Talk:Argentine Americans

extremely poor writing

I created an account just to comment on this - I don't have the energy right now to go and clean it up - it's after midnight here. But the History and Demographics sections are horribly written, obviously by someone who doesn't have a command of the English language. Furthermore, as an Argentine-American and daughter of Argentine immigrants, I can say that the emphasis on the 'Whiteness' of Argentinians is overstated. Yes, there was heavy European immigration (mainly Italian). But there is a significant mestizo population, and our Amerindian roots are visible in my face and in those of my family members. Personally, I'd like to strike the sections entirely from this article but hope perhaps someone will rework it. Or I will.

Lavane (talk) 23:16, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

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)

File:Cesarpelli.jpeg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Cesarpelli.jpeg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Cesarpelli.jpeg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:50, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Argentino americano

In Spanish this is seldom used, maybe because "Americano" almost universally means "from the Americas", and being Argentina a country in the Americas, "argentino americano" would be usually understood as "Argentine from the Americas", which is repetitive. Once again I'll revert to the edition that does not misinforms. Windroff (talk) 05:20, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

It does not misinform. Argentino americano is the translation of Argentine American. American / Americano have several meanings such as (1) The indigenous peoples of the Americas. (2) People from the Americas. (3) People from the United States of America. In this case, the article uses the nationality of the United States of America / Estados Unidos de América. AbelM7 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 06:49, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

As I wrote above the term "americano" is not the Spanish translation of "American", and "argentino americano" is not the Spanish translation of "Argentine American".

What matters here is how often the expression is used and in this regard "argentino americano" is less common than "argentino estadounidense". Windroff (talk) 07:09, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

That is why there is a "or" between Argentino americano and Argentino estadounidense. Argentino = Argentine. Americano = American. Argentino americano is the translation of Argentine American. Argentino estadounidense misinforms native English speakers into thinking American translates into Estadounidense. Estadounidense translates into United Statesian. AbelM7 (talk) 07:25, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

That "or" does not make clear that one alternative is common and the other is much less used. That's why I reverted you. Usually, "American" as "people from USA" = estadounidense; "American" as "people from the Americas" = americano. Windroff (talk) 07:36, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

An Argentine American born and raised or just raised in USA will most likely use American / Americano in the national definition and not in the continents definition. Argentino americano is the translation of Argentine American and Argentino estadounidense is the translation of Argentine United Statesian. American / Americano has several definitions. In this case, the article is referring to Americans / Americanos as in from the United States of America / Estados Unidos de América who are descendants of Argentines / Argentinos as in from the Argentine Republic / República Argentina. AbelM7 (talk) 08:05, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Are you speaking from logic or from a reference? I'd like to see a solid reference to the use in Spanish of "Americano" rather than "Estadounidense" in that context. In other countries in Latin America, the use of that mistranslation could cause offense. It's not quite on the level of saying that "Jew" or "Kike" are terms used to describe those of the Jewish religion, but you can see where mis-documenting something in an encyclopedia could be problematic. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 14:31, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Americano is translated into American. Americano is not an offensive word. It is going to be quite difficult to find an article in Spanish for Argentino Americanos since the Spanish-language press really stresses out the fact to call people from the USA as "United Statesians" and never "Americans" and since Argentine Americans are not a big population (only 0.08%), they probably won't get huge coverage in Argentina. But this does not mean that people do not use other terms. People also use North American to refer to people from USA. Latinos raised in USA or another non Spanish speaking country will use American to refer to people from USA. Argentine Americans will use American in the national definition. What about the word "United Statesian" / "Estadounidense"? Wouldn't the people from USA find that offensive? How many Americans / Americanos actually refer to themselves as United Statesians / Estadounidenses? AbelM7 (talk) 18:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Press is just using the most common translation as you have been told by different people: "American" is the usual English demonym, "estadounidense" is the Spanish one. Those are facts, please stop adding speculative nonsense. Windroff (talk) 23:20, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Facts: Americano = American and Estadounidense = United Statesian. People from Latin America also use Norteamericano / North American to refer to people from USA. This could cause offense to other people from the North American continent (Canadians, Mexicans, Greenlanders, etc.) but people still use it. So Argentino norteamericano is another way to refer to Argentine Americans. AbelM7 (talk) 20:32, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

