Talk:List of Hispanic and Latino Americans

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Notable Hispanics)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject United States / Hispanic and Latino Americans / Mexican-Americans (Rated List-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Hispanic and Latino Americans task force (marked as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Mexican-Americans task force (marked as Mid-importance).
 

Merge proposal[edit]

They are both lists, so they should definitely be merged. Maybe the list should be subdivided by nationality?--Rockero 16:54, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

It refers to the United States Hispanics. There is already a list of Hispanics and also a list for each country. --Zaqarbal 18:06, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
This page needs major reconceptualization. What are we defining as Hispanic Americans? Those of hispanic descent born in america? those of hispanic descent in america? Or what? --Bfraga 21:25, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
I think it refers to Hispanic US citizens, whether they were born in USA or not. For example, Hispanic physicist Luis Álvarez was born in San Francisco (California). Isabel Allende was born in Chile but later became a USA naturalized citizen (American nationality). So both are Hispanic Americans. --Zaqarbal 19:24, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
The article should be titled: Notable Hispanics from the US. Since America is not just the USA but the entire continent. --ElChompiras
I don't think both lists should be merged; one list refers only to Hispanics, the other one refers to American citizens of Hispanic ancestry, they are totally different from each other. --Luis Lema 18:26, 29 July 2006 (PST)

New lists[edit]

As I wrote in the List of Hispanics talk page, I edited a list of Latin Americans and a list of hispanophones. So now Notable Hispanics and List of Hispanics can be merged. But, to avoid confusions, I think it would be better to make redirections to a List of Hispanic Americans. --Zaqarbal 12:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

And well...? Any suggestions? --Zaqarbal 12:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Title[edit]

I think it ought to be either List of Hispanic Americans or Notable Hispanic Americans, because "famous" is so subjective.--Rockero 21:37, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Notable works for me --Bfraga 23:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

List[edit]

I'm going to remove all the people who are already under another list and then link to that list (no need to list twice). Mad Jack O'Lantern 02:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Julie Brown[edit]

I can't find anywhere on the web that Julie Brown has a hispanic ancestry. I think she should not be on the list. If anyone has that information, please post it.

The Arts[edit]

I created sub-categories for this section. Please feel free to reorder if you spot any mistakes. Morlesg 15:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Vandals at IP 147.31.184.40, Widener University and the School Districts of Delaware County, Pennsylvania[edit]

...have substituted at least one NN name but I don't know who rightly belongs on the list; maybe somebody could take a look. -CliffC 02:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

"Notability"[edit]

This article is for "notable" Hispanics. It should not have any redlinks. If a person is not notable enough to have his/her own Wikipedia article, then the person is not "notable" (see WP:BIO). This list had a number of additions of redlink names that do not show up on any Google searches. — ERcheck (talk) 03:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Move the page[edit]

Note: I moved this discussion to the bottom of the page to maintain chronological order of discussion, as is usual practice.ERcheck (talk) 18:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

This is a list of Notable Hispanic Americans from the United States.

It is not, in any case, a list of Hispanic Americans from Hispanic America nor a list of notable Spaniards from Spain. Therefore, I think this page should be moved to Notable Hispanics from the United States or Notable Hispanic Americans (U.S.).

Discuss it please, otherwise, I will go further with this. The title is wrong. Onofre Bouvila 18:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

  • I agree with both, the comments presented by User:ERcheck and User:Onofre Bouvila above. The list is supposed to be about "Hispanic Americans" which would indicate to mean United States Citizens of Hispanic descent. First of all, this article-list lacks an introductary paragraph which should state what the list is exactly about. Second, if the list is about "notable" Hispanics then it should be within Wikipedias notability criteria. Those who are not "Hispanic Americans" as defined, should be taken off the list. Third the list as is in unmagaable. Those are my two cents worth. Tony the Marine 19:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
    • I think that a good name would be List of notable Hispanic Americans. This would make it clear that it was a list, not an article about notable Hispanic Americans. If you have "from the United States" in the title, this would exclude those Hispanic Americans who were not born in the U.S. — ERcheck (talk) 20:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
BTW, I left a note on the Latinos WikiProject talk page concerning this discussion. Any moves should wait until folks have a chance to weigh in on this. — ERcheck (talk) 02:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

