Talk:Afro–Latin Americans/Archive 1

message: How can there be less blacks in Honduras than in Guatemala? It is a clearly false assertion. IMO the title is made up and needs changing. The black Latinos dop not regard themselves, nor does anyone else in LA regard them as Afros. I would like to change the name, but not sure what to, SqueakBox July 6, 2005 17:31 (UTC)
I have removed the false assertion that the majority of Honduran blacks are Garífuna, and removed the percentages of blacks in CA countries as they are not credible figures. I didn't know this article existed but now that I do I look forward to contributing, SqueakBox July 6, 2005 17:57 (UTC)
::I now have serious doubts about the reliability of any statements within this article, given the sheer number of dubious steatements I have read, and I haven't even finished the article, SqueakBox July 6, 2005 18:29 (UTC)
You removed the pecentages.  Doesn't it make more sense to cite the sources of the percentages instead of removing themn altogether?  There are sources available from government or academic agencies.  They all have their problems - but so does any nations reporting of this statistic.
Cacimar July 14, 2005
The first paragraphs seems to have a lot of irrelevant or unsourced information.
"Many black Latin Americans feel insulted to be called Afro or African."  This applies to most general ethnic or racial labels.  Does each entry in wikipedia carry a similar disclaimer?  Usually this feeling "insult" is attributed to relf-racism when it is applicable. "Afro" is an apparent popular term in current and historical cultures in Latin America by people addressing their blackness or africanness.
: No this is not popular in that sense. Al least in Mexico, people with dark skin would not care to be called negro or mulato, but he would not like to be called african.... Nanahuatzin 01:12, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Subjetive and extremey flexible are the same thing.  In colonial times, the spanish autorities tried to keep all the power in hands of Peninsular spaniards. At first they tried to prevent the mix or races, but it was imposible, so they intead tried to label each posible mix, but soon it became to complex. From all the racial terms invented, lobo, saltapatraz, noteendiendo, tenteenelaire, morico, sambo, etc etc. The only surviving terms are criollo, mulato and mestizo. Eventually, in the colonial society, the social status was determined by skin color, not race. A mestizo or a mulato, living indoors, could have considered a higher lever thatn if they were tanned, living under the sun. Each latin american country developed this in diferent ways. In mexico, people are still sensitive to skin colour.. but they really care little about race, since at least 80% of the population is considered mix and in oficial papers there is no record about race, so no one has a way to know the race of his/her ancestors...  Nanahuatzin 01:12, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

text: As i explained, my wording of this need to be cleaned. I asume ( something that SqueakBox has insisted i should not) that  most of the readers in the english wikipedia would adopt the US-centric point of view that the definition of "black" is the On drop rule. If we adopted that rule Mexico would be "probably" 60% black, since originally there were more black people than white. The criteria under wich each country define black, is different. So far i have not found a reliable source on mexican blacks.  Mexico Negro, reports about 50,000 members. But that is as far as i have found. INEGI, (national institute of geography and statistics) does not record race in any study. It is a touchy subject that i think to be treated with more care than most subjects in the wikipedia. Nanahuatzin 01:12, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits

message: I think we should change the name to something like Black Latin American before removing the NPOV tag, as associating black people with Africa when they don't do it themselves is very POV, SqueakBox 19:17, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
:Black Latin American will imply color of skin and no ethnic origin. Many East Indians are very dark skinned and Australians Aborigines are mostly black. Hispanics are not called Brown-Americans. --Vizcarra 20:54, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with cacimar, whent talking about the culture I have heard and read the term "Afro-Cubano/a", "Afro-Caribeño", but never "Negro/a Cubano/a" or "Negro/a Caribeño/a". --Vizcarra 18:14, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Name change

message: This article was riddled with original research, unencyclopedic material and rascism such as the bizarre section Negro actually referring to the Spanish word for the colour black not an English word for black people, SqueakBox 17:00, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: My edits

message: I've attempted to put a bit of order on this talk page by archiving older issues which seem to have fallen out of interest (based on date), and adding a guidelines section above which may help to orient users who are not familiar with the accepted procedure in using talk pages.
Hopefully other's will find my efforts useful --JAXHERE  | Prevaricate at me 15:02, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just added a talkheader template to this page so the 1st section regarding use of the page is redundant.   Rather than deleting it, I'm thinking of archiving it simply in the interests of keeping the history of this page intact.   Does anyone have any strong thoughts about this? --JAXHERE  | Prevaricate at me 17:17, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archiving and cleanup 

message: Funny how none of those righteous warriors determined to keep this article can be bothered to vandalism patrol it, SqueakBox 15:42, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalsim and afd

message: According to a 2001 census between 60 and 70 percent of Cubans  characterise themselves as Black, while close to 15 percent consider themselves to be mulato..  Many Cubans still locate their origins in specific African ethnic groups or regions, particularly Yoruba and Congo, but also Arará, Carabalí, Mandingo, Fula and others.  In contrast, between 85-95 percent of Cuban-Americans, classify themselves as white.
:The percentage ranges in the preceeding paragraph seem too broad to have come from a precise count, such as a census
--JAXHERE  | Prevaricate at me 15:28, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  cuba section 

