Talk:Latin America

Puerto Rico

Shouldn´t Puerto Rico be considered part of Latin America? I don´t see its data in any chart. Joevicentini (talk) 02:18, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Moai pictures

I removed the Moais. Easter Island is in Polynesia, clearly not a part of the American contintent. It wouldn't make any sense to have a picture of them in the Latin America article, just like it would't make sense to have a picture of Guam in the North America article or a picture of French Guyana in the article about Europe. Discuss.

Canada

You forget Canada. see Québec

European Population 2

In the section "Absolute numbers", Absolute numbers means: How many people exactly? and calculating the percentage of the White population of Brazil, Mexico, Uruguay and Venezuela, the results are:

Brazil Population: 190,010,647 Percentage of White Population: 53.7% Total White Population: 102,035,717,439

Mexico Population: 108,700,891 Percentage of White Population: 15.5% Total White Population: 16,848,638,105

Venezuela Population: 26,023,528 Percentage of White Population: 21.0% Total White Population: 5,464,940,88

Uruguay Population: 3,460,607 Percentage of White Population: 94.5% Total White Population: 3,270,273,615

So, in the caucasians section reffering to absolute numbers (not to the percentage), the right order is the following; Brazil, Argentina, Mexico and Venezuela —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zoe0 (talk • contribs) 20:48, 7 October, 2008 (UTC)

African chilenos

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afro-Chilean

http://papelcero.blogspot.com/2006/03/afrochilenos.html

http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=Nr2sVfNxyhU

http://www.assatashakur.org/forum/conscious-edutainment-videos-movies-tv/30485-africans-chile-afrochilenos.html

http://censoafro.blogspot.com/

http://www.tribunadelbiobio.cl/portal/index.php?Itemid=107&id=1555&option=com_content&task=view

http://censoafro.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2008-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&updated-max=2009-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-08%3A00&max-results=1

http://www.tribunadelbiobio.cl/portal/index.php?Itemid=107&id=1555&option=com_content&task=view

http://atinaarica.bligoo.com/content/view/1021/Puntapie_inicial_al_Censo_Afro.html

White Chile

I don't know who is the user who keeps including Chile as a "white" country. It's incredible that somebody erases Chile, then a few days the name of the country is back again. There are no sources that claim Chile is predominantly "white". The census there count mestizos and whites together. It makes no sense. Others claim 30% is white, which is not majority either. Opinoso (talk) 17:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

It's not the census that counts mestizos and whites together. It's the CIA world factbook. The Chilean census doesn't not ask anything about ethnicity (aside from personal indigenous identification).

It's not the census that counts mestizos and whites together. It's the CIA world factbook that does that. The Chilean census doesn't not ask anything about ethnicity (aside from personal indigenous identification). I don’t know if you read Spanish but as per Lizcano

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.

[1]

Translation

The countries with the most Criollo people are Brazil (51%), Argentina (17%) and, with almost 15 million, Mexico (8%); whereas Colombia and Chile have around 8 million each, as well as Peru, Sees and Venezuela, Cuba, Costa Rica and Uruguay with between 3 and 4 million.

The Chilean population is 16 m. out of which 8 million are criollo, which makes it about 50% of the total population. Brazil is listed with a similar percentage. Should we remove it as well? Likeminas (talk) 18:03, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

The Brazilian figure is based on the national census. If there is no "racial" census in Chile, then the figure is based on what? How can people know the percentage of whites in Chile if there's no census? Opinoso (talk) 18:17, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know and I personally don't care. What matters here is what the sources say.Likeminas (talk) 18:21, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

You should care. Because there are sources claiming 30% of Chile is White. If there are different informations about a subject, then one of them must be wrong. And if there are no census in Chile, then these racial figures came from nowhere. And also, everybody who went to Chile know that no way 50% of the population is White. Not even in Brazil the figure is so high, and Brazil has many more whites than Chile, because the European immigration to Chile was minimal, when compared to Brazil.

We cannot trust any source. We have to be carefull. If Chile has no census, then it is has no racial figures. That's the point. The source must be reliable to be acceptable. Opinoso (talk) 18:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

If there are sources listing a wide array of numbers for a stat, then, as per WP:NPOV all of them should be listed. That's why sometimes you see the white population of Chile represented in a range (i.e;30-50%).

What you and I think or claim to know about the demographics of any country is irrelevant here. So let's just save that for the bar.

In any case, I agree with removing Chile from the predominately white statement, but removing it altogether, while using the source posted above, is not an accurate representation of the information therein. Perhaps, it could go within the line and are also a significant demographic group in Brazil, Cuba and Puerto Rico....Likeminas (talk) 18:43, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

"We cannot trust any source. We have to be carefull. If Chile has no census, then it is has no racial figures. That's the point. The source must be reliable to be acceptable."

In the case of Chile, only, I suppose. Because in [White Brazilian], Opinoso thinks that the "information" that there are 25,000,000 "Italian Brazilians" and 12,000,000 (!) Arab Brazilians should be kept, albeit the Brazilian census does not ask for that information. Lol. 200.198.196.129 (talk) 15:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Languages

Since the article is about an area where Romance languages are spoken, the pre-Columbian languages mentioned in the infobox should be delineated from the other Romance ones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.128.208.140 (talk) 03:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Subdivisions- Mario Sambarino

Now I am not questioning his work, but I don't think this information regarding subdivisions in Latin America should NOT be in top of the page because of what one person believes. It can be put in the Demographics section as a side note possibly. Let me know what you all think? Jesusmariajalisco (talk) 23:20, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you, sections should be moved down. Also, he's not a reputable source. His study is very obscure and highly different than other works. AlexCovarrubias ^{( Talk? )} 00:27, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Hispanic barrios

Should Hispanic neighborhoods in anglophone countries in North America be considered part of Latin America or not? The question came to mind when I pointed out that the Southwestern US was once part of the Spanish Empire, which led me to draw Florida into the exclusion as well. Also, there's Quebec, which is French speaking, and I noticed that places such as Miami, Los Angeles, and New York have large Spanish speaking communities, so Spanish might be prevalent in some of those neighborhoods and areas. 192.12.88.7 (talk) 04:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Should Asian neighborhoods in anglophone countries in North America be considered part of Asia or not???South Bay (talk) 04:49, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Gini Index

I wrote the new Gini Coeficent in the page and someone deleted it... I think is quite unfair because I spent a lot of time searching for the new Coeficent. Moreover I don't even understand why this person deleted the current information, I mean, it's always the best thing having the newest information, isn't?

Thanks