Jump to content

Talk:Americans/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

Template error

A recent edit added Ghana as well in the infobox, however it does not show up by this error:

"Warning: Page using Template:Infobox ethnic group with unknown parameter "ref41" (this message is shown only in preview).
Warning: Page using Template:Infobox ethnic group with unknown parameter "pop41" (this message is shown only in preview).
Warning: Page using Template:Infobox ethnic group with unknown parameter "region41" (this message is shown only in preview)."

Someone could decipher what's the catch, as it seems the user added content in an appropriate format? Thank you(KIENGIR (talk) 09:53, 21 November 2020 (UTC))

The catch is that the limit in that infobox is 40 regions. I've reverted the additions, as there is no current discussion on the infobox's talk page to change the limits. BilCat (talk) 10:05, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Vague statement in introduction

The introduction of this article says this: "As a result, American culture and law does not equate nationality with race or ethnicity, but with bona fide citizenship and an oath of permanent allegiance." What does "citizenship and an oath of permanent allegiance" suppose to mean? Is it trying to say that a 1-year-old natural born US citizen (child) is required to also make "an oath of permanent allegiance" before he/she is accepted as an American? Or is it trying to say that Samoan Americans are not Americans because they are not US citizens?--Libracarol (talk) 16:47, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Is it "Americans" or "the American people"?

Oddly, the title of this Wikipedia page is not a term that is used in modern American discourse. I currently live in Canada, and people who live here call citizens of the country "Canadians." However, I follow a lot of U.S. news and media sources, and people who live in the U.S.A. do not appear to call other citizens "Americans," rather, they are always careful to say "the American people." I actually arrived here at Wikipedia when I was trying to understand why everyone always says "the American people" instead of simply "Americans," but there's no reference to it in this article — it would be nice if this could be explained here, I think, because it seems like there must be a significant reason worth understanding. Mecandes (talk) 22:07, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

"Americans" is still extremely common in both public and private discourse. (See This Google news search for an example. Politicians and newsfolks speak oddly anyway, but I seriously doubt that "the American people" is anywhere near as common as "Americans". I almost never use the former term myself, and most other Americans I know don't either, but I live in a region of the US well south of Canada. - BilCat (talk) 22:20, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
I asked a friend living in Boulder, Colorado, about this; she said, "Initially I wanted to dispute this, but then after I started paying attention I realized it's absolutely true." Try listening to prime time news on CNN or Fox News or MSNBC or anywhere, and you'll almost always hear only the phrase "the American people" used, rarely if ever "Americans." It is interesting as it doesn't seem to be some kind of "politically correct" thing either, because both right-leaning (e.g. Fox News) and left-leaning (e.g. MSNBC) media pundits say it this way. A couple of people suggested it may be a way to make a distinction from immigrants to the country, but I assume that's just conjecture, not documented? Still, I feel like there must be some reason, because linguistically the American people have historically tended to simplify and shorten the English language ("color", "ya'll", removing hyphens from hyphenated words, etc.) rather than unnecessarily lengthen it, eh? Mecandes (talk) 05:02, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

I am skeptical this is correct. Looking at Google Ngrams, "Americans" always exceeds "American people" by a fair amount. "The American people" sounds a bit grander than just "Americans" and I suspect speechwriters sometimes use it for that reason. HallamBentham (talk) 23:29, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

I agree, this is most likely the reason Unbeatable101 (talk) 14:56, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

American?

Why is the term american only used for the united states of america? The americas are continents that cover most of the western hemisphere. American should refer to the people of americas. Why limit it just to the US? Canadians, Mexicans, and South americans are all americans. How do we change the term? If wikipedia wants to be an accurate source of information, then the term american should be changed to include all americans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apachewarrior2021 (talk • contribs)