As you have been told many times already, you are just literally translating phrases and reaching wrong conclusions. Refer to my post above to see what matters here. Windroff (talk) 20:53, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

As you have been told many times already, American has several definitions. Refer to my post above for the definitions. AbelM7 (talk) 22:57, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll second the comment about your wrong conclusions - you've got your facts wrong. You can't simply cut-and-paste words to produce translations. American may seem similar to Americano but it isn't the same word, the implications are different. In English, "American" derives from "American colonial" used when speaking to another English speaker, so limited to English colonies. In Spanish, Americano had similar implications, but deriving from Spanish possessions, not English, thus referring to a different region of the world. That usage has largely fallen out of use, but regional resentments will bring back that meaning in an instant when used incautiously. If you speak Spanish, you should already be well aware of this, but somehow it hasn't reached you. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

There is no wrong conclusions, just differences like what to call the Spanish language (Is it call Spanish or Castilian?). I don't have my facts wrong. Like I said before, American / Americano has several definitions. North American / Norteamericano is another word people use to refer to people from USA so Argentino norteamericano is another way to refer to Argentine Americans. Argentino translates in Argentine, Americano translates into American, Norteamericano translates into North American, and Estadounidense translates into United Statesian. Yes I speak Spanish, it was my first language and I also know that nobody in USA refers to themselves as a United Statesian / Estadounidense. Since you know the history of the word American, you should already be well aware it has several definitions, but somehow it hasn't reached you. AbelM7 (talk) 22:57, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Spanish is not english. The implication of "Americano" in Spanish is different than "American" in English. It's not a direct one-to-one correspondence. Languages are funny that way. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 20:16, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Of course English is not Spanish. I never said it was. The article is about Argentine Americans (American people of Argentine descent). American-born Hispanics use American / Americano to refer to people from USA. The word American / Americano have several definitions. AbelM7 (talk) 20:32, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Once again I reverted you. Your last change had all the problems listed here so far, and in addition it was too long. Do not make further edits until consensus is reached. Windroff (talk) 21:38, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Once again I reverted you, this time with explanations which is why it was too long. So what's stopping you from editing since a consensus hasn't been reached? AbelM7 (talk) 22:25, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Quit the childish behavior, please. I am simply restoring the article to the version before you started adding unsourced and biased content. Others reverted you before for the same reasons; this is how things are done here. Windroff (talk) 22:52, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Please quit your childish behavior. This wouldn't have been going on if you didn't reverted the edits. It isn't biased. Biased would be just having Argentino Americano or just having Argentino estadounidense which is what you are doing. What I simply did is added another translation people use but you just won't let people use another translation. Besides, this page wasn't even created with a translation. AbelM7 (talk) 23:33, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

It's not a matter of "letting" people use another translation. It's a matter of documenting in an encyclopedia a translation which not only isn't used, but could be considered actively offensive. You have no citation for such a term ever being used, as best we can tell, you are making it up out of whole cloth. Please cease and desist. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 02:35, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

