Talk:Demographics of Argentina

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Demographics of Argentina article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is part of WikiProject Argentina, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to Culture of Argentina. If you would like to participate, you can improve Demographics of Argentina, or sign up and contribute in a wider array of articles like those on our to do list.
Top	This article has been rated as top-importance.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

Old comments for Demographics of Argentina are archived: Archive 1 (Dec 2005 – Apr 2006): 1 Whites in Argentina - 2 Yiddish - 3 INDEC and World Back on Black roots - 4 The article contradicts itself - 5 Middle Eastern - 6 Afro-Argentineans Archive 2 (Apr 2006 – May 2006): 1 Demographics controversy - 2 Protection - 3 My point of view - 4 To Al-Andalus - 5 Let's give a solution, then

Contents 1 Genetics, revisited, et al 2 Linguistic Claim... 3 Whiteness (again) 4 Fact tags 5 South Asians

[edit] Genetics, revisited, et al

Exactly, most of the people is white doens't matter if they are 2% nonwhite. The genetic test in the Demograohics of the US have been removed too, and the results were similar to ours. This is not a genetic topic but the generals demographics of the people

This genetic research had been removed before Who add it again? and why did you delete my pic???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? I took it myself —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Trelew Girl (talk • contribs) 19:40, 21 June 2006.

The people maintaining the Demographics of the US article may very well have reached a different consensus. As you can see from the discussion above, there was a long discussion and all parts agreed on what they considered a good version. I myself changed the article a bit to reflect criticism of the genetic markers as a method for determining Amerindian ancestry. The genetic research and other bits of info regarding the presence of aboriginal elements were (in the past) removed many times by vandals, without any explanation, and they were restored, as it should be. We don't delete useful information just like that.

I removed the picture you took. The ones present in the current version show Argentinians of several different ancestries and backgrounds; yours showed a rather homogeneous group of women (I'd guess middle-class porteñas), and not very clearly. Besides, I think the article already has enough pictures. Pictures should only be used sparingly, to illustrate an article. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 02:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Linguistic Claim...

"Due to the similarity with Spanish and the social influence of both countries, the average Argentine can also understand Italian and Portuguese, if spoken properly."

What? That's like saying "Due to the similarity with English and the social influence of both countries, the average American can also understand Dutch and Flemish, if spoken properly." It sounds very doubtful to me, as they are separate languages, and thus, are not mutually intelligible. (Además, ni el artículo sobre la demografía de Argentina ni el artículo sobre Lenguas de Argentina en español hacen esta affirmación...) If nobody objects (or provides some sort of proof!), I shall remove this claim. Adso de Fimnu 01:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree we need some source to prove this... Speaking from personal experience only:

• I can understand written Italian and Portuguese (and French to a smaller extent), at least a 80% and usually more.
• I can usually grasp the topic of a slow conversation or monologue in Italian or Portuguese, and I can understand if spoken to, also slowly.
• I cannot understand common conversational Italian or Portuguese at all if it's not directed at me.

I haven't got any training in Italian or Portuguese. The two first points above are more a product of my being familiar with etymologies. If you want to remove the statement you quoted, I won't object, though I do feel a source should be looked for. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 01:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Similarly. I always found I could get around Northern Italy speaking Spanish slowly, as long as people would speak their Italian slowly in exchange. At this point, I've learned some Italian more correctly, but had not when I first traveled there 20 years ago. - Jmabel | Talk 22:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Whiteness (again)

The notion that Argentina is 97% white is ridiculous. Anybody who claims that has never been in this country, or has been only in places like Belgrano and San Isidro. The UBA-Conicet DNA study made in 2005 showed 56% of Argentinians have some indian ancestry. But when I try to put that in the main article, it is reverted back in only a few hours. It seems some people just can't stand the idea that Argentina has a much larger non white ancestry that is usually claimed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.232.15.203 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 22 August 2006.

The last thing you said is undoubtedly true, but the issue of the DNA study, Amerindian ancestry etc. has been discussed ad nauseam before in this page and in Talk:Argentina. Go to the top of this page, open the archives, and read. We won't discuss over already exhausted arguments. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

There are alot of natives and mestizos there. Alot of immigration from Bolivia and places like that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.82.71.137 (talk • contribs) 25 October 2006.

