|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the White American article.|
|Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This page was nominated for deletion on 24 October 2005. The result of the discussion was redirect to white (people).|
|This page was nominated for deletion on 24 February 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.|
|Discussions on this page may escalate into heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here. See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette.|
Links from this article with broken #section links (check):
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 3 months may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
Some comments on this article:
- It's interesting that there's not a strict parallel between "White American", which is treated by Wikipedia as distinct from "European American", and "Black American", which redirects to African American. Presumably the reason for this is a recently more expansive interpretation of "White", which includes Arab Americans and others whose ancestors might originate from beyond Western Europe. If this is the reason for distinguishing "White" from "European" Americans, the above commenter seems well justified in asking where are the pictures of Arab Americans.
- The page on African Americans contains a good deal of historical information about that group, even though they have not always been generally referred to as "African Americans". This article contains no information at all about "White Americans", as though they had descended on Turtle Islands from Europe via Outer Space in the year 2000—just in time for the census. Although there are plausible justification for treating the history of "European Americans" in a separate article, this article should contain historical information about, at minimum, the legal status assigned to "White people" in various places and times within the United States. Perhaps (not sure) the most conspicuous example of an official "White" legal status would be during the Jim Crow era in the American South.
- The "Income and educational attainment" section is quite problematic. An obvious problem is that the text offers (seemingly unsourced) single causalities for sweeping demographic features. Consider the following statements:
- "The median income per household member was also the highest, since White Americans had the smallest households of any racial demographic in the nation."
- "However, due to Whites' majority status, 48% of Americans living in poverty are white."
- Another problem with the "Income" section is the lack of historical context for white affluence in the U.S.
- White supremacy is not linked anywhere on the page. This is an egregious omission, since "white supremacy" describes the social structure of the U.S. from at minimum 1776–1968, and maybe after depending on who you ask. Almost everybody agrees that "white supremacy" is a belief system actively held by some White Americans. White privilege should also be linked.
- Too much of the article is spent re-hashing "definitions of whiteness", given that a main article for this topic already exists and readers can be directed there.
- There's hardly any information at all here about White American Culture. In fact African-American culture and similar articles on other racial/ethnic groups in the U.S. 'There is no single White culture' is a ridiculous cop-out when similar generalizations have been made about the extremely diverse cultures of other groups. The current four-paragraph exegesis of a single book is completely inadequate. simply redirects to the Culture section of this article. "European American culture" goes nowhere. This is insanely lopsided, given the huge article on
- I agree. Some sections look as if they were written in PC language with just the fingertips on the keyboard lest somebody be offended if he or she had gone into any detail about the massive input white people had in forming and shaping American culture.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:56, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Are white americans really white?
- No they are just wearing Casper the Friendly Ghost Halloween costumes.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:58, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
- "Now I obviously have proves to claim my sayings."Winston S Smith (talk) 00:55, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
As whites, especially White Anglo-Saxon Protestants, or WASPs, are the dominant racial and cultural group, according to sociologist Steven Seidman, writing from a critical theory perspective
The article appears to support Seidman's opinion, which is not accurate. If you compare the representation in powerful places by WASPs vs Germans, Irish, Catholics, Italians, there is no difference. The one White subgroup that is greatly over represented is Jewish Americans. This is bias.Winston S Smith (talk) 00:51, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Are Hispanics "White"
The majority of Hispanics identify as White and the census allows Hispanics to identify as such, those that identify as White should be included in the total count. We have pages for Non-Hispanic Whites and White Hispanic and Latino Americans which break out the separate populations. This page is an aggregation of the two populations. Perhaps you should first propose that White Hispanic and Latino Americans be deleted. Patapsco913 (talk) 12:27, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
- I think if you check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Cau7ion you'll find they've got a bit of an axe to grind about race, generally marking controversial edits as "minor". Pinkbeast (talk) 14:39, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes, while about 50% of Hispanics in America identified as white -- 50% of Hispanics in America are not white.
50% of Latinos in Latin America are not even white, certainly 50% of them in America are not white.
I can link to you to sources for the average genotype for certain Latino ethnicties.
I honestly don't even see why a White Hispanic needs to be on the page, besides a reference under related ethnic groups or in one reference in the original paragraph, you might as well put a White Arabs one too cause of identification.
Black Americans do not have a Hispanic one under their total population numbers, Asian Americans, etc, and it seems redundant to have it on the page.
Latinos aren't accepted as white in America generally and you know this -- there is a reason for that too.
I recently edited the White Hispanic component out of the total population number cause it might cause confusion, but left the references in other parts.
In my other edits it was fixing grammar, citations, and a few other mishaps, that's all.
@Pinkbeast correcting things about racial classifications and history doesn't mean I have an axe to grind breh.
- Well in response.
- 1. This article is about the greater category "White" which includes both Hispanics and Non-Hispanics (like Pope Benedict who is of Italian ethnicity). It does not include Hispanics who do not identify as White. We already have a page referencing what you seem to want. If you are opposed to the concept of White Hispanics (since you say that they do not exist despite more than 50% of Hispanics in the US saying that they do), why don't you fight the first battle and propose that that article be deleted.
