User talk:Merchancano

Latin America

Hello Merchancano, and welcome to Wikipedia! When making a large change like this one, that removes a paragraph of the article, it helps to offer your rationale on the talk page, at Talk:Latin America. Also when you say 'Data has been adjusted to main reference' what reference are you speaking of? Articles like this one are often the subject of national or ethnic disputes, and it is a good idea to move carefully. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 05:15, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Interandean Valles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cauca Valley. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

August 2021

Hello, I'm NoonIcarus. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Lima Group, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! NoonIcarus (talk) 10:19, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I'm NoonIcarus. An edit that you recently made to Lima Group seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! NoonIcarus (talk) 10:20, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ethnic groups in Latin America, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Middle America.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Afro-Colombians

Please stop editing the official figure for Afro people in Colombia. There are several genetic studies (if census figures don't work for you) and there's no way over 25% of Colombians are black. I'd suggest you visit Bogota, the country's largest city and see it for yourself. 25% is way too much. Colombia is mostly a mestizo country leaning towards euro-mestizo. Most Colombians live up in the mountains where black admixture was little to non-existent.

Whichever way it may be, every other country on Wikipedia uses the figure provided by their census. It shouldn't be any different for Colombia.

Those estimates and surveys you linked don't compare to the census which is more reliable and thorough.

Hi, I included many sources to support the fact Afro Colombians are around 25% of the country popultion. That figure includes people with full (Blacks) and partial Sub Saharan ancestry (Pardos, Mulattoes and Zambos). Most Afro Colombians are concentrated un coastal regions and river valleys (Magdalena, Cauca, Patia), not in highland cities Bogotá or Pasto. So I think you need to rethink your estimación.

The figure already includes zambos, mulattoes, raizales, palenqueros and afro-descendants. They mostly inhabit the Pacific Region, predominantly black people that is (people with 50% or more Subsaharan-African ancestry). The people with the same degree of Sub-Saharan ancestry in the Caribbean Region and urban areas is much lower and is concentrated around certain pockets. Just for your information, Colombia's Andean Region makes up around 70% of the country's total population. Saying that 25% of the country's population is fully or partially (to what degree?) African is the same as saying all people from the Caribbean Coast are black, which couldn't be further from the truth.

You are adding outdated sources with estimates and surveys but no real data to back up such claims. Even genetic studies indicate the opposite of what you're trying to impose here. Colombians are only 10-11% SSA (out of 100%) on average, that should tell you something. Do these surveys and estimates that you are posting cover the whole population like the census does? NO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougwash (talk • contribs) 23:00, 21 March 2022 (UTC)</s÷pan>

Le contesto en castellano:

Su opinión personal déjela para un foro. Aquí se deben discutir las cosas usando fuentes, y yo le he mostrado más de media docena de fuentes apoyando ese punto y usted insiste en que como no se acomodan a los que usted cree, no tienen validez.

Por lo demás no debería contestar su comentario, pero voy a hacerle algunas correcciones para que deje atrás algo de su ignorancia.

1. La población afrodescendiente incluye no solo los negros, sino aquellas personas con una notable ascendencia subsahariana. Así tenemos a los pardos (mezcla de subsahariano, amerindio y caucásico), los mulatos (mezcla de subsahariano y caucásico) y los zambos (mezcla de subsahariano y amerindio). Nadie dice que la cuarta parte de la población colombiana sea negra, pero si les suma los pardos, los mulatos y los zambos, tendrá un porcentaje bastante alto. Siendo costeño debería reconocer que en su región esos genotipos y fenotipos son bastante comunes, sino mayoritarios.

2. La población afrodescendiente no está ausente en la región andina. En el primer estudio que le dejé en la página de discusión del artículo en español, se señala que alrededor de un tercio de la población del sur del Valle del Cauca y el norte del Cauca es afrodescendiente. En el valle del Patía esa proporción es aún más alta, mientras que en el Valle del Magdalena aún es posible encontrar una gran cantidad de descendientes de esclavos que entraron por el río (ver este artículo sobre la preservación de la herencia afro en Honda-Tolima: http://convergenciacnoa.org/el-color-de-piel-no-blanquea-la-historia-de-un-pais/ )

3. Pero no solo en los valles interandinos es posible encontrar población afrodescendiente, el mismo estudio señala que cerca del 8% de la población bogotana pertenece a ese grupo. Y no es algo descabellado, considerando la gran migración desde la región caribeña. Lo mismo aplica para Medellín y la migración desde el Chocó y las regiones bajas de Antioquia.Por lo tanto no puede decir que entre el 70% de la población andina que tiene Colombia no haya al menos un 10% de afrodescendientes.

