This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 80 | ← | Archive 85 | Archive 86 | Archive 87 | Archive 88 | Archive 89 | Archive 90 |
User:Mark_Miller objects to the below chart being included in the Language subsection (under Demographics) and has removed it twice now:
Language | Percent of population |
Number of speakers |
---|---|---|
English (only) | 80% | 233,780,338 |
Combined total of all languages other than English |
20% | 57,048,617 |
Spanish (excluding Puerto Rico and Spanish Creole) |
12% | 35,437,985 |
Chinese (including Cantonese and Mandarin) |
0.9% | 2,567,779 |
Tagalog | 0.5% | 1,542,118 |
Vietnamese | 0.4% | 1,292,448 |
French | 0.4% | 1,288,833 |
Korean | 0.4% | 1,108,408 |
German | 0.4% | 1,107,869 |
His original justification for removing the chart was that it contained "too much tabled content that is already in prose."
[1].
I reverted this removal and restored the chart, pointing out that it actually contained information not found in the prose. [2]
Mr. Miller then removed the table again, this time stating: "Not in prose means the image lacks discussion to be relevant and serves a decorative purpose. The listed languages are random." [3]
At the risk of avoiding Wikipedia:Edit_warring, I now bring this topic up for discussion on the talk page to develop Wikipedia:Consensus.
I cannot see how the original justification for removing the chart was that it contained "content that is already in prose" while the second removal is premised upon the chart being irrelevant because its information is not contained in the prose? These seem like contrary positions to me.
For my part, I noticed the table was missing when I came to this article to reference the number of French speakers in the United States. This information was not included in the body of the article and I had to restore the chart (which is based on the 2010 census) to find the answer. The listed languages are not "random" as Mr. Miller asserts in his most recent reversion, it's a list of languages spoken in the United States by over 1 million people in descending order.
I don't see the given reasons as justifying the removal of the chart. It's a useful visual aid in the same way the table for religion below it is useful. TempDog123 ( talk) 08:48, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
I must agree with TempDog123 that the language chart offers useful information regarding a nation of immigrants. Also, this particular chart had been in the "Language" section for years. The main problem I've had with the chart is that there's no explanatory footnote; these are languages spoken at home in raw numbers, and those numbers omit the parallel column from US Census specifying the percentage of French- or Tagalog-speakers, etc., who say they also speak the national language, English, well (albeit not at home). This is not a chart of monolingual native speakers of English, Spanish, French, Chinese, etc., and some readers might think it is. That's a minor beef on my part, and I do think the chart should be retained.
Mason.Jones (
talk) 02:17, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
It's meaningless unless it has an additional column for the percentage who speak English "well" or "very well" (my figures are from same source, US Census, 2011). Otherwise, many people would assume that the 20% of Americans who speak a language other than English are monolinguals with no English-language proficiency. (The article "United States" doesn't state that "English is the national language" for nothing; it really is.) Here's the added column, and I've added a small-type explanatory note for French like the one for Chinese. The US Census definition of "French" includes Cajun French but not Haitian Creole. See below.
Mason.Jones (
talk) 01:03, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Language | Percent of population |
Number of speakers |
Percent who speak English "well" or "very well" (2011) |
---|---|---|---|
English (only) | 80% | 233,780,338 | 100% |
Combined total of all languages other than English |
20% | 57,048,617 | |
Spanish (excluding Puerto Rico and Spanish Creole) |
12% | 35,437,985 | 74.1% |
Chinese (including Cantonese and Mandarin) |
0.9% | 2,567,779 | 70.4% |
Tagalog | 0.5% | 1,542,118 | 92.8% |
Vietnamese | 0.4% | 1,292,448 | 66.9% |
French (including Cajun but not Haitian Creole) |
0.4% | 1,288,833 | 93.5% |
Korean | 0.4% | 1,108,408 | 71.5% |
German | 0.4% | 1,107,869 | 96% |
Below is the chart with an explanatory note. I went by the original source, which doesn't list percentage of speakers but rather number of speakers of Spanish, Chinese, French, etc., who also speak English well or very well. (I mention the percentages, an extra interpretation, in the note.) This might well make the chart too wide to be used in this article, but it makes it clear to readers that this chart -- used across WP in almost all "United States" articles -- isn't the number of monolingual Spanish and Chinese speakers in the United States. It is anything but that.
