Talk:Mexican Americans

Political affiliation

To suggest Mexican-Americans usually support the Democratic party, is a misleading fact. if your defination of usually is over 50% then this statement is false -according the U.S. elections

statement is true and article has 2004 actual voting data. Rjensen 19:56, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Not entirely misleading, since there are Mexican-Americans vote in the Republican party. Texas was one example as two-thirds of the state's Latino vote went to incumbent president George W. Bush in 2004. Bush's appeal to Latinos from both personal experiences and the growing political base in his home states, Bush swayed many traditionally Democrat voters of all races and classes. Please this isn't a POV, but a fact you can find in state (Texas) and federal (U.S.) election results. --Mike D 26 20:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Name

Would this not be better at Mexican American, in line with for example Chinese American, German American, Indian American, and so on? — Pekinensis 00:15, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I'll start moving. — Stevey7788 (talk) 00:53, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

O.K., I'll start putting this into action. {{move}} template attached here. — Stevey7788 (talk) 00:55, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Support for above reason. --Taejo 11:32, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I changed the first line to be "Americans of Mexican ancestry" which mirrors the format of such similar articles as Irish American, German American, Chinese American, etc. Saying that a Mexican American is a "citizen and/or resident of the USA" is not only wrong, it is biased in favor of classifying illegal immigrants as Americans due to their residential status. Saying so is not racist; it is a statement of fact. Residence in a particular country does not automatically classify you as a part of that country's national identity. Mirroring this article's name to similar articles' formats is only logical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Batman428 (talk • contribs) 03:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I've moved the [age. Paul August ☎ 04:30, August 15, 2005 (UTC)

---

ZabMom: I used to live in California, and it is a lie to say that Mexican Americans don't use the social welfare system. I personally saw their abuse of the system. They would pack together in public housing and pool together their food stamps, wic, welfare checks, social security checks, etc. They also receive benefits to buy homes, and they send their children to government schools. So it is a LIE to say they don't use the social welfare system.

---

The FACT is 80% of the people on welfare are African American, 17% are white (which wow isn't that sad when they of all the races in this country have it the easiest), 3% are Asian, 1.3% are hispanic. So just because that's YOUR experience, does not mean that represents all hispanics or mexicans. I don't know about you but I have never in my life had a mexican bumb ask me for change. I have however seen them selling fruit or flowers on the side of the road. My people are too proud to take handouts. Get your facts right, don't be like every other ignorant american.

---

Malcolm X: it is funny that you say that most Mexicans abuse welfare. I am a Mexican American and i've never been on welfare in my life, am in college, am working full tome, don't have any kids, fit and the only person living "packed" with me is my little brother. Another funny thing is that last week i went to the grocery store and the only people i saw using WIC was a white women and a white guy trying to buy beer with his food stamp card.

All Mexican's are American, as are all Brazilians, Canadians etc. This is a meaningless term surely? Markb 11:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

No that is not how people talk, They use the term "Mexican American" millions of times every day to refer to a real group of 20+ million people. They are NEVER talking about Brazilians. Rjensen 05:31, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

This is an encylopedia, not a dictonary (try http://en.wiktionary.org). Just because 'people' use the phrase doesn't mean it is accurate. The Xxxx American usage appears to specify a group of people who have moved from Xxxx to live in America. In the case of Mexico, they already were/are America, it would be more accurate to describe them as 'American Americans'. Markb 13:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

That also striked me. It makes no sence. Most Mexicans can either be called Spanish-, or native Americans - or, more oftenly, both. Mexican American is an Oxymoron in that context, since it makes me, as an Unamerican think of citizens of Mexico living in Mexico (In contrast to US-Americans) 84.167.231.27 15:00, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Arguably Accurate but Doesn't Belong

I don't see a reason to enumerate illegal immigrants in the first paragraph. While illegal immigrants are a sizable population they are not numerically representative of the whole. The article is a bit non-NPOV and you are perpetuating a stereotype if you leave it this way. The article is about Mexican-Americans, not illegal immigrants.

