This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This category was nominated for deletion on 29 July 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
Nationality This seems to treat nationality as equivalent to country. There are
-- Jerzy (t) 04:57, 2004 Sep 15 (UTC)
This is a complete misnomer if you are suggesting that you can be Irish and not born in Ireland. In this instance a person would be of Irish descent, but their nationality is determined by their place of birth. However, you can be Irish and move to another country. Your nationality/status would change, but you would, of course, be from Ireland. Your future children, if any, would not be Irish. This trend of assuming nationality based on descent seems more prevalant in America than anywhere else. -- Gerald Davies 11:52, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Can anyone help me understand this? Two lists:
are not the same, eg: the first has Zimbabwean people but not Zambian people; the second has Zambians but not Zimbabweans. Both lists are partial -- presumably the lists are not generated automatically by the database?
-- Mount Pleasant 16:58, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Someone forgot to add the "category:Inuit people" in the "category:People". -- Eleassar777 22:22, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I suggest we consider following what seems an emerging consensus on the Commons to use "(subject) of (name of place)" categorization, thus for example "People of Japan" rather than "Japanese people". -- Infrogmation 00:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
In a currently open CfD discussion, the following statement was made by ChemTerm:
Please no adjectives for references to countries. Category:People_by_nationality contains inconsistent/ambiguous categories. "Democratic Republic of the Congo people", "French Polynesian people" (Are there also Australian Polynesian people?), Frankish people? Are they part of German people? Can German people have Russian citizenship, like maybe the Dalmatian people have Croatian citizenship? The whole category could benefit from clarification by restructuring.
A similar issue was stated by John Pack Lambert in a CfD a couple months ago:
The main issue I see here is that at present Category:Puerto Rican people is misued in many cases for people of Puerto Rican descent who have never been residents of the island, some of whom have never set foot on the island. This category is meant to be limited to those who at one point were residents of the island, and we need to name it in a way that people will use it according to its intent.
The question is, should we go and rename all these categories accordingly (People from Foo)? עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:27, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Use of the pluralisation of a demonym where this is possible
A recent successful RM was made for the following:
– And many similar articles which, on the same president, I would like moved - as would apply to all demonym based population describing articles in those cases those cases in which the plural form of the demonym differs from the singular form of the word.
(explanation was given)
As per:
Albanians,
Americans,
Armenians,
Australians,
Austrians,
List of Bahranis,
Belarusians,
Bosnians,
Brazilians,
Bulgarians,
Lists of Cameroonians and
Canadians, ...
As per
WP:UCRN as demonstrated in searches ...
Designations that seemingly should remain as "... people" as the demonym retains the same form when indicating either singulars or plurals: Bhutanese people, British people and Chinese people,
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes)
On this basis I would suggest that any editor with authority to directly make sensible changes to article and category contents could go ahead and make sensible moves (as relevant to article content naturally).
I would say that this issue also relates to content in which two ethnicities are mentioned such that relating to Afghan American(s) and perhaps this will also need to be sorted out at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes).
I propose that the table on that project page might read as something like the following:
Pattern | Examples |
---|---|
Use pluralisation of a demonym when this is practical |
Koreans · Germans · Swedes |
Use ".. people" when pluralisation of the demonym is not practical |
French people · Wauja people |
Singular demonyms | Iyer |
Groups where two ethnicities are referenced |
Afghan Americans Afghans in the United Kingdom |
Parenthetical disambiguation | Macedonians (ethnic group) |
Peoples for which two nationalities/ethnicities/descents are referenced
In the case of people who are described by use of two national/ethnic descriptions I was interested to see the navigational content at: British Korean which reads as follow:
British Korean or Korean British may refer to:
Mention of this content is also made at: Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board#What to do with articles for Britains with other nationalities, ethnicities and/or descents and, as potentially an example of good practice, I thought I would also present this content "here".
