Image talk:Canadianethnicities.PNG

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Since when is "Canadian" an ethnicity? The availablility of "Canadian" as a choice on the census makes this map pretty pointless, except as an indicator of people's willingness to share what their actual ethnicity is.--bigjarom 15:37, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

I agree. What exactly is the differnece between "Canadian" and "English". Does English refer to people from England? If so, something is wrong with this image. •Zhatt• 18:11, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

I think the point is that these people do not consider themselves as being of "british ethnicity", or rather, descandency, but Canadian. Maybe the fact there's an ocean and 2 centuries of distinct history between the countries has a factor into it too? I mean, I'm sure there's not much people in the US who consider themselves of "Brittish descent" if thay are given the possibility of saying "American". Circeus 18:59, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

I believe it is supposed to show areas of the group with the largest self-identified ethnic origin. See: List of Canadians by ethnicity. The title Ethnic Origins by Census Division could probably be better but I don't know what. DoubleBlue (Talk) 19:21, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

DoubleBlue is correct. This map was compiled using data available at the Statistics Canada website. A similar map exists for the U.S., so if dont think this is important, please get rid of the American map too. (It shows numerous counties as being "American") -- Earl Andrew - talk 19:41, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

The map provides no useful information, and is highly misleading (especially the title printed on top). Many people interpreted the question different. People who didn't say "Canadian" still identify as Canadian. The fact wikipedia may have another misleading map, is no reason to have this one. Wikipedia has lots of useless misleading information, which we shouldn't keep to be "consistent". At a minimum, this map should be placed somewhere, that allows for a proper explanation of it's meaning. --rob 20:08, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

OK, I understand people can identify themselves as simply "Canadian" without any other ethnicity, but, I still don't know the difference between "Canadian" and "English-Canadian". If you look at the article, it explains that a English-Canadian is a term often used to mean a Canadian who speaks English. By that logic, a pure "Canadian" would speak Canadian. Either this map must change or the article English-Canadian must change.

I also say this map seems incorrect because BC is labeled as "English-Canadian". As far as I know, there aren't all that many people in BC who identify themselves as a British ethnicity (if that's the meaning of the term we're using). From what I see, it's mostly Asian. I'd like to see the source for this image.

•Zhatt• 20:17, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

I looked at the Statistics Canada web site and I see that "English" has a total of 1,144,335 responses for BC while "Canadian" has 939,460. I still don't understand the definition of "English" in this situation. English as in British or English as in language? I wonder how it was explained when the study was done. "Canadian" can also be seen in many different ways.

•Zhatt• 20:28, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

I'm talking to myself here, but I found some quotes from the Statistics Canada web site:

Ethnic origin: Refers to the ethnic or cultural group(s) to which the respondent's ancestors belong. An ancestor is someone from whom a person is descended, and is usually more distant than a grandparent. Ethnic origin pertains to the ancestral "roots" or background of the population, and should not be confused with citizenship or nationality. [1]

Meaning that "English" means from Great Britan and the like, but...

A typical question might be, With which ethnic group do you identify? Some respondents may associate the question with citizenship and report Canadian. Others may associate it with origin and report Italian. Others might see it as involving both citizenship and origin and report Italian-Canadian. Others might see racial dimensions and report as black or black-Canadian. Furthermore, in some contexts, ethnicity might be implied but the reference is actually to language. For example, there are frequent references to French Canadians and English Canadians which are not on the basis of ethnicity per se but on the basis of the language spoken. [2]

Means that "English" refers to the language. The web site itself has contradicting terms.

•Zhatt• 20:43, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Please note that, Canadian in no way means British or English. Just look at Quebec. -- Earl Andrew - talk 20:53, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Actually, you can forget about StatsCan definitions on terms for this. Millions of Canadians objected to the very idea of the question, and *knowingly* answered it differently than intended. Obviously, all Canadians have ancestors that are not Canadians. Effectively, they acted as "spoilers". --rob 20:55, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

That would mean that the origins and ethnicity information on the Canada article and the Demographics of Canada article is also "spoiled". The information is OK under List of Canadians by ethnicity, but it should talk more about the discrepancy in the data and the our definitions of the terms should be expanded. (English-Canadian) •Zhatt• 21:09, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Yep, the data was spoiled, regardless of where it's located. But, I could relucantly accept this map and data, in thoses places (but not in Canada), provided there was a clear explanation of its meaning, and related issues, in the article body. Better yet, put a discussion in the Statistics Canada article. There are huge public policy implications to this entire issue. --rob 22:44, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Who decides these days what ethnicity someone is when so many of us have multiple ethnic backgrounds or have been in Canada so long, you don't know from where you came? I suspect this self-identification demographic is the best we can have on Canadian demographics. DoubleBlue (Talk) 21:20, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Sorry. I should clarify. My erk is not with the term "Canadian". I might even consider myself Canadian if asked that question (mothers side actually from Liverpool, fathers side I don't know). My erk is with the term "English" as it can be taken two ways. (Origin vs Language). Someone who just moved to Canada from Mexico might call themselves English-Canadian because they speak English and sure aren't French-Canadian.

