This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
African diaspora article. This is
not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Some of the European entries are apparently counting people from the Maghreb. Those are North Africans, not sub-Saharan Africans - i.e., they aren't "black".
69.129.36.50 (
talk) 20:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)reply
Read the title; African diaspora not Black. The same as Haitians are black but not African. But yes I think they meant to say Black not African coz most Blacks in US or Brazil haven't been to Africa
197.186.1.245 (
talk) 16:00, 1 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Largest 16 African diaspora populations
Where is the citation for this? Where are these numbers coming from?? --
128.122.209.207 (
talk) 17:01, 5 September 2011 (UTC)reply
Africa Diaspora Populations
In Italy there are 2,670,514 black people!! not 800,000! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.35.255.69 (
talk) 20:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)reply
You absolutely must source this, or regular editors will continue to revert you, as we have been doing for days.--
Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (
talk) 20:36, 8 June 2010 (UTC)reply
i' am sorry!! but now i am ready, the number is 2,670,514! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.35.228.49 (
talk) 20:47, 8 June 2010 (UTC)reply
i don' t andesteand, i' am from Italy, soy i speak Italian!! please help me! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.35.245.25 (
talk) 21:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)reply
Just tell us where is your number published? Dov'è 2.670.514 pubblicato? ~
Amatulić (
talk) 21:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)reply
Please is true, in Italy there are 2,670,514!! Demo ISAT Statistiche!! don't stop me now. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.35.245.25 (
talk) 21:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)reply
OK, that article cites
http://demo.istat.it/str2006/ as the source for the number, which reports 2,670,514 non-citizen foreign residents from African countries in 2006. The original cited source
http://noi-italia.istat.it does not quote numbers, only percentages and numbers per 1000 population. I can only conclude that the number from that source was derived.
I am disturbed by the subdomain 'demo' in the source that provides a number. I'd like to see some other editor's opinions. ~
Amatulić (
talk) 21:24, 8 June 2010 (UTC)reply
Thank you vary much=)!! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.35.245.25 (
talk) 21:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
NO is immposible!! is
http://demo.istat.it/str2006/ please now, the black paople are 2,670,514 i don' t think soy 800,000 is vary long for now!! in Italy today there are more black people.
plesa!! in france there are 3,000,0000 not 4,200,000!!! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.36.10.128 (
talk) 00:38, 9 June 2010 (UTC)reply
Not quite. That 2 million+ figure at
http://demo.istat.it/str2006/ is a reference to all immigrants to Italy from Africa, not blacks exclusively. And most immigrants to Italy from Africa are from
North Africa, not Black Africa, as that same website makes clear.
74.12.222.239 (
talk) 01:23, 9 June 2010 (UTC)reply
I find it strange that the article refers to "Africans" inclusively, yet the table of figures has a column for "Black Africans". I wonder why. I suspect many of the other numbers in that table represent all Africans rather than just Black Africans. The entire table may be flawed in its implementation.
So the original 800,000 figure is questionable (derived via original research), and the 2.67 million figure is also questionable because it includes non-black Africans.
In any case, the source breaks it down by country, so it's easy to eliminate all the countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea (Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, etc.). Pretty much everyone south of those countries would be considered black, I think. ~
Amatulić (
talk) 03:47, 9 June 2010 (UTC)reply
I lighten the text a little bit by removing the constant use of the "Black" before the word "African". I think the fact that those Africans were black is abundantly clear by the context of this article and is considered the common use of the word. See the AU definition in the current article for example.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 12:28, 2 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Africa diaspora
In italy there are 2,670,514 africans!! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.35.230.81 (
talk) 13:04, 17 June 2010 (UTC)reply
Africa diaspora popolations
And in France are 3,000,000 mllion, is not true 4,200,000!! tha africans include,
in Italy are 2,670,514 million. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.35.233.71 (
talk) 13:13, 17 June 2010 (UTC)reply
Accepted terminology in reference to African diaspora groups
I'm not sure if this point applies to diaspora groups in other countries but in the U.K. it is now generally preferred if we refer to African-Caribbeans as opposed to Afro-Caribbean, as used in the article. This is similar to African-American, whereas one would not hear the term Afro-American and the use of the prefix Afro may be seen to have offensive connotations.
