Talk:Andalusians

message: An ethnic group is something quite difficult to determine, but it usually refers to a population whose genetical and cultural heritage has remained intact for a certain period of time. The problem arises when we assess the "period of time" required or what is "cultural" heritage. From the genetic perspective, a person from Andalucía is so identic to individuals elsewhere in Spain that the comparison is ridiculous. As to the "culture", it's clear that the Arab influence was much more felt in the south than in the north of Spain, other kind of influence in Andalucía that doesn't apply to the rest of Spain is unknown. An ethnic group would have been indeed the Morish population; but these were soon expelled after the Reconquista was completed. Let's remember that the Reconquista was accompanied by the "Repoblación", which means that the south was being constantly repopulated by peoples (and their traditions and religion) from the north whose offspring are, with probably a higher proportion of intermarriage with Arabs than in the rest of Spain, ultimately present "Andalusians". That leaves about 500 years of more or less homogenic cultural environment.
Let's not be confused by 19th century ideas of "people","nation","ethnic group", that so much pollute the political landscape in Spain.
It's also remarkable that in the section of Spanish ethnic groups there's no "Galician-Asturians", or "Aragonese" or "Castile-Leonese", or "Canarian". History shows us that they have no less reasons to qualify at the same level as the others. Especially the latter may have a greater claim, though ridiculously small anyway, than any other to be considered under the scope of ethnic groups. However, we only get the typical three: "Catalonia", "Basque" and "Andalusian". Just glance at the papers and you'll know why those three do seem us now worthy of such considerations whereas others equally (un)worthy don't. El que no llora no mama.
I don't agree with this last edit. In my opinion no nation-state is genetically homogenous, but in the case of Spain it has been clearly established that it is far from it and Andalusia, is (to a degree) genetically distinct. (See Spanish people) So are the canary islands, the basque country, catalonia etc... But Genetics do not make an ethnic group. What makes Andalusians a distinct ethnic group is their shared culture and identity which is strong and distinct enough to make them a nation in their own right. If nationalism isnt strong in Andalusia it is because of the historical importance this region has had for the Spanish state (in every sense) , and because Andalusian culture (or a version of it) has come to represent Spanish identity as a whole, especially during the Francoist period. This, despite a psichzofrenic disdain other Spaniards have held towards Andalusians. I would also like to point out that the idea of a repopulation of Andalusia and of the "Novísma Castilla" is a myth. Few Northerners established themselves in the South after the Reconquista and a majority of modern-day Andalusians are the descendants of the original inhabitants of the region.--Guzman ramirez 12:38, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Andalusians an Ethnic Group 

message: I partially agree with the above edit. In any case this issue is 1)complex and 2)very politisced. This article could be greatly improved.--Ismael76 11:58, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewriting this article 

message: User Veritas et Severitas, as a Spaniard, seems to be extremely offended by the inclusion of Morroccans as a related people to the Andalusians, and has erased the whole "related ethnic groups" section. Either we stick to that solution or we examine to what extent they are related... 
===Historically===
===Culturally===
===Ethnically===
===Other and General Identity===
--Burgas00 18:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I seem to have missed all of this thread, as I was pretty much inactive at the time. As the person who originally added Moroccan people as related, I would like the chance to explain myself. At some point in the History of Morocco, up to one third of the population was made up of forced exiled from Andalusia after the Reconquista. Assuming that all of them were just descendant of the same few thousands who came over with Musa and Tarik is just naive and extremely POV. Most of them were born and bread Andalusian of Hispano-Roman stock (to choose a name) indeed. So, in that sense, if it is OK to have an English people page listing Frisians as related people, I sincerely cannot see the problem of doing likewise with the Andalusian people article. In any case, I perfectly happy with the gentlemen's agreement reached between both of you and will be respecting it accordingly. Regards, --Asteriontalk 22:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't confuse Al-Andalus with Andalusia. What we call Andalusia was only a part of Al-Andalus. Most muslims and moriscos who settled in northern Africa came from other spanish regions like Valencia and not mainly from Andalusia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.153.62.81 (talk) 18:43, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Moroccans as related ethnic group?

