about the actual percentage, so, in the near future I plan to do a table with different percentages and differen studies.--Kodosbs (talk) 01:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Wikipedagog The opposite happened to me when I was in Colombia, I was in Bogota, Medellin, Bucaramanga, coffee axis and the main urban areas of the country and I saw that people had a strong Mediterranean and Levantine average appearance (olive skin, dark eyes, facial hair, prominent nose) according to US standards, they would be considered white. Although I also saw people with blonde, red hair and blue/green/hazel eyes (these are the whites you call a minority I guess) because they look Northern European. Except for Cartagena, half of Barranquilla and different Caribbean areas of the country where Afro Colombian communities are prevalent, I noticed a strong euromestizos people in the country, which could easily not be noticed in southern Italy, southern Spain and especially in Arab countries. Even reading different research studies of ancestry, they prove what I saw in my experience:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4670080/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6218714/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6491930/

I have been to different countries in Latin America and without a doubt, along with Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay and Costa Rica, this country is one of the closest Latin countries to the Caucasians (predominantly Mediterranean and Levantine) in appearance.

https://encolombia.com/educacion-cultura/geografia-colombiana/grupos-humanos-en-colombia/caucasicos-en-colombia/#:~:text=Los%20cauc%C3%A1sicos%20en%20Colombia%20vienen,45%25%20y%20el%2050%25. Jhoan Batipse (talk) 23:15, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Title

Why not change the title to European Immigration in Colombia? Is more neutral and objective, that a "term" (White Colombian) unofficial of dubious origin?, or maybe create an more general article called Ethnography of Colombia. Regards--GiovBag (talk) 10:58, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

GiovBag - right now the article is more about european immigration to Colombia, but while race is not as much a factor in Colombia as it is in the U.S., it is somewhat important, and articles about the various racial groups of Colombia are appropriate. This article and this paper would be good places to start in writing an article about white identity in Colombia. (But I'm not going to do it, because I'm too lazy and my Spanish isn't good enough to do the research. And I don't like sifting through all the crap that I'd find trying to look this stuff up.) By the way, why did you delete the "ethnic group" infobox from the article? Argyriou (talk) 02:58, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Because "White colombian" is not an Ethnic group, it is just a term to describe colombians with european origin, but whom belong to different ethnic: italians, germans, spaniards, slavic, etc. In that way, is not better talk about of Colombian of European origins? or European immigration to Colombia?--GiovBag (talk) 19:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Most "white Colombians" are of Spanish origin, though there are some other European and Middle Eastern Colombians. However, there is some ethnic awareness and cohesion at the level of "white" versus "non-white" - the War of Independence was essentially a family conflict among white Colombians, with one side partially mobilizing non-white (mestizo, mainly) Colombians to prevail. The elite of Colombia is much whiter than the general population, and the links I gave indicate that there are some racial attitudes within Colombia which point to "white Colombian" being a distinct population within Colombia, while differences within that group based on exactly where in Europe or the Near East one's ancestors came from being much less important. Up through my parents' generation, and even perhaps later, white Colombians with any status pretensions at all would not marry non-whites, except *maybe* mestizos who were mostly white (like Jessica Alba). So there is a basis for identifying "white Colombians" as an ethne, just as White Americans are. It might be appropriate to change the title to "Euro-Colombian", except that would be synthesis, as the term only turns up currency exchange discussions in Google right now, and does not appear to be used by anyone discussing ethnicity or race. Argyriou (talk) 00:35, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Considering: a) The article refers to Colombian's population of European origin; and b) "White Colombian" is no recognized as an ethnic group, as has been demonstrated. The most logical and neutral thing to do is to rename the article, to Colombian of European descent, or something like that. Regards.--GiovBag (talk) 08:01, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I concur with Argyriou and with Secret killer. Clearly you've failed to make the case for renaming the article. "White Colombian" is more inclusive, allowing Colombians of Middle Eastern ancestry to be included under that umbrella. SamEV (talk) 19:45, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I think that there is some "white" awareness too as Argyriou says, but I am open to do a discussion about a proper name for the article.--Kodosbs (talk) 01:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete

Considering that: [1], this article would be deleted.--GiovBag (talk) 11:28, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

This artice is unnecessary. All information contained in it, exist in other ones: Colombian people, Immigration to Colombia and Demographics of Colombia. White Colombian is not a ethnic group, and this article seems original research. In fact, it is, to determine unilaterally the existence of an ethnic group not recognized by any publication, statement or valid source.--GiovBag (talk) 23:37, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Images are not allowed inside the infobox but the images are allowed in the article as a way to keep wikipedia illustrated

Images are not allowed inside the infobox but the images are allowed in the article as a way to keep wikipedia illustrated.

