Talk:Portuguese people

message: This edit changed the total population from 5 million to 40 million. In August 19, an edit turned 40 into 5, and another edit turned 54 into 40. An old version, from May 2019, said 55 million.
The note [a] correctly says that "Total number of ethnic Portuguese varies wildly based on the definition."
I analyzed what the sources cited say. Below, I summed up the relevant parts of each reference, and then added the references below, as they appear on the article right now.
*Ref [1]. Adriano Albino's study. Three generations down, there are 31,19 million Portuguese people outside of Portugal. Portugal would have over 40 million citizens if not for emigration. Official statistics say 4,53 million emigrated between 1951 and 1965.
**()
*Ref [2]. It cites Albino's study. It explains where the 40 million number comes from.
**(Portugal has 10 million nationals. The 40 million figure is due to a study estimating a total of an additional 31 million  descendants from Portuguese including grandparents; these people would be eligible for Portuguese citizenship under Portuguese nationality law (which  grants citizenship to grandchildren of Portuguese nationals). Emigração: A diáspora dos portugueses  (2009)) Archived link links to the same thing as Ref [1].
*Ref [3]. This is a genetics paper. I couldn't find any mention of the total population of Portuguese people. It does not have the word "million" at all. I propose this be removed as a reference.
**(ref name="ReferenceA" = )
*Ref [4]. This is also a genetics paper, but talks more about total population and how Portuguese people affected Brazilian population. However, I couldn't find any direct quote about the total population of Portuguese people.
**(ref name="PLoS ONE" = )
*Ref [5]. This one talks about how the Portuguese government want to attracts immigrants, but does not talk about how many Portuguese people there are. I propose this be removed as a reference.
**(https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/08/portugal-emigration-incentives-population/)
Therefore, it seems that the only sourced information is the 40 million figure, based on Albino's study. I propose that the infobox present this number, which, fortunately, is the one currently in the article. Therefore, I propose we keep it this way. Mateussf (talk) 21:03, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Total population info in the infobox 

message: I’ve noticed a string of repeat users (maybe the same individual under different names) adding and reverting Portuguese People’s degree of White vs Moorness.
Why this is happening is beyond my comprehension as no historical, genetic or cultural features single out the Portuguese (natives) from the rest of Europeans: these edits clearly try to do that.
My suggestion therefore for Administrators is:
Make this page semi-protected or protected and prevent/stop further malicious editing as this appears to be a place for some anti-Portuguese (the most obvious type of sentiment tends to come from Brazilians and Spaniards who for different reasons, sometimes hold historical grudges against the Portuguese) kind of virtual ‘crusade’.
Wikipedia is an online Encyclopaedia for factual and unbiased information, not a shambolic virtual weapon to politicise distorted views.
Melroross (talk) 21:25, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portuguese People / General Traits 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:36, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:51, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: The article currently states: "There were also limited conversions of Jews and Berbers" 
And nevertheless the source that it has linked affirms that: "Admixture analysis based on binary and Y-STR haplotypes indicates a high mean proportion of ancestry from North African (10.6%) and Sephardic Jewish (19.8%) sources."
There is no faithful correlation between the phrase and its source, neither in quantity nor in substance. In addition, two other sources of a scientific nature have been added, and both two scientific sources and the exact phrase extracted from the initial source of the article are being systematically eliminated by Melroross. NormanGear (talk) 15:05, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit war 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Portuguese people's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Cunliffe":
From Corded Ware culture: 
From Atlantic Bronze Age: 
From Celts: Cunliffe, Barry, (1997) The Ancient Celts. Oxford, Oxford University Press , pp. 183 (religion), 202, 204–08.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:46, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Portuguese people]] 

message: Melroross is removing information supported by sources from the body of the article.
 
