Talk:Spanish Americans

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Romagall.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

George Santayana

I feel that an American of Spanish descent as important as George Santayana ("Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it") should be represented in this article.--Zulu, King Of The Dwarf People (talk) 21:10, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Untitled

Why dose Spanish American refer to people of pure Spanish decenty only and not apply to people of partial decent. Why should Puerto Ricans not be included in this article if they have Spanish ancestry, since Puerto Rico is a United States territory then even by the definition of American only applying to the united states of America then it should not be a problem to have Marc Anthony or any other Puerto Rican in the gallery.

There is the term Spanish America which is more accurate than Hispanic or Latin America since the Latin speaking Romans did not colonized the region,this was a term of French origin. The term Hispanic is a confusing term linked to the word Hispania, a region of the ancient Roman empire, but adopted incorrectly by the US government. It seems there is a racist ideology which may be linked to the idea of European superiority in this article and the clear distinction many people want to have between pure Europeans and people of mix ancestry. French Canadian is the culture of Montreal and Quebec which denotes the French culture but the so called French Canadians are not of pure french decent nor are all of European decent only. The Flag of Montreal has symbolic representation of French,english,scottish and Irish cultures that contributed to the culture of the French Canadians. In addition French Canadians have been influenced heavily by the Metis people (mix ancestry between French, Scottish and Native Americas/First Nations). If French Canadian is used as a way to describe a culture rather than a race then why can't Spanish American be used to describe the culture that the Spanish brought to the america regardless of pureness of race. The idea that people in Spain are homogeneous is flawed too, Spanish culture has been heavily influenced by North Africans,Muslims, Berber, Phonecian, Roman, Visigoths, Celts,Gypsies and immigrations from freed slaves and natives from all of Spains colonies. If the word Hispanic is used as an ethnic culture and not a race why shouldn't the word Spanish be used in stead to refer not only to language but the culture of Spain and Spanish America. I hope this information is useful and sparks an interest on why terms are used incorrectly and how we can rectify that.

Comment

The whole terminology here is confusing. We all know that spanish americans are decendants from SPAIN born in America, and by America I mean the Americas. I would say that the correct term for the definition given on this site is Latin US American. Also if you want to talk about African descendants born in the United States, they should be called African US Americans. An African American can come from Colombia, Republica Dominicana, USA, etc, countires that are part of the Americas. Again, America is not a country, it's a Continent! - signed by anon IP

What you could do to influence government policy in the classification of races in the US census is to send an e-mail about your proposition to www.census.gov , and have them either create a new "US-American" terminology or like many Americans in recent years wanted to reverse the ethnic titles: Spanish-American may well be called "American Spanish" instead, or "American African", "American Asian" and if this catches on, the "American European" while abandoning the racial/colorist term "white". We got one year left until the 2010 Census is conducted, maybe they could eliminate racial categories or not have them a requirement for respondents to answer. + Mike D 26 (talk) 22:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Spanish People in Newark, NJ?

Spanish people in Newark, NJ? The people in Ironbound are all Portuguese and Brazilians. There might be a few people actually from Spain, but they are a small minority. - signed by anon IP

Is somebody anonymously trying to create problems or tension in Wikipedia? To call a Hispanic or Latin American "Spanish" is somewhat offensive and inaccurate for a Central or South American. Newark, NJ has a large community of Hispanics/Latinos, who may speak Spanish but aren't originally from Spain in Europe. There may be a large Portuguese, Brazilian and maybe Cape Verdean community in Newark, but if the Spanish (European not Puerto Rican or Cuban) population is too low, the anonymous edits are worthless and doesn't contribute to the article. + Mike D 26 (talk) 22:27, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

It's NOT offensive or innacurate to call South, Central and Hispanic Caribbeans Spanish, I can guarantee you that right away. By calling them Spanish doesn't mean they're nationality is Spanish (although many Latinoamericans of Spanish origins do have both the Spanish nationality and the one from the country they are born) but that they're basic language is Spanish, just like it's not offensive for a French Canadian to be called French or French American —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.146.72.210 (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Census form

The census form makes it impossible to get any sort of useful a truly useful count of Spanish Americans, so I propose that a box for them be added to the existing ones for Mexican/Mexican American/Chicano, Cuban, Puerto Rican and Other Hispanic, along with a small edit to the text for the latter. The new question would look like this, then:

Question 5 on long form

Is this person Spanish/Hispanic/Latino? Mark [X] the
"No" box if not Spanish/Hispanic/Latino.

✗ No, not Spanish/Hispanic/Latino	✗ Yes, Puerto Rican
✗ Yes, Mexican, Mexican Am., Chicano	✗ Yes, Cuban
✗ Yes, Spaniard/Spanish (Spain)
✗ Yes, other Spanish/Hispanic/Latino — Print group or country name.