4. Los estudios genéticos son sobre mezcla racial, no sobre composición étnica. Usted menciona un estudio dónde las muestras colombianas tiene 10% de ascendencia subsahariana, aunque hay otros dónde esa cifra supera el 20% como este: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087202

De todos modos, si un estudio dice que la mezcla promedio es 10% subsahariana, significa que el 50% de la población tiene más de 10% y el 50% tiene menos que esa cifra. De ninguna manera significa que solo el 10% de la población sea afrodescendiente.

5. Siendo usted costeño, seguramente le cuesta discernir el aporte africano de las personas, pero teniendo en cuenta todo lo anterior es totalmente probable que hasta una cuarta parte de la población colombiana lleve una considerable cantidad de sangre negra en sus venas, y por tanto se pueda considerar afrodescendiente. No digo que todos los costeños sean mulatos o pardos, pero si la mitad de ustedes lo es, y a eso se suman los tres cuartos de la población del Pacífico que es negra o mulata, y un décimo de la población del interior de Colombia, estaríamos llegando muy cerca de ese 25% que estiman todas esas fuentes.

Entonces sugiero hacerse un favor y hacerle un favor a la verdad y dejar a un lado las ediciones arbitrarias. Muchas gracias.

Edit warring

Hi Merchancano, I'm leaving this brief note to inform you that I am heading over to the Edit Warring page to report you for repeatedly adding unreliable and outdated sources.

Hi, there are not "outdated" sources, because there aren't any demographical change in Colombia that modified ethnic composition the in past 20 years. If You don't believe (orif don't like) Afro Colombians are over 20% of population, it's your problem but you should not delete legitimate sources.

July 2022

Hi Merchancano! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of Afro-Colombians several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree at Talk:Afro-Colombians, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 19:07, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Afro-Colombians) for a period of 48 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  331dot (talk) 20:42, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

You need to discuss your dispute on the article talk page. If necessary, use dispute resolution procedures. Edit warring is unacceptable. 331dot (talk) 20:43, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

July 2022

Hi Merchancano! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of White Colombians several times. You have been reported for vandalism on this page, possibly a blocking process will be initiated to your account, remember that all editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. Please refrain from further editing the page.Jhoan Batipse 01:03, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

I added my observations in Talk page. Another users don't answer this observations, and they are editing arbitrarily and threatening with block my account. Merchancano (talk) 01:01, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

Your sources are from 2005 and are not reflected on any genetic study done on the country. 2005 is almost two decades ago. Since then, many afro colombians have fled the country to ecuador and chile. im not colombian but I lived and studied the country for some time. unfortunately the zones where afro colombians live are not the most habitable. Are you colombian? you should know that 80% of the country lives in the andean region, where the only major city with a noticable afro colombian population is cali. Most people in colombia are notibley whiter than chileans for example who have far more indigenous ancestry on average, yet chile is listed as 50% white or above while you claim colombia is only 20% white. Meanwhile most if not all, genetic studies show colombia has more european ancestry than chile Jacob Barus678 (talk) 02:24, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm Colombian, and your stament is false. Afro Colombians didn't migrate massively to Ecuador or Chile, and there are any source claiming that. The major demographic change in Colombia in last years is the arrive of near two millions of Venezuelans immigrants (4% of country population), and many of them are Afro descendants (mostly mulattoes and zambos).

So, sources from 2005 and more recent years (Schwarzman 2008, CIA 2014, Latinobarometro 2016) reflect faithfully the ethnic composition of the country. There are any external source claiming half of Colombian population being White or Afro Colombians being less than 10%.

It's true most Colombians living in Andean Region (around 70%), where most people is mestizo (mixed White-Indigenous), but in Interandean valleys the African admixture is remarkable, for example in Magdelena Valley (e.g. Honda, Barrancabermeja), Cauca Valley (e. g. Cali -third largest city in the country-, Santander de Quilichao) and Patia Valley (e.g. El Bordo). Moreover, many Afro Colombians migrate to Andean cities like Bogota and Medellin in the last decades, so it's completely wrong to say African admixture is absent in Andean Region.