FWIW I agree, except that the title should be List of Hispanic Americans, on the assumption (as in other such lists) that by definition those included must be notable. --Jbmurray 23:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

If it was "List of Hispanic Americans", that would mean that it includes the Hispanic Americans from Hispanic America, and it is not so. It includes only the Hispanic Americans from the United States of America. Therefore, it should be List of Hispanic Americans (U.S.), or (according to U.S. definition of Hispanic American), because remember this is a global Wikipedia, not a U.S. Wikipedia. Onofre Bouvila 13:32, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

So, Julio Iglesias (a spaniard, not an american citizen) is in the list. I offer two more spaniards' names: Pizarro and Cortes as ... umm... explorers.

So I definitely move the page to List of notable Hispanics from the United States. It's better than List of notable Hispanic Americans, because Hispanic Americans are also those from Hispanic America, and here, we are talking about "Hispanics" in the US. In the article "Hispanic Americans" also was done like this; it was moved to "Hispanics in the United States", because otherwise it would cause conflict with the Hispanic Americans from Hispanic America. . 18:00, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


According to all this, I think the article should have only people from Hispanic America born or naturalized in the United States. Currently the article is a mess, because it considers lots of people from Spain / Hispanic America as "Hispanic Americans" (according to US definition) just because they have won an Oscar or stuff like that. If this article wants to be serious, it should only contain Hispanic Americans born or naturalized in the United States of America. . 18:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Cristina Coria[edit]

I could have sworn she was Mexican, not Puerto Rican. Is there any proof of where she's from? 74.229.215.99 20:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Flags[edit]

I hope everyone likes the new look of the page where i put the flags of each hispanic and latino.It makes it much easier tell let everyone know where they're from and who they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.55.41.94 (talkcontribs) 22:00, 27 May 2007

History of Latinos and Hispanics[edit]

Please consider contributing to the article entitled History of Latinos and Hispanics. Thank you! --JuanMuslim 1m 02:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Hispanics in the United States - requested move[edit]

Hello everyone. There is at present a discussion going on at Hispanics in the United States, due to the request that the page be moved to Hispanic Americans. Would you like to comment please? Thank you. The Ogre 18:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

redlinks[edit]

I see the comment that we generally do not include redlinks on list pages like this. I suggest that these lists are the best place to include redlinks, to make it easier for people to find pages that need to be created. Since people with no current page cannot be listed in the category pages, it makes sense that they be left on these list pages. Yes? No? Aristophanes68 (talk) 20:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

How about having a separate list of redlinks, either on the article or on the talk page? SamEV (talk) 02:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Desired articles should be listed at the relevant project, Wikipedia:WikiProject Latinos, or at Wikipedia:Requested articles, but not here, where the potential for hoaxes and "my cousin who's a really great artist" abuse is too great. Pairadox (talk) 03:10, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Ah, yes. Somehow I misunderstood Aristophanes as meaning (also) that including redlinks would provide readers an extra set of names that would otherwise not be on the list. Maybe it's because I do find redlinks occassionally useful that way myself; I can then go find out more about the subject, including right here on Wikipedia, in articles that mention them. SamEV (talk) 03:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
That's what I meant, Sam. I find the redlinks useful for knowing what articles need to be created, and having them in the lists is more useful than having them sequestered in a list of needed pages that I never think about examining (and may not even have the redlinked name on them). However, I see Pairadox's point about the potential for hoaxes. Perhaps a compromise would be to include redlinked names, but only when they are accompanied by a summary of their importance and/or a link to an external site. I know I've seen lists that have numerous redlinks with outside pages connected to them.... Aristophanes68 (talk) 05:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
The reason that I (and many others) take a hard line on redlinks in lists is because of notability issues. To continue with the example of an artist, it's really easy to set up a website to showcase one's own artwork. That would provide a link to an external site, but that individual could still fail Wikipedia's notability guidelines horribly. Similarly, a summary of their importance doesn't meet verifiabiltity requirements. If, on the other hand, an article exists, then that person either meets notability and verifiability guidelines or the article will soon be deleted. I think a better compromise is to use Wikipedia:WikiProject Latinos as a collection point. It allows for a wider range of like-minded individuals to see redlinks and create articles. I'd be interested in knowing what lists you've seen that include numerous redlinks. Pairadox (talk) 05:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
That makes sense. But a summary and an external link do at least provide instant means for judging importance. If it's done as you recommend, Pairadox, then please make sure that each list article such as this one contains a very visible link to the redlinks list in the WikiProject. SamEV (talk) 06:54, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

the term Latino Americans is an erroneous term.[edit]

