Talk:Argentine Americans

American citizenship??

Why is Ginobilli appearing in the article of [1]?, and on his page profile there is nothing about his american citizenship. I deleted Ginobilli's information from this article (~~Frank~~).

I also deleted basketball players oberto, nocioni and herrmann, since neither of them are americans, but simply argentines playing in nba teams.-

Argentina only was a proper spanish's colonial since the 1776 till the polititical independe in 1810, and even then it was a melting pot of Italian, Spanish and French according to the historians. In fact just look at the names in the first govermment to see the italians Castelli, Berutti, etc. The immigration didn't star in 1880. The first wave was made of Swiss, Irish and Nother Italians in around 1850!!!.

Mostly to Buenos Aires??? what?? The 1914 census count the a similar percentage of immigrants not just in Buenos Aires but in Cordoba and Rosario (the three more populated cities in the country) and these cities have the 70% of the national population. Besides there are lot of cities even funded by italians in the South and populated by Nothern italians besides of swiss and germans like the largest city in Southern Argentina, Bariloche.

you can see similar influence of spanish as italians in names in all the three most populated cities in the country.

All the articles estimated the numbers of italians in Argentina in 18 million (check out the italian people article), which is half of the population. And the official site of the Italian embassy said that OVER half of the Argentine population have right to the Italian citizenship "ius sanguinis". In fact I would said that we have more italian culture than spanish (but that would be just my personal experience and I've just lived in Rosario, Buenos Aires and Bariloche, tho that mean much in the percentage of country's population) but let's speak about numbers and facts.

about the native population, if it growht, we'll know in the next census, the entire population obviously has increased (obviously) but probably their percentage is the same, and again the foreign population is foreign, they are not Argentinian and if they go to anoother country they would be Bolivian, Paraguayan or Peruvian.

As for the native populatin even if it has increased in the next census, all the population will have increased hence tehy would be still around 0,8% of the population that's like less than the US native population(2,5%), and less that the Jewish population (around 2-3%). It would as much as the Asian Argentine population.

""there were only spaniards for the first 200 years during the colonial period.."""

Actually Spanish were the least numerous european group in 1810!! (when anyway, Argentinian population was scarse).

En 1810 comienza la independencia de España. Los extranjeros ya forman parte importante en la Argentina. A principios del Gobierno de Rosas en Buenos Aires había 70.000 personas: 8.000 ingleses, 6.000 italianos y 4.000 españoles y portugueses. Es decir, la tercera parte no había nacido en Argentina.

In 1810, there were in Buenos Aires around 70.000 persons, a third of them foreign-born, 8000 British, 6000 Italians and 4000 Spanish.

www.nuevoorden.net

Most common Argentine surnames.
Rank Surname
1. Fernandez
2. Rodriguez
3. Gonzalez
4. Garcia
5. Lopez
6. Martinez
7. Perez
8. Alvarez
9. Gomez
10. Sanchez
11. Diaz
12. Vazquez
13. Castro
14. Romero
15. Suarez
16. Blanco
17. Ruiz
18. Alonso
19. Torres
20. Dominguez

Not one, Italian surname....expain?..I know this will include the native americans too..but if there are so many italians...and i know they did immigrate there...then why are there surnames scarse...atleast within the first 20..and the list goes on..to 100...which

Italian last names have a wider diversity than Spanish last names. That's why maybe there are more people with the same Spanish last name than the same Italian one. Plus, in this article it refers to Nocioni and Oberto as Argentine Americans, when they only play basketball in the US and do not have the american citizenship. 24.232.128.220 05:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Constanza

Surnames don't exaplin anything, spanish are few, that's why they are more numerous Italians are more s simple as that, and practically evryone i Argentina even with Spanish surnames have italian grandparents too. how do you explain that 18 million of Argentinian are of mainly Italian descnet then?

Beside culture means more than surnames lol

the explanation is quite simple if you take the several italian surnames and the spanish which are few even when in Argentina come directly from spain not like in many L. American countries you have that some spnish are more common. But in real life you see almost half and half (with other surnames too).

You have the nu,bers half of the population is of italian descendent or part italian, part spanish. surnames are subjective, you can be just 1/8 spanish and 7/8 italian and have an spanish surname.