SamEV 10:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Plus if the "ancestry Question" is anwered properly, the White Hispanic's with Spanish ancestors via any Latin American country, you can then get a 'REAL' idea of how many people are of Spanish descent...although many already answer the racial question as White, but dont state their roots/ancestors.

Saying your ancestry is Puerto rican, Argentine, Cuban, doesnt help unless your confused of your background..that is a "Nationality"...like "American", "Cuban", "Argentine".

'Question 10 on long form:

What is this person's ancestry or ethnic origin?

(for example: English,Scottish,Irish,Welsh,Italian,
Swedish,Portuguese,African-Am,Cambodian,Cape verdian,
Norwegian,,Dominican,and so on.)


----------------------------------------

----------------------------------------

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.146.7 (talk • contribs) 21:09, 14 October 2007

Because many Latinos who call themselves "Spanish" actually mean "Hispanic" or "Latino," it's not clear how many of those who only answered "Spanish" in the Hispanic origin write-in space or in the Ancestry question really are Spanish American. Also 2.5 million respondents to the ancestry question reported "Hispanic"; who can tell how many are Spanish American and how many are not? That's why it's so difficult to get as good an estimate of Spanish Americans as for others. ... Anyway, for some reason I opted for posting this suggestion here rather than write the Census Bureau. I guess I wanted someone else's opinion about it first. Thanks. SamEV 21:29, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes this is the problem with Americans using the completly wrong usage , refering to Spanish people as people that come from from a Spanish speaking background,......like calling an Australian or a scottish ,Irish and a New zelander or even a Jamaican....Are you English?....just because they speak english. Thats why if they answered their ancestry question properly, this would help also.. This article is to help clear up this problem hopefuly.. Hispania 01 November 2007 (UTC)

There should be an additional box or scheme for the large number of people who are only part Latino, i.e. the product of intermarriage of a Latino/a with a non-Latino. Tmangray 17:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

We need to remember, Latin is a language group, not an ethnicity, so thus one cannot be half latino. Latino would be anyone who can speak a latin language, or is a descendant from a country where a latin language is spoken. Casey14 23:42, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Tmangray is talking about Latinos, a U.S. ethnicity, so yes, one can be half-Latino, just as one can be of half-Jewish ethnicity or half-Danish ethnicity or half-Irish ethnicity. "Latin" is a different subject. SamEV 21:29, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

History of Latinos and Hispanics

Please consider contributing to the article entitled History of Latinos and Hispanics. Thank you! --JuanMuslim ^1m 02:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

list of Spanish Americans

Please see new article, List of Spanish Americans, which needs a lot of improvement work. Thanks Hmains 04:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Descendants of conquistadores

The Spanish Conquistadores conquered Mexico and traveled north to conquer New Mexico. In the process they had children from the Native Americans of the New Mexico Territory. The descendants of these "marriages" are commonly called Spanish Americans in New Mexico. Other terms used to describe these descendants include: genizaros, coyotes, and manitos. SLucero2 15:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

This may be true in some parts fo th U.S, but we can assume that most people who answer their ancestry question correctly today , i know what you mean though ,which occurs in alot of Hispanos. but its just understanding what you are, ancestry or race wise.Hispania 25 October 2007 (UTC)

If I recall, a few Wiki articles about the subcategories and regionalisms of Spanish-descent Americans were deleted: Cantabrian American, Galician American, Andalusian American, Valencian American, Leonese American, Extremaduran American and Aragonian American. I'm fully aware on the cultural distinctions, provincial governments (communities) and linguistic differences being co-languages (if not classified dialectal forms) of the Castillian Spanish, but the articles are empty and void of enough reliable sources or info. to have a complete profile. I think the Spanish-American article already made can go into further detail on the subject of the various diversity of Spain and the Spanish American community. + Mike D 26 (talk) 22:24, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

race?

are spaniards white or hispanic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.95.13.82 (talk) 14:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

White Hispanics. SamEV 05:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Spanish people are white like the others europeans the problem is that when this expression appear "hispanic" ,people saw many mexicans and other latin americans and saw that the most part of then were not white.but why many mexicans and other latin americans are not white?Because of the big racial miscegenation with blacks and indians.in fact 30 percent of the mexican population are pure indians and 60 percent are a mixed between white and indian.So if a indian mexican enter in usa he should choise in a racial classification native american (because all really native people from american continent is native american).but what he does? he doesn't choose native american , why? because tv and other things say that he is hispanic so he thinks like many other people that hispanic is race .And than people started thinking if hispanic people are not white so spanish are not white. But spanish people ,people from spain are white because they are native from europe .if you see the racial classification of the usa governament you see that all europeans , ALL EUROPEANS south,north,east,west are white . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Augusto 201.17.99.243 (talk) 06:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC) Augusto f. arruda fontes