In the other hand, Pacific Region is mostly Afro Colombian, and in Caribbean Region most people are pardos, mulattoes and zambos (similar to Venezuelan coast), so considering those regions are home of a quarter of population, it's not hard to understand because up to 20% of Colombian population could be Afro descendant (pardos, mulattoes, zambos and blacks).

Genetic admixture is not useful in order to determine the ethnic composition of a country. For example Candaela Project (2014) shows 19% of Colombians self identified as White, but they have an avg. of 35% of non-White ancestry (compared with 5% of non-White ancestry in White Americans), so most of them are light skinned mestizos pretending to be Whites. You need to consider Colombian didn´t have any considerable European migration in last centuries, so population is very admixed and it´s hard to find pure White populations like, for example, German immigrants in Chile. Additionally, genetic research shows an avg. Amerindian ancestry of 30% for Colombians, and you cannot say 30% of Colombians are Indigenous.

Caucasoid admixture in Colombia ranges from 45% to 62% (you need to consider all genetic research, not just those where White admixture is high), so the average figure is even lower than Chile (~53%) and this is consistent with sources claiming 20% to 30% of Colombian population is White (you can find sources where 30% of Chilean population is White).

Colombians are mostly mestizos (around 55%), with many light skinned mestizos living in highland cities like Bogota, Medellin or Bucaramanga. Whites must be aroun 20% (living in main cities and in certain regions like Oriente Antioqueño) and Afro Colombians another 20% (this figure includes pardos, mulattoes and zambos living mostly in Caribbean Region, Pacific Region and Interandean valleys), and 5% are indigenous populations (living mostly in Southwest and Amazonas rainforest). Merchancano (talk) 04:36, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

You say you don't believe admixture studies are relevant to the white colombian page, then you continue add studies yourself, which make no sense. Your first source that lists white colombians as 19% "Admixture in Latin America: Geographic Structure, Phenotypic Diversity and Self-Perception of Ancestry Based on 7,342 Individuals"pdf.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4177621/. lists colombian european ancestry at 60%. You somehow come up with the figure of 19% which makes no sense.

your second source Geografía humana de Colombia., cites the CIA world factbook and colombian census from 2005 as a source to claim 20% of colombia white and that 20% mulatto, 14% black, 4% zambo. If you trust those sources so much why not utilize the most updated versions that they offer??? As of 2022, the CIA world factbook and the colombian census state the colombian population is Mestizo and White 87.6%, Afro-Colombian (includes Mulatto, Raizal, and Palenquero) 6.8%, Amerindian 4.3%, unspecified 1.4%. It seems that you are just going out of your way to present the racial makeup of colombia the way you want it to be.

Your third source which list the popualtion at 26% and just a snapshot of a page from a study done by Latinobarómetro 2016.ttps://www.slideshare.net/dragonite20/informe-latinobarmetro-2016. No infromation is provided on how are when this conclusion that 26% of colombia is white other than a question stated at the top of the diagram , saying "queraza considera que pertence usted?" This makes it clear that this is just a survey, not an actual study. Self-identification is the least reliable form of determining race. Anyone can say anything.

Your third source by Simon Schwartzman. "Étnia, condiciones de vida y discriminación" (PDF). pdf. Retrieved 2 March 2022.that lists the white opulation at 37% is very much reliable and relevant. Which is why it has been kept. ProEra30047 (talk) 06:02, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

(1) Genetic research shows average admixture not ethnic composition. 60% of White admixture means Colombians are Mestizos with and average 60% of European/Middle Eastern admixture, not that 60% of population is White.

(2) There are just one study where genetic admixture of White Colombians is considered: Candela Project (2014). In that research, 19,3% of Colombians self identified as Whites, showing an average of 65% of White admixture (so demostrating they are mostly mestizos and there are even few 'pure' Whites in Colombia.

(3) Traditional estimations about White Colombians are around 20% since at least 1965. This figure is used by The CIA World Factbook until at least 2014. Current estimations comes from 2018 Census, where Mestizos and Whites are not counted separately.

(4) Latinobarometro is a survey where people from many Latín American countries self identified with ethnic categories previously defined. In the last survey, 26% of Colombians self identified as Whites.