Did you understand Italian?:

""Alla formazione del popolo argentino hanno contribuito soprattutto gli italiani (35%), gli spagnoli (24%), in misura minore tedeschi, francesi, slavi, ecc. Oggi si calcola che il 50% della popolazione argentina abbia anche la cittadinanza italiana o i requisiti per richiederla per ius sanguinis. Lo spagnolo correntemente parlato in Argentina, specie a Buenos Aires (dove si parla un dialetto chiamato porteño), ha subito influenze dall'italiano.""

The following list shows the surnames distribution. It was built based on a sample of 1.247.328 records. Within this sample there are 121.645 different surnames. The ratios were calculated with this value. These records belong to a voter list of year 2001. Most of the surnames have Italian and Spanish origin. You will find also jewish surnames, polish surnames, portuguese surnames, russian surnames and irish surnames. Immigration was a very important fact in population formation. In the twenties, about a half of Buenos Aires population were foreign people. This fact contributed to the surname diversity of the city. While in the neighbor countries people use two surnames, in Argentina this is not necessary.

http://www.cosas-de-argentina.com.ar/

History of Latinos and Hispanics

Please consider contributing to the article entitled History of Latinos and Hispanics. Thank you! --JuanMuslim ^1m 02:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

mmm There are some history of latinos, latino is a stupid make up term used mostly in the US, every country in America has his own history really, and Argentinian history is as different from the Mexican or Dominican history as the American history is from this coutries. There are SOME similarities between certain American countries like Mexico and other Central American countries, Argentina and Uruguay or Canada and th US. But a common history or culture???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.232.25.24 (talk) 08:37, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Lalo Schifrin

Shouldn't he be listed as an argetine american? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.116.230.221 (talk) 18:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Argentina's Demographics: Fact and Fiction

It is interesting that some feel it is their duty to keep the "Whiteness" of Argentines intact throughout every Argentine related article... Leaving out the fact that many are part Amerindian... Yes, a study at the University of Buenos Aires has confirmed that 56% of every single Argentine has Amerindian admixture in their DNA. It is interesting that the European aspects of Argentina are dreadfully over exhausted, while it's Amerindian and Mestizo elements, People (Whether Castizo, Mestizo, or Indian), Culture, etc. are swept under the rug, and kept in a state of silence. However, in the real world, and in the REAL Argentina, they are very visible. Most notably the People of Argentina show it in their faces. This country of Latin America is not very different from all other regions in Latin America, although it tries very hard to distance itself... Facts are Facts, And the fact that some do not wish to let the truth be told says much about their character. Argentina's Mestizo Population is quite large, many "Whites" have Indian blood, and the real Argentina is far from a 'European country in Latin America'. Cali567 (talk) 09:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

http://www.clarin.com/diario/2005/01/16/sociedad/s-03415.htm

I agree and include that the deletion of references without discussion such as what Fercho85 is doing because it doesn't fit his POV be labeled vandalism.CenterofGravity (talk) 05:18, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

There's no way one can state that "56% of every single Argentine has Amerindian admixture in their DNA." Did this study test "every single" Argentine? Impossible. I don't completely object to including this study, but with a small sample size, it cannot be stated as fact that 56% of all Argentines have Amerindian DNA. It might be more, it might be less, but if included, it has to be stated properly. We need to be careful on how DNA evidence is presented, as it cannot paint a complete picture. Even if someone's great-great-great-great....grandmother was an Amerindian, they can still be predominantly white and identify as white. Remember that Y-DNA and MtDNA are passed down through paternal and maternal lines, but they cannot detect all ancestors, just one line out of thousands. I believe some nuclear DNA studies work differently, but the Y-DNA/MtDNA studies can be limiting. Kman543210 (talk) 05:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Your point is valid but to eliminate the fact (supported with verifiable sources such as the Argentine census) that there are Argentines who are either mestizo or indigenous who make up a proportion of the Argentine population while only including that Argentines are white would be the fabrication of a fallacy. CenterofGravity (talk) 23:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

That study was made to the Argentine POPULATION not Argentinians (over 10% of the Argentine POPULATION are immigrants from other American countries and are not Nationals). Besides this is a study made to 200 persons in one part of the country...

Besides it make not point whatsoever with the article, is like saying that 30% of the 70% white population in the US has a black ancestry accordding to ONE small research. (as it was stated in 2007) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.245.45.3 (talk) 01:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

What's the point of adding genetic information on this article?? What is it that you're trying to prove? --Grimshep (talk) 13:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

"Raised and educated?"