Because English Wikipedia follows normal English language usage. In English, a person from the United States is called an American. In fact, most English-speaking Canadians would emphatically deny that they are Americans. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an activist website, so it's not going to change this until another term for people from the United States becomes common usage in English, as represented in reliable, published sources. BilCat (talk) 11:03, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
The term is a common slang used by many but not accurate. They are many slang terms in the english language. Popularity does not equal accuracy or fact. An encyclopedia should state fact as accurate as possible and not be determined by popular use. Facts are not slang or rumors or opinions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apachewarrior2021 (talk • contribs) 04:18, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Please see the article American (word). As that article explains, the term American "generally refers to persons or things related to the United States of America; among native English speakers this usage is almost universal, with any other use of the term requiring specification." That article includes numerous sources that support that usage, as does the article Americans your edits of which were reverted. While the term may also be used to describe people indigenous to other countries in the Americas, we follow and promote usages supported by cited sources. General Ization Talk 04:22, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
I'd be amazed if many people in either North or South America who aren't citizens of the US refer to themselves and their compatriots as Americans - they call themselves Mexicans, Brazilians, etc (in their own language of course). @Apachewarrior2021: what reliable English language sources give you the idea they don't? Doug Weller talk 11:14, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
I am talking accurate use of the term based on race and ethnic guidelines. My references are geography and history. People are labeled by their place of origin. Not by census or how they feel or label themselves. Citing sources that use slang instead of science are inaccurate. Their is no country named America so American cannot refer to citizens of a country that does not exist. If wikipedia wants to be viewed as place for factual information, then it should follow scientific guidelines not mass opinions or common usage. Many words that were common use a hundred years ago are no longer used.Apachewarrior2021 (talk) 09:39, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
@Apachewarrior2021: sorry, you are wasting your time as you are trying to use your logic rather than reliable sources. See WP:VERIFY - "Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources." It's as simple as that. And titles of articles "are based on how reliable English-language sources refer to the article's subject." See WP:Article titles. Your idea of "scientific guidelines" has nothing to do with the way we work, and it seems pretty subjective in any case as it's based on your concept of science, which seems idiosyncratic. Please understand that this is not a WP:FORUM and it's time to drop this. Doug Weller talk 15:24, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
I apologize. I am new to wikipedia and didn't understand the rules for editing articles. So, every edit must have a reliable source. I will add a link to a globe or Earth as well as a map or the Americas as a reliable source. Thank you for your help. I do wonder what that if "a reliable English language source" is not factual, then it is a reliable source? I don't think logic and science is subjective. They are the simple ways of defining the world. They are unbiased truths.Apachewarrior2021 (talk) 06:48, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Why not to include the flags of respective countries in the nav box?

I did that twice but was reverted. Hey, Americans are to special cititzens for India. If it so, then why not remove each and every flag from the diaspora or the every citizen article? Utkarsh555 (talk) 04:33, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

They should be removed per MOS:INFOBOXFLAG: Generally, flag icons should not be used in infoboxes, even when there is a "country", "nationality" or equivalent field: they could be unnecessarily distracting and might give undue prominence to one field among many. BilCat (talk) 18:09, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

"People of the United States"

Why does "People of the United States" redirect here instead of a page for the demographics of the USA? Most "People of Foo" pages redirect to a "Demographics of Foo" page. --62.165.249.184 (talk) 09:31, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Why shouldn't People of the United States redirect here? That's the most logical target to me. Most "People of Foo" pages did redirect to "Fooians" type articles until changed by one user in 2020, apparently without prior discussion. Perhaps those pages should be reverted back instead. BilCat (talk) 18:54, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Puerto Rico in "Regions with Significant Populations"

Puerto Rico is an American territory and all Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens, so it should be removed from the "regions with significant populations."

Nothda (talk) 23:37, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Done. Garuda28 (talk) 21:18, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