(1) Genetic studies shows average admixture, not ethnic composition. 60% of White admixture means that average person in Colombia is mestizo with 60% of European or Middle Eastern genes, not 60% of population is White.

(2) Candela Project research (2014) is mentioned because it is the only study where Genetic admixture of White Colombians is considered. In that research, 19,3% of Colombians self identified as Whites, and they show an average of 65% of White admixture (so being mostly mestizos and demostrating 'pure' Whites are even less numerous).

(3) Traditional estimations about White Colombians put their numbers around 20%. Current data in CIA World Factbook come from 2018 Census, where White and Mestizos are not counted as separarte categories.

(4) Schwartzm research is based in Federal Research Division study which uses 2005 Census data to estimate 49% Mestizo and 37% White population for 86% of non ethnic population. This source is even older than CIA World Factbook data.

(5) So we have four legitimate sources about number of White Colombians:

Genetic research self identification (2014): 19,3%

Traditional estimation (2014): 20%

Self identification survey (2016): 26%

Estimation based in 2005 Census (2005): 37% Merchancano (talk) 19:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring, as you did at White Colombians. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Ad Orientem (talk) 01:53, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Colombians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Embera.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

CS1 error on Ethnic groups of Argentina

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ethnic groups of Argentina, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "missing periodical" error. References show this error when the name of the magazine or journal is not given. Please edit the article to add the name of the magazine/journal to the reference, or use a different citation template. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 23:23, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Gene pool table (Nicaragua data)

I see that you have problems to asimilate the high percent of european dna in Nicaraguan genes (im not nicaraguan by the way), either prejudices or the hostility between Nicaragua and Colombia. These fact doesnt mean that Nicaraguans are most beauty than Colombians, because the Colombian european dna is more diversity in nationalities combined with arabic dna influence. But is anti-historical put the 47% as the official, the recent Nicaragua territory was the least populated at 1500 A.C [1] [2], the Central and Pacific conquered by Spain haved the second most important colonial city in Central America and the Atlantic was conquered by United Kingdome during two centuries and half. If you consider the 47% figure of Nicaragua reported by a Costa Rican University, this reported 46% in the Costa Rican genes with smililar number of individuals analyzed.

P.S. I don't have intentions to continue a war editions between both because I don't want entering into a lawsuit with administrators involving you and me, but I am writing this message because I hate the prejudices that exist towards 5 of the 7 Central American countries. I have no interest in receiving your answer, if you want, delete the conversation. --Vers2333 (talk) 22:28, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm not a Colombian nationalist, so that is not the problem.

The problem is that a study where Nicaraguans are 70% European is not reliable, when most researchs about the issue shows European admixture in your country is around 50%.

Otherwise, I think genetic admixture in Colombia and Nicaragua is very similar with both countries being less European than Costa Rica.Merchancano (talk) 04:16, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Possible vandalism

This user seems to be deleting facts off of many Wikipedia articles for no reason. I have reverted those edits but this user continues to delete facts over the basis that “they are poorly spelled” which is not a reason to delete it and the user can instead fix the spelling. Wikipedia is used to spread truth, not revert facts that you don’t like for a poor reason. Zaquezipe (talk) 22:34, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 12

An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited Stateless nation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page English.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:47, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 20

An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited List of official languages by country and territory, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Quechua and Aymara.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:49, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

CS1 error on Afro–Latin Americans

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Afro–Latin Americans, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 21:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Changing information

Greetings, throughout the Spanish and English pages I have noticed that you've been changing information to one that suits your own views even if they aren't supported by the cite without speaking in any talk page but instead choosing to engage in edit warring. i've seen this specifically about the genetic composition of Colombians in which you choose not to talk in the talk page about this, you also seem to want to use more outdated information that makes colombians seem more european than what is true, such as changing the genetic composition to be 48% and 47% european respectively, removing larger estimates for indigenous people in colombia. If you keep up with these edits without speaking in the talk page or explain your edits then you will be reported. Lets reach a consensus rather than participating in constant edit warring. Zaquezipe (talk) 12:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Voy a responderte en español.