Mason.Jones (
talk) 18:31, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Language | Percent of population |
Number of speakers |
Number who speak English well or very well |
---|---|---|---|
English (only) | 80% | 233,780,338 | All |
Combined total of all languages other than English |
20% | 57,048,617 | 43,659,301 |
Spanish (excluding Puerto Rico and Spanish Creole) |
12% | 35,437,985 | 25,561,139 |
Chinese (including Cantonese and Mandarin) |
0.9% | 2,567,779 | 1,836,263 |
Tagalog | 0.5% | 1,542,118 | 1,436,767 |
Vietnamese | 0.4% | 1,292,448 | 879,157 |
French (including Cajun but not Haitian Creole) |
0.4% | 1,288,833 | 1,200,497 |
Korean | 0.4% | 1,108,408 | 800,500 |
German | 0.4% | 1,107,869 | 1,057,836 |
Source: 2010
American Community Survey,
U.S. Census Bureau. Most Americans who speak a language other
than English at home also report speaking English "well" or "very well." For the language groups listed above, the
strongest English-language proficiency is among native speakers of German (96% report that they speak English "well"
or "very well"), followed by speakers of French (93.5%), Tagalog (92.8%), Spanish (74.1%), Korean (71.5%),
Chinese (70.4%), and Vietnamese (66.9%).
References
As with every U.S. demographic chart and survey in Wikipedia, illegal immigrants may not be included. This population might number up to 15 million people -- no one knows how many there are. But they would speak many different languages (not just Spanish) and so their numbers would not have a significant effect on this chart (which is also a survey, not a census). Mason.Jones ( talk) 17:01, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
I wouldn't support a note to that effect, as there are no such notes under other U.S. Census tables mentioning illegal immigrants. There's no way to confirm if (or how much) this population affects the statistics. It's possible, but purely speculative. Mason.Jones ( talk) 21:41, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
I've added the revised chart under "Language." The last edit summary, "Corrected under C," should read: "Right column corrected under Chinese speakers -- Cantonese and Mandarin are added to total." Mason.Jones ( talk) 16:15, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Why was it decided that America should re-direct here?? Is it likely that someone who wants to search for this article will expect it to be titled America?? Georgia guy ( talk) 20:04, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
@ Ribbet32: What is the basis for your objection? At WP:POVNAMING we have,
In some cases, the choice of name used for a topic can give an appearance of bias. While neutral terms are generally preferable, this must be balanced against clarity. If a name is widely used in reliable sources (particularly those written in English), and is therefore likely to be well recognized by readers, it may be used even though some may regard it as biased.
At WP:RECOGNIZABLE we have,
Wikipedia ... generally prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources. … When there are multiple names for a subject, all of them fairly common, and the most common has problems, it is perfectly reasonable to choose one of the others.
At WP:RNEUTRAL we have,
Because redirects are less visible to readers, more latitude is allowed in their names. Perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is therefore not a sufficient reason for their deletion.
At [4], the continent “Norteamérica" is translated into English as “America”. While the English “America” redirects to “United States”, it does not follow that the Spanish convention should be used in the English encyclopedia, so "North America” in English should not also redirect to “United States”.
Given the WP policies quoted above, when the term “America” is used in English, a) what country can be meant other than the United States? b) what country is MOST frequently meant using the term “America”? or c) What reliable source claims “America” is non-neutral? This may just be trolling, I'm guessing, but it's fun exploring the basics. TheVirginiaHistorian ( talk) 09:09, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Madonna is a disambiguation page, Nirvana is about the religious concept, much less known than Nirvana (band), Georgia is a disambiguation page. Why can't America be a disambiguation page? Fridek ( talk) 21:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
The name of the nation isn't solely "America" but the "United States of America". It's also redundant to say the country is "America" but the continent it belongs to is North America and in turn the latter belongs to the Americas, thus creating a vocabulary paradox. Just because the country is referred by the third part by the majority of its name it doesn't mean it constitutes a valid reason to redirect an ambiguous name to solely one nation its part of strictly speaking. After all, by all technical standards Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and Cuba are all American nations as the USA is, and that's without using prefixes such as "latin-/south-/franco-/native-/meso-/etc".