What part am I making it up? American does have several definitions, Norteamericano is another word people use to refer to people from USA, Argentino translates in Argentine, Americano translates into American, Norteamericano translates into North American, and Estadounidense translates into United Statesian, nobody in USA refers to themselves as a United Statesian / Estadounidense. The word American is not offensive. As a Hispanic, let me explain the situation. People from Latin America don't find American to be offensive. They will only get mad if a person from USA uses American to solely mean a person from USA since they use the continents definition more often than the nationality definition. A person from USA is an American both as in "from the Americas" and as in "from USA" and, if he or she is a Native American, as in "one of the indigenous peoples of the Americas". As I said before, American as several definitions. People from Latin America also use American to mean from USA such as fútbol americano (American football) and sueño americano (American dream). Here's where the hypocrisy starts. People from Latin America also refer to people from USA as norteamericanos (North Americans) without worrying if it will anger other North Americans such as Canadians and Mexicans. They use the term estadounidense (United Statesian) to refer to people from USA despite the fact nobody from USA calls themselves United Statesians and that Mexico's full name is Estados Unidos Mexicanos (United Mexican States) so Mexicans are also estadounidenses (United Statesians) as well other people from countries who have used "united states" in their names such as Brazil and Colombia and as well any other countries that are also a "united states" such as Australia and Germany. Estadounidense / United Statesian is awkward and sounds ridiculous in any language. They use estadounidense but don't use reinounidense (United Kingdomian) to refer to people from the UK. Instead they use británico (British) which is what people from the UK use. They refer to people from the Federated States of Micronesia as micronesio (Micronesian) and not as estadofederadense (Federated Statesian) even though anybody from the Micronesian region are also Micronesians. Back to Argentine American. Argentino Americano is the actual translation and Argentino Estadounidense is an indirect translation. American has several definitions and is not an offensive term. AbelM7 (talk) 05:27, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

This isn't about playing games with what should be or by analogy with other terms in other languages. The term isn't used. You don't have a citation for its use. As best I can tell, you make these up by doing bad reverse translations. Stop doing that. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 05:31, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Nobody is playing games. Like I said before, the Spanish language press will use estadounidense so you aren't going to find that many articles with the term. That doesn't mean that people don't use other words such as americano, norteamericano or yanqui (yankee). What part am I making it up? I'm not using any "bad reverse translations". Norteamericano means North American, Argentino means Argentine, etc. AbelM7 (talk) 05:43, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

The article is not a place for your biased and extravagant personal opinions, that counts as original research and is forbidden. As you have been told repeatedly, the only relevant thing here is the actual usage of the Spanish demonym and "argentino americano" is not the most common one, as it has been admitted by yourself which pretty much makes all this chat pointless. Windroff (talk) 14:23, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not biased. I'm trying to have both translations on here. I was explaining the situation of the word American in Latin America. I said the Spanish language press will use the world estadounidense but that does not mean that other people don't use other terms. This whole chat is pointless. It wouldn't have been going on if you hadn't reverted the edits. AbelM7 (talk) 15:45, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

We won't let you put false information into Wikipedia. The article documents what *IS* not what you want it to be, or what you can imagine might be. Your translations are simply incorrect. You can seek arbitration on this, but in the meantime, any further edits you make of this type will be reverted due to lack of citation. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 18:25, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

And I won't let you remove information. What part is false? Argentino = Argentine, Americano = American, República Argentina = Argentine Republic, Estados Unidos de América = United States of America. Like I said before, people *do* use other terms as well. AbelM7 (talk) 19:10, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

I have requested a neutral third party evaluate this issue at WP:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Argentine_American#Argentino_americano. Please await commentary from a mediator. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 20:24, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary anymore. Removing the translation solved the problem. Like what you said, this is the English Wikipedia, we don't need debates over what foreign language terms are here. This article is about Argentine Americans, not about the translation of Argentine American. AbelM7 (talk) 20:29, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

And thanks for the edit deleting the translation. I was going to suggest a compromise to end this debate with either choice (A) Having both Argentino americano and Argentino estadounidense in the translation to satisfy all parties or (B) Deleting the translation all together since this page is about Argentine Americans and not about the translation of Argentine American. Since you deleted the translation, I think you would prefer choice B. AbelM7 (talk) 20:49, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Argentine Americans. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140324110824/http://hoylosangeles.com/news/2013/jan/10/un-latino-montando-el-diablo-en-anaheim/ to http://hoylosangeles.com/news/2013/jan/10/un-latino-montando-el-diablo-en-anaheim/

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: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:40, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Dan Bucatinsky 2014 (cropped).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 23:40, 25 July 2018 (UTC)