Talk:Demographics of California

message: This page is being created as a daughter article with material transfered from the California article, and a new intro added.
When this material was transfered, there were undated Disputed and Contradict itself tags, which I have removed, with the invitation that whoever posted those tags on the original material is certainly welcome to re-post those tags, with an explanation on this page of the reason for re-posting those tags. NorCalHistory 13:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creation

message: The following material has a dead link as its only source, and is being placed here for further discussion:
:In actual practice, California's official-English law is not strictly enforced; many state, city, and local government agencies continue to print official public documents in other languages.
The statement appears, in any event, to be a confusion - the "English-only law" typically relates to teaching in public schools, not to other state actions.  If anyone can supply an up-to-date source (and an accurate statement), please do so.NorCalHistory 14:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  dead link material 

message: These 'Demographic templates' are highly wrong and out of date; Please delete them. Thanks you!!  Dwilso 05:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If they are out of date, they can be updated. But they reference 2005 data, the same as used in the text of article (where it isn't referenced, by the way). If you have any problems with the template please discuss it with me. Gimmetrow 22:57, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  template 

message: In the Racial and Ancestral Makeup section, it is stated that 42.3% of the population in Non-Hispanic White. Two paragraphs down, it is stated that whites make up 57% of the state's population. Then there is a chart that shows the state is 79.07% White, 33.59% of which are White Hispanics. The first number and the chart appear to be consistent, but the 57% number seems to come out of thin air. Something doesn't add up.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.192.41.109 (talk) 23:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistent Data 

message: The article says, "Over 6,000 Laotian Americans live in the Fresno area, including an even larger Hmong American community, the largest of its kind."
However, this statement appears to be false per Hmong American, which states that more than twice as many Hmong Americans live in Minneapolis/St Paul as Fresno ("In terms of metropolitan area, the largest Hmong-American community is in Minneapolis-Saint Paul-Bloomington, MN Metro Area (64,422); followed by Fresno, CA Metro Area (31,771)...")
So, I changed it to read "the second-largest of its kind." AgnosticAphid talk 19:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Sidenote: even to be hypertechnical about it, just St Paul still has more Hmong people than Fresno apparently per the same article ("As of 2001, the largest Hmong population in the United States by city is located in St. Paul, Minnesota."). AgnosticAphid talk 20:02, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  hmong population of fresno not actually "largest of its kind" 

message: A Californian is somebody who lives in California. It is not an ethnic group. So, I'll be removing this infobox unless anybody has any objections. It seems pretty irregular. --TimothyDexter (talk) 08:12, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic group infobox 