•Zhatt• 21:47, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

I am pretty sure English in this case means you have ancestry from England. I would also like to note, it is a federal crime to lie on the census forms, so if someone did lie, they should be investigated, and prosecuted for their actions. -- Earl Andrew - talk 23:48, 5 August 2005

(UTC)

• Yes, technically lying on it, is a crime, so you think nobody does it? People can and do answer such questions as they wish. Confidentiality rules of the census make it virtually impossible to test the "truthfullness" of answers. That's why people are more likely to "mis-answer" (fake word), than not answer. If you don't fill in an important answer, you might get a call. If you put in something that's false, you almost certainly won't. As said before, if you read the precise meaning of the question, it's *impossible* to list *only* Canadian as the answer. Nobody has only Canadian ancestors. Do you think millions of Canadians should be prosecuted for clearly mis-answering. It's time to stop worshipping at the alter of StatCan, and realize, on this specific issue, their numbers mean very little, if anything.
• I doubt StatCan makes much effort on this question. In the last census, I wrote a breif comment explaining my objections to such questions, and misuse of a similiar question on a certain census of a certain country at a certain time. I haven't heard anything back about it. StatCan's attempt at gathering this information has been defeated by widespread objection to it. You can't force people to give you this type of information, if they really don't want to (or you can't in a free country).
• Please don't use the silly term "federal crime". All crimes are federal in Canada. So, a crime is not more serious because it's "federal". People often use the term "federal crime" as a way of making something sound ominous and frightening. --rob 01:03, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

As I understand it, "Canadian" is for people like me, who have so many ancestries, that it is just easier to put Canadian than "English, Scottish, Irish, German, etc" -- Earl Andrew - talk 01:12, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

That's one interpretation. If StatCan told people that they should use "Canadian" when they're of such "highly mixed blood", then this would be a valid question. But, each person is left to their own interpretation. Rural Quebec is generally more homogoneous in origins than southern BC (especially Vancouver), yet Quebec is "pure Canadian", but Southern BC is English, according to the map. --rob 01:35, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Quebec is pure French Canadian, so "Canadian" can mean a number of things. Obviously, if one feels that their family has lived in Canada long enough, they have the right to call themselves Canadian, or if they feel they have a very multicultural background, as one of the traits of being "Canadian" is often considered. This too is a reason for being considered Canadian. BC was settled more recently than Eastern Canada, so this may be a reason for the high number of English people. -- Earl Andrew - talk 02:17, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

To me the issue is not if "Canadian" or "English" is an appropriate response or not, it's that there were no set meanings for these terms when the survey was done. Therefore, people who were questioned could respond with anything they like and have it mean whatever they like, therefore distorting the data and have it become meaningless. If you look at the List of Canadians by ethnicity (the article the image is on) nearly all the titles contain the word "Canadian". If you wanted too, you could colour nearly the entire map red. Zhatt 02:49, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

2001 Census Questionnaire Question 17: Ethnic origin was:

I think it's entirely appropriate for a person to decide themselves to what ethnic group their ancestors belong and not to be judged by anyone else to be wrong to say they are of Canadian ancestry, Scottish-Greek, or whatever group they feel their ancestors belong to. Label it more clearly as self-identification, if you like, but I feel the answers, charts, and this image are an accurate picture of the ethnic background of Canada in 2001. DoubleBlue (Talk) 03:51, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] french-canadian

the person who made this map seemed to have oversimplified a bit. For one thing, I doubt the vast majority of quebec self-identified as "canadian only". --Marc pasquin 00:25, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

• http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo26f.htm DoubleBlue (Talk) 00:32, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
  • No, French Canadian counts as a response for both French and Canadian. There was only one "French" County in Canada, and it was in Nova Scotia. -- Earl Andrew - talk 01:09, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Have you considered the idea of a map, that shows the highest non-Canadian origin for each census district. Quebec would then appear as being mainly "French". --rob 06:14, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
      • I have, but that totally ignores the biggest cross-section of the country. -- Earl Andrew - talk 07:12, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
        • I guesse the easy to say, but hard to do, suggestion is to have two maps, using what's appropriate in each seperate context. --rob 08:14, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
          • You're free to make such a map, however I do not have the time to do it. -- Earl Andrew - talk 09:08, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
            • On the hypothetical, that I (possibly) make such a map (non-Canadian origins of Canadians), or found one released into the public domain (doubtful), would anybody agree that it would be suitable for the main Canada article. --rob 09:20, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
              • I think it would be wrong to exclude "Canadian" responses from Ethnic origin demographics. To represent, for instance, that Quebec's largest ethnic origin is French, if the largest ethnic origin reported there was Canadian, is inaccurate, to say the least. DoubleBlue (Talk) 14:22, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
              • Rob, if both are used, I would see it as acceptable. Either both, or non at all, but it deffiantely belongs in the Demographics of Canada page. -- Earl Andrew - talk 17:52, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

