User talk:Analyticalreview: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Your recently added table: Reply |
m ←Blanked the page Tag: Blanking |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Your recently added table == |
|||
Greetings Analyticalreview, it comes to my attention that you made significant changes to demographic information on the article of White Mexicans recently and I'd like that you discussed those changes first for reasons such as the fact that you added a table claiming that it is from the Latinobarometro survey 2023[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=White_Mexicans&diff=1226712196&oldid=1226704699] but I read the actual survey[https://www.fundacioncarolina.es/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Latinobarometro_Informe_2023.pdf] and there's no such table anywhere, can you explain whats going on?. [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 22:14, 1 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I added the screenshot of the table in the citation! Go ahead and click on https://www.latinobarometro.org/lat.jsp. Then click on Análisis Online at the top. Click on 2023 and Mexico and search up "Raza/Etnia a la que pertenece." This is a great source and the only survey I can find of Mexicans explicitly mentioning the race they identify with. These results are very in line with what I had assumed it would be from earlier research. Changes will be made to reflect the newer and much more accurate metrics. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 22:55, 1 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::My mistake, let me simplify the steps. |
|||
::1) Click on https://www.latinobarometro.org/lat.jsp |
|||
::2) Click on Análisis Online at the top |
|||
::3) On "Paso 1" click on 2023 |
|||
::4) On "Paso 2" click on Mexico |
|||
::5) Now click "Analizar" on the top right of "Paso 2." |
|||
::6) On the right where you see "Buscar" type in "Raza/Etnia a la que pertenece." Proceed to click on the link that is provided. |
|||
::They have been doing surveys on Mexican racial identification since 2007. There is some clear consistency with there never being more than around 11% of Mexicans self-identifying as their race being White. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 23:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::'''They have been doing surveys on Mexican racial identification since 2007''' so why they do not include them in their published documents? there are also concerns in regards to their methodology, of which other than the fact that it was conducted in only 1200 people (does it have to take precendence over gevernmental surveys carried out in between 30,000 to 70,000 people like the ENADIS ones?) I can't find anything, was it conducted only in one city? If so, which?. [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 00:36, 2 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Latinobarómetro literally published it for their 2023 Mexican survey. The Mexican government does not publish racial data and the only survey it allowed Mexicans to self-identify back in 2010, we had 10% identifying their skin as "blanco" which is basically identical to this survey. Also, a sample pool of 1000 is pretty normal for a countrywide survey. The findings here are very consistent with what we know. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 00:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::'''Latinobarómetro literally published it for their 2023 Mexican survey''' I am aware that sometimes Latinobarometro publishes surveys for particular countries but I haven't seen such thing for Mexico, do you have it? perhaps we can then get more information about the methodology used.<br/> |
|||
:::::'''a sample pool of 1000 is pretty normal for a countrywide survey''' not really, most surveys that size are conducted in two or three cities at most.<br/> |
|||
:::::'''the only survey it allowed Mexicans to self-identify back in 2010, we had 10% identifying their skin as "blanco" which is basically identical to this survey.''' We already discussed that exhaustively in the talk page of White Mexicans, the survey used other words that are used coloquially to refer to White people such as güero, claro etc, and you acknowledged that those terms summed up together give a result of 26%[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:White_Mexicans&diff=prev&oldid=1216953638] (and this is not considering that the word moreno can refer also to people who are racially White[https://web.archive.org/web/20170823165306/http://www.wordreference.com/definicion/moreno]) which is nearly 3 times higher than the result of this Latinobarometro survey, so if anything the Mexican survey you talk about refutes the Latinobarometro one. [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 01:57, 2 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::'''"I am aware that sometimes Latinobarometro publishes surveys for particular countries but I haven't seen such thing for Mexico, do you have it? perhaps we can then get more information about the methodology used"''' |
|||
::::::Follow the instructions I stated earlier barring part 6. |
|||
::::::'''"not really, most surveys that size are conducted in two or three cities at most."''' |
|||
::::::Incorrect. In many countries (including the USA which has a much larger population than Mexico), surveys with 1000 people is enough to be sufficient. |
|||
::::::'''"We already discussed that exhaustively in the talk page of White Mexicans, the survey used other words that are used coloquially to refer to White people such as güero, claro etc, and you acknowledged that those terms summed up together give a result of 26%[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:White_Mexicans&diff=prev&oldid=1216953638 <nowiki>[3]</nowiki>] (and this is not considering that the word moreno can refer also to people who are racially White"''' |
|||
::::::Well, you completely hurt your own logic here. Using your same reasoning "blanco" can refer to people that are racially Mestizo (such as myself). |
|||
::::::I'll do more digging and try to find more racial identification surveys later, but as of right now this is the only one! It's a great source of information. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 02:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::'''Follow the instructions I stated earlier barring part 6''' you are not understanding, I am asking you for a published document that includes more in-depth information on sample design and methodologies used, please look for that. |