Why are not allowed to place people in this article and in the opposite case can be placed people in other articles such as the following?

Germans, Italians, Americans, Mexican Americans, Bulgarians, etc.

I think that you are committing an injustice against Wikipedians who try to illustrate the wikipedia. All these Wikipedians are not violating any rules, wikipedia policies do not prevent highlight some people in sections of the article other than the infobox.--181.137.12.115 (talk) 15:52, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

There has never been any consensus as to who was depicted, and you simply grabbed your own preferred 'notables' to create a gallery in the notables section as a method of getting around WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES. Now, in order to get around it, you've sandwiched the text by plastering the entire article with enormous images of your personal selection of notables. As I have already suggested to you, try getting some form of WP:CONSENSUS together with other editors on this talk page regarding a small gallery in the relevant section.

How would you feel if I were to go through these today and substitute every one of those with other notables who I believe to be more important, then another editor came through and changed them to another selection tomorrow (then multiply it by 50 other editors passing through)? We'd all have the right to do so because no one WP:OWNs the article.

Find some form of consensus with other editors. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:16, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't see a problem in that other people add other notable people to this list. --181.137.12.115 (talk) 20:32, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

In this list there are people from different backgrounds, such as athletes, artists, scientists and politicians. --181.137.12.115 (talk) 20:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, obviously you don't see a problem. I am telling you that there is a problem, particularly in light of the fact that you've adopted a WP:BATTLEGROUND attitude to the content of this article. At the moment, I politely suggest that you self-revert. Follow WP:BRD. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 20:43, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm not doing anything wrong, I am pointing out that there are other articles on wikipedia where there are pictures of notables, so it is obvious that I am not committing any harm to this article.

Read these articles:

Germans, Italians, Americans, Mexican Americans, Bulgarians, etc.--181.137.12.115 (talk) 20:56, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

As noted by another editor who has reverted your edits, Wikipedia is WP:NOT an image repository. If you can't see the difference between the size of the article in comparison to the number of images as compared to the other articles, then I think you have problems with your judgement. The articles you are pointing to are also going through teething problems after having the infobox galleries removed and the overly large galleries will be trimmed. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:16, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

2 images in the section of the article and therefore are few images, if you deleted these images, it is obvious that you are attacking my edits. --181.137.12.115 (talk) 21:29, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

181.137.12.115, too many pictures do not add extra value to the article. Please see BRD and consider dispute resolution. JimRenge (talk) 21:38, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

They are only 2 pictures and I'm not damaging the article, it is clear that you decided to attack my edits. --181.137.12.115 (talk) 21:43, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Let me clarify that I am going to defend my edits because I have the right to edit on Wikipedia because I am not vandalizing--181.137.12.115 (talk) 21:47, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on White Colombians. 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/20090803102828/http://www.lablaa.org:80/blaavirtual/publicacionesbanrep/boletin/boleti5/bol29/tierra3.htm to http://www.lablaa.org/blaavirtual/publicacionesbanrep/boletin/boleti5/bol29/tierra3.htm

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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} 13:27, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Difficult article

Who is a "white"? Now with the genetic revolution, pure ethnics are over. Colombians in particular are mixed. Maybe some racists would find it as a dismain, but the true is that anthropology predicts a global merge of races in 10 thousand years. It puts Colombia in a good level of "the people of the future". Just that list of "Colombian white people" is funny: If Fernando Botero has not African and Native American gens, he would not be Colombian. For me this article is useless. --Albeiror24 - English - Español - Italiano - ខ្មែរ 14:20, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

White and Mestizo demographics info

According to the 2005 census, 37 percent of the population self-identify as being white - This phrase has never existed in the Census.

The 2005 census reported that the "non-ethnic population", consisting of whites and mestizos (those of mixed white European and Amerindian ancestry), constituted 86% of the national population. 10.6% is of African ancestry. Indigenous Amerindians comprise 3.4% of the population. 0.01% of the population are Roma. http://www.dane.gov.co/files/censo2005/etnia/sys/visibilidad_estadistica_etnicos.pdf

An extraofficial estimate considers that the 49% of the Colombian population is Mestizo or of mixed European and Amerindian ancestry, and that approximately 37% is White - https://www.loc.gov/resource/frdcstdy.colombiacountrys00huds/?sp=181

I put a sentence more appropriate.