message: --Burgas00 18:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I seem to have missed all of this thread, as I was pretty much inactive at the time. As the person who originally added Moroccan people as related, I would like the chance to explain myself. At some point in the History of Morocco, up to one third of the population was made up of forced exiled from Andalusia after the Reconquista. Assuming that all of them were just descendant of the same few thousands who came over with Musa and Tarik is just naive and extremely POV. Most of them were born and bread Andalusian of Hispano-Roman stock (to choose a name) indeed. So, in that sense, if it is OK to have an English people page listing Frisians as related people, I sincerely cannot see the problem of doing likewise with the Andalusian people article. In any case, I perfectly happy with the gentlemen's agreement reached between both of you and will be respecting it accordingly. Regards, --Asteriontalk 22:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't confuse Al-Andalus with Andalusia. What we call Andalusia was only a part of Al-Andalus. Most muslims and moriscos who settled in northern Africa came from other spanish regions like Valencia and not mainly from Andalusia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.153.62.81 (talk) 18:43, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Other and General Identity

message: To put Trajan as an andalusian makes nosense, its like saying that Charlemagne was french or Ataturk a greek.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.61.252.86 (talk) 16:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erase Trajan 

message: I just wonder why is Andalusia considered in wikipedia as a nation, and not Murcia, Extremadura or Castille. Who has decided that they can be considered a nation, although andalusians do not consider them as one? Andalusia is a just the southern part of Spain, not a nation.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.60.78.60 (talk) 17:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You can't really believe what you wrote. Ask any andalusians if they consider Andalusia a nation and 95% of them will say clearly no. If you are really an andalusian you will know this perfectly. The law speaks about a "nacionalidad" (not about a nation) which is an ambiguous term brought by politicians who seek more political power and to do so they copied the definition thought for Catalonia, Basque Country and Galicia.
Hi, I am Andalusian and I consider Andalusia as a nation, and please, don`t compare Andalusia with other parts of the Spanish state, Andalusians is the people that more has contributed to the "Spanish idiosyncrasy" throughout history. ¡Viva Andalucía libre!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.229.55.86 (talk) 23:21, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Andalusia a nation? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Andalusians. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061007210407/http://andaluciajunta.es:80/CCVV_FDComu_CAE/0,19057,5263732_17010963,00.html?fpChannel=17010963 to http://andaluciajunta.es/CCVV_FDComu_CAE/0,19057,5263732_17010963,00.html?fpChannel=17010963
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930094945/http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/iea/dtbas/dtb06/dtb2006.pdf to http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/iea/dtbas/dtb06/dtb2006.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.ahimsav.com/149-nov_archivos/page0006.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I think it should be stated somewhere in the box that there are 10s of millions of Andalusian descendants in Latin America. It should not just include Andalusian-born people.Asilah1981 (talk) 14:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of Andalusians abroad

message: This section dominates this article and is highly problematic. No other "peoples" article I follow contains such a list of people born in the geographical area, and considering the size of the area and the size of the population the list is unlikely to be anywhere near complete. So the problems are:
# Too big an undertaking. Completion is likely to be impossible
# Original research
# Not a single source. Every single entry needs to be sourced
# Disproportionate effect on the article
I want to just delete it, but someone has put a lot of effort into that list, and will understandably be upset if I do. Thus this talk section. What to do with this? Do we have consensus to delete from here? Is there somewhere we can preserve the list? Is there another page (perhaps an existing list page) that it makes sense on? Thanks. -- Sirfurboy (talk) 11:32, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: For deletion; I couldn't agree more, the section is a dumpster fire. I just thinned it out a little bit, but I am also fine with deleting the section as a whole, its a very hard to define type of section and most ethnic peoples pages don't contain these sections. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 05:34, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am going to attempt to delete the section. I recognise that a consensus of two is easily challenged, but the list of names is unsourced and problematic. After my deletion I will link the diff so that any editor can quickly find the deleted material, and if they wish, create a list article using the deleted information. -- Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 22:58, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Here is the diff of the deletion, so that any editor may quickly find what I deleted. It would be a good start for a list article somewhere (but it is entirely unsourced so would need a lot of work). -- Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 23:03, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  For deletion; I agree. It'd be one thing if they were sourced, but they're not. Notable people sections get added to over the years, with people just going to the notable people section of an article and adding whoever they want, with no thought given to proving notability or even relevance to the article. Heck, half the time, they don't even insert it in the correct place. LanHikari64 (talk) 23:07, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable People born in the south of the Iberian Peninsula 

message: An editor has today attempted to reintroduce the term "ethnic group" for Andalusians. I previously challenged this because ethnic groups are not well defined, and neither is is clear that Andalusians would see themselves as an ethnic group. I think my term (which was also the settled term on this page for a very long time) is more neutral. Are there arguments for changing it to ethnic group? -- Sirfurboy (talk) 18:24, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic Group 

message: An editor inserted text in this edit:  However the study does not say what was being claimed. Apart from the fact it is single study, primary sourced, the conclusion of the study was: 
I have thus reverted the additions pending something more concrete and nuanced. I also reverted the addition of "citation needed" on the claim that Andalusians are from Andalusia. See WP:FACTS. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:41, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saiz et al. 2019