The Africans immigrants in Italy 2010, are 1 milion!! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.35.240.138 (
talk) 15:51, 28 November 2010 (UTC)reply
Africa diaspora popolations
Please!! control in Demo
ISTAT 2009 stranieri residenti in Italia!!the africans are 931,000 —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.35.248.141 (
talk) 21:59, 6 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Please!! Some LOGIC. 931,000 is number with Moroccans, Tunisians, Egyptians, Algerians and Lybians. YOU MUST READ THE ARTICLE!!! In table we have title: "BLACK AND BLACK MIXED POPULTION"!!! The Term "African Diaspora" is applied to sub-saharan Africans. 931,000 - North africa + Caribbean = about 300,000. Use your brain! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
46.113.100.34 (
talk) 10:53, 7 December 2010 (UTC)reply
The total are 931,000 Africans in Italy in 2009!! please control in demo
ISTAT 2009 —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
93.35.229.91 (
talk) 14:24, 14 December 2010 (UTC)reply
931,000 is number with Moroccans, Tunisians, Egyptians, Algerians and Lybians. YOU MUST READ THE ARTICLE!!! In table we have title: "BLACK AND BLACK MIXED POPULTION"!!! The Term "African Diaspora" is applied to sub-saharan Africans. 931,000 - North africa + Caribbean = about 300,000. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Ecsperto (
talk •
contribs) 20:15, 15 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Overuse of the rarely used black african expression
What is important for Wikipedia is the common use of the word and when people refer to Africans and African descent they use black before it because it is understood withing the context. A simple Google search of "African descent" can convince anybody that people rarely used added the word black (much less Black) before it. What is important here is the common use of the words and frankly it's very cumbersome to read that way especially when it's repeated over and over again.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 18:14, 9 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Perhaps some reading on the topic will change your mind.
Moxy (
talk) 19:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Thank you for those links. It clearly demonstrate my point. They use the term "African" without any constant references to the color of the skin of the people preceding the word. It's the common use of the word "African". For example articles about the slave trade would use the word Africans to describe the people who were enslaved.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 19:36, 9 February 2011 (UTC)reply
???Pls read the books...let me give you some links to pages and terms used
Moxy (
talk) 19:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Even in the text you provide they generally use the expression Africans without any qualitative regarding the color of the skins. Making a search (or browsing the book) with the word African or Africans can clearly show that. Same result would be provided by doing a search in google or current news sites. I gave an example by using the United Nation link above. It's the common use of the word. In fact this very article was written using the word African at beginning.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 20:08, 9 February 2011 (UTC)reply
I can also state the African Union definition of "African diaspora" quoted in this article to consolidate my point: The African Union defined the African diaspora as "[consisting] of people of African origin living outside the continent, irrespective of their citizenship and nationality and who are willing to contribute to the development of the continent and the building of the African Union."Analyzer99 (
talk) 21:03, 9 February 2011 (UTC)reply
I think we have to be careful to specify "Black African descent" because by your definition, every human being is part of the African diaspora. —
Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk 04:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)reply
I really don't see what your beef is. African or Black African, they can be used interchangeably, but there is nothing wrong with using "Black African". The vast majority of people in North Africa are not Black and shouldn't be lumped together with people of a different race.
Blackjays1 (
talk) 05:30, 10 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Analyzer99, the subject is intended to be people of Black African ancestry, aka Subsaharan African ancestry, throughout the world. It is to them that the literature on "African diaspora" is devoted. The subject shouldn't be misrepresented, either by commission or omission.