Cuadro 1. Censos de Población en Colombia, y criterios de identificación de los grupos étnicos, siglos XX y XXI

Año	Total	Indígenas	%	Negros o afrocolombianos	%	Rom (Gitanos)	%
2005	41.468.384	1.392.623	3,40	4.311.757	10,60	4.858	0,01

El Censo General 2005 contó a un total de 41.468.384 personas residentes en el territorio colombiano, de las cuales 5.709.238 personas se reconocieron pertenecientes a un grupo étnico. De acuerdo con la información del Censo General 2005, la población indígena, es el 3,43% de la población del país que dio información sobre su pertenencia étnica; los afrocolombianos corresponden al 10,62% del total y el pueblo Rom o gitano es el 0,01% de la población total, el 85,94% de la población nacional no se reconoció perteneciente a ninguno de los grupos étnicos, el 2,08% no informó sobre su pertenencia étnica. pp. 27-28. =>http://www.dane.gov.co/files/censo2005/etnia/sys/visibilidad_estadistica_etnicos.pdf

Ethnic groups: mestizo and white 84.2%, Afro-Colombian (includes multatto, Raizal, and Palenquero) 10.4%, Amerindian 3.4%, Roma <.01, unspecified 2.1% (2005 est.) https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/co.html - According to international agencies like the CIA

Thank you----ControlCorV (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Numbers are not correlating

The article states that 37% of Colombians are White which would be approximately 18.5 million. However the article gives 23.5 million as the number which would be 47%. I will therefore change the number to 18.5 million. - Pastore Barracuda (talk) 13:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Pastore Barracuda. I would appreciate your help in further protecting this site. --Kodosbs (talk) 01:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for noting this, I have updated the figure according to population estimates for 2022. 37% of Colombians would be approximately 20 million people as of 2022. 181.53.38.118 (talk) 16:17, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

45%-50% figure/Global ancestry composition

Although there are no official figures, it has estimated that between 45-50% of Colombians are white, mainly of Spanish and Middle East with small groups of Italians, Germans, French, and Slav sdescent.https://encolombia.com/educacion-cultura/geografia-colombiana/grupos-humanos-en-colombia/caucasicos-en-colombia/#:~:text=Los%20caucásicos%20en%20Colombia%20vienen,45%25%20y%20el%2050%25. In addition, the famous science publisher PLOS (Public Library Of Science) has determined by sampling the Colombian population that the country has a composition as follows:

• The study entitled in 2015 "Genomic Insights into the Ancestry and Demographic History of South America" yielded a European heritage of 62.5%, among the 5 countries with the second highest European ancestry. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4670080/
• The study titled in 2018 "Understanding the Hidden Complexity of Latin American Population Isolates

The study "Understanding the Hidden Complexity of Latin American Population Isolates" yielded a European heritage of 72.9% in a study comparing countries such as Costa Rica, Finland, Mexico, Puerto Rico and CEPH-European where Colombia obtained the third highest European composition only behind Finland and CEPH-European. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6218714/

• The study titled in 2019 "Assortative Mating on Ancestry-Variant Traits in Admixed Latin American Populations" showed a European heritage of 63.4% in a study comparing countries such as Mexico, Puerto Rico and Peru. Colombia was the second highest component. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6491930/

This shows that Colombia has one of the highest European heritage populations compared to the average of its region, being only surpassed by countries such as Argentina and Puerto Rico (countries considered whites), therefore the sources of recent years should be annexed and maintained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chauxlemount (talk • contribs) 22:41, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

45%-50% figure comes from nowhere. Any of genetic studies you mentioned contain said number.

You are also ignoring deliberately genetic studies where Colombian samples shows a lower European admixture. For example this, this or this.

In any case, overall ethnic admixture doesn't reflect ethnographic composition.

For example, the only genetic study about White Colombians (Candela Project) shows Colombians are 60% Caucasoid in average, but just 19,3% of samples self identified as White, and even among them, non-White admixture is high (35%).