|||
:::::::'''In many countries (including the USA which has a much larger population than Mexico), surveys with 1000 people is enough''' I just can't agree with that, specially when sources with much bigger sample sizes are available. |
|||
:::::::'''Well, you completely hurt your own logic here. Using your same reasoning "blanco" can refer to people that are racially Mestizo (such as myself)''' you already used that argument in the talk page and I replied to it there, various times [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:White_Mexicans&diff=prev&oldid=1224051936][https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:White_Mexicans&diff=prev&oldid=1224086603]. Also with that kind of response you are backing up the observations of the Princeton University on how the phenotype-based methodology Mexico's government uses reports more accurate results. [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 05:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::'''I just can't agree with that, specially when sources with much bigger sample sizes are available.''' |
|||
::::::::I can tell by your misinterpretation of various studies you probably have very little background in basic statistics. A 1000 sample pool is absolutely enough to model a country. Also, there is not a single other source you have posted that showcases the racial identity of Mexicans. |
|||
::::::::'''the phenotype-based methodology Mexico's government uses reports more accurate results''' |
|||
::::::::No serious sociologist would pretend skin color is the only determinant of race. The Mexican government purposely does not publish racial data besides Afro-Mexicans (which was a recent addition). Why are you using a self-identification survey for the Mexican-American figure but not using one for the Mexican figure? That is pure contradictory. Find a survey that shows the racial identification of Mexicans. Until then, I will do actual research. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 05:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::Going back to the sample pool argument. Here is a list of the [https://www.as-coa.org/articles/poll-tracker-mexicos-2024-presidential-vote polls] leading up to the 2024 Mexico presidential election tomorrow. |
|||
:::::::::"'''Sources''': '''Oraculus'''—[https://oraculus.mx/presidente2024/ Aggregated polling]. '''Buendía & Márquez'''—[https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/elecciones/morena-y-sheinbaum-aventajan-a-la-coalicion-opositora-encuesta/ October 4, 2023 poll] of 1,200 people was conducted September 22–28, 2023 and has a margin of error of ±3.23%'''. '''[https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/elecciones/sheinbaum-con-24-puntos-de-ventaja-sobre-xochitl-samuel-empieza-la-carrera-con-8/ November 27, 2023 poll] of 1,000 people conducted November 17–22, 2023 and has a margin of error of ±3.53%. [https://edicionimpresa.eluniversal.com.mx/files/pages/tablet/6.jpg February 23, 2024] poll of 1,000 people conducted February 15–21, 2024 and has a margin or error of ±3.53%. [https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/elecciones/llega-sheinbaum-con-amplia-ventaja-al-final-de-la-campana/ May 28, 2024] poll of 2,000 people conducted in two phases on May 16–22 and 22—26, 2024 and has a margin of error of ±2.9%. [https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/nacional/2023/05/08/sheinbaum-aumenta-ventaja-sobre-corcholatas-de-morena-encuesta-el-financiero/ '''El Financiero'''—][https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/nacional/2023/10/31/claudia-sheinbaum-aventaja-por-18-puntos-a-xochitl-galvez-encuesta-ef/ October 31, 2023 poll] of 1,620 people involved in-person polling of 720 people from October 19-25 and telephone polling of 900 people from October 19-22, 27-28. [https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/nacional/2023/12/05/sheinbaum-saca-19-puntos-de-ventaja-a-xochitl-baja-cifra-de-indefinidos-encuesta-ef/ December 5, 2023 poll] of 1,000 people conducted November 9–11, 24–25, 2023 and has a margin of error of ±3.1%. [https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/nacional/2024/01/04/encuesta-ef-claudia-sheinbaum-aventaja-por-22-puntos-a-xochitl-galvez/ January 4, 2024 telephone poll] of 1,200 people conducted December 8–9, 15–16, and 20–21 with 1,200 people and has a margin of error of ±2.8%. [https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/nacional/2024/01/29/baja-brecha-a-16-puntos-sheinbaum-48-y-xochitl-32/ January 29, 2024 telephone poll] of 1,000 people conducted Jan 12–13, 26–27 and has a margin of error of ±3.1%. [https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/encuestas-ef/2024/03/01/sheinbaum-arranca-con-50-y-xochitl-con-33/ March 1, 2024 telephone poll] of 1,000 people conducted February 9–10 and 23–25 and has a margin of error of ±3.1%. [https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/encuestas-ef/2024/04/01/encuestas-ef-sheinbaum-51-por-ciento-de-preferencias-vs-34-de-galvez-tras-un-mes-de-campana/ April 1, 2024 poll] of 1,200 people conducted March 9—10, 15–16, and 21–23 and has a margin of error of ±2.8%. April 26, 2024 poll of 1,360 people conducted Abril 17–24, 2024 and has a margin of error of 2.7%. [https://www.elfinanciero.com.mx/encuestas-ef/2024/05/29/cierra-claudia-sheinbaum-con-amplia-ventaja/ May 29, 2024 poll] of 2,308 people (1,008 in person and 1,300 via phone) people conducted May 1–11, 16—20, 21–26, 2024 with a margin of error of ±2.0%. '''Mitofsky'''—[https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/Sheinbaum-con-amplia-ventaja-Galvez-sube-y-Maynez-baja-20240325-0014.html March 25 poll] of 1,600 people conducted March 14–17, 2024. [https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/Se-amplia-la-ventaja-de-Claudia-Sheinbaum-20240423-0152.html April 23, 2024] poll of 1,600 people was conducted April 10–13, 2024. [https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/Sheinbaum-con-56-de-preferencia-20240513-0138.html May 14 poll] of 1,600 people conducted May 3–6, 2024. [https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/Aventaja-Sheinbaum-con-25-puntos-20240527-0148.html