SamEV (
talk) 01:28, 11 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Let's use a definition and choice of words as the sourced definition by the African Union and African Diaspora association of Canada (
http://www.africancanadiandiaspora.org/eng/), among others. Which are line with the earlier version of this very article and in agreement with common use.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 02:35, 11 February 2011 (UTC)reply
I understand your point of view but Wikipedia is not the place to express personal quibbles about semantics but strive to use reliable sources for its encyclopedic articles (Verifiability). Here I provided sourced definition of African diaspora which are in line with common use and earlier version of this article.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 10:50, 18 February 2011 (UTC)reply
I want to recall again the core principle of
WP:V in the editing of Wikipedia article. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Analyzer99 (
talk •
contribs) 18:54, 22 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Dont not change this again..as you see noone thinks your right. You do not have consensus to change the wording. If this continues i will report this behaviour. Pls read
Wikipedia:ConsensusMoxy (
talk) 19:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)reply
This is a low viewed page so consensus is easy to come by with multiple or a few accounts. I will seek external dispute resolution if the non-sourced wording of the African Diaspora definition is constantly changed for an unsourced one. Wikipedia talk pages is non-proper source. Still I encourage editors to consider the core
WP:V principle above personal quibbles about semantic and discuss it on this talk page. Because
WP:V is a core principle of wikipedia to prevent that type of arbitrary edition (even by so-called consensus which is not a core principle as the concept of Verifiability). As I said above, the wording of the definition of African Diaspora is the one used by the majority of the African Diaspora sources and association and it's not the place of Wikipedia to redefine expression.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 20:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)reply
You are free to seek outside opinions at any time for anything - Perhaps outside help will solve this edits. We have explained Y the word is relevant and have provided references to this fact. If you believe outside intervention is needed please see Dispute resolution requests which details the various different methods used in dispute resolutions.
Moxy (
talk) 01:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)reply
I didn't see any sourced definition of African Diaspora using the 'approximate' skin color of African people as a qualifier. The African Union definition African Diaspora didn't use it. Nor is the New Dictionary of the History of Ideas or the Unesco encyclopedia. In fact all the contrary. Of all African Diaspora association
http://www.africancanadiandiaspora.org/eng/aboutus.aspx all use the term African without any qualificative on the color of African people. Here the African Diaspora association of Europe:
http://www.auads.info/ And:
http://www.aswadiaspora.org/ African diaspora museum:
http://www.moadsf.org/about/index.html. All those completely contradict personal opinion about it not backed by any sources. In fact, in contradiction with all the main sources, common use and earlier version of this very article before it was modified without any source to back the change.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 02:02, 24 February 2011 (UTC)reply
Analyzer99, you're being a major pain in the ass, and I think you know it. You really want sources that say the African diaspora consists of Black Africans and their descendents? Take a look at these:
"dynamic interactions among black communities and cultures"
"Black political movements since the 1960s"
"Africans who lived south of the Sahara and were dispersed by free will or forcefully to the non-African lands"
Becoming Black: creating identity in the African diaspora
Black theatre: ritual performance in the African diaspora
There's more, but you can see it for yourself. Enough already, or I'll see to it that you're blocked again. —
Malik ShabazzTalk/Stalk 03:59, 24 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The contentious is about the terminology used. This article is about "African Diaspora", your sources aren't, and all sources cited about "African Diaspora" which defined the concept used the term "African" without any qualifier about the color of the skin (which is not needed). Why should Wikipedia be any different? Why you're taking up upon yourself to change the term used by all African Diaspora associations, common use (like most news articles), African Union definition of African Diaspora. Personal quibbles about semantic, or fringe original theory, not backed by any sources is hardly any reason to do so. In fact, earlier version of this very article used "African" as the cited in the sources for many years before it was modified without any sources to back up the changes. People on a Wikipedia talk page hardly constitute reliable sources about personal quibbles and fringe theory and offer no proper sources to back up their claims. In fact, the 3 sources in the article intro simply mention Africans. Isn't that true? So why do you refuse to accept the terminology for the African Diaspora used by the African Union, African Diaspora/Museum association in Europe, Canada and the US and Unesco encyclopedia and the dictionary of new ideas? Wikipedia is not the proper venue to change common terminology. I think the terminology used should be the one used by all major African Diaspora associations and the African Union.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 08:18, 24 February 2011 (UTC)reply
If you take the time to read the definition of African Diaspora in the link you provided:
http://www.wadupam.org/about It reads:
Q What is the African Diaspora? A The African Diaspora is mainly those persons of African descent dispersed from Africa into Europe, Asia and the Americas during Arab and European commercial slave raids.. Again showing my point strongly, and disproving yours about the absolute need to put "black" in front of "African", which is not surprising since it's the common definition (and common use of the word "African" which refer especially to black) and terminology used for it by almost all sourced definition of African Diaspora.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 09:17, 24 February 2011 (UTC)reply
So again we are showing the term is used but you are simply dismiss it. You did noticed the word is on the page right? I think i see the problem now - Do you believe all Africans are black? .
