Talk:Maps of American ancestries
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Source of images
These maps are self-generated by me at the U.S. Census Bureau's American Factfinder site ([1]). "West Indian," "Arab," and "Sub-saharan African" ancestries are not listed. These maps focus only on the European ancestries of white or Caucasian Americans.
Hope these pictures will be educating and informative for you. -- Stevey7788 03:01, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I've also created Maps of Oakland, California and Maps of Chicago. This is part of my project of obtaining self-generated images from the American Factfinder ([2]), although I do hope a bot would be available for this because I have to do all this manually. The tiring steps are :
-
- Selecting preferences/color/settings/location
- Selecting the theme
- Saving image
- Uploading
Maybe a bot would be nice to have.
-- Stevey7788 03:01, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The page is missing a map for Swiss ancestry, which is listed on the source site. Please add it since I can't quite figure out how. 69.248.116.112 22:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Using Factfinder
If you would like to learn how to use the American Factfinder ([3]) , here's how (it takes a while to learn it):
Go to the website's main page and click on the "Data sets" tab on the left side. Once the page loads, you should see "Summary File (SF) 1," "SF 2," "SF 3," and so forth. Use SF 1 for race, renter/owner occupation, and age/sex data. SF 3 is for all sorts of economic, social, and housing characteristics.
Now click on "SF 1" or "SF 3." You can now select "quick tables," "detailed tables," or "thematic maps." Once you've selected something, select "place," "county," "state," etc. Then select a theme.
Summary of operations: Main -- All Data Sets -- Data Sets with Thematic Maps -- Geography -- Themes -- Results
There are a lot more features I haven't mentioned. Feel free to experiment with the Factfinder tools.
Thanks.
-- Stevey7788 03:01, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] year
are these from the 2000 census? - Omegatron 21:19, May 1, 2005 (UTC)
- Yes they are, 2000. — Stevey7788 (talk) 06:07, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Moving page
I moved this page because United Statian is not the term for a resident or citizen of the United States. -Acjelen 18:06, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Unsupported page move
No consensus was reached prior to moving this page. It should be reverted to its correct title, "Ancestries of Americans". Firebug 03:23, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
- Support current title, "Ancestries of the people of the United States", since the article is only about the heritage of people in the United States. Iff the article covered all of the Americas (North America, South America, Central America, and the Caribbean), then, and only then, the title should be "Ancestries of Americans". BlankVerse ∅ 09:46, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
-
- Comment: Actually, since the article is almost totally maps, and only covers certain European countries (no Switzerland or Austria, for example) plus African ancestry (from a separate source), even the title "Ancestries of the people of the United States" is too broad (no Asian ancestry, for example). I would support a name change to "Maps of ancestries of the people of the United States" (or something similar). BlankVerse ∅ 09:46, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
- I agree with Blank Verse. No Account 00:05, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I added introductory paragraphs and changed the level structure so that more information could be added to make it a broader topic. Originally this article was original research at best or a vanity page at worst. I had intended on nominating it for deletion, but thought I would try to improve it instead. -Acjelen 17:16, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Moved page
The page was moved again, this time to Maps of American ancestries because this page isabout maps. It is different from Demographics of the United States. — Stevey7788 (talk) 01:23, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Hispanic population
What about Hispanic/Latino ancestry? --Lord Voldemort (Dark Mark) 18:09, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
The Latinos are divided into many groups; the leading of which is "Mexican", and "Spanish from Spain"... — Badlands17
[edit] "American" ancestry is Confederate ancestry
These people's ancestors were repatriated Americans. IP Address 13:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
- Ironic on the face of it, perhaps. But the southern Appalachians were the major center of Unionist sentiment within the Confederacy, while in the northern Appalachians WV seceded from VA to stay in the Union. --JWB 21:02, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I think that the Constitutional Union Party (United States) has something to do with this; the core of the area seems to be the Border states (Civil War), but the general gist of it seems to be the original colonists. Then again, most Southern ancestry seems to be African. Slaves obviously outnumbered their masters, so your argument doesn't hold water. In respect of political parties and alliances throughout the war, it is so ironic that Rhode Island elected Democratic governors in the thick of heavy violence by Northern Republicans against Southern Democrats. IP Address 04:33, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, you can also talk about Highland and Lowland Southern cultures as David Hackett Fischer does. But getting back to "American" ancestry, the main factor is that more Northerners have recent ethnic roots, so everyone is assumed to have an ethnicity. Anyway, the Confederate States of America were still American, not to mention the rest of the hemisphere. --JWB 06:10, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Right; DHF is totally on the mark. I'm Chapter Four, North Britain: Borderland to the Backcountry and of the same roots as the Calverts in Maryland. I consider myself American for this reason, regardless of composite ethnic heritages. Of course, my male ancestor goes back to Brittany anyways (like the Stuarts, whom had their English powerbase in Northumbria). This makes me like a North English Cavalier, with extensive Celtic relations (Lords Baltimore were Irish Catholic Barons). Out of eighths in my great grandparents, I have 2 Northumbria, 4 Wessex, 2 Normandy. I did not know that some of the Calverts and Robert E. Lee were descended from King James, which is the most recent royal blood in America. Somebody ought to track this blood descent down, because of course the Stuart legacy is strong in our country. Stuarts in fact have a fan base in the South, while the later (Protestant) dynasties seem to be a concern of Northerners. It is ironic that the staunchly Protestant South looks to a usually Catholic dynasty, while an increasingly Catholic North looks to Protestant dynasties. Strange. IP Address 06:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- The North is already about as Catholic as it's likely to get. It's the South where Catholicism is on the increase, with migration from the North, Latin America, and the Caribbean. Not sure what you mean by Northern interest in later dynasties? --JWB 20:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
I think it also is important to remember that most of the people who describe their ancestry as "American" are southerners. Most who's lineage has been in the U.S. for so long in some cases since discovery. However easy to find by surnames and accents that they are easily distinguished to be from some kind of Celtic or Anglo stock. For example think of all the adjacent town names in a metropolitain area like Atlanta compared to Detroit.
[edit] orientals
i like how orientals and asians dont even exist in usa. even though they have the highest population in the world
[edit] Did not mark the last edit as "Minor"
Edit at 17:12, 15 March 2007, was minor. Apologies. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.54.255.14 (talk) 17:20, 15 March 2007 (UTC).