message: There are evident sociocultural differences in regional demography, between the coasts (most of CA's urban centers) and inland valleys including the Sierras and Deserts (more rural and increasingly suburban). The left of the Coast Ranges or I-5 are more affluent and ethnoracially diverse, however the richest parts are mostly white Anglo; while the right of I-5 are less affluent and developed a Hispanic/Latino majority in recent decades on much of this section and poverty rates in some counties are among the US' highest. And most voters are registered Democrat in beach cities and metropolitan areas surrounding Los Angeles and the San Francisco bay area, plus the Mexican border region; while more voters are Republican about 60-100 miles from downtown L.A. and the Bay shore, and the rural Central Valley (Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys) and areas about 30-50 miles north of Sacramento. There are high percentage Hispanic/Latino towns east and south of Los Angeles as well the southern San Joaquin Valley: Huron is reportedly 88% (for example) while the city of Los Angeles is about 44% as stated by Los Angeles Times' editorals on the local impact of immigration. And there are affluent suburbs like Chino Hills on the Orange county line in the "poor-middle class" Inland Empire region, as well low-income sections of the Silicon Valley like East Palo Alto inside mainly "rich" San Mateo County. 2605:E000:FDCA:4200:1FA:3A88:955:CACC (talk) 03:48, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed socioeconomically, cities 60-120 miles away from Los Angeles in the Inland Empire and Mojave Desert are notably low-income, higher unemployment rates and now has higher minority populations than inner-city L.A. Places like Lancaster-Palmdale, California City and Ridgecrest in Kern county (among the state's poorest counties in income level similar to Imperial, the lowest overall), Victorville area and Barstow along with Yucca Valley-29 Palms, and the highest poverty cities of Desert Hot Springs and Coachella in the Palm Springs area. Gentrification, lower housing prices as well higher availability of section 8 housing, and dependency of cheap migrant laborers in agriculture and construction, is why there is such a demographic profile in those places. They are the exact opposite of Orange County, which is one of the state's and nation's most populous counties, and the highest population density outside of New Jersey, and even higher than notably urban downtown San Francisco. 67.49.89.214 (talk) 17:35, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  The shift of wealth per region from the 1980s to 2010s. In the 1980s, the "yuppies" seem to been concentrated in Orange County and Santa Clara Valley, then by 2000, they shifted to San Francisco or Western Los Angeles county (West half of city of Los Angeles), and today the gentrification of central Los Angeles and Oakland due to lower housing rents. There are also 3 factors in California's majority Black sections in the late 1990s/early 2000s: 1. gentrification (Southern Downtown L.A.), 2. high rate of other racial immigration (Hispanization of South-Central L.A.) and 3. abandoned sections (between I-10, Figueroa and Alameda streets, and Martin Luther King Jr Blvd in L.A). And finally, the 100-mile distance arc from L.A./San Diego and San Francisco/Sacramento has the top worst cities to live in the state now. 67.49.89.214 (talk) 17:31, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

text:  This seems like interesting information to add to the article, do you have any sources you could share? This would fit well into the section I proposed below on socioeconomic information. Seaplant (talk) 08:36, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  California's regional demography 

message: "As of 2015, California has the largest minority population in the United States. Non-Hispanic whites decreased from about 76.3 - 78% of the state's population in 1970 to 38.0% in 2015"
Doesn't this mean that California is ONE HUNDRED PERCENT ethnic minority? After all, if we are referring to ethnic minorities within the state, all ethnic groups are minority ethnic groups.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.252.200.22 (talk) 02:04, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that the common understanding of the term "racial minority" refers to non-hispanic whites and derives from the indisputable fact that 62% of the US population is non-hispanic whites.  I think your comment is a bit pedantic and think readers are unlikely to be confused.    AgnosticAphid talk 23:58, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest minority population is a meaningless distinction in a state without an ethnic majority. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Demographics of California. 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/20101123142018/http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/asm/ab_0751-0800/ab_800_cfa_20020116_162757_sen_comm.html to http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/asm/ab_0751-0800/ab_800_cfa_20020116_162757_sen_comm.html
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) 19:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Demographics of California. 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/20100114163734/http://californiagovernors.ca.gov/h/biography/governor_32.html to http://www.californiagovernors.ca.gov/h/biography/governor_32.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/tab19.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:54, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Income, income inequality, and poverty see like important demographic descriptors conspicuously absent from this article. I'm thinking of adding a section for this information, drawing on the below sources. Any suggestions?
*  It would be helpful to report Supplemental Poverty Measure rates (and possibly old-style poverty rates), as well as data on income.
*  This source provides data on average per capita income and income distributions. It draws comparisons to other states and shows differences between regions within California. It also provides historical context from the past two decades, highlighting trends. It offers a way  to bring in an income-focused frame.
*   This documents income inequality in detail, from a politically-motivated frame.
*  This offers a employment-centred perspective on income and poverty. It is narrowly focused by geography and demographic segment, but this makes it a useful illustrative example.
*  This source uses a socioeconomic index computed from several factors to offer a more broadly-defined frame; the correlation to life expectancy may be less relevant to this article than the description and mapping of class in California.
— Carl (Seaplant (talk) 08:32, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding income and poverty data 

message: I came looking for breakdowns of different age groups, but didn't find it. I don't really have the background/desire to search for this data, but wanted to signal it for whoever is working on this article. Sadads (talk) 12:29, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age data? 