Moxy (
talk) 09:34, 24 February 2011 (UTC)reply
I took the portion of your source which define African Diaspora which is the subject of this article and the current point of contentious. Don't put that on me. As if it was my personal opinion. All reliable sources about the African Diaspora agrees with the terminology. Which is the essence of
WP:Verifiability.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 09:54, 24 February 2011 (UTC)reply
O well i am done here. Will let other respond from now on ..Quote ="All reliable sources about the African Diaspora agrees with the terminology" Like the 14 refs on this page are not not there? Good luck in the future on your endeavour to rid the world of the word black -->
Encyclopedia of the African diaspora.
Moxy (
talk) 10:13, 24 February 2011 (UTC)reply
The sources I used are about the definition of "African diaspora" and the terminology used which is the contentious here. Even your own sources agrees with it and only use "African" in the African Diaspora definition. Hard to believe all African Diaspora associations, the African Union, the Unesco encyclopedia, news articles (including the United Nation), earlier version of this article and dictionaries are on a personal mission against your quibbles about semantics and personal theory.
Analyzer99 (
talk) 10:37, 24 February 2011 (UTC)reply
France
there are only about 350,000-400,000 blacks in the european part of France but if you include the black populations of the overseas departments then the black population for France as a whole is over 1 million for example there are 200,000 blacks in the paris region of ile de france(population 12,000,000) but in comparison the city of london england(population of 8,000,000) has 1,100,000 blacks,that means london has way more black people than all of the european part of france. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
96.250.236.192 (
talk) 14:04, 26 March 2011 (UTC)reply
Neanderthal slur
Isn't the use of this term just a cover for the Neanderthal slur, painting other people as being not pure Homo sapiens sapiens, even though no firm evidence of crossbreeding has been offered?
Hcobb (
talk) 18:54, 31 December 2011 (UTC)reply
Putting a tiny note in the lead to handle this.
Hcobb (
talk) 04:45, 2 January 2012 (UTC)reply
Neanderthals aren't mentioned. The page is on historic migration from Africa (mainly to the New World), not the hypothetical and debated Out-of-Africa exodus of around 70,000 years ago/prehistory.
Middayexpress (
talk) 11:25, 2 January 2012 (UTC)reply
No mention of biological factors
Take a map of the Americas and draw lines at the north and south ranges for
Malaria. The
Mason–Dixon Line is a good estimate on the north side.
Given all of this, where would you expect the Africans to move to in the Americas? Why isn't any of this even mentioned in this article?