Similarly, external sources seem to match that information. Both Lizcano in his ethnographic study Composición Étnica de las Tres Áreas Culturales del Continente Americano al Comienzo del Siglo XXI and the CIA in The World Fact Bookestimates White Colombians to be 20% of population. This figure is traditional and reconigzed by Colombian government since at least 1965, when Agustín Codazzi Institute included it in its National Atlas (see La población de Colombia, Ricardo Rueda, p. 78.) and it is similar to data found in old Censuses (17% of White Colombians in 1851 Census, see Colombia País Fragmentado Sociedad Dividida, Marco Palacios, p. 373). This is relevant considering Colombia didn't receiv any major migration wave after its independence.

In the other hand, any recent Census contain information about the proportion of White Colombians. The last Census that do so was 1912 Census (see Colombia País Fragmentado Sociedad Dividida, Marco Palacios, p. 376) where self identified White Colombians where 34,4% of total population. This figure is very similar to that found in FRD and Schwartzman estimations (37%), whose are the highest legitimate sources about the matter.

The most recent survey about ethnic composition in Colombia is Latinobarometro. In that survey, just 26% of Colombians self identified as White, a figure nearer to the traditional sources/genetic research than to the FDR-Schwartzman estimation.

In conclusion, there is any legitimate source claiming White Colombians are 45%-50% of population. Genetic research show average Caucasoid admixture in Colombia is 40% to 60%, but it is not useful in order to determine the ethnic composition of the country. The only genetic research about White Colombians is Candela Project and it shows just 19,3% of Colombians self identified as Whites and they have a considerable non White admixture (35%). Most external and historial sources also shows White Colombians are around 20% of population, with a few of them claiming that number is around 35%. Merchancano (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:14, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

1. The sources I have for testing are shown on the White People page, I'll expose you there if you keep removing those sources.

2. The Colombian government has never given a clear figure on whites as well as mestizos, both are in the same group in the national census. For which you cannot brazenly say that 19% of Colombians consider themselves white when they have NEVER done so in the NATIONAL CENSUS.

3. Your "Candela" figure is a vile fallacy, it practically says that Colombia is an Afro-mestizo country, when Afros are a minority in the country, they represent 9.4% of the population according to the national census.

4. YOU CANNOT COMPARE CANDELA SOURCE FROM 2005 (17 YEARS OLD) WITH THE SOURCES OF PLOS Genetics, which is one of the MOST RECOGNIZED biogenetics portals on the PLANET, which has carried out genetic and ancestry research for years through average samples from many countries, from Latinos to Europeans, Asians and Africans. The world evolves, year after year different sources on different topics are being updated. YOU CANNOT PRETEND THAT A SOURCE FROM 2005 IS WORTH MORE THAN SOURCES FROM 2015, 2018 AND 2019 (THESE MADE BY SAMPLING).

5. YOU ARE NOT ONLY ELIMINATING IMPORTANT RECENT SOURCES, but you are also eliminating ARAB COLOMBO SOURCES (taken from the Arab diaspora), SOURCES OF THE IRISH AND FRENCH GROUPS IN COLOMBIA, AND ALSO YOU HAVE THE CHALLENGE TO ELIMINATE ENGLISH AS AN OFFICIAL LANGUAGE ON THE ISLAND OF SAN ANDRES WHEN IT WAS A FORMER BRITISH COLONY BEFORE SERVING COLOMBIA AND IT IS THE ONLY AREA IN LATIN AMERICA WHERE ENGLISH IS SPOKEN AS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE IN ADDITION TO SPANISH AND CREOLE. Chauxlemount (talk) 23:48, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

1. Sources I published are legitimate, so I don't understand your insistence to deleted those sources. I agree with include all sources, including those make you feel incomfortable because show White Colombians are just 20% of population.

2. Since 1912 there are not official Census about White Colombian population. We have a genetic study where 19% of population sampled self identified as White (Candela Project, 2014) and a internacional survey (Latinobarometro, 2016) where 26% of Colombians surveyed states to be White.

Ethnographic estimations puts White Colombians between 20% and 37% of total population.

3.Candela Project is a genetic study from 2014 that shows Colombians are in average 60% Caucasoid, 29% Amerindian and 11% SS African. This is the only genetic study about White Colombians, showing an avg. admixture of 65% Caucasoid, 26% Amerindian and 9% SS African.

4.Candela Project is from 2014. I think you are talking about Lizcano (2005), but there are most recent sources where that data is confirmed (CIA World Factbook until 2012 and Latinobarometro in 2016).