May 28 poll] of 1,200 people conducted May 21–24, 2024. '''''Reforma'''''–[https://www.reforma.com/aventajan-corcholatas-xochitl-la-mas-competitiva/ar2664907 August 26, 2023 poll] was conducted August 18–23 with 1,000 adults and a margin of error of ±4.0%. [https://www.reforma.com/sube-claudia-xochitl-se-estanca-y-samuel-corta-racha/ar2721138?utm_source=bcm_nl_noticias_reforma&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_noticias_reforma_20231204&utm_term=usr_registrado December 4, 2023 poll] was conducted November 22–24 with 1,000 people and a margin of error of ±3.8%. [https://www.reforma.com/puntea-claudia-mc-se-desfonda/gr/ar2775170?md5=6a31c07b0809584b9274a8e34dae4680&ta=0dfdbac11765226904c16cb9ad1b2efe March 19, 2024 poll] was conducted March 6–12 with 1,000 respondents and has a margin of error of ±4.3%. [https://politico.mx/sheinbaum-cierra-campana-con-ventaja-de-20-puntos-ante-xochitl-segun-encuesta-de-reforma May 29, 2024 poll] conducted May 21–26, 2024 with 1,000 people and has a margin of error of ±3.9%." |
|||
:::::::::As you can see most had a sample pool of around 1,000 people. This is very standard practice. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 05:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{outdent}} |
|||
'''No serious sociologist would pretend skin color is the only determinant of race''' I think the the Princeton University is serious enough and they consider it the most accurate, dircetly quoting their document[https://www.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/insights/IO873en.pdf] in the page 2 ''"an outward measure of race, we believe that skin color is relatively objective and better reflects classification by others."''<br/> |
|||
'''Going back to the sample pool argument...''' You may not realised it when you wrote all that, but that you have to link ''so many examples'' does essentially refute your own argument. And the small sample size is not the only concern there is about that Latinobarometro survey, the numbers themselves are sketchy: The 23% Indigenous that appears on your image is the same as the result of Indigenous peoples reported by the 2015 intercensal survey made by the INEGI, then there's the 9% White and 52% Mestizo figures that are almost the same than the figures of White and Mestizo that appear in the World Factbook (not to mention that we have sources like the Springer document[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12394-010-0074-7] that state in the notes found in the page 3 that the mestizo group increasing to such large size is simply statisctically impossible)... this is why I '''need''' to see what methodology they used, on what cities they asked etc. because it doesn't seem like they have actually done so (and the fact that such numbers do not appear on the report that was published further suggests this). [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 00:08, 3 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:'''"I think the the Princeton University is serious enough and they consider it the most accurate, dircetly quoting their document[https://www.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/insights/IO873en.pdf <nowiki>[7]</nowiki>] in the page 2 ''"an outward measure of race, we believe that skin color is relatively objective and better reflects classification by others."''''' |
|||
:I'm going to act in good faith and assume this is a translation error on your part. It is ''not'' stating skin color is an objective measure when classifying race. Instead it is stating that it is easier to match socioeconomic outcomes with skin color rather than race due to how fluid racial identification is in Latin America. So this actually hurts your argument. |
|||
:'''"And the small sample size is not the only concern there is about that Latinobarometro survey"''' |
|||
:As mentioned earlier, the sample size is not a problem at all. 1000 participants is standard for surveys/studies in Mexico. |
|||
:'''"The 23% Indigenous that appears on your image is the same as the result of Indigenous peoples reported by the 2015 intercensal survey made by the INEGI"''' |
|||
:Wow, it's almost like the survey did a good job and found a similar figure that other reputable sources also came across. |
|||
:'''"then there's the 9% White and 52% Mestizo figures that are almost the same than the figures of White and Mestizo that appear in the World Factbook"''' |
|||
:Yes, because those are the accurate figures so other sources have similar findings. |
|||
:'''"that state in the notes found in the page 3 that the mestizo group increasing to such large size is simply statisctically impossible"''' |
|||
:Again, you are misinterpreting the findings of these papers. It suggests that the rapid increase in the mestizo population in Mexico, as recorded in census data from the 19th century, cannot be solely attributed to biological factors such as reproduction rates. The paper implies that social and cultural processes, such as the reclassification of individuals previously identified as indigenous into the mestizo category, played a significant role in this growth. Which is information we already know! |
|||
:It's impressive how you misinterpret almost every single study you send me. Find more surveys or sources and do actual research, please stop wasting my time while I actually seek accurate information. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 00:22, 3 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::'''it is stating that it is easier to match socioeconomic outcomes with skin color rather than race due to how fluid racial identification is in Latin America...''' In other words you are saying that is more accurate, right?.<br/> |
|||
::'''because those are the accurate figures so other sources have similar findings''' What are you talking about? The 9%-10% White 52%-57% Mestizo has its origins on the 1921 census and is almost considered universally innaccurate nowadays, the Springer document I presented on my previous reply does so aswell on the notes in page 3[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12394-010-0074-7]. It just happens that you are the one that is misunderstanding it, when it says ''"Such an increase could only be explained through a catastrophe of enormous dimensions—just affecting indigenous communities—, combined with a disproportionate and gigantic reproduction of Mestizos..."'' It is highlighting how statistically impossible the suppossed growth numbers are, furthermore the note right above that one states "''many Mexicans would not clearly recognize themselves as Mestizos or Mestizas, even when directly questioned about their ethnic or racial identities..."'' meaning that is not true that Mexicans at a point massively decided to identify themselves as Mestizos.<br/> |