The apropriate term is Latin American. There is no Latino America. It is not in a legitimate dictionary or anywhere else legitimate. People from the Latin Americas are Latin Americans. Whoever put up the title to this page, please change this. How do you justify taking the name of a very large part of a continent, where the legitimate term is known all over the world, and with a slight of hand change it to something which only serves to obscure the reality of the peoples origen. Latino was adopted from the Spanish language in which, the meaning is Latin. This is also the case in English, see the Merriam webster dictionary. Sometimes for short Latino was used for Latino Americano, which is Spanish for Latin American. The English term is Latin Americans and that is what should be used as this is the English Wikipedia. The question is, why would someone knowing this, That the part of this continent where these people come from is and has been known officialy as Latin America, choose to use a term (that will be used by others in the perception of this group) that is not in the dictionary or any government forms. A term that attempts to illegitimize and disassociate the many individuals of this group from the correct English term 'Latin' and 'Latin America(n)s.' EDGARR (talk) 01:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

There's just one key detail you're missing: this is not about Latin Americans. It's about citizens and residents of the United States (Americans) who are of Hispanic and Latino ethnicity; ergo, Hispanic and Latino Americans. SamEV (talk) 17:43, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

There is another detail missing. The continent is named America after Americo Vespucio therefore ALL citizens of the contient are americans similar to the Europeans in Europe or the Asians in Asia. The term American is not exclusive for the citizens of the United States (of America). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.139.11.2 (talk) 18:38, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't disagree. But it isn't a relevant detail. SamEV (talk) 19:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Link this group[edit]

I've added Voices Of Theory to the "groups" section. The article exists in Wikipedia but needs to be linked.

22:09, 7 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.159.210.66 (talk)

Done. SamEV (talk) 03:30, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Bogus Aritcle[edit]

Over half of these people were not even born ina Spainish-speaking country and they do not even have Spanish names! On top of that, they either have on parent who is Spanish-speaking or PART, but it does not make these people "latinos." Most of them did not even go as "latino." Tatiana Ali never talked about being a "latina" and he name is clearly far from a "latino" name.

I am not sure the point of the article or is it to claim people who you really cannot claim. Latino is no race anyways, so anyone with a partial ancestry related to ONE parent or someone who is from a Spanish-speaking country BUT IS NOT of Spanish-speaking origins should not be on such a list. It's like calling a "latino" an American (in the US) when you know they come from another country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.234.233.203 (talk) 14:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Removed Spanish and Brazilian entertainers, as well as white Europeans who recently immigrated to places like Argentina, Chile, Cuba, few from Mexico[edit]

    • First of all Brazil is not part of Hispania. Ibero-America would include Brazil. See Hispanic America.

Second of all, Spanish people and people who are European who happen to live in Latin or Central America are NOT Hispanic. Knowing many people who are "Mexican", but who's whole families recently came from Spain or other European countries, they are considered white, not hispanic. The term Latin can refer to people of Spain, Italy, France, etc. People who are mestizo can also be called Latin, but the term "Latino" is used more; which is also used interchangeably with "Hispanic" to describe race. "Latino" and "Hispanic" are used to describe people of mixed ethnicity - Spanish (European) mixed with Native or Native and African. "Hispanic" also refers to the region, culture and language of Spanish-speaking countries, but when referring to race, hispanic is not used. A person from Spain is a Spaniard and a white European. There were many white cubans and chileans on the list who's family came from Spain. I removed them. I left those on the list who were native Cubans, who's grandparents did not come from Spain directly. So a Chilean who's family was all European was deleted. I personally have a friend born and raised in Chile, whose parents came from Spain (mother is Galician and from a region where Celts settled). She's pretty much Gaelic. So her parents are Spanish, and she's not Hispanic.