This is like writing in an article about U.S. Americans: "Of the 300 million Americans, 215 million are obese and an estimated 50 million are ignorant. Most unhealthily obese Americans reside in Florida, South Carolina and Colorado. Of the ignorant Americans, most don't know if Canada resides on the northern border or the southern border. Additionally, in scholastic aptitude tests, most high school freshmen score at a 65 pecentile when measured against their Singaporean, English, Australian and other Anglophone counterparts. Low scores and their gradual decreases are attributed to obesity and lack of exercise, and cultural complacence due to individualistic values."

It's frighteningly accurate, but it doesn't belong in an introductory paragraph. --Deepstratagem 09:52, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Religion

Under the culture section, only the arts are highlighted. I would like to see some information on religion as well

Mexican Americans are for one thing, predominantly Roman Catholic as this goes back 500 years, after the Spanish introduced this kind of Christianity into what's now Mexico and Latin America. There's quite a heavy folk segment in Mexican Catholic practices, mainly of Amerindian origin as well localized mythology like the story of the Virgin Mary sightings in Guadalupe, Mexico (1543). Also we need to indicate there are Protestants in the Mexican American community, along with an increase of Spanish-speaking Protestant denominations in the U.S. since 1990. Jews of Spanish origin settled in Mexico (new Spain) since the 1600's and today, only 34,000 estimated Mexican Jews continue to practice Judaism in the country. --Mike D 26 20:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree we should put more information on religion. Although not all Mexican Americans are catholic.

Redundancy of term "Mexican American"?

The section on the redundancy of the term "Mexican American" should probably be removed. The way American is used in Latin America is to mean more or less from the Americas. In the phrase Mexican American, at least in US English, it is used to describe a person of Mexican descent who lives in the US. The term is only redundant in Spanish and Portugese as spoken in Latin America. Theshibboleth 06:41, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

The fact that the term is actually used in the U.S.A. doesn't make the term any less redundant. For example "PIN Number" is widely used but it is still redundant.
--Deepstratagem 06:33, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

_ _ The Shib is right, and the analogy is absurd.

_ _ It is a fact that "number" is part of what PIN abbreviates (though the PIN number article creates a controversy where there is none: all it needs to say is that strictly speaking there is redundancy; any sensible reader knows that that implies some people will draw attention to the fact. (But that is off-topic in that article, bcz drawing attention to it is not about PIN numbers, but about a matter of psychology and sociology -- about what underlies drawing attention to

• such redundant expressions,
• the "nucular" and "artic" and "Febuary" pronunciations of the corresponding words,
• whether it's ever accurate to write a zero in a box that asks for a "number",
• whether Caucasians should write "white" or "pink" in boxes asking for race, and,
• oh yes, now i remember, about how concieted it is to write the first person singular pronoun in upper case, as if i were a monarch entitled to violate plain logic in My personal grammar.)

_ _ This is not about a fact of redundancy, but about the fact that some people object to the primary meaning in English of the word "American"; they want to use it only in a way that would make it redundant to use it in the phrase the article is about. The mention in the article is simply hijacking users' attention in order to harangue them about something they are not interested in.
--Jerzy•t 05:12, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, Jerzy; the analogy only goes so far. However, since the people who object to the meaning in the U.S. of the word "American" happen to be the people described in the article, and since the redundancy exists as a recognized socio-cultural phenomenon it is more relevant than you make it out to be. --Deepstratagem 06:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Really, do we need to compartmentalize everyone down to the smallest group we can come up with? Mexican American is like saying caucasian white guy. It's that redundant. How about we all be Americans instead of Mexican American, Irish American, African American, Italian American, British American. How come I never hear Canadian American? Why not be unified instead of divided. If you were born in America and reside in America, then you're and American. It's just getting down right rediculous.

I agree, partially. Some people - i.e. born in another country or with parents or parent from another country, can be or clearly are "X-American". However, certainly not everyone with a drop of X ancestry is "X-American", as some Wikipedia editors seem to errnoneously believe. Mad Jack 06:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

You really shouldn't blame wiki editors for this. The debate over Mexican-Americans being white Americans has been going on way before wikipedia came along. I suggest you look up LULAC and get more aquainted with this topic since it might be assumed you are cluttering up the talk page. Mosquito-001 13:50, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

---

Evidence that others consider the term Mexican American redundant and the reasoning behind it. Deepstratagem 21:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Bias?