|||
::'''stop wasting my time while I actually seek accurate information.''' How about you search for the methodology of the numbers from the Latinobarometro survey instead? I spent much of the weekend looking for it and I couldn't find anything on it maybe you'll have better luck. And by the way, I'm now unsure of what I said earlier about Latinobarometro sometimes publishing special surveys for a single country, (I have a vague memory of one but it may have been about Indigenous peoples of the continent) I thought there was one for Colombia but I double checked the edit that gave me that impression months ago[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=White_Latin_Americans&diff=prev&oldid=1216811177] (by an editor called Zaquezipe) and in reality he is linking to the same site you do[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAnalyticalreview&diff=1226805607&oldid=1226804376]. [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 04:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::'''"In other words you are saying that is more accurate, right?"''' |
|||
:::Nope, you are 100% misunderstanding this statement. It is stating skin color is more accurate when trying to measure socioeconomic conditions, not racial identification due to how fluid it could be. |
|||
:::'''"What are you talking about? The 9%-10% White 52%-57% Mestizo has its origins on the 1921 census and is almost considered universally innaccurate nowadays"''' |
|||
:::Latinobarometro has done several surveys since 2007 with slightly different results (some have the White population a bit lower and some a bit higher). These have nothing to do with the 1921 census. |
|||
:::'''"It just happens that you are the one that is misunderstanding it"''' |
|||
:::The person misunderstanding the Springer document is ''you.'' It is clearly stating the bulk of the increase of the "Mestizo" population is coming from Indigenous peoples that assimilated to Mestizo culture. You left out the next sentence in your quote you used. |
|||
:::Here is the full quote: |
|||
:::''"Such an increase could only be explained through a catastrophe of enormous dimensions—just affecting indigenous communities—, combined with a disproportionate and gigantic reproduction of Mestizos (Navarrete [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12394-010-0074-7#ref-CR36 2005]). '''In''' '''fact the study argues that the enormous and expedient growth of the Mestizo group is better explained by the inclusion in the Mestizo category of people formerly included under the indigenous brand.'''"'' |
|||
:::So actually it is stating the growth of the Mestizo population was due to ''INDIGENOUS PEOPLE BECOMING ASSIMILATED'''.''''' It is clearly written and there is no more room for discussion on this part. |
|||
:::This discussion is over. If you find any more sources that estimate racial identification I would love to see it in the future. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 05:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::'''Nope, you are 100% misunderstanding this statement. It is stating skin color is more accurate when trying to measure socioeconomic conditions''' Aren't you aware that that's the main purpose censuses/surveys are made for?. |
|||
::::'''Latinobarometro has done several surveys since 2007 with slightly different results''' And can you find information about the methodology of those or you can't either?.<br/> |
|||
::::'''So actually it is stating the growth of the Mestizo population was due to INDIGENOUS PEOPLE BECOMING ASSIMILATED''' And what do you have to say about the note in the same page (No. 3)[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12394-010-0074-7] where it is stated that many Mexicans do not identify as Mestizos then?. [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 00:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I see that you removed my new table to re-add yours in the article White Mexicans when there's too many doubts about it[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=White_Mexicans&diff=1227660771&oldid=1227660721] and even worse, you are now removing data from higly reputable sources[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=White_Mexicans&diff=next&oldid=1227660771] and adding it claiming that is 2023 data when it didn't even appear on the actual 2023 version of the Latinobarometro report[https://www.fundacioncarolina.es/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Latinobarometro_Informe_2023.pdf]. Have you found the methodology I asked you for three days ago at least?. [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 04:59, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::You are free to make separate tables on any sources that try to do full '''''racial/ethnic''''' estimations. However, you cannot use '''separate sources''' and try to make your own table with your amateur calculation abilities. If you want to do a separate table on sources that do full estimations such as the one made by Britannica you are more than welcome to. |
|||
::::::Also, Muslims are followers of Islam, they do not belong in a table regarding ethnicities/races. Only one regarding religions which is a different page altogether. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 05:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::I think that's debatable, sometimes Jewish people and Muslim people are regarded as ethnic groups, also you haven't answered to my concerns about the methodology of the Latinobarometro survey and are now removing well sourced data such as the sources that state that many Mexicans do not identify as Mestizos to make room for your questionable source. What about that?. [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 05:19, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Jews are both an ethnic/religious group. Muslims are generally not regarded as an ethnic group, although most are of MENA origin. Again, you are free to make separate tables for every source that does ethnic estimations, you are not allowed to try to try and combine multiple different sources and try to make rough estimations yourself. |
