Talk:Spaniards

Infobox: representing Latin Americans of Spanish descent

I reverted @Davidnfx:'s edit since I think the former version is better at separating the imprecise (yet huge) number of Latin Americans of (very old) Spanish descent from more recent Spanish nationals and their descendants.--Eostrix (talk) 14:34, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree with your Reversion, Eostrix. I am the poster who originally added the "hundreds of millions" figure. It is a vague number, no doubt, but it is not only true but important enough in the demographics of those countries where those descendants live that it would be foolish not to include until we can find more precise figures. --Zulu, King Of The Dwarf People (talk) 02:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Diaspora

A figure is being put in for the Spanish Diaspora, but none of the sources check out. The editor adding the figure added two sources and a youtube video. Youtube is not a WP:RS and the two sources do not have this figure. There are also a string of sources next to the number, referring to individual countries, but even if we read the numbers from each source and added them together, and even if this number matched the new figure (which I doubt) it would be WP:SYNTH. The pages are not all counting the same thing so the numbers cannot be summed. The old wording was "hundreds of millions" which is accurate because it is vague. If we want an actual number here, then we need a good and reliable source for the number. The number needs to be trusted, verifiable and uncontested if Wikipedia is to assert it. Please discuss the figures and sourcing here. When we have editor consensus I am more than happy to see a sourced figure inserted. -- Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:13, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

‘…an estimated 8 million deaths following the initial conquest…’ Not sure of the relevance of including this sentence in this topic. In any event the 'conquest' was not something that occurred overnight and instantaneously, it was a process that encompassed the subsequent decades and centuries since European arrival. So it’s more coherent to extrapolate that an accidental biological genocide ultimately proved to be the real conquerors as casualties from it were responsible for far more deaths than actual warfare in that period.

Furthermore indigenous people initially comprised the majority of the warriors that defeated the native empires of the day. Old World diseases then proceeded to indiscriminately wipe out a large portion of the native population (including native allies) and those that survived were left in a severely weakened physical state. These circumstances are what allowed Westernized biracials (mestizos who’ve outnumbered those of mostly European ancestry) to thrive at the expense of the indigenous population, gradually gaining the ascendancy and absorbing (voluntarily or by force) the remaining native nations across the region. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:388:6080:156:1C98:634A:101E:A8EE (talk) 09:12, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Remove Berbers and Maghrebis

Berbers and Maghrebis are not part of the Spaniards or Spanish people. They should be removed from the section "Other groups". They are not even ethnically related on any level, before it should be named the Portuguese, the French and the Italians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.152.129.32 (talk) 08:55, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

They live in Ceuta and Melilla. --Jotamar (talk) 21:03, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Arabs from syria

Umayyad are not syrians they are native meccan tribe but they take damascus in syria as their capital as will the word "moorish conquest" should fixed to umayyad conquest of hispania Kasaxu (talk) 22:58, 17 April 2021 (UTC)