message: Several parts of this sentence make no sense:  "Since the 2000 (US Census), California has been known as the second state in US history (after Hawaii since its statehood in 1959) to have a non-white majority, the first state in US history to have a Latino minority, and since 2014, the first state to have a Latino plurality surpass other racial/ethnic groups."  Can someone clarify? Particularly the "first state in US history to have a Latino minority" portion which can't be correct as written.  Edgeweyes (talk) 19:53, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does this mean? 

message: The US Census 2020 estimates CA has 40.0-1 million people, but an undercount of up to 4.9 million is possible, could be second home and seasonal residents. The Census 2020 official population statistics will be published next year, but let's keep the 2019 state population estimate at 39.5 million. I'm aware people are always moving in and out, as well based on people being born and have died. 2605:E000:100D:C571:6DCE:ABEA:BC50:DF93 (talk) 07:56, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  CA Population in 2020 

message: A multi-racial group in Central Valley of California centered in the major city of Fresno, they tend to be of White/Anglo-American, as well Black/African-American, Cherokee Indian, Samoan and Native Hawaiian stock, while many others have Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean and Mariana Islander ancestry, and finally some intermarriage with the first waves of East Indian, Armenian, Arab/Syrian, Iranian/Persian and Turkish peoples. The Fresno area has a history of Basque, Dutch, Greek, Portuguese and Yugoslav immigration whose descendants not only assimilated with White/Anglos, but intermixed with the mentioned other races as well. The "Fresno Indians" tend to have relatives in Hawaii where the island chain state has an Asian-American majority and many Polynesians. Tokyo, Japan in the neighborhood called "Texas Town" or "Okie Town", already home to Americans, esp. US Armed Forces servicemen (majority White and many Black) since the end of WW2 when the US occupied post-war Japan (1945-52). And Central California itself since 2000 is a majority Hispanic/Latino American, despite the Mexican community are present as early as 1890, esp. after immigration waves as a result of the Mexican Revolution of the 1910s, however Anglo-European Americans were the majority from California's statehood in 1850 to the end of the 20th century. Fresno first gave the name of "Indians" to Armenians and East Indians, as well Mexicans and Cherokee Indians, due to arrival from the 1920s to 50s (peaked in 1930-45). Over the course of the century (since 1900-2000), the pattern of intermarriage of almost all "races" of humanity in this California city became a singular "racial" community. Adinneli (talk) 04:03, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: "The Fresno Indians"

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect History of Mexican Americans in California. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  signed, Rosguill talk 23:09, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "History of Mexican Americans in California" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Portuguese Americans in California. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  signed, Rosguill talk 23:10, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Portuguese Americans in California" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: In 2022, there could be 300,000 Californians may have Cherokee ancestors, but those who are enrolled members (citizens) of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma at around 25,000 is what's legally recognized "Cherokee" according to the tribe, as well international, federal, state, and even county and city laws (i.e. Tulsa, OK) in the definition of Native American by tribal affiliation and/or ancestry through legal documentation. 2603:8001:2601:F351:4023:50B9:4083:39D2 (talk) 19:40, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you provide a source? That would be helpful. Fettlemap (talk) 01:00, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Race/Ethnicity definition 

message: "California has over one million residents each with Spanish or Portuguese ancestry"
Why are these two lumped together? Most of the Spanish Ancestry comes from Mexicans who are usually mixed race, Amerindian and European. And most of the Portuguese Ancestry are generally European. 71.9.141.71 (talk) 17:52, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:   "Spanish or Portuguese ancestry" 

message: The links just link generally to the US census site. Here are the actual tables:
2010: 
2020: 
These have consistent classifications. 
The huge change from 2010 to 2020 in the White row shown in the Wikipedia table does not reflect the census data. John Nagle (talk) 07:20, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: OK so just change it to the correct % Tweedle (talk) 23:08, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethinicity table is inconsistent/wrong.