|||
::::::::Also, something I think we can both agree on. The page needs more organization. The "European Immigration to Mexico" section should just be added to the "History" section. Agreed? [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 05:23, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::I do not agree with merging both sections, one focuses on Europeans in the colonial era and the other on Europeans on independent Mexico to present time. In regards to your claim about making tables using different sources, it seems that's a blurry topic here on Wikipedia as to make tables using different sources is something commonly seen on here, but what is more clear to me is that you are using an evident double standard (something that as I pointed before[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Analyticalreview&diff=next&oldid=1216639268], you tend to do), because in articles such as Ethnic groups in Latin America you've edited tables that combine different sources[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Ethnic_groups_in_Latin_America&diff=1216100305&oldid=1216021692], so are those to be taken down?. You also continue avoiding my concerns about you removing sources that stated that most Mexicans do not identify as Mestizos to make room for your source[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=White_Mexicans&diff=next&oldid=1227660771] that you cannot find any info on its methodology and that was conducted on 1200 people at best (and that does not appear in the 2023 edition of the document[https://www.fundacioncarolina.es/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Latinobarometro_Informe_2023.pdf]). [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 23:09, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::'''In regards to your claim about making tables using different sources, it seems that's a blurry topic here on Wikipedia as to make tables using different sources is something commonly seen on here''' |
|||
::::::::::Refrain from doing it. You are always free to post tables on racial/ethnic estimations from singular sources. |
|||
::::::::::'''because in articles such as Ethnic groups in Latin America you've edited tables that combine different sources''' |
|||
::::::::::That was on request by @[[User:Uruguayan989|<bdi>Uruguayan989</bdi>]] and I'm pretty sure most of those changes were reverted by other users. I actually do not like doing "averages" or calculations based on multiple sources for that reason. I'll go back to double-checking information on that page later. |
|||
::::::::::'''You also continue avoiding my concerns about you removing sources that stated that most Mexicans do not identify as Mestizos to make room for your source''' |
|||
::::::::::There is not a single source you've sent that states this. In fact, every source I have seen that does ethnic estimations has Mestizos making either a ''Majority'' or ''Plurality'' of the population. Please find one that supports your claims and send it to me! |
|||
::::::::::'''and that does not appear in the 2023 edition of the document''' |
|||
::::::::::You have a terrible habit of misunderstanding papers / studies you read. This publication has nothing to do with their annual Mexico publication which can be easily accessed. This is a separate one regarding Democracy in Latin America. The surveys Latinobarometro does for individual countries tackles many more topics unrelated to democracy such as ethnic identification, financial status, etc. They post these ''separately'' for each country. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 23:32, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{outdent}} |
|||
'''Refrain from doing it... I'll go back to double-checking''' Well, I see that you made some edits of questionable neutrality to the Mexico section (such as adding the study by Salzano & Sans[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Ethnic_groups_in_Latin_America&diff=prev&oldid=1227827983] which we have previously agreed had a notorious sample bias, in fact, you said yourself back then that ''"there is definitely problems with it"''[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AWhite_Mexicans&diff=1223924555&oldid=1223921119]) but the tables are still there, and is not only the one on genetics, there's an entire section of "Racial distribution"[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Latin_America#Racial_distribution] that is completely made of combined sources, how is it possible that you charge with everything against a table made with sources exclusively from Mexico's government but have no problem with tables such as those that combine a myriad of different sources (various of rather questionable quality)?.<br/> |
|||
'''There is not a single source you've sent that states this...''' You cannot be serious with this, I've cited the source that states that many Mexicans do not actually identify as Mestizos multiple times just on this discussion [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Analyticalreview&diff=prev&oldid=1227015556][https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Analyticalreview&diff=prev&oldid=1227147327] there are also sources such as the ENADIS (which you mentioned earlier on this discussion) that contradict Latinobarometro's numbers as I subsequently recalled to you here[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Analyticalreview&diff=prev&oldid=1226825552].<br/> |
|||
'''The surveys Latinobarometro does for individual countries tackles many more topics unrelated to democracy such as ethnic identification, financial status, etc''' Did you read that on the sample design documents I've been asking you to present for nearly a week now? I mean if they are going to collect so much data then to find a sample design sheet, or at least an elaboration on their methodology that states things such as the cities where the survey was conducted is to be expected don't you think?. [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 04:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Well, I see that you made some edits of questionable neutrality to the Mexico section (such as adding the study by Salzano & Sans which we have previously agreed had a notorious sample bias, in fact, you said yourself back then that ''"there is definitely problems with it"''''' |