Spaniards are whites.--Karljoos (talk) 20:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Please check this edit

This edit was not given any justification. Can someone please verify it? -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 06:30, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

It's really easy, Alan: the material was challenged and removed, so source it and restore it. SamEV (talk) 20:48, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Article needs some photos

Anybody who has any photos "free public domain" of the "Spanish American Families or Community areas, influences" today and colonial-20th century, of early people like old Tejanos, Spanish Celebrations from Spain etc..

U.S Latin/Hispanic Americans of Spanish ancestry gallary issues

I have taken issue with the gallery in "U.S Latin/Hispanic Americans of Spanish ancestry". This gallery has too many Cubans and Puerto Ricans. There was similar problems in White Hispanic and Latino Americans gallery, but that has been solved. We need to remove most of the pictures from that gallery, and put people of different Latin American origins.

Another issue I have is that gallery states on top "People of Latin American national origin, who are ultimatly of Spanish ancestry", which means these people are pure Spanish. There are people in this gallery who are not pure Spanish at all. That is Eva Longoria (who is Mestiza), and Marc Anthony (which I don't know, can be either Castizo or Mestizo?) I removed them both because it they don't fit the description above. If you want to add them back, that means the description should be changed to "People of Latin American national origin, who are either full or partial of Spanish ancestry"! Lehoiberri (talk) 03:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Spanish American = Latin American?

I'm from Spain and I find amazing how this article tries to convice you Latin-Americans are a subset of a greater Spanish-American group. You know very well that this is nothing but a semantic misconception in the US about the correct meaning of the term "Spanish" and "Spanish people" (which means of course: people from Spain).--62.57.89.201 (talk) 02:55, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes I agree. In my opinion, I don't really like how Latin Americans with Spanish ancestry are referred as Spanish Americans in this article. I agree that people who are "Spanish Americans" are those whose are either Immigrants from Spain who became citizens, or Americans who have ancestors who left Spain and settled in the United States, not Latin America. There was a similar problem in Basque American, too. In that article, there were editors referring Latin Americans, like Cristina Saralegui, as "Basque Americans". I never heard once Cristina calling herself as Basque, she only says that she is Cuban. I found that inappropriate, and removed her and all the other Latin Americans in that page. I really doubt that many Latin Americans with Spanish ancestry view themselves as Spanish Americans. Lehoiberri (talk) 20:01, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree 100%. Christina Saralegui, is a Cuban-American (with Basque ancestry). In the same way that if Jean Reno or Olivier Martinez moved to the US they would be regarded as French-Americans, not Spanish-Americans.--81.184.130.252 (talk) 22:29, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

It's all correct in calling yourself by your recent national origin, since these people came from a Spanish speaking country and are proud of their country not just where their grandparents were from for example. How does salma Hayek identify herself in the US, a Mexican American ofcourse. Then if she has to answer the ancestry/ethnic origin question she is going to put lebanese and Spanish. What's an argentine-american in the US with pure Italian or german ethnic origin going to put, I'm guessing that they will be part of the Italian and german-American population. For people of Spanish descent from a former Spanish colony it's always going to be more cloudy. Oh and the Spanish term usage in the US is badly used to alot of Hispanics of any racial ethnic background, it's just like calling a Jamaican an English person. It's self identification Vs the true facts I guess.86.152.123.241 (talk) 23:12, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

The mother of Salma Hayek was a Mestiza (Native American+Spanish). Mestizo Mexicans have different culture and biological origins than Spaniards. Downplaying other heritages saying "I'm Spanish", like some Hispanics do in the US is the first cause of the misconceptions about the Spanish-American term. In my opinion, the main cause of the wrong usage being so widespread is no other than eurocentrism. As I said before I don't live in the US, but I know well about this tranks to working in a tourist-related area and hearing how tourists fom the US (and even from Australia, I guess due to the cultural influence of the US) in Spain show surprise to see that Spanish people are culturally and racially related to other Southern Europeans groups in the US (like Italian-Americans) instead of "Spanish-Americans" or "the Spanish people in the US". Spaniards differ culturally and look different than Spanish people :) . That meaning: they probably never meet a real Spanish-American and have been using and hearing the term wrongly all their lives. And this article tries hard to give encyclopedic legitimacy to that wrong usage. Other thing: This article is part of WikiProject Latinos (with a nice sombrero in the barnstar). Are Spanish people in the US considered "Latinos"?--81.184.130.252 (talk) 01:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