The Economic issues portion states that Mexican Americans almost exclusively are blue collar workers in places such as California, Texas, Arizona, ect. It seems to draw the conclusion that there are no Mexican Americans in White Collar fields. I find this to be untrue. I hope someone will rewrite the entire paragraph to reflect a more truthful picture.

Also, most of the information tends to lean towards ethnic Mexican and not Mexican Americans. As if to say there is little difference in the cultural, economic and social standing of Mexican Americans and Mexican immigrants. There is a difference!

Sgarza 17:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• Okay. I changed "Economic Issues". It's short and sweet. And more precise. Sgarza
• Here we go again! Why does this article emphasize Mexican American poverty and not our social mobility? If anything we have the greatest mobility of all! If we emphasize one, it only fair to emphasize the other! Sgarza 16:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Greatest mobility? Add to the article if you can find any sources that confirm this idea.

Another topic that is missing in the article is crime. IIRC, Mexican Americans have crime rates twice the American (USA) average. This is significant and worth adding to the article if proper sources are found and added. Peoplesunionpro 03:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

It has been my experince that MOST Mexican Americans are not White Collar. Only until recently have we seen some change in that field. Mexican American's are doing a Cross Over. Remember not too long ago that we got our freedoms. White males were the only ones that could vote. Women didn't even have rights, including white women. It will take some time for the world to change and realize that we do exist, we do have a voice and we will use it.

Latino template

Please help with the Latino template. --JuanMuslim ^1m 18:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Removed edit below is appropriate for articles on Latino and Hispanic people, but not in Mexican American, and Vicente Fox-Quesada is the former president of Mexico relevant to the article. Bachelet and Chile are the other side of the coin, the same coin but let's put this edit on sections dealing with racial categories and what North Americans assume Vicente Fox is "white" or treated like a "Mexican". I mean, he's from Mexico (yes, Mexican) but of mainly European background (in the eyes of some horribly narrow-minded white Americans, he's another white guy in the street). It would be the same for a customs officer examined Michele Bachelet's ethnicity and get confused on whether she's a "Latina" (Chilean) or a Frenchwoman (not Canadian, Ok?).

<< Many prominent "white" Latin Americans who "don't look" like a stereotypical "brown" Latino, for example, Chilean president Michelle Bachelet would be called a "white Anglo" due to her heavy European (French-German-Greek) background, despite she originally came from a Spanish speaking country in South America, not a Mexican. >>

Can anyone tell someone is Mexican from American?

Whoever said you can tell a Mexican is an American not an immigrant across the border is a recent practice of discrimination and stereotypes. There are plenty of ethnic jokes of what an American "Mexican" (Chicano) looks like: Knows english but speaks "spanglish", has a bandana, wears a shirt with Aztec calendars, a "Raiders" cap or jersey, has tattoos of gothic letters on arms or back, drives low-rider customized '76 Cutlasses, the radio is on "Art LaBoe smooth rock oldies" and has a shaved head (men) or dyed blond hair (women). I'm afraid this is a result of American society took notice of Mexican immigrants dress, acts, talks or appears not exactly like what longer descriptions of "Mexicans" or Chicanos are. But the level of racial hate crimes against Latinos is feed by two different, but equally harmful images of what a "Mexican" or "Chicano" looks like, and I'm surprised with the media attention on hate crimes, the record on how much Mexican Americans or Latinos are targeted never carried weight. --Mike D 26 06:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Mexicans ARE Americans. See Use of the word American. Deepstratagem 07:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

If the person of Mexican descent is born and raised in the U.S., and are naturalized citizens, you're totally right. But as long racial stereotypes and anti-immigration attitudes exist, the perception of Mexican Americans is going to release the kind of discrimination and intimidation. There are jokes and slurs that described Mexican Americans and other Latinos that I don't see as funny...and I'm not a Latino. You still have Anglos referred Mexicans as a backward, docile or "stupid" people unable to assimilate, but only want to work and get money to send home, a generally offensive statement. In movies and T.V. shows in the 1960's, Mexican Americans are depicted as bandits and field workers, always sleeping on the job or violently attacks white people, and spoke in accents: "ey speek no eengles". Most people in today's society don't find it real or funny, just like age-old racial portrayals of African Americans, Chinese, Arabs, etc. won't bother to get transmitted today. --Mike D 26 20:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I get the impression you didn't read the article. Mexico is in America, like Germany is in Europe, and therefore Mexicans are Americans, just like Germans are Europeans. Deepstratagem 08:32, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