Another example is Alexis Bledel, a white European, and not Mestizo, and therefore NOT Hispanic either. Her mother's nationality is Mexican, but her background is French and German (maiden name Dozier) . The actress who's father is white Argentinian (with a full Danish background) and a mother who is French and German, obviously isn't Hispanic. I left her under the Mexican American since her mother was raised in Mexico, and that category is enough to establish that cultural background.

I have no idea why so many Brazilians were added to this list. White Brazilians or mixed. They speak Portuguese, not Spanish. So . . . all Brazilian entries were deleted, and anyone who is Spanish Cuban without native mixture (according to their background), Argentinian (non-native, white), Spanish, or other recent Europeans who immigrated to South America were deleted. I thought to delete Guillermo del Toro, since he seems to be white from Guadalajara, but since I can't verify his background as having a family who is just Spanish, I left him on the list. My friend's father is from Guadalajara and came from Spain - but that is verifiable. --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 09:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Once again, do NOT add Spanish people to this list. Spaniards are not Hispanic in terms of race. The term used is Spaniard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic_America DOES NOT REFER TO PEOPLE FROM SPAIN. I will be forced to report those who keep adding back Spaniards to the Hispanic American list if this continues.--CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 00:26, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

This includes people in the U.S to be grouped together as Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic America and Spain), see Hispanic & Hispania. According to the Hispanic pew center 70% of immigrants from spain identified as Hispanic, who's Hispanic?.Bluesky26 (talk) 21:07, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be many sources supporting this. When people say Latino/Hispanic in the U.S., they are generally referring to those from Central and South America and Mexico, and mainly people who are mestizo. While I see how it has to do with culture and language, the category in terms of ethnicity and race do not refer to people from Spain. Every Spanish person I know has said they were Spanish, not Hispanic. I know there is a category White - Hispanic, which can probably also refer to those who are from Spain, Argentina, Chile, etc., who emigrated from Spain and did not mix in with the population, but there has always been a distinct difference between those from Latin America and those from Spain. The Spanish are European. I also see a difference between latin and latino. Usually, latin refers to Italians, French, Spaniards, etc. and latino is used by Latin Americans. However, maybe things have changed in recent years. Since there is also a white - hispanic category, maybe hispanic is being used for the Spanish as well. I just haven't seen too much of that. CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 01:16, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The flags[edit]

I think it would be best to replace the flags with the names of Hispanic or Latino subgroup(s). For example, instead of:
"* [country flag] Juan Z.X. Smithez, symbologist", let's have:
"* Juan Z.X. Smithez, symbologist; Fooian American".
The flags may be unfair to [native-born] US citizens. When looking at a name, the flag next to it can give the impression that the person is an immigrant from the country represented by the flag, which most H/L Americans are not. SamEV (talk) 00:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC); 05:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Hispanic and Latino Americans in the United States.[edit]

This list is only for the Hispanic of United States and not Hispanic Americans in general. I say this because in the list appear some Hispanic Americans that never lived in the United States, as is the case of Pablo Neruda. I know that the term "Hispanic-American" in the United States is unclear, yet as a Hispanic-American can be a Hispanics living in the U.S. or a Hispanic who lives in Latin America, but this list should only refer to Hispanics United States.

--Isinbill (talk) 21:05, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

This list is about the Hispanics and Latinos of the Unites States. For now, at least, it includes residents of the United States, not just citizens. It is certainly *not* about the people of Hispanic America. And again, no flags, please.
I presume you added Juanes because he lives in the US. I have no idea where he lives. SamEV (talk) 22:19, 3 May 2010 (UTC); 22:21, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Juanes said in an interview that he and his family live in Miami. Furthermore, I state only that the list have Hispanics never lived in the United States. I did not say in it should only have Hispanics who have American citizens. Actually, is not the same person living in the United States, even without citizenship, a person who has never lived there. In my opinion, only the first should appear in the list.