You erased a valid source from a US court backing why Spanish people are more readily assimilated in the US than other Hispanics. You wouldn't even need a source there: is common sense. There is nothing that differienciates Spanish people from other Southern Europeans, nor culturally nor in the way they look or in the level of national development (actually Spain in GDP per capita, HDI, crime statistics, democracy index, technology index and other social indexes is the leading Southern European nation, and in most others ranks at the same levels of Western European countries). Who do you think are more readily assimilated, Mexican-Americans or Italian-Americans? The only reason why Spanish-Americans can get more discriminated than other Southern Europeans has nothing to do with Spanish people: is by association with different Spanish-speaking groups. Italians or Greeks never had this problem, and they are now very rarely subjected to discimination.--62.57.240.212 (talk) 23:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

It looks like your message is addressed to 86.135.70.201, when, I assume, you're actually addressing me, since I'm the one who removed that content.

But it was only because I was trying to reverse other changes, and didn't quite have the time to be more picky. I'm sorry. SamEV (talk) 04:18, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

He erased it before you. Anyway if we are going to take the aproach for this article of "Spanish-speakers, regardless of nationality, are Spanish people", then I encourage them to continue their hard work with the English-American article (All Enlglish-speakers living in the US are English people). That's exactly the same kind of logic being pushed here.--81.184.130.194 (talk) 04:56, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Do you think that there are currently any statements or other content in the article that pushes that definition? SamEV (talk) 05:12, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Spanish American = White Hispanic?

Tracing their ancestry in Spain, including White Latin Americans of Spanish ancestry 24,806,065 Americans 8.23% of US population Spaniard Settled directly in the US 354,019 Americans 0.12% of the US population in 2007[1] White Hispanic or Latino of Spanish ancestry 24,452,046 Americans 8.11% of the U.S. population in 2007

This is completely, totally, utterly wrong. Almost all Hispanics have some degree of Spanish ancestry, so you may as well count every Hispanic as Spanish-American. The truth, is that most people self-identified as White Hispanic in the US are mostly light-skinned mestizos, and if you live in areas with heavy Hispanic population you know very well that this is the truth. Those "24,806,065 Spanish-Americans" look like, let's say, Italian-Americans (an ethnic group who have a general physical appearance similar to Spaniards)? If you lived/has visited the US you already know the answer. If you were not born in Spain, having some degree of Spanish ancestry doesn't makes you a Spaniard. A Black man being born in Spain and moving later to the US would be a Spanish-American. Someone with a Spanish grandmother being born in Mexico and later moving to the US, not really.

For example let's take a look at the demographics of California:

According to the 2006 ACS Estimates

   * 59.8% White American including White Hispanic
   * 43% White non-Hispanic
   * 35.9% are Hispanic or Latino (of any race)[24]
   * 12.3% Asian American
   * 6.2% Black or African American
   * 3.3% mixed
   * 0.7% American Indian

So, half of the Hispanics in California are actually Spaniard-Americans? Give me a break.

And why is there a picture of Cameron Diaz in this article? She is a Cuban-American (with Spanish ancestry... like, by the way, most Cubans and Cuban-Americans.). This page should be for Spaniard-Americans only, there are already other more global pages like Hispanic, Hispanic and Latino Americans and White Hispanic.--79.152.44.47 (talk) 02:00, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Ken Salazar

Ken Salazar is Mexican-American and not related to Spain. His photo should be removed. Thank you. --Karljoos (talk) 22:25, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Issues with this article

This article has several issues, some of them very important, that should be resolved soon:

1 SOURCES- this article lacks proper and verifiable sources. It is unreferenced

2 BASQUES– there’s a whole paragraph about basques, which is quite partial. I quote: “Basques stood out in the exploration of the Americas, both as soldiers and members of the crews that sailed for the Spanish”. Let’s not forget that they not sailed for the Spanish, as THEY were, and still are, Spaniards.

3 DANCE–a Dance section? It belongs to a different kind of article.

4 CENSUS– I’m not sure the census section belongs here but to the article U.S. Census. Also, this section seems to confuse “Spanish/Spaniard” with Latin Americans.

5 LANGUAGE– The section “Spanish language in the United States” is pointless. It gives basic Spanish examples… what’s the point? “¿Qué hay? (What's new?) and hasta luego”???

Something serious has to be done about it.--Karljoos (talk) 22:45, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Spanish Americans = Latin Americans = Basque Americans?