|||
:I didn't say the study has a problem. I said the commentary random people wrote on it has a problem. It's a great analysis by two respected researchers. Salzano is a professor at the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul which is known as one of the best universities in the country. |
|||
:'''but the tables are still there, and is not only the one on genetics, there's an entire section of "Racial distribution"[[Ethnic groups in Latin America#Racial distribution|[22]]] that is completely made of combined sources, how is it possible that you charge with everything against a table made with sources exclusively from Mexico's government but have no problem with tables such as those that combine a myriad of different sources (various of rather questionable quality)?.''' |
|||
:I don't like these tables either. I would be willing to fix them in the future, but I am only one person. It would require fact-checking information from every country listed and I am only focusing on Mexico for now. Also, Mexico's government does not publish data on their estimation of the White population. As far as I recall, we only have numbers for the Indigenous population and Afro population. |
|||
:'''there are also sources such as the ENADIS''' |
|||
:ENADIS does not do racial / ethnic estimates. I would love if Mexico published their full racial demographics, ''but unfortunately'', they do not. Which is why we are using independent sources. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 05:18, 8 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::'''I didn't say the study has a problem. I said the commentary random people wrote on it has a problem''' This is not true as you removed the study from the article yourslef little more than a week ago[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=White_Mexicans&diff=1225979803&oldid=1225501127] (which is one the only edits by yours that has been good/neutral), so why to add to another article a source that not even a month ago you considered had several issues with its sampling?.<br/> |
|||
::'''It would require fact-checking information from every country''' Factchecking for what? You removed my table from the article White Mexicans, which was composed entirely of sources from Mexico's government with the pretense that it was a table made using different sources[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=White_Mexicans&diff=1227660771&oldid=1227660721], it looks as if you were defending those tables and acting with double standards.<br/> |
|||
::'''I would love if Mexico published their full racial demographics, but unfortunately, they do not...''' You are going in circles now, not even two weeks ago it was proven to you in your very own talk page that Mexico's government does conduct ethnoracial research using skin color as the basis as it produces more accurate results, here's the diff, with direct quote to the document by the Princeton University[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Analyticalreview&diff=prev&oldid=1226988353], you need to stop ignoring aswell the source that I've presented to you multiple times by now where it is stated that many Mexicans actually do not identify as Mestizos[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12394-010-0074-7] (first not of the page 3), this is the fourth time in a row that I ask you to consider it and you keep ignoring it, and here's another source[https://clutejournals.com/index.php/JDM/article/download/4993/5084/19982] that states in the note 1 from the page 7 that many Mexicans do not agree with numbers such as the ones presented by the World Factbook (or Latinobarometro, whose numbers happen to be coincidentially similar). [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 23:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::'''This is not true as you removed the study from the article yourslef little more than a week ago''' |
|||
:::I probably was making a lot of changes. It's a great report from a professor that is one of the best in this field. |
|||
:::'''Factchecking for what? You removed my table from the article White Mexicans, which was composed entirely of sources from Mexico's government with the pretense that it was a table made using different sources[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=White_Mexicans&diff=1227660771&oldid=1227660721 <nowiki>[27]</nowiki>], it looks as if you were defending those tables and acting with double standards.''' |
|||
:::How am I defending those tables? I already said I don't like them, but I have not done research on every single Latin American country. I also am purely doing volunteer work, it is not my job to fix every single error made. Maybe one day I can get to it. |
|||
:::'''You are going in circles now, not even two weeks ago it was proven to you in your very own talk page that Mexico's government does conduct ethnoracial research using skin color as the basis as it produces more accurate results''' |
|||
:::Nope, like always, you are misinterpreting what the paper is stating. The paper clearly states measuring socioeconomic inequality with skin color is more accurate because race is very fluid in Latin America. Mestizos can easily be both light skin and dark skin, yet the dark skin one will face more inequality in society. My literal job involves reading published papers at a university. |
|||
:::'''need to stop ignoring aswell the source that I've presented to you multiple times by now where it is stated that many Mexicans actually do not identify as Mestizos[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12394-010-0074-7 [29]''' |
|||
:::I'm demanding you stop reading papers if you're going to continue to have the complete inability to understand what the authors are saying. Here is the direct quote regarding the growth of the Mestizo population: |
|||