In regard to Afro Colombians, I will add my observations soon un Talk page of these article (You were blocked in Wikipedia in Spanish because your vandalism in these version, so I hope you have better ideas this time).

5. Where is the genetic or ethnographic study that support your figure of '45-50%'? Until you don't share a legitimate source in the matter it is false.

You also need to demostrate a important number of White Colombians speak English.

Finally, you must not be afraid about Colombia being less White than you imagine. Even in this page there are people saying Colombia is a mestizo countries with Whites being a minority. Merchancano (talk) 01:24, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

The last census that divided mestizos and blancos says 37% of the population is white. External sources can simply not obtain an average for the entire Colombian population. Overall I believe if we count mulattos as blacks we can count castizos as white. Although both are mixed races, they are predominantly one race over the other, because of this, they are racialized differently. After all, this is what they do in the white chilean, Argentine and white Mexican pages. They count castizos as whites. Race is a social structure. The same way a castizo can be white in Latin America is the same way Italians were not considered white in the US and parts of Europe. I suggest you read this: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1206&context=qc_pubs

I also believe we should include genetics on each ethnic page as it is relevant to ancestry. The coast of Colombia is one of the blackest part of Latin America while the interior of Colombia is one of the whitest. There is considerable less amount of Indigenous DNA in Colombia then in most of Latin America. Places like Peru, Chile, Guatemala etc have much more indigenous DNA despite having much less population in total. Enlightened105747 (talk) 04:18, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

@Enlightened105747: if we count mulattos as blacks This is plain WP:OR. We cannot "count" anything, we can only report what reliable sources say. The word "mulatto" is dated. Your sources about the Basque contribution are self-published, meaning that they don't qualify as reliable sources, see WP:RS. @Merchancano: What is Caucasoid supposed to be ? Rsk6400 (talk) 06:58, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

, The world Factbook currently states the afro Colombian population is at 9%. The third source states the following: "De acuerdo al censo de 2005, 4 533 951 per- sonas se autoreconocieron como afroco- lombianos, raizales y palenqueros, es decir, el 10,6% de la población del país." basically it is simply citing the 2005 census. The current census says 9% of the population is black.

The lizcano source not only shows evidence of being outdated, but also bias. Such as in the following :  La suma de las etnias mulata y negra representa 24% de la población re gional., mientras que en los países afromestizos se localiza 18%. Por tanto, los otros tipos de países, pese a que todos ellos contienen afrodescendientes con lenguas maternas ibéricas, aportan porcentajes muy reducidos en relación con la población regional de estas etnias. Brasil es el país que concentra el mayor número de mulatos y negros de Iberoamérica (65%), Colombia y Venezuela ostentan importancias similares (9% y 8%, respectivamente).  Basically stating the same as the census, that blacks in Colombia are about 9% of the population. The lizano source also states the following:  parte de sus integrantes viven en tipos de países donde esta subetnia está más claramente delimitada, en los países criollos y en los afrocriollos. En efecto, algo más de la mitad (55%) de los criollos vive en los países afrocriollos (naturalmente, la gran mayoría en Brasil), la cuarta parte en los países criollos y el resto (20%) en los otros tipos de países. Los países que más criollos contienen son Brasil (51%), Argentina (17%) y, con casi 15 millones, México (8%); en tanto que Colombia y Chile tienen en torno a 8 millones cada uno, así como Perú, Venezuela, Cuba, Costa Rica y Uruguay entre 3 y 4 millones. According to the lizano source only 17% of Argentina is white, as well as only 8% of Mexico. If you believe this source then why do you not update all the other countries accordingly? Why are you so fixated on Colombia? It doesn't make sense to change the government designated numbers of 18 million- 20 million to only 8 million because of this source but not follow through by changing the stats of other country as well.

As I said before, race is completely a social construct. Castizos are white the same way black and mixed populations can be considered black. aNyone who visits Chile or looks at genetic studies done on the country, knows half of every chilean in street is not "European passing" yet 50% self identify as white. Colombia has on average much higher European genetic composition and much lower indigenous composition yet only 37% self identified as white. Like I said before race is a social construct. In each country race means somthing differently. \

Enlightened105747 (talk) 06:21, 23 October 2022 (UTC) Enlightened105747 has been blocked for sockpuppetry Rsk6400 (talk) 11:41, 23 October 2022 (UTC)