Is there some reason the infobox image contains a non-negligible amount of individuals who would and should never be referred to as "Spanish Americans?" For example, I've searched for a while and there's not a single source that refers to Raquel Welch as "Spanish American". Bulldog123 22:12, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

• The RfC you started here at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups showed no consensus to adopt your proposal, which was that you propose - simply - that we not include any user-created or user-selected people montages in the infoboxes... for any ethnic group. Fresh off that failed RfC, you went here at Talk:European American, where you proposed the removal of the infobox picture, along with the innocuous observation of: It really doesn't make any sense. Nobody identifies as "European American," they identify as one or more of the various European ethnic groups that this word encompasses. Failing to get any bites on your proposal, your removal of that montage resulted in numerous reverts of your removal and the {I DON’T LIKE IT} tags. The final consensus there was that there was no support for your removal of the montage nor for any tags on the montage and on the whole article itself over the montage.

  Given the disruption you’ve caused in the last several days on this matter, it is only fair to request that you abide by consensus here on this article now. Please also don’t confuse silence by the community on your proposal with acquiescence to it. Silence is often the Wikipedia-equivalent of a pigeon-hole veto. Also, please be advised that you since there was no community consensus (at both the RfC and at the last article with a montage) for removal of the montages and there were many editors who simply did not share your concerns or ideas, that you may be in violation of WP:Tendentious editing if you persist at what amounts to death by a thousand cuts to achieve your ends.

  And, since facts matter on Wikipedia, this Google search shows that Raquel Welch is often referred to as “Spanish American”. Moreover, our own articles states as follows: She was the daughter of Josephine Sarah (née Hall) with English ancestry dating back to John Quincy Adams and the Mayflower, and Armando Carlos Tejada Urquizo, a Bolivian of Spanish descent. This is therefore internally consistent with Wikipedia’s own article “Spanish American”, which states as follows: A Spanish American is a citizen or resident of the United States with ethnic origins in the southwestern European nation of Spain. That definition is copiously cited in our article to RSs, as is the fact that Raquel Welch’s lineage traces to Spain. This article “Raquel Welch Found Her Bolivian Identity” states that her father did not speak of his heritage or allow Spanish to be spoken at home. It also states that Raquel’s singular goal in life is to learn to speak Spanish more fluently and that she delivered a speech in Spanish while touring Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Greg L (talk) 23:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

• P.S. Just to preempt an argument you made on Talk:European American, (“I plainly stated above that the "self-identification" rule only applies to WP:BLPCAT”), in fact, WP:BLPCAT states no such thing. We don’t need her self-declaration that she is a woman nor that her lineage traces to Spain, nor that she lives in America; all three are self-evident and well cited. WP:BLPCAT governs only writing about a living person’s sexual preference, religious affiliation, and any aspect that paints them as having poor character. The rationale underlying BLPCAT is entirely self-evident. I encourage you not to re-try this over and over on Wikipedia; I think the community has spoken and you should abide by it unless you can raise a new and novel argument you haven’t made numerous times before without success. Greg L (talk) 23:37, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

• Please stop hounding me and misrepresenting my positions. Everyone (should) know(s) what the proper way to source individuals in these articles is, and sourcing someone as a "person whose father had Spanish descendants" is not the same thing as sourcing them as a "Spanish American." That she's a woman is fact. That she lived in America is a fact. That her father had descendants from Spain (we can assume from her biography) is a fact. That she is a "Spanish American" is not a fact unless it's stated somewhere. To say it is... is WP:SYNTH. Ethnicity is something that does not have to be identified with per the very definition of "ethnic group." Furthermore, extreme literalism of WP:BLPCAT does not change that it (and WP:BLP) is widely used on noticeboard cases involving a person's ethnicity and by no means is exclusive to concerns about an individual's "reputation." Since the infobox is a template, WP:EGRS (which BLPCAT links to) applies when referencing ethnicity. Bulldog123 08:17, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

• So… you claim that Raquel Welch can’t be referred to as “Spanish American” because “not one single source” states she is such. I showed that notion to be utterly fallacious on all fronts. Simply… wrong. Her lineage traces to Spain and she lives in America; ergo the obvious. And once again, faced with the *inconvenient truth* you then employ your “Pay no attention to that argument behind the curtain”-tactic and dig up your old arguments from your failed RfC. Fascinating.