"American" is reference to the United States of America. In English language, the word "American" usually refers to this. Peoplesunionpro 03:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I'm with Deepstratagem on this one. Yes, "American" in the English language only refers to a resident of the United States. However, as a United States citizen, I've never considered this a proper term at all; for one, it's not reliable, your average American out of central or south America hardly ever relates to what you're describing; and two, the name of my country is the United States of America, as in every resident of the western hemisphere is an American, I am just a US citizen. So when you add it all up, the term just doesn't fit. However, sometime in the near future, I'd like to see someone casually make an impact on the world to separate the two. Nikki88 04:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

"American" is labeled as anyone that comes from America. "Mexican" is anyone that comes from Mexico. And by coming from means that you were born there. I live in Europe and they always ask me where I am from. I always respond I am from Texas. They never bother to ask me if I am Mexican, Cuban, Puerto Rican. They don't care. You know where they do care? That's right, in the US. And why does it matter? Because we are still Stereotyping people! Only in "America" do you care what color your skin is and who speaks what language. In Europe people here speak 3-4 languages, that is normal. The question was can you tell if someone is Mexican or American? The answer is why does this matter, they are human just like the rest of us.

No mention on intermarriage rates

There is a rising rate of racial or cultural intermarriage between whites/ Anglos and Latinos/Mexican Americans. Although not entirely common at this time, but I said this is on the rise and indicates the rate of assimilation is happening when a Latino/a is comfortable to marry a white Anglo...or outside their ethnicity. Anyone has an opinion on this and what it means for Mexican Americans, some have strong ties to Mexican heritage and insist on preservation of that? Personally, I've knew "white Americans" or those with blonde hair, blue eyes and light skin said they are Mexican or have a parent/grandparent who was. It's not yet a trend for anyone to say "I'm part Mexican" alike to say "part Indian" (not tribal) or "part Chinese" (not from China) or "part Jewish" (not religious). In the past when prejudice against Latinos was worse, it was considered miscegenation to some Anglos to marry outside their race or color, sometimes included with Hispanics. Today, most people aren't afraid of intermarriage and this silly fear of what their children look like or identify with. But if the trend of intermarriage does become common, will the Mexican American group blend in not socially, but genetically, with Anglos or white people? --Mike D 26 06:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Mexican relates to nationality and not race. Nothing prevents a "white" or a "black" person from being Mexican, if they have the ancestry, culture or nationality. 70% of the Mexican population has European roots. See Demographics of Mexico. Now, whether "Mexican American" is considered a race (provincially speaking, in the United States) that's an interesting question, but technically, the answer is no. Deepstratagem 07:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not trying to insult or degrade people of Mexican ancestry, but I'm saying a trend gain notice in the U.S. Census and Hispanic political groups. This is a shared experience with all immigrant ethnic groups in the U.S. as more children or/and grand-children of immigrants would marry someone from another culture. True, state laws blocked intermarriage of white and African Americans, and in California, white and Asian Americans. Hispanics (in the case of Mexican Americans) are exempt because they qualified as "white" or European racial descent, unless they are declared "other" or appeared more African or American Indian on past Census documents. --Mike D 26 20:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

We are in such a hurry to be accepted into the "All American Dream" that we are blindsided by racism. I am married to a white man. His family dates back to England, all white. I am the third person of this generation to marry into the family.(African-American, Iranian, Mexican American) They still do not accept me, but they don't have to. My sister and cousin both married white men as well. We are not scared of losing our heritage, our culture, our roots. It's with every person to decide if they want to take that with them and share it with their children. To make their children aware of who they are and where they come from. To remind them of the past and see that they have a better future. I think that America was and still is a melting pot of sorts.

long list of Mexican American communities

What is the fn value in listing all these cities? danedouard00 07:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm inclined to replace the long list with an overlayed map of the US from the census bureau... please discuss danedouard00 06:42, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

im pretty sure that in DC its adams morgan with the high mexican population not just DC its self. im gonna do some research. - signed by anon IP