Hcobb (
talk) 12:51, 14 May 2012 (UTC)reply
Brazil
First off there is no category in the Brazilian census labeled "multiracial" and even if there was that doesnt necessarily mean African + other race, it would also include Amerindian + European. The category is called "Pardos", which mean brown, a phenotypic description. Many people who identify as Pardos are mixed Amerindian + European, and a good percentage of them are unknowingly almost full blooded Amerindian. You cant claim that every single person who identifies as Pardos has African blood. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
67.85.3.79 (
talk) 18:34, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
4 months later still no explanation and still not fixed...... — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
67.85.3.79 (
talk) 02:53, 2 December 2012 (UTC)reply
Emigration from Africa
The lede states the following: "In modern times, [African diaspora] is also applied to Africans who have emigrated from the continent in order to seek education, employment and better living for themselves and their children." According to this I propose merging the contents of the
Emigration from Africa article (which is hardly more than a stub) into this article.
FonsScientiae (
talk) 20:45, 4 August 2012 (UTC)reply
That sentence is misplaced and should be removed; changing the scope of the entire article based on it is unwarranted. The Emigration from Africa page is reserved for discussion of recent immigration from Africa and can be expanded. The contextually very different historic migrations that formed the New World communities (who, in any case, no longer have just African ancestries) and the prehistoric, hypothetical Out-of-Africa exodus are separate topics for their own respective articles.
Middayexpress (
talk) 15:10, 5 August 2012 (UTC)reply
I see your point, but the lede states that the article is particularly about "the descendants of the Africans who were enslaved and shipped to the Americas by way of the Atlantic slave trade, with the largest population in Brazil". In that case the title is misleading. My other source of confusion is that the article often talks particularly about black people, but the definition includes anyone of African descent (regardless of skin color). So is the article only about dark skinned people or everyone of African descent?
FonsScientiae (
talk) 16:21, 5 August 2012 (UTC)reply
Though perhaps a little ambiguous, African diaspora is a common term for the historic migrations that formed the New World communities
[1]; c.f.
Music of the African diaspora.
Middayexpress (
talk) 17:18, 5 August 2012 (UTC)reply
If so, why are there 'dispersal through migration' and 'emigration from Africa' subsections? And my previous question again: is the article only about black Africans in the New World, or emigrated Africans in the world generally?
FonsScientiae (
talk) 16:10, 6 August 2012 (UTC)reply
The article is about the various New World communities that were formed by the historic migrations of peoples from (mainly West and Central) Africa. While these population movements originated in certain parts of Africa hundreds of years ago, the communities that today descend from them have through time developed their own unique cultures, languages, personal names, and multiple ancestries due to intermarriage, miscegenation and other factors. Most of those population movements were also involuntary. However, the dispersal through migration sub-section is there to discuss the additional instances of voluntary historic migration (viz. "From the very onset of Spanish activity in the Americas, black Africans were present both as voluntary expeditionaries and as involuntary laborers.[4][5] Juan Garrido was one such black conquistador. He crossed the Atlantic as a freedman in the 1510s and participated in the siege of Tenochtitlan.[6]"). Discussion of recent emigration from Africa as a whole, while briefly touched on in that particular sub-section since it too is voluntary, is generally out-of-place and belongs on the Emigration from Africa page devoted to it.
Middayexpress (
talk) 14:11, 7 August 2012 (UTC)reply
The first sentence of the lede contradicts that: "African diaspora ... historic movement of peoples from Africa — predominantly to the Americas, Europe and the Middle East, among other areas around the globe." It doesn't talk about involuntary migrations or migrations to the New World. This article should be either about New World migrations or general emigration from Africa which are two very different topics. At present state, it is confusing what the topic of the article actually is.
FonsScientiae (
talk) 19:44, 7 August 2012 (UTC)reply
The topic is quite clear: "communities throughout the world that are descended from the historic movement of peoples from Africa — predominantly to the Americas, Europe and the Middle East, among other areas around the globe." The second sentence mentions historic involuntary migrations to the New World. I just added another on historic voluntary migrations.
Middayexpress (
talk) 15:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)reply
Thank you. In that case it should include emigration from Africa; as emigration is voluntary migration from a place (here: Africa).