- 2. It is irrelevant what percentage of Hispanics outside the US are White since the article is about the US.
- 3. The average genotype of Hispanics is irrelevant since we are discussing about the sum of individuals.
- 4. White Hispanics are on the page since they are a large portion of the White population.
- 5. The term White non-Hispanic is used to measure the non-White population in the US (and generally the only category used by the news media) where if you are any part non-White (Black, Asian, Native American..etc) or Hispanic, you are considered non-White. So if we added Black Hispanic and Latino Americans and Asian Hispanic and Latino Americans to their respective pages everything would be ok? That could be easily rectified.
- 6. You seem to be the only one confused about what a White Hispanics is. Patapsco913 (talk) 09:47, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
- Well in response.
1.No, I know that a White Hispanic does exist in reality -- I just believe that 50% of Hispanics in America are not white (they aren't and you know the average Hispanic is of mixed ancestry in America) hence the reason I began talking about genotypes.
2. Pope Benedict lives in Argentina, not America. Exactly, so his ethnicity means nothing.
He's an Argentine, not an American.
3. Nope, it's quite apparent that even the census has some connotations about their legitimate whiteness, even more so than Arabs, cause of their separate classification.
4. Yes, but nobody believes that 50% of Latinos in America are white (they aren't socially accepted as white) just look at my above post, basically just covered this.
PS: never met a Latino in real life who considers themselves white.
I lived in Southern California for a good portion of my life.
5. If you want to a add an Asian-Hispanic/Latino American and black one, go ahead.
Just keep them out of their total population numbers in the original article, it might cause confusion.
6. Nope, perfectly fine, just 50% of Hispanics in America are not white.
People from Uruguay are mostly white (actually white) not some mestizo identifying as white in America, that happens seemingly on the census, but I have never seen it in real life.
I don't want White Hispanics in the total population number in the article cause it might cause confusion about the true white population in America.
They aren't seen as white generally, or socially accepted as white, and aren't genetically European (like I mentioned) you might as well make a White Arab one for the Arab-Americans who identified as white. If you did that though, it would just be seen as stupidity by most -- just like the sham White Hispanic population in America.
tl;dr -- just keep the White Hispanic out of the total population number as it's not used by most sources as legit (like you mentioned) and will just cause confusion, but keep the reference to these so called 50% of White Hispanics just in case.
- The above only proves that you are editing based on your personal opinion and not cited references and not consensus--which you clearly do not have. It also shows that your statements that the edits are minor cleanup are false. Hmains (talk) 19:45, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No, I already stated that I could provide to you evidence of these peoples genetic composition on average.
He even admitted in his own post that the non-white Hispanic is used by my most sources -- not one that includes a White Hispanic aka a mestizo who identified as white and creating false numbers for the true white population.
The fact that Arabs and Jews (Ashkenazi, Sephardi, etc,) even get classified as white is honestly hilarity at its finest.
Even the whitest Jew ethnic group (Ashkenazi) are Middle Eastern/European hybrids.
There is no black Hispanic Americans or Asian Hispanic Americans or White Arabs references but apparently there needs to be a White Hispanic one under the total population part of the article?
Socially you know they aren't accepted as white, genetically 50% of are not of European descent, and it is just gonna cause confusion and isn't used by most sources.
My other edits were just fixing grammar and a few other mishaps.
- You seem to know nothing about WP and its editing requirements. Your personal opinions are of no consequence and you do not prove anything to me or another other editor. What you must do as an editor is to only include material in articles that is taken from reliable cited sources. You need to read, understand and follow the following: WP:NPOV, WP:OR, WP:VERIFY, WP:SOURCE, WP:CON. Hmains (talk) 05:00, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Smh you must be an illiterate fool son, I just stated that I could provide sources for the average genome of various Hispanic ethnicties in America and prove to you that 50% of them are not white and are of mixed ancestry for a very high percentage of Hispanics.
Hispanics get a separate category in the census for white population and aren't put into the total volume because even the government has a questioning connotation about their legitimate whiteness.
I didn't remove Arabs and Jews from the white population (because they actually get put into the official number) despite the fact that I don't consider them to be white.
So no, it wasn't a personal opinion, but using the number that's used by my most sources.
I didn't remove the White Hispanic/Latino reference out from the article, just from the official number under total population cause it might cause confusion.
My other editing was just grammatical fixes and other basic things like I stated previously.
- There is no genetic definition of "White American". It's not science and never was. If somebody self-identifies as white then they are white. There is no test. — ArtifexMayhem (talk) 05:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Okay, your perception on who is white may differ from mine, but like I stated earlier under the total population I was using the non-Hispanic white percentage and number (the number and percentage that is used by most pretty much all sources) even the other dude I was arguing with conceded on that.
