Talk:Demographics of South Carolina

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

File:Downtown Rock Hill sc exit.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Downtown Rock Hill sc exit.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:03, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On the Matter of "Origins"[edit]

It was stated that the legacy ehtnic origins in the South (and particularly the Carolinas) that whites were of primarliy Scottish and Irish descent. I beg to differ. Since the explorer Guisseppi Caboti(a\k\a) "John Cabot", founded the colony, might there have been an emigration of northern Italian, and even Swiss(Genoa, Geneva, etc.) to the area? And how about English expats, refugees and indentured servants? Otherwise, it seems that the most glaring lie presented under the subject of "racial stock" origins is the ommitance of African Americans and their origins. Africans who were brought to South Carolina as either slaves or indentured servants have origins from west Africa and the various nations, kingdoms, or ethnic tribes therein. (We also acknowlege that some of the first Africanos were brought to the English colonies not directly from Africa, but from Brazil, as in the case of Jamestown, Vaginia. Then there is the category of "other"; what "others" are these? I say adamantley one cannot dismiss the Native Aborginal (Native America) from the demographics of this region, nor anywhere else in the territories of the British colonies. Records were kept and preserved up to this day. Many "Indians" were taken out of the region east of the Missippi to then unknown lands on the continnet, however not all of them! The Alogoquin ethnics (made up of mullatos of anglos, "natives" and very often Africanos) remained as residents long after the War Against Southern Rebellion. Many Carolanians who claim they are "While" and "nordic" are in fact mixed with "native" and Africano strains. So much on this matter. There is also the case of the category of "other" as concerns Asian immigration to the South in the short years following the end of the "Civil War" and the emancipation of Africanos. Unrepentant, and incalcratrant whites looked desperately to keep the status quo of illegal free labor. Some had thought they found a solution by sponsoring East Indians from the Sub-Continent, or even the Guyanas and Seranim to replace Blacks. The brutal, southrn white power structure reasoned that this system of their "kissin" cousins, The "British Empire" worked very well in South America and India; so it was that thousands of (Asiatic)Indians were brought in on the same indentured sevitude contracts that now were illegal by Contitutional Amendment and the Manumisson Laws. As evolution must follow, these new "immigrants" saw that they were being brutalized as much as African Americans. They gravitated towards a closer kinship with the latter. and, as they were "divested" and otherwise distaffed from their "cultures" (except those few who stubbonly and secretly stuck with the practices of their Muslim beliefs, especially those inhabitants of the "Sea Islands" off the coast of Carolina and Georgia. Finally, there should be mention-in the category of "other"-of refugees who fled the former Ottoman Empire, and afterwards, the carnages of WW I and Mustapha Kemal Attaturk's nation-building pogroms! Some of these "young (and old)Turks" and their families settled in South Carolina, destitute and propitious of the Africano communities there as they were brutally harrassed and denied "christain charity" by whites. I say again, the category of "other" in the census of South Carolia, as with all the other southern and, yes, mid-western and south-western states should be meticulously defined. --67.86.98.26 (talk) 16:31, 15 December 2011 (UTC)Veryverser[reply]

"Jamestown, Vaginia"
Is this a typo or sabotage? IleanaDU 2601:14A:503:2E00:39D1:D201:29C7:DA09 (talk) 21:14, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Demographics of South Carolina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 20:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Demographics of South Carolina. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 15:05, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics table should be updated after 2020 Census[edit]

The information in the table is from 2005. That means it wasn't updated after the 2010 census. Rather than update now, we should probably schedule this to be done after 2020 Census results are available. Someone might want to keep a list of articles with the more/most outdated numbers. IleanaDU (haven't been able to log in for weeks), 2601:14A:503:2E00:39D1:D201:29C7:DA09 (talk) 21:19, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Demographics_of_South_Carolina&oldid=1201448110"