:::''Census from the XIX century show a massive growth of self identified Mestizos in Mexico (23% of the total population in 1808, was considered mestizo, this number increased to 43% in 1885, while the indigenous population diminished from 60% in 1808, to 38% in the same time lapse).Such an increase could only be explained through a catastrophe of enormous dimensions—just affecting indigenous communities—, combined with a disproportionate and gigantic reproduction of Mestizos (Navarrete [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12394-010-0074-7#ref-CR36 2005]). In fact the study argues that the enormous and expedient growth of the Mestizo group is better explained by the inclusion in the Mestizo category of people formerly included under the indigenous brand.'' |
|||
:::They attribute the overwhelming majority of it due to assimilated Indigenous peoples. So this actually hurts your argument of a supposed large "White" population. Instead what they are stating is a lot of the "Mestizo" population is genetically Indigenous. Your second source simply has a small note attached that states "Many Mexicans would not agree with this racial classification." Okay? Cool. "Many" could mean any number of people. It could mean as little as 100 Mexicans! Unless they are doing a measured study to see if the majority of Mexicans disagree or agree, this note tells us literally nothing. |
|||
:::You have a seriously bad habit of misinterpreting papers. Please work on your reading comprehension skills so we can actually discuss the contents in a meaningful way. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 00:12, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::'''I probably was making a lot of changes''' per the article's history[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=White_Mexicans&action=history] is the only edit you made to the article in two weeks.<br/> |
|||
::::And please no more evasives here, tell me why do you keep ignoring this quote from the first note in the page 3[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12394-010-0074-7], here I'm writing the quote again ''"many Mexicans would not clearly recognize themselves as Mestizos or Mestizas, even when directly questioned about their ethnic or racial identities..."'' and you are also now ignoring this other quote from this document (page 7, note 1)[https://clutejournals.com/index.php/JDM/article/download/4993/5084/19982] ''"Many Mexicans would not agree with such numbers'' (this in allusion to the ethnic percentages reported by the World Factbook, which also happen be like thos Latinobarómetro presents).<br/> |
|||
::::'''but I have not done research on every single Latin American country.''' Why do you need to do research in order to see that the tables[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Latin_America#Racial_distribution] are made of combined sources? That's evident right away, furthermore you didn't care about that when you removed the table in the article of White Mexicans[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=White_Mexicans&diff=1227660771&oldid=1227660721], you removed it because "different sources were used to make a singular table" without caring that the sources were documents published by Mexico's government itself.<br/> |
|||
::::'''The paper clearly states measuring socioeconomic inequality with skin color is more accurate because race is very fluid in Latin America''' I'm gonna make the same question I did days ago when you stopped replying to this discussion[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Analyticalreview&diff=prev&oldid=1227147327]: Aren't you aware that to measure socioeconomic inequalities is the main purpose governments around the world make censuses/surveys?. [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 04:45, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::'''And please no more evasives here, tell me why do you keep ignoring this quote from the first note in the page 3[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12394-010-0074-7 <nowiki>[32]</nowiki>], here I'm writing the quote again ''"many Mexicans would not clearly recognize themselves as Mestizos or Mestizas, even when directly questioned about their ethnic or racial identities..."'' and you are also now ignoring this other quote from this document (page 7, note 1)[https://clutejournals.com/index.php/JDM/article/download/4993/5084/19982 <nowiki>[33]</nowiki>] ''"Many Mexicans would not agree with such numbers'' (this in allusion to the ethnic percentages reported by the World Factbook, which also happen be like thos Latinobarómetro presents).''' |
|||
:::::Okay, tell me where these documents state that Mexicans believe there is a larger White population. None of them say this. They are clearly alluding to some Mexicans not knowing their own racial background (as evidenced by Latinobarometro having a significant amount of the population not knowing their racial identity when directly asked). |
|||
:::::'''Why do you need to do research in order to see that the tables[[Ethnic groups in Latin America#Racial distribution|[34]]] are made of combined sources? That's evident right away, furthermore you didn't care about that when you removed the table in the article of White Mexicans[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=White_Mexicans&diff=1227660771&oldid=1227660721 <nowiki>[35]</nowiki>], you removed it because "different sources were used to make a singular table" without caring that the sources were documents published by Mexico's government itself.''' |
|||
:::::Is it my job to fix every error on Wikipedia? It will be fixed eventually. Also, the Mexican government does not publish full racial census data. There has never been a modern census that shows the Mestizo or White population. You instead took different publications by the government and just made up the numbers of your table. You ''cannot'' do this. If you want to add information to the Indigenous and Afro-Mexican Wikipedia pages that would be great, since the government actually publishes data on that. |
|||
:::::'''Aren't you aware that to measure socioeconomic inequalities is the main purpose governments around the world make censuses/surveys?''' |
|||
:::::What does this have to do with anything? Are you seriously still pretending skin color is the sole determinant of one's race? [https://whyy.org/articles/what-is-race-it-isnt-skin-color-as-some-young-people-are-learning/ That's wrong.] This is a very basic thing we learn in undergraduate biology classes in the United States. |
|||
:::::Sarah Tishkoff, a professor of genetics and biology at the University of Pennsylvania states: |
|||