  OK, let’s look at your new (old) arguments. Your expressed reasoning on this issue here and at the Infobox Images for Ethnic Groups RfC (that you started) and elsewhere makes you seem exceedingly convinced your logic is unassailably correct. You raised WP:SYNTH and WP:BLPCAT at the Ethnic groups RfC and over on Talk:European American, where the consensus wasn’t with you in both places. Your actions as documented here on European Americans (deleting the montage and slapping tags on the article when you didn’t get your way and all of which was against consensus) and then your again raising the exact same points here are a serious cause of concern that further disruption might occur. If you don’t edit against consensus wherever you land, things will be just fine. Now…

  Your edit history is one that might cause some editors to think we’ve got a single-purpose editor on our hands. I’d much prefer to go back to the articles I normally frequent, but feel obliged to protect the project from further disruption. It would be nice to see something from you (a pledge?) or something suggesting that you have an inclination not to edit against consensus on this issue and merely contribute constructively to Wikipedia in other ways. However your continued raising of the same points over and over and over at AfDs and RfCs on this issue and—now at individual articles—is a bit worrisome.

  In the mean time, the bottom line here is that you may delete the montage when there is a consensus here for you to do so. Greg L (talk) 18:00, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

• Yes, I claim that Raquel Welch cannot be referred to as a Spanish American because we can't find a source that says she is. This is the standard that is and was instated on nearly every ethnic group list for almost four years now (see the talk pages of nearly every List of X people article here, at the top of the page here, also at the very top of the page here, all over this talk page too). List of Jewish actors and List of Jewish American businesspeople are sourced this way and any attempts to source otherwise are immediately reverted on those articles. The problem is that a lot of these lists have since fallen into disarray because we've lost a few really good editors who were maintaining them... it doesn't mean that the original sourcing ceases to exist however. This standard applies to categories and templates as well. If you don't (or choose not to) admit this... how is that my problem? Your standards for "consensus" are set unrealistically high and only set that high because you don't like me. Also, that you keep bringing up my RfC just shows your intent to constantly "comment on the user" instead of the content. Your comment on my RfC said that infoboxes can be dealt with on a case-by-case basis... and yet now when I'm trying to do that... you keep pointing out that my RfC failed to gain consensus... weird, huh? Also, if you want pledges, I tried to make one here, but was reverted by your buddy. Yup, I'm definitely the one who doesn't want to cooperate here. As for Talk:European American, pegging me as a disruptive editor and then saying "what say the community?" (after canvassing your friend)... wow... you expect a fair and balanced "consensus" from that complete railroading? LOL. Regardless, since you didn't complain about my compromise, I'm working on a new montage for the article... one that actually can be sourced. Bulldog123 00:00, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

• Let’s be clear about these “standards” that Wikipedia supposedly adheres to. I just looked at your first one (which you aliased “here”). It is Talk:List of famous German Americans/Archive1#Sources. The editor who posted that list merely opined what he thought ought to be the standard for labeling someone as “German American”. That editor was User:Jack O'Lantern. His opinion does not set policy.

  Probably the best thing for establishing policy is the RfC you started (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups#Infobox Images for Ethnic Groups). That venue was a rather centralized one suitable for gaining the input from a wide variety of editors. I hope that User:Jack O'Lantern had an opportunity to weigh in there. There was no consensus there for what you were proposing, which was I propose - simply - that we not include any user-created or user-selected people montages in the infoboxes... for any ethnic group. There, you raised pretty much the identical arguments you are now raising here. That ship has sailed and I won’t be going down that path again here with you.

  In the case of Raquel Welch, the fact that she is a woman is incontestable, that she is American is incontestable, and that her origins trace through Bolivia to Spain are also incontestable. It’s simply not going out of bounds, IMHO, to use her picture in a montage nor for anyone to describe her, where it is encyclopedically relevant, that she is a Spanish American woman. Moreover—at least with Raquel Welch—she is proudly embracing her Spanish heritage as of late and has been trying to better master the Spanish language. Whoever chose her picture for inclusion in the montage did a wise move because, based on what I’ve now read about her as a result of this discussion thread, Raquel would probably be the first person around to proudly call herself a “Spanish American”. I understand there is potential for error and abuse in these sort of classifications. But, in this case, I don’t share your concerns. Sorry. Greg L (talk)03:20, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

CALIFORNIA The name "California" comes from "CALIDA FORNAX" being "fornax" a latin word ("horno" in Spanish, or "oven" in egnlish) So, "Califonia" means "HOT OVEN".--83.53.167.119 (talk) 00:47, 4 April 2011 (UTC) Also de MALASPINA Glaciel in Alaska was named after the Spanish explorer (of Italian origin) Malaspina, and the JUAN DE FUCA STRAIT between Canada and the U.S. was named after the Spanish explorer Juan de Fuca.