message: Comments about Haitian unimportance, and discrimination removed because they are irrelevant to this article.  --JAXHERE  | Prevaricate at me 15:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Haiti section 

message: Note, although most of the "facts" are interesting and relevant, they need to be substianted, or they face elimination due to being considered as opinion.  The points which I have not questioned, I would leave,even though they, too, would benefit from some verification
*Most of the roads, bridges and cathedrals were constructed by Black people. (((During what period)))?
*In the 16th century, Afro-Mexicans made up 71% of Mexico's population. (((Source?)))
*Vicente Guerrero (El Negro Guerrero), Mexico's 2nd President, helped abolish slavery. (((Source, when, what "help"?)))
*Blacks had important roles in Mexico`s military and helped gain its independence from Spain.  (((Source, when, what roles?)))
*Mexico employed more African slaves than any other nation in the western world.  (((Source, when?)))
*Under the dictatorship of Porfirio Diaz, Black people were not allowed to immigrate into Mexico. Source, when?
*Many Black communities bear names related to Africa such as Mozambique, Cerro del Congo (Congo Hill) and El Mulato.
*Guerrero, Oaxaca, Tabasco and Veracruz are where most Afro-Mexicans live today.  (((Source?))) 
*Negro is viewed as derogatory and is no longer used but rather Moreno (Brown) when the subject of Afro-Mexicans is brought up. (((Source?)))
*2002 Black Population: App. 1,000,000 (((Source?)))
--JAXHERE  | Prevaricate at me 15:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: DELETE ALL FACTS THAT ARE NOT SOURCED OR PLACE A DISCLAIMER UNTIL THE SOURCES ARE CLEARED UP. While the information that are claimed is important, having incorrect information is not helpful for anyone doing a high school paper or wanting basic information on Afro-Mexicans. Chriscarlos 02:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mexico section 

message: points needing attention numbers refer to paragraph number in section:
#1 However, an island-wide mitochondrial DNA study conducted by the University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez (((when?))) revealed Puerto Ricans to have 61% Native Amerindian (Taino) ancestry, 27% West/Central (Sub-Saharan) African blood and only 12% European/North African (((is this designation correct?)))blood.
#para 2 Certain critics (((need to be identified))), consider these numbers to be skewed since they are based on self-definition and acute physical observation of census-takers.  
# ok
# It has been noted that the Puerto Ricans that typically identify (((do they identify themselves as such?)))as black, make up the majority of Puerto Ricans immigrating to the U.S
--JAXHERE  | Prevaricate at me 16:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Puerto Rico 

message: points needing attention numbers refer to paragraph number in section:
#1 However, an island-wide mitochondrial DNA study conducted by the University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez (((when?))) revealed Puerto Ricans to have 61% Native Amerindian (Taino) ancestry, 27% West/Central (Sub-Saharan) African blood and only 12% European/North African (((is this designation correct?)))blood.
#para 2 Certain critics (((need to be identified))), consider these numbers to be skewed since they are based on self-definition and acute physical observation of census-takers.  
# ok
# It has been noted that the Puerto Ricans that typically identify (((do they identify themselves as such?)))as black, make up the majority of Puerto Ricans immigrating to the U.S
--JAXHERE  | Prevaricate at me 16:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Puerto Rico 

message: I've added sections for several countries which have not been included.  I hope some people can provide some information (sourced) about the Afro-Latino elements in these countries. --JAXHERE  | Prevaricate at me 15:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New country sections 

message: An unregistered user added some info without a source, but it seems that there was an intent to have one. I sent this message to the IP's talk page, but I don't know if it will ever be seen, so I've copied it here
Do you have a reputable source to add to this change? If so, please use the   tags instead of  and place your reference notes between the beginning and ending of these tags, replacing the  template which I've inserted
If anyone can fix this, please do so.  --JAXHERE  | Prevaricate at me 13:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  dominican republic  

message: I decided to add this so that people who are ADDING their POINTS OF VIEW can explain why there are no references to their obvious POINTS OF VIEW. A person's POINTS OF VIEW are not FACT but can be referenced if there is a BOOK, ARTICLE, or NEWSPAPER ARTICLE which has the same POINT OF VIEW. Chriscarlos 02:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This may work, but I think that many people who edit don't bother to even look at a talk page, and even if they did few would be inclined to explain why they didn't leave a source.  They'd either just add it or leave their edit for someone else to fix.--JAXHERE | Talk 02:53, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why No References?

message: I decided to add this so that people who are just placing information from various sources (some of which may or may not be academic, since it is not referenced, see "Why No References?") can explain why they are not using or perhaps referencing the use of academic sources. I love to see an article or section expand, but I dislike and discourage placing information with no credibility or references. Chriscarlos 02:07, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing should be on any page without reliable sources, Chris. See WP:RS and WP:V. If you have good sources, particuarly for material that is unsourced or you believe is incorrect, you are welcome to work on the page and add them into the article. Good academic sources are desperately required here.--Zleitzen 03:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why No Use or Referencing of Academic or Recognized Sources?