:::::“And that’s what I hear at every undergraduate course I’ve lectured in: Whenever we talk about this, first thing that people say is skin color... And we’re able to show that that’s just a terrible classifier of race because skin color is an adaptive trait.” |
|||
:::::[[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 06:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::'''They are clearly alluding to some Mexicans not knowing their own racial background (as evidenced by Latinobarometro...''' That does not mean that Latinobarometro numbers are correct, you are forgetting the part on which the first document[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12394-010-0074-7] (page 3, second note) states that a 48% mestizo population is statistically impossible (therefore so is a population of 52%-57%) and that the second document in the notes from the page 7 [https://clutejournals.com/index.php/JDM/article/download/4993/5084/19982] directly states that many mexicans do not agree with the world factbook numbers (which estimates mestizos at 57%), speaking of Latinobarometro, finally found some information about its sample design, here is a questionnaire sheet [http://investigadores.cide.edu/aparicio/data/encuestas/Latinobarometro/Latinobarome05_cuestionario_esp.pdf], as can be seen the only question about race is the one in the last page about languages spoken, which means this is likely an example of the questionnaires used on Mexico.<br/> |
|||
::::::'''where these documents state that Mexicans believe there is a larger White population...There has never been a modern census that shows the Mestizo or White population''' What about Brittanica that gives 31%? What about the ENADIS 2012, which gives a result of 26% per the narrowest definition as you have previously acknowledged yourself[https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Analyticalreview&diff=prev&oldid=1226825552][https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:White_Mexicans&diff=prev&oldid=1216953638] and is also the one on which, in the page 7[http://www.conapred.org.mx/documentos_cedoc/21_Marzo_DiaIntElimDiscRacial_INACCSS.pdf] the government of Mexico subsequently stated that 40% of men and 54% of women identified with lightest colors? What about the documents Mexico's government itself has published using the term White?[http://www.inegi.org.mx/saladeprensa/boletines/2017/mmsi/mmsi2017_06.pdf][http://bibliodigitalibd.senado.gob.mx/bitstream/handle/123456789/3525/Presentacion_MMSI2016_Senado.pdf?sequence=7&isAllowed=y](on the page 7 of this one can be seen how Princeton university statement about skin color being more accurate is true, as the H-K colors group together by themselves) There's plenty of high quality evidence that Mexico's White population is much higher than 9%.<br/> |
|||
::::::'''You instead took different publications by the government and just made up the numbers of your table. You cannot do this''' actually the table of "Mixed race distribution by country" in the racial distribution section of the article Ethnic groups of Latin America[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Latin_America#Racial_distribution] is completely made up, why don't you start removing that one? nothing to "fact check" there.<br/> |
|||
::::::Also Sarah Tishkoff is a proponent of races being defined entirely by social constructs such as culture, customs, language etc. instead of phenotype, hence the mention of skin color, as is what most people typically associate race with (point for me here) so I don't get why you bring her up here, as her posture is far more distant of yours than of mine given that you've previously tried to take this debate down to the "genetically pure races" level. [[User:Pob3qu3|Pob3qu3]] ([[User talk:Pob3qu3|talk]]) 00:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::'''you are forgetting the part on which the first document[https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12394-010-0074-7 <nowiki>[37]</nowiki>] (page 3, second note) states that a 48% mestizo population is statistically impossible (therefore so is a population of 52%-57%)''' |
|||
:::::::I am getting sick and ''TIRED'' of explaining the same thing over and over again. The document clearly states the Mestizo population was a product of Indigenous people becoming assimilated to Mestizo culture and being labeled as such. It does not mention the White population growing AT ALL. I will not repeat myself further. |
|||
:::::::'''What about the documents Mexico's government itself has published using the term White?[http://www.inegi.org.mx/saladeprensa/boletines/2017/mmsi/mmsi2017_06.pdf <nowiki>[43]</nowiki>][http://bibliodigitalibd.senado.gob.mx/bitstream/handle/123456789/3525/Presentacion_MMSI2016_Senado.pdf?sequence=7&isAllowed=y <nowiki>[44]</nowiki>](on the page 7 of this one can be seen how Princeton university statement about skin color being more accurate is true, as the H-K colors group together by themselves) There's plenty of high quality evidence that Mexico's White population is much higher than 9%.''' |
|||
:::::::We are repeating the same stuff over and over again. The Mexican government does not publish their estimation of the White population, most likely on purpose as the country historically pushed this "color blind" narrative of the country (although that is changing in recent years). The Princeton study does ''NOT'' state skin color equals race at all. It is specifically saying it is more accurate to measure poverty with skin color than racial identification due to fluidity in self-identification. That's it. I will no longer be repeating myself. |
|||
:::::::'''actually the table of "Mixed race distribution by country" in the racial distribution section of the article Ethnic groups of Latin America[[Ethnic groups in Latin America#Racial distribution|[45]]] is completely made up, why don't you start removing that one? nothing to "fact check" there.''' |
|||
:::::::You are free to remove it yourself and I'd agree with it. I make edits when I have free time, you are not my employer. |
|||
:::::::: |
|||
:::::::Here is the bottom line and I'll make you a final deal. I will remove all tables that are completely made up, and you will stop complaining about them. [[User:Analyticalreview|Analyticalreview]] ([[User talk:Analyticalreview#top|talk]]) 01:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||