If you went by those statistic you would still expect to see some blue since its about a 2 to 1 answer yet the map only show red. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding the methodology used ?--Marc pasquin 01:30, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

No, Canadian out numbers French in Quebec. -- Earl Andrew - talk 01:49, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

I got that bit on the survey. What I mean is why is the map showing strictly red when other provinces have more then one colour segment ? based on the survey, it should be (putting aside the other answers for the sake of example) 2/3 red and 1/3 blue (4 milions canadian answer & 2 milions french answer).--Marc pasquin 02:03, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Because every census division in Quebec had Canadian as its most common answer. -- Earl Andrew - talk 02:25, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

so the map is based on a "first past the post" approach, got it. One thing I wonder, there isn't a single "french-canadian" answer (although there is acadian) wouldn't take make it a bit murky since frenchmen and french-canadian would then be loped together ? (I know its not your survey, i'm just thinking out loud).--Marc pasquin 03:00, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

More like first past the post approval voting. But anyways, French Canadian is counted as being both French and Canadian- which is where some of the problem is. -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:45, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Let's say "personA" says "German" and "Irish"; but "PersonB" says only "German". Does that mean you have two votes "German" and one for "Irish"? Or did personA's "German" "vote" count for less. In other words, did StatCan use the principal that all individuals are equal in weight or the principal that each individual/origin was equal in weight? --rob 11:30, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Just to make sure I get it this time (sorry if I sound a bit slow on the uptake): Lets say for the sake of example that you get these answers: 10 canadians, 10 french-canadians and 5 french. Would that be counted as 15 canadians & 10 french or 20 canadians & 15 french ?--Marc pasquin 00:46, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

My guess is you would get 20 Canadians and 15 French. -- Earl Andrew - talk 02:16, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

That's just bizarre. Zhatt 02:49, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. got it now. I wonder though if it might created false result ?--Marc pasquin 01:00, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

I checked the StatCan web site[3], and noticed they have a "three column" approach. They seperately add the numbers for "single-selectors", and "multiple selectors". Then they combine the two for a total that over-represents. The "single-selection" under-represents(<100%). There is no "100%" column that weights all respondents equally. Earl, I assume from your answer that you used the "combined total" column which over-represents in the map. Is that right? --rob 03:31, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I did. -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:40, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. Next question (sorry to bug you) do these numbers include Landed Immigrants, and other legal residents. I know they took part in the census. Did they count for this question (with the potential of non-Canadians being counted as Canadians)? --rob 04:50, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I have no idea. I would assume so. This particular question was asked to one in five Canadians, but that doesn't answer your question. 05:59, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I didn't see it when I first looked, but found the details here. Non-permanent resident non-citizens count as much as permanent resident citizens. So, we can have non-Canadians of exclusively Canadian origin showing up, to go along with the Canadians of exclusively non-Canadian origin. --rob 06:28, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I doubt many Non Canadian Canadians exist. -- Earl Andrew - talk 08:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

There are 5.4 million immigrants in Canada (18% of pop), who were eligible for the census[4]. In some census districts they are a much higher percentage. We have no idea what they put down. Many don't speak English or French, and probably don't clearly understand the question that's obviously confused people on this talk page. If I was an immigrant, and wanted to be Canadian, and was told I could call myself Canadian, I'ld probably call myself Canadian. Also (seperate subject) the article List of Canadians by ethnicity (which uses this image) has a misleading title; since it's not just Canadians. The 18% probably have very different origins, and would wildly throw off the results. The title and/or content of the article and image needs to be changed. --rob 09:52, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I pointed out in the section above that the question was pretty clear. You seem to have a POV that is really driving your work here but I'm not sure what it is. DoubleBlue (Talk) 13:57, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

StatCan has said the same answers to the question have different meaning. --rob 19:06, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ethnic representation in the map

I haven't had a chance to read all the previous discussion, but I have skimmed it. Anyway...

The problem with this map, as I see it, is that it does not represent the distribution of ethnic backgrounds throughout Canada, but rather the ethnic group with the greatest population in each census area. The Greater Toronto Area has a high density of people with Chinese and Italian ancestry, yet the map makes no indication of this. Same with Kitchener and people of German ancestry, and I could go on at length about other CAs.

I'm not sure how a map could be created to accurately depict ethnic population distribution throughout Canada, but I don't think this map does it. Mindmatrix 19:29, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I think the only way you can realy represent this is either through separate maps for each ethnic groups (the darker the colour use, the more of a given group) or a single map with pie chart on major concentration of population --Marc pasquin 00:40, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New Title

I changed the title of the picture. It is now at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Canadianethnicities2.png --bigjarom 00:00, August 12, 2005 (UTC)