--Isinbill (talk) 23:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Why don't you remove the people that you know have never lived in the US? That would be helpful. SamEV (talk) 00:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

uncited claims of ethnicity[edit]

I have moved from the article all its uncited genetic and racial claims, feel free to add a WP:RS and replace. Thanks. John lilburne (talk) 20:46, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

What "genetic and racial claims"? Do you know what "Hispanic or Latino origin" means?
And rather than gutting the article, how about proposing and participating in a citation drive to last a reasonable period of time? That would have been far more helpful. SamEV (talk) 17:54, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Unsourced assertions of ethnicity are a violation of WP:BLP policy, and as such can be deleted. Instead, John lilburne has moved the list to this talk page, where it should remain until proper sourcing is found. If you want a 'citation drive', I suggest you do this in the correct manner, which will be to first find WP:RS, and then move the relevant entries back. Frankly, though it seems to me that this list is so ridiculously long, and the criteria for inclusion so vague, that it can serve no useful purpose. Meanwhile, I'll revert the list to here, and ask you to conform with policy regarding sourcing. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Has there been any major change to WP:BLP in the last several months?
Content that appears likely to be false should definitely be sourced. And I most definitely want to see this list become fully sourced. But dumping the page's contents here is a recipe for failure, because unlike an improvement drive, the sense of urgecy will be lacking. I know, because I've tried it elsewhere. The list ended up in the talk page's archive.
So I deplore the actions of any user who takes it upon him/herself to 'clean up' this article in a heavy-handed, drive-by cop fashion; and their lack of commitment to an improvement drive would give me no confidence in their good intentions towards this subject. SamEV (talk) 21:01, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Whether you 'deplore' anyone's actions is beside the point. The list is almost entirely unsourced, and an unsourced assertion of ethnicity is controversial by definition, I'd say, particularly when the 'ethnicity' in question is actually nothing of the sort, but is instead an arbitrary category constructed by the compilers of the list. It should not be in article space. Strictly speaking, it shouldn't be in talk space either, since WP:BLP applies here too. And I totally fail to see how moving the list here makes it appear 'less urgent'. It is at least 5 years old, how much longer should this policy violation remain uncorrected? Since I don't wish to engage in an edit war, can I ask what you propose to do to make the article comply with policy? AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Further to this, please note that this article came up for discussion here: Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#List_of_Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans. You may wish to comment there. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps it isn't so beside the point if it affects how we work, or not, to improve this list.
I propose that we set a deadline of between 2 weeks and the rest of the month to add references. What do you think? SamEV (talk) 21:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
You've not really explained why the list needs to be put back into the article while it is corrected. In any case, since it wasn't me that made the initial move, I can't really agree with any change that would leave the article unsourced and visible. Perhaps the best thing would be to continue to discuss this in the BLP/N thread I have linked above. Note that there seems to be agreement that this unsourced list of ethnicities problem is widespread, and there was nothing in particular that singled this list out at the time it was raised (though as I've said, personally I think it is arbitrary, and also likely to become ridiculously large). AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
There's no gross violation of BLP here: Calling someone Hispanic or Latino is not exactly an insult.
And there is no deadline—unless we set one.
The thing is, you already 'sound' evasive about making any commitment to help out. SamEV (talk) 02:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Having the unsourced entries listed on the talk page allows them to be reinstated to the article as and when sources are found. That's consistent with the policy that there is no deadline, and with the consensus on the BLP noticeboard. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
"The thing is, you already 'sound' evasive about making any commitment to help out". I'm not being evasive at all. I never suggested I was going to help. My commitment is to the principles of Wikipedia, not to the wishes of those who compile lists which contravene policy. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Nice ad hoc inversion of the spirit of WP:NORUSH, Larry.
Well, of course you don't have to help, Andy. You don't have to do anything at all at WP. That includes gutting a page for the mere satisfaction of enforcing Wikirules.
I'll source as much of the list as I can, for the rest of this month, by myself. (FYI, it's likely that I've added not a single name to this list, ever.) In the meantime, please cease your reverting. SamEV (talk) 22:56, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
WP:NORUSH is an essay which itself contains various conflicting interpretations. I only mentioned it because you did. My point was that by having the list here on the talk page, the entries can easily be restored as and when sources are found. I don't think anyone is acting simply out of satisfaction at enforcing rules, but rather because they feel that rules such as WP:V and WP:BLP exist for good reason. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:55, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Explain why you think the list cannot be sourced while it is on the talk page, and then we will be able to discuss this. Meanwhile, stop reverting the article to a state which you admit yourself if in breach of rules. Or discuss this elsewhere if you like: at the BLP/N thread or any other appropriate place. Meanwhile, the policy-breaching article will be reverted. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Explain it to you again? I'm no masochist.
You "win". The list will disappear, as you wanted. Good day. SamEV (talk) 23:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I expressed my willingness to fix the list, even by myself, if the list were not removed to the talk page. (We're all entitled to our preferences in how we do things; you have yours. After all, no one's compelling you to enforce certain rules and not others.) Instead you chose the path that ensures the effective destruction of the page, because I won't fix it, and I doubt anyone else will step up to do it. You've stated your disinterest in the page's future. IOW, the effect of your zealous rule enforcement will be to prevent the improvement of a page. You know it, but you continue removing the list. In the face of that, I'm supposed to believe that your intentions are good? SamEV (talk) 00:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
And once again, you refuse to give a straight answer to a simple question: why cannot it be fixed on the talk page? Whether you chose to fix it or not is your choice, not mine. I note too that you have chosen not to do as I suggested, and discuss this elsewhere if you consider what has been done as wrong. I can only understand this as an acceptance that the removal of unsourced data was entirely in line with policy. If you continue to revert, without giving adequate grounds, I may consider raising your actions elsewhere. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:38, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Jeez... When did I dispute that the lack of sources is a problem? It isn't that you're not acting within policy; the problem is how you're acting within policy: inflexibly, which goes against the spirit of Wikipedia. Though it's possible that it does go against policy (WP:IAR?). And did I not say that my stance is a matter of personal preference? You prefer to be inflexible, I choose flexibility. SamEV (talk) 02:09, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