File:Spanish-American-people2.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Spanish-American-people2.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:51, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Daisy Fuentes

May someone please remove Daisy Fuentes from the article. She is Cuban , and she merely moved to Spain temporarily. According to the article, she is not Spanish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.149.255.139 (talk) 05:01, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Spaniards are only the people with Spanish nationality

People born in any other Spanish-speaking country should not be considered Spanish, even though they have some ancestry from Spain. There are articles about mexican-american or cuban-american. So Raquel Welch should not be here.--79.155.113.50 (talk) 15:37, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Why don't you read her biography?. .she says she is of Spanish descent and ancestry therefore no one said this is for only people that have direct links straight from Spain to the US.... What about all the French Canadians that moved to the US?.. did they stop being French in ancestry.. No they didn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.43.7.172 (talk) 09:23, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Spanish American defenition

Greetings,

Would it be proper to say that Spanish is the culture and language of Spain. Spain being a culture made up of the evolution that took there with its unique mediterrenean, european history. So when the Spanish empire expanded to the Americas, Africa and Asia is only logical to refer to the areas that still use the language of Spanish and the cultural traits which are more similar than different as Spanish America. This seems like a proper and precise term rather than Hispanic America or Latin America since no country officialy speaks Latin nor the Ancient region known as Roman Hispania had any relationship to the countries and regions who were directly in relation to the Spanish culture during the colonial time. So that said, I would like to emphasise and promote the use of Spanish Americans as the people who are culturally linked to the regions that belong to the Spanish Americas. Spanish being a culture and not a race since Spain herself has had the influence of many different groups who contributed to the rich and development of that culture with their many different origins and also the fact that race is not a scientific fact. I strongly believe that besideds the majority of the people having some degree of Spanish ancestry that making a disctition between a person who is of partial and a person of full Spanish ancestry is more of a racist and discriminatory ideology. However to point out that the language and the customs is directly from the Spanish culture and that the regional differences are minor comparred to the great link between Spain and Spanish American culture that Spanish American should have more of a global definition and not the limited ideology that Spanish American suggest only the full decendants direct European immigrants to the United States of America. It is just to limiting and prejudice of a definition because it undermines the people who have ancestors who settled in what is now the south west of the USA, Florida and Louisianna before these areas were incorporated into the USA Union. Also, Many people considered White (a rather racist ideology) in the USA are not of full Europa ancestry, many with Aboriginal and African roots but because of phenotype or ignorrance of not knowing, they are considered and believe to be of some pure race which is a social construct. If we use proper language with a clear definition we can shed light into what appears to be a complex subject. I believe that adding the global definition that Spanish American is the people of Spanish American (All the Americas not just one country in the American continents) is fair, rational and very proper. Spanish American, people who are from areas in the Americas of with cultural ties to Spanish American culture and ancestry. In addition anyone from The United States of America should just Identify as citizen of the USA. Racially, even do that ideology is a social construct, should label themselves as of European, African, Asian, Aboriginal ancestry or a combination of these groups. Hope that my thoughts and ideas serve of some aid to this article and more importantly to the way people view this subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.3.37.80 (talk) 15:45, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

We would need reliable sources to verify what you are saying♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 17:27, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Latin American have predominately Spanish ancestry

"About 50 million Americans are of Latin American descent and therefore most have predominately Spanish ancestry due to Spanish colonialism of Mexico and South America". I doubt that is true. Is there a reference that can be used to support this claim? Otherwise I would rephrase to "About 50 million Americans are of Latin American descent and therefore may have some Spanish ancestry due to...".Drar3g (talk) 13:46, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I doubt so. The biggest Hispanic communities come from Mexico and Central America, where native background is predominant over Spanish.--Xareu bs (talk) 13:11, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

The population of this poor Spanish descent

Is that there can be a few thousand Spaniards in united states, also according to the ad in this Spanish version goes that in 2000 there were about 10,017,244 Spanish descent... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derekitou (talk • contribs) 02:25, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 13 May 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. EdJohnston (talk) 23:26, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

---

Spanish immigration to the United States → Spanish Americans – Articles current name is "Spanish immigration to the United States" and the article focuses on far more than just that, it focuses on the demographics, religion, language, socioeconomic, and more things pertaining to Spaniards in America. The current article is set up like the Italian American page or the French American page or just ethnic groups in the United States pages in general. Not only that, but "Spanish Americans" already redirects here, I feel this article needs to be cleaned up a bit, obviously the correct name for the article is a good start. Kymako (talk) 10:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Kymako the two articles that you mention start with the wording "Italian Americans ..." and "French Americans ...". The title of the main article is Americans and I would consider "Spanish Americans" as being a subset of this group. As the words "Spanish" and "American" are both adjectives I don't see how a title as "Spanish American" can work as per WP:NOUN. The topic is a group of people who are commonly described as "Spanish Americans". Can the proposal be changed? GregKaye 13:02, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