Go ahead, the Washington DC article might have info. on these matters, most major city articles have sections on featured neighborhoods and how they vary from one another. I believe some of the list of Mexican-American communities are skeptical and not throughly researched, some may be more Puerto Ricans, Guatemalans, Salvadorans, Dominicians and Cubans than Mexicans et al. + 63.3.14.129 06:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

new material, citations

this article tends to get a lot of edits that end up in questionable or unsourced material. a lot of it hints at being first hand experience or understanding by the editor, which doesn't really contribute to a good encyclopedia article.

there's already lots of clean-up that's required and i would suggest that new edits be reverted unless they have accompanying citatiosn or summarize already-sourced material. i've already done that with a long series of edits that were done today with no backup. danedouard00 02:41, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Mexican American vs. illegal Mexican alien

Folks, we need to keep these terms straight.

I cleaned up the article a little under "Economic and Social issues" but there is more work to be done. According to the very first sentence, Mexican Americans are legitimate US Citizens - not illegal aliens. Therefore the article should not dwell on any perceived plight of the illegal Mexican alien, difficulty finding employers willing to break the law to hire them, illegals receiving or not receiving government benefits, etc.

In addition, articles referring here (such as Santa Ana) probably need to reference illegal immigrant as well.

The "Discrimination and stereotypes" section is poorly written and should probably be removed altogether. --Da Cubs 04:18, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Please remove. I hate reading unencyclopedic junk. Be prepared to get unexplained restores from persons with variable quality standards... they'll make themselves known.danedouard00 05:58, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. Some editors keep making it worse. danedouard00 21:24, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

The section was rewritten and cleaned to anyone's liking...but no reliable sources and "citation needed" captions everywhere. I observe what goes on in the Mexican American community about the issue of stereotypes. There wasn't enough mention on today, there is less overt discrimination against Mexican Americans. But, the main problems affecting the ethnic group are immigration problems (legality and status) and the impact of large sources of "Mexican" cheap labor. The Mexican cultural niche is stronger because of millions of Mexicans straight out of the rural interior states, carried much of their culture over the border and not the same culture you may find in Mexico city, the beach resorts or in east Los Angeles. Not all Mexicans are the same and most older generation Mexican Americans think of themselves as Americans of Mexican descent...not "Mexicans" happen to live in another country. + 63.3.14.129 05:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Good job on cleaning up... Looks a lot more factual and less stereotypical. Deepstratagem 07:12, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Ridiculous bias. TOTALLY DISPUTED

Sorry, but you don't get to write screeds attractive to your particular form of victimology on Wikipedia. Referring to the Minutemen and SOS as "nativist" and "extremist" groups which target Mexican-Americans is about as far from NPOV as it gets. And how about a source here and there to support some of the more absurd claims in the 'Racism' section?

I found out about this article by following a vandal who likes to make silly little modifications to immigration reform groups' entries. I see he has been hard at work on this page. BulldogPete 02:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

"related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 17:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

allegations of racism are funny

Mexican is not, has never been and will never be a race. I have cousins in Mexico City that are completely White (although I am not) they have not a single (known) drop of Indian blood. As a matter of fact, if they came to the states, you'd probably think they were Americans with Speech problems. Mestizo Mexicans may be Indian, but they're White too. There is no some other race. Most Mexican Americans should probably claim themselves as "Two or more races" because that is what most of them are. I'm White. I'm American Indian. I have enough sense to acknowledge I'm both. I really don't think It's fair that the BIA won't let them classify themselves as Indian, but they should at least classify themselves as White, considering most of them do have White ancestry.

Let's go back to ancient times and explain where the term of "white" came from...The "white" people are from Europe. Germans, English, French, Greek, and Russian are all "white." Spaniards and Portugual are African from the Moors and Italians. Italians are from Egypt and Mesopotania area. They did alot of trading back in the day and alot of people moved into Europe from Mesopotania and Egypt area. If you ever come to Europe you can even see their facial features are so different. Russians are white like snow, and blond hair. English are white thin and brown hair. French are almost like the Italians with a little color, but the French women are a bit rounder in the face. Italians have their glow from the sun and the prodominant nose. Germans are white some brown some blond haired, deep voice and mainly medium build. The German men are quite strait and their hair is always quite thick. So eventhough they are "white" they are all different.