He asumido la labor de corregir ciertos números, porque estás incluyendo cifras que no aparecen en la fuente original. Por ejemplo,los promedios que has hecho sobre el estudio de Rojas son especulativos. Si quieres incluir otra columna con más información sobre ese estudio, eres libre de hacerlo, pero primero hay que reflejar los resultados originales. Además, existen otros estudios genéticos, incluso más amplios, que se están ignorando en tus ediciones. Sería bueno incluir otros puntos de vista, porque en general, todos los estudios muestran que entre los colombianos la mezcla caucásica supera a la mezcla indígena o africana (y eso es cierto incluso para el estudio de Rojas).

En ese mismo sentido, no es conveniente que borres fuentes legítimas que contienen información importante. Por ejemplo, aquellas que muestran un cierto porcentaje de blancos o indígenas entre la población colombiana. Hace tiempo se tuvo un debate sobre la proporción de afrocolombianos, y se concluyó que se deben mantener todas las fuentes, las del gobierno y las externas. Por lo tanto, creo que esas directivas básicas deben conservarse en esas páginas que, tanto en inglés como en español, llevo editando hace varios años. Un saludo.

al Merchancano (talk) 03:08, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Entiendo sus puntos, sin embargo, no se indica en ninguna parte del estudio de Rojas el al que el 47 % de ADN sea europeo, el 42 % es amerindio y el 11 % es africano. De hecho, los promedios de ese estudio y, en particular, el gráfico muestra un componente amerindio generalmente más alto que el europeo para la mayor parte del primer gráfico. Y en realidad, el primer promedio para ese gráfico del ADN "estimado" muestra que en realidad es alrededor del 45% nativo, 41% europeo y 14% africano que se tomó de combinar el promedio de esa sección, incluso lo reconoció teniendo en cuenta el hecho de que no lo has cambiado hasta ahora, preferiría que usáramos esto en lugar del 48/42%, 47/42% y 11% por los que seguimos editando. Y para la estimación colombiana nativa, no entiendo por qué está eliminando las estimaciones de números reales, estaba perfectamente bien y estaba respaldado por la información, estoy tratando de limitar y eliminar los estudios más antiguos/obsoletos para los más nuevos y eso debería hacerse para toda la información relacionada con las etnias colombianas debido al hecho de que simplemente hay información más nueva y confiable para demostrarlo. Propongo que para la sección de los pueblos indígenas de Colombia mantengamos mi edición original, pero debajo de la parte de estimación agregamos los otros porcentajes numéricos para la estimación de manera se puede llegar a un consenso. Estoy dispuesto a llegar a un consenso, pero si vas a eliminar deliberadamente todas mis ediciones y restaurar las tuyas, entonces no se puede o no se alcanzará nada, así que para la genética de Rojas et al, sugiero que volvamos a mi cambio original, donde establece que el 45% es amerindio, 41% europeo y 14% africano, y para los pueblos indígenas de Colombia mantenemos mi número de 5.000.000 y tales ediciones para que mostremos la información más reciente que involucra el % y el lugar debajo de las otras estimaciones para el % de indígenas colombianos. Me gustará escuchar tus opiniones. Zaquezipe (talk) 03:40, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

En el estudio de Rojas se dice explícitamente lo siguiente:

"On average, urban populations had a similar

Native American and European autosomal ancestry

(47 and 42%, respectively) and relatively low African ancestry (~10%)." (página 5 del estudio)

No es correcto deducir otros porcentajes, cuando esos son los resultados ciertos del estudio.

Respecto al número de indígenas, las estimaciones son variadas. 4,3% es la cifra del censo. Otras fuentes ponen ese número entre 1% y 4%, y solo Latinobarómetro el número ronda el 10%. No existe por lo tanto unanimidad al respecto, hay que mantener todas las fuentes, como se ha hecho con otros grupos étnicos.

ancest~y (10%). Merchancano (talk) 06:06, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Lo vi, estás confundiendo la ascendencia europea (42%) con la ascendencia nativa (47%) en la forma en que lo dice “Urban populations show mostly (1) Native American and (2) European autosomal ancestry

(1. 47 and 2. 42%, respectively)”

También para el número de indígenas, las estimaciones de latinobarometro de 2018 y 2023 son las más recientes, por lo tanto, deberían representar la estimación principal y más actualizada, ya que para las otras ya han sido incluidas, por lo que no hay razón para cambiar nada. Zaquezipe (talk) 06:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Entonces para la página “anexo:composición genética de colombia” recomiendo que cambias el número europeo y amerindio, porque no puedo hacer eso. Zaquezipe (talk) 07:20, 29 April 2024 (UTC)