What exactly is flexible about "do it my way because I want it done that way, though I won't say why"? AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
My willingness to accept that the page needs to come into compliance soon, and to abide by a reasonable deadline, after which any unsourced content remaining should be deleted.
Now it's your turn... SamEV (talk) 03:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
This isn't a chess game. We aren't playing by turns. I can now only take your refusal to answer my repeated question as a refusal to conform with the behaviour expected of Wikipedia editors, and will act accordingly. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
BLP violations should be removed immediately, not moved back onto the page and worked on whenever an editor gets time. SamEV, if you're only willing to work on the BLP violations in article space, then you might as well go ahead and take this article off your watch list. Dayewalker (talk) 04:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Andy, I said "your turn" as in "your turn to show that you can be flexible if the result is a good". I wasn't talking chess.
But now you go and start a thread at ANI. Sorry, but I thought you could tell that I moved on. I hope you do the same.
Daywalker, yes, I was "willing to work on the BLP violations in article space", so I don't understand your comment. SamEV (talk) 04:11, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I have now raised this issue at AN/I: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#A_dispute_at_List_of_Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:12, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
SamEV, that was my point. If you're only willing to work on this article if the BLP violations are in article space while you do, that's not going to work. Dayewalker (talk) 17:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
  • There is nothing in BLP about ethnic origin being a BLP violation. Race, religion, other things, but not ethnic. This has been debated and rejected several times. Hmains (talk) 18:49, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
And your point is? If unsourced material is used in BLP's (or any other article come to that, if it is at all contentious), it shouldn't be there, regardless of what it is about. Also, 'ethnic origins' is a misonomer at the best of times, and doubly so in relation to 'Hispanic and Latino Americans'. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:14, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
It is not good enough to say that ethnicity is referenced in the articles. Each such statement of fact requires a reference. You have just inserted several 100 names back into the list which ones did you check before hand and where are the references? John lilburne (talk) 19:19, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
My point is you cannot play the BLP card in regards to ethnic anything. And if 'Hispanic and Latino Americans' is not ethnic, then maybe it is national origins--for which the BLP card also cannot be played. There is nothing contentious about these facts, other than in the minds of a few editors. There is also no requirement anywhere in WP that every statement of fact needs an immediate citation when the citation can be readily find by looking at the linked article. We do not pull into the linked-from article links found in the link-to article. The rules of WP assert that facts need to be capable of being verified, not that every line in WP has a verifying citation. I am wrong, show me the exact guideline rules, not your sloganeering assertions. Your edits are simply wrong and disruptive of WP. Hmains (talk) 00:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
This has been discussed in the appropriate places, and the consensus is clear: see here [1] and here [2]. There is a current thread on the issue at BLP/N here [3]. If you want to debate this, I suggest you do it there, but please read the linked threads (and this one [4], on a similar subject) first. And no, the linked article isn't a citation, and neither can it be used as an indirect link to one - Wikipedia isn't a WP:RS for itself, obviously. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:36, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
What I see here is mostly you and lilburne self-congratulating each other with your statements. These are not discussions and have no value. I asked for guideline locations not your personal comments and I am still waiting. And I agree a linked article is not a citation and I did not say that. What I said is you you can go to the linked article and find the citation. All of which is perfectly allowed under the 'verifiable rule'--capable of being verified. Hmains (talk) 15:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
No, if you claim there are 'citations' in the linked articles that state the ethnicity of the persons concerned, then go to the articles, find them, and add the person concerned, with the link, to the list. And before you go any further, I suggest that you actually try doing that - I did this with four picked at random: two were unsourced, one was questionable (is someone of 'Puerto Rican, French, Dutch and Scottish ancestry' a Latin American?), and one was almost certainly just plain wrong. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:20, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
I don't expect the bio articles here are any better or any worse than the rest of the bio and non-bio articles in WP: a mixture of fact and fancy. As with all articles in WP, however, there is no requirement that each fact have a reference citation: that is only needed for featured articles and for certain BLP facts--and ethnic and national origin are not among BLP fact concerns that require such citation. In general, WP, for better or for worse, trusts that the articles writers have been honest in taking information from the article references and putting it into article content. Citations are not required and missing citations are not a valid criteria for removing content--they are only a criteria for adding 'citation needed' templates and moving on. What you are personally requiring for this list is not required elsewhere in WP. Which is why I am still waiting for you to show me the specific WP guidelines to support the mass deletions that you are performing. And not your personal consolidation and extrapolation of such guidelines--the specific statements in guidelines that say 'delete this' if no reference citations are present. And I see, so far, that you have been unwilling or unable to do this so I am beginning to suspect there are none. Hmains (talk) 23:26, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
from WP:CATEGRS: "...inclusion must be based on reliable sources". I note that you have now attempted to reinsert the entire list, even after I pointed out that it was likely to be problematic even if one accepted links to articles as 'sourcing' (which it isn't). I suggest that you discuss this at BLP/N, rather than engaging in petty squabbles here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:59, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