Greg Kaye 11:17, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
What basis is there that we can only include people on a nationality list ie . Category:American people only if they are citizens of that country? This is a note that appears on every such country category that exists.-- Prisencolin ( talk) 19:09, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
"People of" has been standard in category names for former countries with compound names, but this is now deprecated following Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_September_4#Category:People_of_the_Russian_Empire, and "People from" will replace "People of". – Fayenatic London 07:54, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This category was nominated for deletion on 29 July 2008. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
Nationality This seems to treat nationality as equivalent to country. There are
-- Jerzy (t) 04:57, 2004 Sep 15 (UTC)
This is a complete misnomer if you are suggesting that you can be Irish and not born in Ireland. In this instance a person would be of Irish descent, but their nationality is determined by their place of birth. However, you can be Irish and move to another country. Your nationality/status would change, but you would, of course, be from Ireland. Your future children, if any, would not be Irish. This trend of assuming nationality based on descent seems more prevalant in America than anywhere else. -- Gerald Davies 11:52, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Can anyone help me understand this? Two lists:
are not the same, eg: the first has Zimbabwean people but not Zambian people; the second has Zambians but not Zimbabweans. Both lists are partial -- presumably the lists are not generated automatically by the database?
-- Mount Pleasant 16:58, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Someone forgot to add the "category:Inuit people" in the "category:People". -- Eleassar777 22:22, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I suggest we consider following what seems an emerging consensus on the Commons to use "(subject) of (name of place)" categorization, thus for example "People of Japan" rather than "Japanese people". -- Infrogmation 00:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
In a currently open CfD discussion, the following statement was made by ChemTerm:
Please no adjectives for references to countries. Category:People_by_nationality contains inconsistent/ambiguous categories. "Democratic Republic of the Congo people", "French Polynesian people" (Are there also Australian Polynesian people?), Frankish people? Are they part of German people? Can German people have Russian citizenship, like maybe the Dalmatian people have Croatian citizenship? The whole category could benefit from clarification by restructuring.
A similar issue was stated by John Pack Lambert in a CfD a couple months ago:
The main issue I see here is that at present Category:Puerto Rican people is misued in many cases for people of Puerto Rican descent who have never been residents of the island, some of whom have never set foot on the island. This category is meant to be limited to those who at one point were residents of the island, and we need to name it in a way that people will use it according to its intent.
The question is, should we go and rename all these categories accordingly (People from Foo)? עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:27, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Use of the pluralisation of a demonym where this is possible
A recent successful RM was made for the following:
– And many similar articles which, on the same president, I would like moved - as would apply to all demonym based population describing articles in those cases those cases in which the plural form of the demonym differs from the singular form of the word.
(explanation was given)
As per:
Albanians,
Americans,
Armenians,
Australians,
Austrians,
List of Bahranis,
Belarusians,
Bosnians,
Brazilians,
Bulgarians,
Lists of Cameroonians and
Canadians, ...
As per
WP:UCRN as demonstrated in searches ...
Designations that seemingly should remain as "... people" as the demonym retains the same form when indicating either singulars or plurals: Bhutanese people, British people and Chinese people,
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes)
On this basis I would suggest that any editor with authority to directly make sensible changes to article and category contents could go ahead and make sensible moves (as relevant to article content naturally).
I would say that this issue also relates to content in which two ethnicities are mentioned such that relating to Afghan American(s) and perhaps this will also need to be sorted out at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes).
I propose that the table on that project page might read as something like the following:
Pattern | Examples |
---|---|
Use pluralisation of a demonym when this is practical |
Koreans · Germans · Swedes |
Use ".. people" when pluralisation of the demonym is not practical |
French people · Wauja people |
Singular demonyms | Iyer |
Groups where two ethnicities are referenced |
Afghan Americans Afghans in the United Kingdom |
Parenthetical disambiguation | Macedonians (ethnic group) |
Peoples for which two nationalities/ethnicities/descents are referenced
In the case of people who are described by use of two national/ethnic descriptions I was interested to see the navigational content at: British Korean which reads as follow:
British Korean or Korean British may refer to:
Mention of this content is also made at: Wikipedia talk:UK Wikipedians' notice board#What to do with articles for Britains with other nationalities, ethnicities and/or descents and, as potentially an example of good practice, I thought I would also present this content "here".
Greg Kaye 11:17, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
What basis is there that we can only include people on a nationality list ie . Category:American people only if they are citizens of that country? This is a note that appears on every such country category that exists.-- Prisencolin ( talk) 19:09, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
"People of" has been standard in category names for former countries with compound names, but this is now deprecated following Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_September_4#Category:People_of_the_Russian_Empire, and "People from" will replace "People of". – Fayenatic London 07:54, 13 September 2022 (UTC)