FonsScientiae (
talk) 16:28, 8 August 2012 (UTC)reply
The article is on the global communities that were initially formed by historic migrations from particular parts of Africa, not recent movements from the continent as a whole. Though not exclusively the case, most of that dispersal was involuntary as well.
Middayexpress (
talk) 16:55, 8 August 2012 (UTC)reply
This source defines African diaspora as solely migration through slavery to the New World. (
1) But I believe that it the term can be mean any historical migrations from Africa. The definitions I found of the term are quite vague: some implies only New World migrations, some historical but involuntary movements. Because of this vagueness I propose changing the title to 'Historical migrations from Africa' and redirecting 'African diaspora' to this article.
FonsScientiae (
talk) 12:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)reply
The problem with 'Historical migrations from Africa' is that it could be mistaken as encompassing, say, the Moorish expeditions in
Al Andalus since they too were also historic migrations from Africa. But that's ultimately not what is being discussed here. The article is about the actual global communities that were formed by the largely involuntary historic migrations from specific parts of the continent; mainly West/Central Africa
[2].
Middayexpress (
talk) 15:47, 10 August 2012 (UTC)reply
According to broad definition Moors living outside Africa are part of the African diaspora. According to the other definition, African diaspora is involuntary historic migrations, and doesn't include Moors. The problem here is that the term 'African diaspora' can mean many things. The problem is the inconsistency: the article includes communities which were formed mostly by voluntary movements of African people (Europe, Asia, Oceania), and not only New World communities. The article should only discuss historical, involuntary movements of Africans, or should talk about general African communities around the world. How do you feel about it?
FonsScientiae (
talk) 15:18, 11 August 2012 (UTC)reply
The article should discuss what it's about. Namely, the global populations descended from the historic and largely involuntary movement of related peoples from mainly West/Central Africa, not from the continent as a whole. The involuntary historic migrations themselves are discussed in the various slave trade articles. This community is commonly referred to as the "African diaspora", however imperfect the term (esp. given the peoples' multiple ancestries at this point).
Middayexpress (
talk) 17:48, 11 August 2012 (UTC)reply
Then the lede, the general description should include this, that it is mainly about the movements of West and Central African people.
FonsScientiae (
talk) 08:55, 18 August 2012 (UTC)reply
The page is not mainly about the movements of West and Central African people, but about the global populations descended from the historic and largely involuntary movement of related peoples from Africa; primarily the Western and Central parts. At any rate, I've added a note to that effect.
Middayexpress (
talk) 16:10, 18 August 2012 (UTC)reply
Diaspora and Modernity
Patrick Manning recently wrote about how the African diaspora has helped shape modernity. This article could benefit from a small paragraph explaining this idea. I would appreciate any feedback or input people may have.
Rmb86 (
talk) 00:00, 10 May 2013 (UTC)reply
I too joined because of my interest and studies about the African Diaspora. You may see by the way I edit (constantly rewriting), that my contributions derive from careful reading and reflection.
Ivettedez (
talk) 09:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)reply
The Forgotten Afro-Spanish
I do not know if this relevant enough to be included in the article, but I find it interesting. Although most of the african slaves captured by Spain in the middle ages were sent to the Americas, a sizeable number of them ended up in mainland Spain, specially in Andalusia to the South, and they were relevant enough to have their own guild in the sevillian fair (see
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermandad_de_Los_Negritos_%28Sevilla%29).
In the the XVth century we have the example of the Duke of Medina Sidonia (based on Niebla, a town in Huelva, Andalusia), who freed the slaves that he had "employed" to build his castle, and settled them in Niebla, with the right to choose their own major. We have records of the complaints of the white inhabitants of Niebla to the son of the Duke, a generation later, claiming that the former slaves had been given "Too many freedoms and gifts". The noble rebuked them, saying that given that their inhabited his village, they were also his vassals. At any rate, it seems that they started to mix with the local population early on. Their descendants were called "morenos" (literally "swarthy") but continuous intermarriage meant they were mostly assimilated. By the last century just a few families with noticeable black features remained, mostly in the town of Gibraleon.