The list[edit]

Arts[edit]

Dance[edit]

Film, stage, and television[edit]

Music[edit]

See Latin music in the United States

Alphabetized by surname[edit]
Groups[edit]

Reality show stars[edit]

Visual arts[edit]

Business[edit]

Winthrop Shaw Pittman]] LLP; Cuban American

Civil activists[edit]

Education[edit]

Fashion[edit]

Government and politics[edit]

Journalism[edit]

Literature[edit]

See also:

Religion[edit]

Sciences[edit]

Sports[edit]

Baseball[edit]
Basketball[edit]
Boxing[edit]
American Football[edit]
Golf[edit]
Martial artists[edit]
Football[edit]
Wrestlers[edit]
Other sports[edit]

Why is the web page only sports?[edit]

It seems that somehow the page that is visible only lists the sports figures. Obviously, a complete list of Hispanic and Latino American (impliedly the prominent ones) should include academics, artists, politicians, etc. The implication is that Hispanics are famous only for their roles in sports. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.47.164.2 (talk) 23:29, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

The reason is quite simple. Contrary to well-established policy, the list was almost entirely devoid of sources, as the discussion above noted. It seems that there are those who wish the list to exist, but won't however do the necessary work to ensure that those on the list should be on it. Given the potential size of the list, this is perhaps not surprising.. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:18, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Huh? None of those actors could be verified as Hispanic or Latino? Now, there are no actors listed, which is probably quite a misinformation. 212.50.203.198 (talk) 17:32, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of Hispanic and Latino Americans. 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}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:25, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of Hispanic and Latino Americans. 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.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:29, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Hispanic and Latino Americans. 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.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:17, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Hispanic and Latino Americans. 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.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:35, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference BR was invoked but never defined (see the help page).