The information that he is systematically deleting appears in the Lead, and therefore must also appear in the body of the article. The Lead is the summary of the body of the article, therefore it is evident that the information should also be mentioned or developed in the body of the article.
Please Melroross, stop reverting edits and starting Edit Wars.  NormanGear (talk • contribs) 12:17, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: @Melroross: There is no evidence of violation of 3RR by either of you at this page. The rest of your concerns are content related. Please discuss your concerns at this talk page. —C.Fred (talk) 22:39, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

text: @NormanGear: Please discuss your concerns at this talk page. —'''
Re:User:NormanGear, despite my best efforts and countless warnings, you continue to engage on your disruptive Edit Wars and Harrassment on both Portuguese people and Spaniards in a partial and unfair effort to exaggerate the Moorish legacy in Portuguese people and minimise this same aspect in the Spanish people page. I have also warned you against COI edits and 3RR rules. You are saturating the intro with this topic, duplicating sources and placing the same texts and quotes both on Intro and Lead  which I have tried to clear several times, only to have them reinstated again. I feel that at this stage and after countless incidents over the same topic, this is not mature or acceptable conduct and should you proceed with this conduct, I will have no option but to escalate this. Melroross (talk) 15:40, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Systematic content reversions 

message: "A recent study by Candille et al. (2012) comparing pigmentation levels between the Portuguese and three other ethnically indigenous European national groups—the Irish, the Polish and the Italians—concluded that, in parts of the body not exposed to the sun, the Irish were in the lightest end of the spectrum, followed by the Portuguese, Poles and Italians, with the latter being darkest."
This is the correct order now. I just changed it. Someone keeps reversing it and putting Polish as lighter than Portuguese. I will copy here for your convenience the results of the study:
Skin (M)
Males
Mean (sd)
Ireland = 25.8 (2.4)
Poland = 28.5 (2.0)
Italy = 30.0 (2.5)
Portugal = 28.3 (2.7)
Therefore the order for males from lightest to darkest is: Ireland (25.8), Portugal (28.3), Poland (28.5), Italy (30.0).
Skin (M)
Females
Mean (sd)
Ireland = 27.0 (2.0)
Poland = 30.4 (1.9)
Italy = 31.3 (2.0)
Portugal = 30.3 (2.5)
Therefore the order for females from lightest to darkest is: Ireland (27.0), Portugal (30.3), Poland (30.4), Italy (31.3).
In both cases Portugal is lightest than Poland. Please stop reversing this order.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:1383:83E3:B9AD:3E7F:7788:109 (talk) 00:01, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portuguese skin color compared to Polish 

message: In Chile, 1% of surnames are portugueses (Tayer, 1989); equivalent to 174.000 descendants according to Censo 2017. Wikidromo 05:56, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diaspora in Chile 

message: Take this article as an example of what you should do.
There's nothing that refers to culture.
There's a lack of photos of the average people and the only one there is are pictures of people from portuguese descent from other countries.
Ygglow (talk) 04:00, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article lacks so many things 

message: I just removed about 30 kBytes of picture galleries. In my opinion, the guideline WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES exists to protect WP from arbitrary selection (e.g. everybody adding the picture of his / her favourite chef / scientist / musician ...) and also to protect the encyclopedic nature of WP. But still I feel sorry, because I know that a lot of work was necessary to create the galleries. Rsk6400 (talk) 09:11, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic galleries 

message: Espejo del Perú no es una fuente fiable, puesto que el sitio web es un blog. Acto seguido, la supuesta monografía que hace de referencia para varias de las ascendencias mencionadas en dicha página, dígase: [Abuhadba Rodrigues, Daniel (2007); Monografía: «Origen de los Apellidos en el Perú», Cusco, Perú, Fondo Editorial de la UNSAAC – Publicación disponible en la Biblioteca Universitaria de la UNSAAC (2007)], no existe en la mencionada biblioteca: véase. El autor tampoco existe fuera del sitio Espejo del Perú, cuando se le busca en buscadores como Google, Google Scholar, etc. no existe, cuando lo lógico es que haya más huellas de su aporte, considerando la importancia de sus supuestas contribuciones. Por ende, hace un buen tiempo que Espejo del Perú no es una fuente fiable para Wikipedia en español, y por ende, para toda Wikipedia, incluyendo su versión en inglés. Saludos. Wikiedro (talk) 13:57, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Espejo del Perú