RfC about the hatnote

CONSENSUS IS TO NOT INCLUDE
I'm WP:BOLDly closing this early because consensus seems clearly against this proposal to include the hatnote, and the OP was blocked as a block-evading sockpuppet. Per WP:EVASION, there is no reason to encourage this block-evasion by letting this RfC continue to run. Aoidh (talk) 01:49, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Should the hatnote
For a specific analysis of the population of the United States, see Demographics of the United States.
be placed at the very top of the article? Privybst (talk) 23:34, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
No, but there’s no reason it shouldn’t be linked in the lead. The same applies to British people. — HTGS (talk) 01:09, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
No ...link in lead....and cut back on current scrolling nightmare hatnotes.Moxy- 03:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Weak No. I wouldn't consider it egregiously wrong but, as noted above, this is more of a closely related topic than one that needs disambiguation. I also note that Demographics of the United States is right at the top of the Overview section after a very brief lead, so I would expect anyone looking for that article to find it pretty readily. (Contra HTGS's suggestion, I think having the link at top of Overview is more elegant and readable/easily found than working an additional text wikilink into the lead would be.) CAVincent (talk) 03:50, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Having a mass amount of text to scroll through before the article even starts is a deterrent for readers..... that's why we have rules for lead spam of this nature.Moxy- 03:53, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
On Argentines, the OP added one of those hatnotes today. Apparently these are the only articles where they're doing this either. BilCat (talk) 04:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
@Privybst Hi. You've gone around on multiple articles including Finns, Icelanders and Swedes removing hatnotes linking to this discussion. I'm not sure you should take this thread as some sort of consensus to go around and change every single article, but rather treat them on individual basis depending on article content. TylerBurden (talk) 08:08, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Second sentence in the lead

The second sentence in the lead currently reads "Although direct citizens and nationals make up the majority of Americans, many dual citizens, expatriates, and permanent residents could also legally claim American nationality." The source cited for that sentence doesn't seem to support it and actually has more to do with the third sentence about American nationality being composed of people from all over the world. Here are some issues:

  • "Direct citizens and nationals": One is a citizen or national or is not; there's no direct vs. indirect.
  • "Dual citizens": A dual citizen with U.S. citizenship is a citizen. There's no difference between a dual citizen and a citizen.
  • "Expatriates": Is this referring to (1) U.S. citizens residing outside the U.S. or (2) citizens of other countries without U.S. citizenship residing in the U.S.? If it's (1) then, again, there's no difference between an expatriate citizen and a citizen. If it's (2) then no, an expatriate from another nation residing in the U.S. without U.S. citizenship does not legally have U.S. nationality.
  • "Permanent residents": Permanent residents without U.S. citizenship do not legally have U.S. nationality.
  • The only people who legally have U.S. nationality but not U.S. citizenship are people born in American Samoa or on Swains Island to parents who are not U.S. citizens (because of a choice by the government of American Samoa).

-- SJy2iI83VJ (talk) 19:40, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Section 308 of the INA confers U.S. nationality but not U.S. citizenship, on persons born in "an outlying possession of the United States" or born of a parent or parents who are non-citizen nationals who meet certain physical presence or residence requirements. Moxy- 04:37, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Yes, there it says, "the term 'outlying possessions of the United States' means American Samoa and Swains Island" and lays out the conditions for non-citizen nationality for parents and children from there. The government of American Samoa laid out their case for this practice again in 2022 before the Supreme Court: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1394/236566/20220829125923506_2022-08-29%209am%20FINAL%20Fitisemanu%20BIO.pdf -- SJy2iI83VJ (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Your misunderstanding the OR part [1] Moxy- 11:29, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

It is a bit strange to define American as a citizen of the USA

Not about article Improvement. Repeated argument not going anywhere productive and posted in multiple places

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Normally the name of the people of a continent are called by the name of the continent. Asia, Asians Africa, Africans Europe, Europeans and so on.

So I would say Americans are the population of the American continents.

To claim the name of American for a single country on the American continents, is a bit strange. Where is this defined as the official usage and definition? I do not see any reference. As the Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia, is this used that way in all English speaking countries? I would look at this as an USA slang, rather than an official designation as here is implied. Jochum (talk) 17:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