Indian in fact is a person that is native to that country. So unless your family dates back hundreds of years in America you shouldn't label yourself as an Indian

If you are not white then why are you American Indian? If you were born in the US you are a US Citizen, your race depends on where your ethnicity comes from. If your family comes from Latin America, then it is specified as such. I was born in the US but my family comes from Mexico and Spain. My family that still lives in Monterrey is also white skined, but they are Mestisos. I on the other hand am a Mexican American, or Latina. (Hispanic is someone from Hispanola, Cuban, Puerto Rican decendance or African decendence.)

In the future I see the government making "other" selection invalid. There will be many choices to choose from, especially if more and more minority get into the congress.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.166.142.3 (talk • contribs)

do you know something? You have no right to tell me I'm not Indian. I have an Indian grandfather and an Indian grandmother. So, yes, I am Indian. But. I'm still White. Don't tell be otherwise. That by they way, was a personal attack on me. Iamanadam 15:32, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Mestizo is a race and if they are Mestizo, they are not white. I am Mestizo because I have Native Mexican blood in me but I also have Spaniard blood in me so I am Mestizo but not white. There are people in my family who are dark skinned and light skinned but the ones who are light skinned do not have european features. Me, I'm not white, my race is technically Mestizo not white despite me having European blood in me that I got it from hundreds of years ago when the Spaniards conquered our anscestors. People like me should put "other" when talking about race and not white unless they have prodominantly european blood.German16rs 14:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Mestizo isn't a 'race', but it doesn't matter because there is only one human race and different groupings. It seems that you're trying to say that you are Native American with European blood that isn't a part of you. "our ancestors" (meaning Native Americans in Mexico) are not our ONLY ancestors...the Europeans are as well. Just because you think you're not white, doesn't mean it's correct. Mestizo's are both, not Native Americans just raped by Europeans as people put it, rather grotesquely I think. Cali567 00:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Merge List of notable Chicanos into List of Mexican Americans

See discussion at Talk:List of notable Chicanos. Pairadox 19:48, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

History of Latinos and Hispanics

Please consider contributing to the article entitled History of Latinos and Hispanics. Thank you! --JuanMuslim ^1m 02:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Politics and Entertainment

This article really needs a section that discusses politics. The fact that the current attorney general, governor of new mexico, and mayor of the second largest city in the US are all Mexican American isn't even mentioned.

There should also be a sports and entertainment section. Again, it should be mentioned that three starting NFL quarterbacks are of Mexican descent. There are also quite a few Mexican American entertainers such as Robert Rodriguez, Eva Langoria and Jennifer Alba that have achieved international fame.

ComputerChess 01:10, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

cities....

Other cities in the Upper Midwest with thriving Mexican American communities are Detroit, Kansas City, Missouri, St. Louis, Milwaukee and Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota..

WHAT ABOUT THE LARGE MEX-AM POPULATION IN CHICAGO?

Racial Classification

I really believe the racial classification sections should be shortened, nearly a third of this article is related to that one issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreamcast88 (talk • contribs) 02:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Make better and more comprehensive

Someone should really consider and make an effort to make the Mexican American reference a lot more robust. This version of the page has been like this for so long and really only touches on the obvious issues of immigration and discrimination. What about traditions? What about holidays? What about contributions? There is absolutely a whole lot more to the Mexican American. I suggest one reference the Chinese American and the Filipino American. Now those are fine and quality references of a culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.59.176 (talk) 01:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I had not noticed that. I hope those who edit this article regularly take your advice to heart. SamEV (talk) 01:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I believe information in the History of Mexican-Americans articles should be integrated into this article. It seems to address more contemporary issues than this main article.

KayoRu (talk) 04:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

The article has included a section on ethnic "segregation" of Mexican Americans, it's well informative and has in-depth information. How about one section on educational issues affecting this ethnic group? In the 1970s, the California Dept. of Education studies has found in special education classes across the state, there were unusually high numbers of Mexican American students were wrongly labeled as mentally "retarded". But the study confirms these students misplaced in special education classes had lacked enough proficiency in the English language and came from households with little resources to boost academic performance. If given tests in their native language (Spanish) or had more resources for them available, they would have about the same level of academic performance. + 71.102.53.48 (talk) 20:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)