• Support perfectly per nom Red Slash 22:38, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
• Support to Spanish Americans GregKaye 02:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
• Support This article covers Spanish Americans in general, not only recent immigrants. Dimadick (talk) 07:22, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 1 June 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Number 57 15:10, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

---

Spanish Americans → Spanish American – Page title is currently plural but it was and should be singular to match other pages such as Italian American, Mexican American, Colombian American, etc. Dash9Z (talk) 18:23, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:PLURAL and the recent RM result at Talk:Korean Americans#Requested move 11 March 2015. RGloucester — ☎ 20:19, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • All other Descendant-American articles are singular such as British American, French American, Brazilian American, Guatemalan American, Chilean American, etc. It seems most single nationality articles are plural such as Americans, Canadians, Swedes, Italians, etc. and most nationality-nationality articles are singular such as Vietnamese Canadian, German Venezuelan, American Australian, Japanese Brazilian, etc. Dash9Z (talk) 00:05, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose, Surely the relevantly related articles to Spanish Americans are Americans, Hispanic and Latino Americans and Asian Hispanic and Latino Americans. To say "Spanish American" would simply present two consecutive adjectives. Spanish American what? GregKaye 20:28, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Spanish American people. They will say "I'm Spanish American". And those are broader groups. All other Descendant-American articles are singular such as British American, French American, Brazilian American, Guatemalan American, Chilean American, etc. It seems most single nationality articles are plural such as Americans, Canadians, Swedes, Italians, etc. and most nationality-nationality articles are singular such as Vietnamese Canadian, German Venezuelan, American Australian, Japanese Brazilian, etc. Dash9Z (talk) 00:05, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:PLURAL Red Slash 03:53, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • All other Descendant-American articles are singular such as British American, French American, Brazilian American, Guatemalan American, Chilean American, etc. It seems most single nationality articles are plural such as Americans, Canadians, Swedes, Italians, etc. and most nationality-nationality articles are singular such as Vietnamese Canadian, German Venezuelan, American Australian, Japanese Brazilian, etc. Dash9Z (talk) 00:05, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Photos

16? Why? What is the selection criteria? "Do not change this list without first discussing it in the Talk page". Where are past discussions? --Ronz (talk) 14:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

A simple question

You like to put people with dark eyes and black hair always when there is a main Hispanic or Spanish and Portuguese languages? There are many more famous Spanish American people and you put mostly those with dark eyes .. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derekitou (talk • contribs) 01:48, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Spanish Americans. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100705130300/http://www.drclas.harvard.edu/revista/articles/view/577 to http://www.drclas.harvard.edu/revista/articles/view/577

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed as correct. Thanks, Cyberbot II. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:37, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Español americanos

I see Spanish Americans is translated to Español-Americanos, I guess to distinguish from hispanoamericanos which basically means Latin Americans from Spanish-speaking countries. That is fine, except Español - Americanos is gramatically incorrect and does not exist in the Spanish language. Asilah1981 (talk) 20:48, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Which doesn't make sense considering that the lead opens with the description, "(Spanish: español-americanos, hispano-americanos or estadounidenses de origen español)." Hispano-americanos actually translates as Hispanic Americans in the same way as hispanoamericanos. It may be well intentioned, but it's WP:OR and confuses the situation even further. My take on it is to remove the pseudo-translation from the top of the infobox and use further hatnotes to expand on the convolutions in order to assist the reader in finding the subject matter they're looking for. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:47, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

On Californios

Iryna Harpy I edited significantly the lead. Let me know what you think.Asilah1981 (talk) 19:56, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Spanish Americans

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Spanish Americans's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "odisea canaria":

• From Isleño (Louisiana): Balbuena Castellano, José Manuel. "La odisea de los canarios en Texas y Luisiana" (The Odyssey of the Canarians in Texas and Louisiana). Pages 137, 138, 150 and 152. (ed) 2007, editorial: Anroart Ediciones.
• From Canarian Americans: Balbuena Castellano, José Manuel. "La odisea de los canarios en Texas y Luisiana" (The Odyssey of the Canarians in Texas and Louisiana). Page 46; (ed) 2007,editorial: Anroart Ediciones.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 20:22, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Basque Americans

The article states that: Basque Americans may or may not be considered Spanish Americans, as they form a separate linguistic group from other Spaniards. The fact is, that even in Spain, Basque-Speaking people are a very short minority, so they have to use the Spanish language to be understood. --Fev 17:07, 3 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fev (talk • contribs)

Spaniard excludes Spanish Basque

That comment (Spaniard excludes Spanish Basque) appears in 2 different points of the page. Can someone explain it? --Jotamar (talk) 22:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

With no reply in one year, I think it's preferable to delete the comment. --Jotamar (talk) 22:00, 5 February 2024 (UTC)