What's that all about, Lehoi? Why shouldn't that be removed? SamEV (talk) 05:09, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what being educated here has to do with, but the definition seems a little awkward to me, even compared to the other opening of hyphenated American articles. It looks like they're all over the board with no consistency:

• Mexican Americans are Americans of Mexican ancestry.
• Venezuelan Americans are citizens and residents of the United States who trace their heritage to the South American nation of Venezuela.
• A Bolivian American is an immigrant or descendant of Bolivian immigrants to the United States.
• English Americans are citizens of the United States whose ancestry originates wholly or partly in England.
• Russian Americans are Americans whose ancestors were born in Russia.
• French Americans are citizens or permanent residents of the United States of French descent.
• An Italian American is an American of Italian descent and/or dual citizenship. The phrase refers to someone born in the United States or who has immigrated to the United States and is of Italian heritage.

The Mexican American article definition is pretty short and simplistic; what do you think about that one, or is it too simplistic? Kman543210 (talk) 05:32, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, one doesn't necessarily have to be raised in the United States to become American, so that isn't necessarily a prerequisite to being Argentine American (many immigrate here later in life and are still called hyphenated Americans). I couldn't find any dictionary definitions of Argentine American, but here are two from Random House and American Heritage dictionaries that could be simplistic enough to use for an opening sentence: "a citizen or resident of the U.S. of Mexican birth or descent" or "a U.S. citizen or resident of Mexican descent" (replace Mexican with Argentine). Kman543210 (talk) 05:59, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Most of those definitions, including Random House's and American Heritage's, pretty much say the same thing: inhabitants of the United States who are of X origins/ancestry. (Notice that only English Am seems to limit itself to citizens.) So, although the phrasing is different in each case, in substance they're almost all the same.

The Mexican American definition is masterful! Of course, it's possible I wrote it. Really, I may have. I'd have to scour the history to know for sure. I also edited the Venezuelan and perhaps also the Bolivian, though again I'm not sure I rewrote them: my normal attitude is to retain the definitions unless they're completely off. So usually I only copyedit them, as in the case of this one an hour ago.

"Also, one doesn't necessarily have to be raised in the United States to become American"...

Exactly. SamEV (talk) 06:15, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

WTF?! I am confused right now! What the heck are you talking about SamEV? Are you confusing me with someone else? I did not put the statement "Raised and educated?", it was Fercho85, look at the edit: [2]. Please do some research before you call out anyone, ok. Lehoiberri (talk) 21:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Lehoi, I'm not confused at all, and I wasn't calling you out. I never said you added that stuff. I kept an open mind and considered that someone else might have written it. So the aim of my question was to find out whether you had a reason for keeping it, because you were editing the article and are an Argentine American, not to mention that that material was in the first sentence (hence, very visible, to say the least). I assumed good faith and wanted to hear from you first before removing material I thought you wanted to keep in the article, instead of removing it right away, which is what I should have done, it turns out. SamEV (talk) 04:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

"Notable" Argentine Americans

Isn't the list very simplistic and biased? What's the criteria to add a name in this list? A mediocre actress whose father is Argentine is in the list, but Argentines that changed the course of science while living in US (see below) are not mentioned... I don't understand.

Juan Martin Maldacena (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Martin_Maldacena) Leopoldo Máximo Falicov (http://www.nap.edu/readingroom.php?book=biomems&page=lfalicov.html)

Anyway... I don't see the point of this article. You are either Argentine OR American. The Gilmore girl was born and bred in United States: she is American. Her father was born and bred and educated in Argentina: he will always be an Argentine in exile. It's that simple. (And please don't come with "genetic" arguments because her father's family comes from Denmark, so she sholud be "Danish American"... there is nothing like an "Argentine genotype".) 196.35.252.210 (talk) 08:13, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

You sir are stupid. "Argentine genotype" what does that mean, especially when Argentina is a country of immigrants, just like the United States. Her families ancestor must came from Denmark, but she cannot be Danish American b/c her Danish ancestors did not settle to the United States from Denmark. Plus you obviously haven't read this article well. Argentine Americans are citizens or residents of the United States whose origins are in the South American nation of Argentina. They can be immigrants or American-born children of Argentines. So by following your ignorant complaints, that means Italian Americans are not Italians just Americans. And to your complaint on why the scientist are not listed, why don't you add them yourself. Lehoiberri (talk) 18:42, 4 April 2009 (UTC)