2607:FB90:1F03:CA45:0:49:802E:2801 ( talk) 23:32, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
And yet the redirect has caused some internal conflict in Wikipedia. 2607:FB90:24C1:7A49:0:49:566D:1901 ( talk) 02:28, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
When the first map recognizing and naming America appeared in 1507, Waldseemüller map, the New World counted only with Spanish and Portuguese colonies. The name was chosen to honor the Portuguese-sponsored explorer Amerigo Vespucci, using the feminine version of his Latin name Americus. The English settlement in the New World started only 100 years after the name "America" came into existence. That is one of the reasons why the attribution of the name "America" to refer to the United States of America has been considered controversial. Rafaelsousa88 ( talk) 22:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC) I think this information should be in the America and America (disambiguation) pages. This could show that Wikipedia is committed with impartial information. Rafaelsousa88 ( talk) 22:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafaelsousa88 ( talk • contribs) 22:07, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
United States has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
It says "Official language: None at federal level" then right below that it says "National language: English" RCrowley49 ( talk) 23:07, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
United States has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Correct the population total for when you google the United States we have 321million as of the 2013 census and did not lose 1.1million people in 2014 so please fix this. Dathistorybuff ( talk) 23:36, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
I have changed the "maxarchivesize" parameter from the strange 78K to the more standard 75K. I have also reduced the "minthreadsleft" parameter from 12 to 8. MB298 ( talk) 19:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 3 external links on
United States. 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 to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:15, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. This is clearly going to fail. ( non-admin closure) sst✈ 03:24, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
United States →
United States of America – We should simply use the full name of the country, since this is what it formally calls itself. "United States" is just a common shortening of it. The "United States" could then redirect to here, and
United States (disambiguation) can be left as it is.
AYFKM (
talk) 02:29, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
United States has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
please add some native history and extermination of the so called indians who are the actually American race before this land was stolen from them lol...But seriously we know history was written by the winners but TRUTH CAN NOT BE hidden for ever..
DMDiegom ( talk) 07:41, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
United States. 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}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:26, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
should change every mention "democracy" to oligarchy. the government does not represent its people, but instead its businesses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.254.77.167 ( talk) 00:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
I partially see what this sentence is getting at, Bretton Woods effectively chose the US dollar as the world's reserve currency rather than Keynes' proposal for Bancor, but this sentence is much broader; do historians actually say this? The way it is written, it may be an example of hindsight bias or historian's fallacy.
If this is agreed, I would suggest the first sentence of the previous paragraph is reworded for readability so both paragraphs do not begin with the same phrase and to clarify 'early stages':
(p.s. I raised similar types of questions on other articles such as here on Talk:Constitution of the United Kingdom, a discussion now being facilitated by an uninvolved American editor, not just this article.) Whizz40 ( talk) 11:51, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
My suggestion is to add Spanish to "National language" (then National languages) because it is used by more than 13% of the United States' population. It's also asssumed that 25% of the US population will speak Spanish as a first language in 2050. -- 217.87.170.234 ( talk) 19:08, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
This has garnered little support. First, there have been many different predictions about Hispanic immigration, but we will have to wait till 2050 to see if "25% of the US population will speak Spanish." There's no proof that will happen, especially with recent surges in Asian immigration. As of now, the United States is not Canada or Belgium: the US government functions almost entirely in English (translation available in multiple languages). All 4,300 university campuses in the 50 US states operate entirely in English. All public schools stress the mastery of English, not Spanish, for American students. Some 74% of Spanish-speakers at home also speak good English (often with bilingual skills). Spanish simply doesn't fit the requirements of a "national language" in the United States.
Mason.Jones (
talk) 20:11, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. Grüße aus Deutschland -- 79.227.68.21 ( talk) 20:49, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
87% don't speak it as their first language... 74.90.110.7 ( talk) 12:23, 30 March 2016 (UTC) 74.90.110.7 ( talk) 12:23, 30 March 2016 (UTC)