This is a pretty obscure topic (pun not intended) and I have found only one book dealing with it: "Arcadio Larrea (1952) Los negros de la provincia de Huelva". There are, however, several articles on the net about it like this one
http://www.elmundo.es/magazine/num124/textos/esclavo1.html . It is an article from El Mundo, one of the major spanish newspapers.
The problem being, this topic does not seem to have attracted much attention outside of Spain, and I have found nothing in english about it... May I include this information with the citations I have provided?
I also doubt that Spain is the only country in Europe that has some kind of half forgotten minority remaining from the slavery years. I think that maybe information about that would belong in this article more than the data about the black population currently living in Europe, because the vast mayority of them arrived during the last century, and their presence has nothing to do with the African Diaspora of the Middle and Modern ages I think this article originaly intended to cover. Maybe talking about that original diaspora and the current african emigration in the same article is a bit confusing. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
213.143.50.94 (
talk) 00:03, 20 May 2013 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
African diaspora. 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:
My interest in the plight of African Americans in the US has inspired me to contribute to this page. My work for this page will be driven toward insuring that the page is non-bias and inclusive. The page is currently filled with driving forces for diaspora and numerations of how certain countries have been affected. I aim to make sure that the article also includes the social, psychological, and economic effects on diasporic people. I hope to update the article to include this information with supporting references from peer-review sources. The Wikiproject: African Diaspora lists this article as top-importance but it only has a B-class rank. I hope my improvements give the article more depth in order to increase it's rating.
These updates will take place over the next few months. I welcome edits and advice. This will be the second Wiki article I have edited; I could use all the help you guys are able to give. Looking forward to working with the Wiki-community.
Ratilley (
talk) 01:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Ratilley: I am glad you are interested. Me too. What are your reading?
Ivettedez (
talk) 06:13, 7 January 2016 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
African diaspora. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
YAn 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.
Beginning in the 8th century, Arabs took African slaves from the central and eastern portions of the continent (where they were known as the Zanj) and sold them into markets in the Middle East and eastern Asia.
It would be nice if "took" was changed to an entire sentence of it's own describing how this was accomplished. Took is unnecessarily vague, in my opinion. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
71.115.147.94 (
talk) 13:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on
African diaspora. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
YAn 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.
Even if we were to take the
World Factbook figures at face values, how did you manage to arrive at "black 9.3%" of the 11,179,995 total population of Cuba as being over 4 million. As regards the Brazilian population, you are (as with Cuba)
conflation the concept of a 'diaspora' with those who do not identify as being African/Afro-'something'. The majority of nation-states in South America use different terminology for mixed race, and these terms are often considered mutually offensive. Throwing the World Factbook (which does not provide their sources for the 2010 estimates) and replacing the
reliably sourced figures
with your own preference is misinformation and intentionally misleading as you've introduced your
WP:OR a few times now despite what reliable sources used say. If you dispute the numbers presented, the
WP:BURDEN is on you to demonstrate that you have better/more recent/more reliable sources for any content changes you make. --
Iryna Harpy (
talk) 04:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Addendum: I removed GodSentMe22's previous commentary on the subject on this talk page as
WP:SOAP. For the edification of other editors, however, please note that the editor made his/her intentions of continuing a POV-push clear
here. --
Iryna Harpy (
talk) 04:39, 23 April 2017 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on
African diaspora. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
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.
I have just modified 3 external links on
African diaspora. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
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.
I have just modified 5 external links on
African diaspora. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
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.
I came her to figure out what that d-word meant. Instead it's used again without definition then poorly written self-definition. The very first sentence should clearly and unambiguously define the word diasporsa (found as a misspellt word in chrome dictionary, something I've written up in
Chromium bug reports in the past about so don't bother). I got confused quickly then came here.