I am not using a personal opinion here for my discern on who is white and who isn't, but using the number that is used by the census (non-Hispanic 63.7%) and used by pretty much all sources too when referring to the white population.
63.7% is an official number by a government census.
I did not delete the White Hispanic reference to show how many Hispanics identified as white, just did not use the 72% number under the total population.
The assertion whether US Hispanics are white or not is so simplistic! It is exactly the same as to discuss whether Americans are white or not. Americans come in all shades and races, exactly the same as "Hispanics". People really cannot grasp such a simple thing? Wow, the education system is really a mess!. I agree that the majority of Hispanics in the US, who are mostly of Mexican descend, tend to be Mestizo, many also pure Amerindians, others Black or Asian or any mixture thereof, and others white. More or less like it is happening with the rest of the US population, especially children: See: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/us/whites-account-for-under-half-of-births-in-us.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
In short, most Hispanics are not white but many are. According to the reasoning above, those who are White in American should not be considered white at all when the majority of the population is not, which is already happening. Therefore, the article should be deleted, right?. Sorry, but some people's critical thinking skills are very weak.
As to the genetic thing, even the blondest of Europeans in Europe have lots of non-white genes.See:
Now again, "whites" will not even exist now? Those types of positions are, as said, extreme, simplistic and ignorant, sorry. Pipo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 21:07, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
I understand all about non-European admixture in the Euros whether if be the Finns with Asian or Spaniards with Arabic -- the thing is it the average Hispanic in America is not white and 50% of them are not (you just admitted that) 63.7% number used for the total population is an official number from the government census regarding a white population in America -- Hispanics get there own category for their white population.
should not be considered white at all
No, while white children are a minority in America there are still a decent amount of American whites.
Black Americans do not have a Black Hispanic under their page, Asians do not, etc, using the 63.7% is an official number from the census once again and is used by most sources regarding the white population.
Here's an example:
I did not delete the White Hispanic reference, but kept it there for people to see how many Hispanics identified as white like I've stated before.
63.7% is not a made up number, but an official one from a census.
The opening to the article pretty much sums things up very clearly: "White Americans are people of the United States who are considered or consider themselves White. The United States Census Bureau defines White people as those "having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicated their race(s) as “White” or reported entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Arab, Moroccan, or Caucasian." Like all official U.S. racial categories, "White" has a "Not Hispanic or Latino" and a "Hispanic or Latino" component, the latter consisting mostly of White Mexican Americans and white Cuban Americans." As such, we need to consider the full amount of white people per the census, both Hispanic and non-Hispanic, each of which has their own webpage. Further discussion about the acceptance of different groups as White or not can be discussed further down in the srticle.Patapsco913 (talk) 16:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
White Hispanic number and percentage under the total population category and in the paragraph is fine, just keep the non-White Hispanic number and percentage there in both too.
I would also appreciate it if we're gonna put one for whites, then blacks and Asians need one too, only to make it fair.
@Patapsco913 -- do not revert it back to the elder version in its entirety, just do what I said in the above statements if you want to.
I corrected a lot of mistakes on this page and reverting it back fully will also bring back a lot of a lot of errors I rectified.
My multitude of recent edits to this page is fixing grammatical errors, citations, and a few other mishaps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cau7ion (talk • contribs) 04:41, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
A week ago ArtifexMayhem removed a section about racial admixture claiming one of the sources was not relevant and the other was unreliable. I take it the latter was referring to the personal opinions of the correspondent, but that is not pertinent given he wrote this as a journalist for UPI at the time and the information being included in this article was about a scientific study someone else did. The other that was claimed to be irrelevant mentions American Caucasians, which I presume is why it was deemed irrelevant, but it seems clear the study is using Caucasian as a general term for white. I think evidence that many or most white Americans have a statistically significant amount of non-white genetic heritage is worthy of note in this article.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 05:13, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I agree, but this and other pages are constantly visited by very suspicious people. I guess we cannot help it. Put them back. Pipo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:09, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
The changing face of America.
I wonder if it is not important for such an article to include the fact that according to the US Census, Whites are a minority of new borns in the country, which means Whites are increasingly a minority in the US:
- No, it doesn't; it means that the degree to which they are the majority is decreasing. The article suggests they will become a minority in 2043. Pinkbeast (talk) 02:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Raquel Welch is definitely not a good example of a White Hispanic. You can obviously see that she has indigenous traits in her factions. I've been looking for a photo of her Bolivian father, but considering how racially mixed most Bolivians are, and how strong the indigenous component is in that country, I highly doubt her father was of pure Spanish descent. I'm from Uruguay, probably the whitest country in Latin America (Argentina used to be quite white too), and nobody here would consider her to be pure white. A good example of a White Hispanic living in the US would be Alexis Bledel, Frankie Muniz, Martin Sheen (real surname Estevez), Guillermo del Toro, Cristina Saralegui or Pitbull. Those people obviously have no indigenous or african ancestry --220.127.116.11 (talk) 19:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)