Well maybe the ancestry is non-white, genetics or whatever but it is true that 97% of the population is white. If you are in any part of argentina you can see it with your own eyes(maybe in the northern provinces this 97% is not accurate) but i'm not from San isidro i live in Rosario and it is very hard to find black people or mestizos/indigenous caracteistics.201.235.220.131 20:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Somehow I know I shouldn't reply to this... I don't know where in Rosario you live, but even if you never leave the Oroño-Pellegrini radius you can still see plenty of mestizo-looking people begging and scrounging in the garbage. I mean, please. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 21:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes maybe you're right. So which do you think would be the more accurate perecentage of white people?? i read in some websites that the white population in Argentina is 89% or 87%. Shoud we change it to these numbers?? 201.231.46.3 22:58, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Please Pablo. You mean to tell me that it is more common to see a Mestizo/Indian then a black person in the US!! You've got to be kidding me. Just because a few areas of the of certain Cities have more Mestizos doesnt mean that Argentina has a large population of them. If that was the case I could go into Belgrano and go "oh look there are a lot of Asian people here, they must be 15 percent also." You've got to be kidding me.(XGustaX 00:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Fact tags

Fact tags ({{fact}}) are used when a citation is required to back up a controversial or dubious assertion. I've corrected a few of those. In one case (2.8% of Argentine home have at least one member of an indigenous community) the source was directly above in a previous citation; we can't have the same cite repeated all over on every sentence.

I also removed the claim about increased African immigration with its fact tag. Increased African immigration into Argentina is not common knowledge; if it all, it has received more media coverage lately, based on dramatic accounts of a few individuals. No statistics were provided by the media or in official organizations, or even speculation, so I took that out. —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 21:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Alright, the Wikipedia article has a paragraph on illegal immigrants and two reliable internet sources to back up the information, Like in the western world (US, Canada, Europe, Australia, Israel, Japan, etc.), immigration is a divisive and critical issue for countries long depended on it for economic growth and to maintain a suitably large population. 63.3.14.1 11:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

References: 34. ^ Patria Grande - Argentine government's immigration policy

35. ^ Making Room Argentina's new immigration plan - Newsweek: International Editions (Sept. 11, 2006 issue)-- MSNBC.com

<<Illegal immigrants... Illegal immigration has been a relatively important population factor in recent Argentine demographics. Most illegal immigrants come from Bolivia and Paraguay, countries which border Argentina to the north. Smaller numbers arrive from Peru, Ecuador, Romania, and the People's Republic of China. The number of stowaways inside incoming ships from West Africa have increased in recent times. The Argentine government estimates 750,000 are undocumented and has launched a program called Patria Grande ("Greater Homeland"),[34] to encourage illegal immigrants to regularize their status; so far some 200,000 applications have been processed under the program. Other unofficial estimates suggest that over one million people reside in Argentina illegally.[35]>>

[edit] South Asians

Pablo flores keeps adding his claim about "substantial number of immigrants from south Asia". Pablo, please cite some sources or else get a life instead of posting such unsubstantiated claims. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.96.168.33 (talk) 11:02, 23 December 2006 (UTC).

You're mistaken. I do not "keep adding" anything; what I did was revert your unexplained deletion of information that was maybe doubtful, but was marked as such with a "citation needed" tag. Repeated unexplained deletions without justification amount to vandalism. Your claim that South Asians are a negligible community in Argentina is neither backed up by sources nor marked as such; you just wrote what you believe is right and commanded that it mustn't be changed. In the absence of good sources indicating the size of the South Asian community, I'd suggest we delete any mention of it altogether.

Please review Wikipedia's policies before editing, and before insulting other editors. And sign your posts (use four tildes: ~~~~). —Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 13:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, let's remove the mention of the south-asian community! BTW, the burden-of-proof is on the person making the aforementioned claim, not the person objecting to it.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.96.168.33 (talk) 02:58, 24 December 2006 (UTC).

All I know is the south Asian population is generally small (how about a few thousand of them from India or Pakistan? )to get picked up in the Argentine official census, that's where to find out the latest statistical data to use to edit the article. Don't restore the entry without the criteria and note all unsourced edits will be taken down. You want to head over to the Argentine census web link and look up the country's racial makeup. Argentina official census web page (solo en espanol/only in Spanish 63.3.14.1 07:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)