No, it's not just slang. It's used that way in all English-speaking countries, and many non-English speaking countries too. See American (word) for a detailed treatment of the word, including many sources. BilCat (talk) 17:29, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Can you point me to the official definition denoting an American as only meaning a citizen of the USA? That is what Wikipedia should be about. An official definition, not the notion of some, in this case perhaps many posters.
The definition of Americans as a Citizen of the USA only, goes against the usage in regards to any other continent.
Asia Asians
Africa Africans
Europe Europeans
and so on Jochum (talk) 06:35, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
In English, America is not a continent. North America and South America are considered separate continents. So when most native English Speakers say "American" without any other qualifications, they generally mean people from the USA, and it's usually understood they don't mean people from the Americas. BilCat (talk) 06:52, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
That is a pretty lame excuse, apart from perhaps you should say, that in the USA, America is not regarded as one continent. It is trying that USA citizen often confuse American English with English and USA definitions as international definitions. The point is that the Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia, not an US American one.Jochum (talk) 20:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
English-language usage of "America" to mean "the United States" is not unique to the United States. You are correct that Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia, and this usage reflects international usage. The word America is routinely used to refer to the United States by non-American sources such as BBC, Indian Express, Le Monde, and the citizens of the United States are American. Spanish and some other languages do use America to refer to the entire landmass, so it is correct to say that in Spanish the word America does not refer to the United States. However, this is the English Wikipedia and it is English-language sources and usage that guides the content. - Aoidh (talk) 21:01, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
Exactly. I don't know what sort of English-language publications and sites the OP reads, but some people from countries, including the UK, Canada, and.especially Australia, are even more prone to use "America" to mean "the United States" than people from the US. Here's a very recent example from Australian media, which uses "America" to refer to the country in at least six places in one story. BilCat (talk) 21:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
Such examples do not really matter. Read the definition of American in for example Merriam Webster or Collins dictionary. That I think is a more important reference. Claiming that the only meaning of American or Americans is being a citizen of the USA, is simply wrong. It is plain arrogance to see this promoted in the Wikipedia. I assume with a lot of help of USA posters. I also do not see any serious reference to the interpretation, that Americans or American refers solely to a citizen of the USA. I assume as this is the Wikipedia somebody that want to keep this interpretation should provide a serious reference, like for example the official usage of the government of the USA when referring to it's citizen. Jochum (talk) 13:50, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Feel free to read WP:COMMONNAME. We are not claiming that American only refers to US citizens, but simply reflecting the common usage of the word in English. That's why we have this header at the very top of the article:
This page is about the people of the United States of America. For a background on their demonym, see American (word). For other uses, see American (disambiguation) and The Americans (disambiguation). For the legal term, see United States person.
Further griping is really pointless and it is beyond arrogant to continue pushing ones own POV in contradiction to Wiki policy, and really, the majority of English speakers worldwide. Not that it really matters, but have you read Collins dictionary's definition? "1. adjective An American person or thing belongs to or comes from the United States of America." Amusingly, the UK based Collins leads with that definition while the US based Merriam Webster has that at #3 for adjective use and #2 for noun use of American. Cannolis (talk) 14:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Concur. BilCat (talk) 04:15, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
The article strongly implies that Americans refers only to the citizen of the USA. That is definitely wrong. Very simple. I am not griping, but this article starts with a wrong definition of Americans. I understand that the fragile egos of USA citizen can not imagine other people than themself be called Americans, but it is fact the the inhabitants of the Americas are also called Americans. Furthermore the beginning of the article breaks Wikipedia rules, by not stating a serious reference for the claim, that Americans is only used for citizen of the USA. Jochum (talk) 15:35, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
I'd also note that this is not by any means restricted to the way Americans themselves use the term. If you called a Canadian or a Brazilian an "American", they would correct you, not agree with you. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:43, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Bring an serious reference, for the claim that Americans means only citizen of the USA. As it is, it is a claim originating in the Wikipedia. That is against all Wikipedia rules regarding original content. Perhaps the official usage by the USA government? Jochum (talk) 15:44, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Have you looked at American (word) for even a second? That's the place, if any, for this. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 15:44, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
This is starting to feel very WP:IDHT and certainly borders if not crosses a breach of civility with the repeated attacks on US editors. Recommend closing discussion and not wasting any more time feeding into this. Cannolis (talk) 16:09, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Yup. I'd already come to that conclusion myself re: IDHT, and don't intend to respond directly to the OP any further. I won't close it myself as I'm involved here, but I welcome it. Note: I did suggest above that the OP read American (word) and the sources cited there, but all they apparently did was post a similar message on that talk page instead. Their comments since have shown no evidence of the user having consulted those sources at all. BilCat (talk) 00:24, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Americans/Archive_6&oldid=1241171835"