Technophant (
talk) 21:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)reply
There is a fuller explanation of the word itself (basically, it just means "scattering") at the article on
Diaspora.
Ghmyrtle (
talk) 14:51, 4 August 2020 (UTC)reply
What are you trying to say exactly? I’m confused. Is that a misspelling? I am also interested in revising this article.
Highflyingkitty (
talk) 14:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Should North Africans be included in this article?
The term African diaspora is usually used to refer to people of sub-Saharan African descent outside of their native lands. However, in this article North Africans are included in the numbers for African diaspora in France, Italy and probably some of the other European countries as well. Thus, my question is if we should include North Africans in this article or not.
Pastore Barracuda (
talk) 12:12, 16 November 2020 (UTC)reply
We should not. There was already a discussion here on what the African diaspora encompasses. In my opinion, these numbers should only include Black people of sub-Saharan African descent anywhere, including North Africa. Therefore, these numbers should be revised for France, Italy and Spain.
Maxxies (
talk) 23:34, 26 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Lol, you guys are idiots and racist. North Africans are still Africans and this term should absolutely not be defined by skin color
2601:8C:981:A3C0:6883:6362:600:D7C5 (
talk) 02:08, 11 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Not idiocy not racism. In Brazil for example, people of North African descent, mostly Moroccan Jewish, self identify and are identified as white. Therefore they are not considered Afro-Brazilians.
@
Leo020304 and
Slainek: You changed the data for Brazil, but the sources you gave don't contain information about the number of members of the African diaspora in Brazil. That's why I had to revert you. --
Rsk6400 (
talk) 20:24, 17 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Genetic history
@
Daniel Power of God: I deleted your recent addition of genetic history. It is based completely on primary sources (see
WP:PSTS). An article should be based on secondary sources, because WP is not a repository of all kinds of lists, but should present information in a way that allows our readers to understand information in its context. --
Rsk6400 (
talk) 18:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Infobox
User @
Belevalo: are persistently trying to change the information presented for Brazil in the infobox simply because they doesn't like how it appears, despite with verified sources - and the information being consistent with the map and the order of data by country. I have warned them several times, but they still keep on doing it. I asked him to seek a consensus, apparently they refused.
Hassanjalloh1 (
talk) 02:31, 21 January 2022 (UTC)reply
infobox isn't for duplicating everything in the dedicated stats section. also, wiki image is a bad source also the notion that all pardos are of african descent is blatantly incorrect.
Belevalo (
talk) 02:39, 21 January 2022 (UTC)reply
You see everything according to your own point of view. You don't care about what reliable sources are saying. I don't think that would work well with YOU as an editor in WP.
Hassanjalloh1 (
talk) 03:11, 21 January 2022 (UTC)reply
"we citizenship"
The article mentions "we citizenship". Is this a term that needs to be explained, or is it a typo?
Pete unseth (
talk) 13:27, 23 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Adding New African Diaspora in Indonesian
Please, add new African diaspora in Indonesian (population total)! If all of you can do it.
Hariman Muhammad (
talk) 07:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Africa Dispora and their presence in the new world
Their Presence in the world today
102.90.43.233 (
talk) 22:07, 28 August 2023 (UTC)reply
African Diaspora
It is not clear if the information in this section is factual as the source url does not work properly.--
Mayor1704 (
talk) 18:13, 20 October 2023 (UTC)reply
Wrong article for 'Kush' link
In the subsection Dispersal through slave trade in the History section of this article, the 'Kush' link - in "Most Aithiopian slaves in the
Greco-Roman world came from
Kush (modern-day
Sudan) ... [bold emphasis mine]" - takes users to the
Kushan Empire article. The Kushan Empire was a polity in the Indian subcontinent, not modern-day Sudan as the quote claimed. The Kush article link needs to be changed to the correct article.