Talk:Ethnicity

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2018 and 13 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kayloz9!.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Moc504.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

How do you make an ethnic group of an imaginary country?

How do you make an ethnic group of an imaginary country? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.28.34.253 (talk) 02:09, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

You use your imagination. 81.154.172.135 (talk) 13:57, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

A very confusing article

This page uses a lot of words to say very little. It does not list main ethnic groups and the linked pages for continent specifics only order ethnic groups by language, without any division through macrocategories. It starts as a lesson for racists and then muddles everything up becoming an incomprehensible mess of links and superfluous details. It really needs some serious cleaning, less smoke and more meat. 2001:B07:A96:9FA6:C1E6:6324:C5A:90D4 (talk) 12:41, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. Will do in a few months. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 15:56, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Social

How does nationality unit people 150.107.106.61 (talk) 14:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Photo in lead should include several ethnic groups

The photo in the lead should reflect the fact that many ethnicities exist. The current photo of the Karamojong people may give some readers the erroneous impression that ethnic groups are something that only exists outside of the Global North / the West. It might therefore be wise to add photos of diverse ethnic groups, include white ethnic groups. Thenightaway (talk) 16:29, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 15 March 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Silikonz💬 15:34, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

---

Ethnic group → Ethnicity – The article not only defines ethnic groups (referred to as "An Ethnicity"), but also emphasizes the broader sociological concept of ethnicity, which is an uncountable noun. Maedc (talk) 11:45, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

• At first sight this makes sense.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:50, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 16:40, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nom.--Rjensen (talk) 19:11, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nom.--Treetoes023 (talk) 17:07, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above 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.

Ethnicity: a social construct

My recent edits with reliable sources for some reason have been reversed, there are tons of reliable sources that states that ethnicity is a social construct like these ones:

• “Ethnicity, like race, is a social construct, but it's still a construct with significant implications for the world. How people perceive ethnicity, both their own and that of others, can be tough to measure, particularly given that it's so subjective” Washingtonpost
• “Ethnicity is a complex social construct that influences personal identity and group social relations.” And “Ethnicity is typically invoked via the term, ‘race/ethnicity’;” ncbi
• “Contrary to supposedly scientific approaches to determine the objective physiological , genealogical , or genetic origins and boundaries of racial groups, a growing consensus of scholarship across fields and disciplines has now concluded that ethnicity is a social construction , a fictional product of a people's common imagination .” Ethnic Negotiations: The Function of Race and Ethnicity in Acts 16, emory university

i hope people stop removing reliable sourced content. Chafique (talk) 16:35, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it is a social construct, but certainly a very different one when compared to race (unless "ethnicity" is abused as a euphemism for "race", as often happens in US discourse). I object to have them mentioned in one breath. Also, our opening sentence clearly talks about "people who identify with each other", which obviously equals a social construct. We also say this in the forth paragraph, so repeating it is redundant here.

Since the social (and hence fluid) understanding of ethnicity is mainstream now over primordalist interpretations, we might consider to put it further up in the text. But not with unencyclopedic phrasing such as "but still" and "it's so subjective". I'll think of a more adequate fix. –Austronesier (talk) 17:42, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

It’s not me or you who decide that, it’s reliable sources, the source say “Ethnicity, like race, is a social construct, but it's still a construct with significant implications for the world. How people perceive ethnicity, both their own and that of others, can be tough to measure, particularly given that it's so subjective” [1] , these are the exact words of the source, it’s the source that says “like race”, you are objecting to the source not me. You have no right to claim that the source is wrong or made a mistake without at least providing a source stating that. And no saying “people who identify with each others” is not as saying “ethnicity is a social construct”, and if we got to choose between a direct or indirect statement to introduce an information we should go with the direct statement. Chafique (talk) 18:26, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I've just become aware that you have plagiarized the WaPo text (see WP:COPYVIO). I will make my final revert explicitly for this reason. I have already voiced my substantial objections to your text (which isn't yours), let me just add that I have all the right to object to a text that contexualizes ethnicity in a way that does not reflect the scholarly mainstream understanding of the concept (i.e. as something similar to "race"). WP:Due weight is part of Wikipedia policy. But now it's time for other to chime in. I suggest you stop edit warring about. –Austronesier (talk) 18:37, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I will make my final revert explicitly for this reason.

great. Then i guess after fixing that then we are fine.

I have already voiced my substantial objections to your text (which isn't yours)

yeah you are objecting to the reliable source, not me, that’s your personal opinion and belief not what reliable sources say. You have provided zero sources so far and yet you are pushing your personal opinion over the reliable sources.

let me just add that I have all the right to object to a text that contexualizes ethnicity in a way that does not reflect the scholarly mainstream understanding of the concept (i.e. as something similar to "race")

then provide a source that support your claim !, you are the one claiming that a reliable source doesn’t reflect or contradict with the “scholarly mainstream understanding of the concept”, provide quote/s from any source that says or show that. Until you do, this remains your own personal opinion. Chafique (talk) 19:15, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

This edit [1] does remove the COPYVIO but remains problematic.

• FIRSTLY adding three sources to the lead is WP:OVERCITE.
• SECONDLY, on sourcing, The Washington post source is really not of the kind we should be using for this kind of information, and Barreto (2010) is all very well but you reveal in the referencing that you have not read the book, but merely searched for the phrase "ethnicity is a social construction". This suggests you have begun with the point you wish to express and googled sources that support your point of view. This is not how this should be done (although it is not uncommon). Austronesier, above, says I have all the right to object to a text that contexualizes ethnicity in a way that does not reflect the scholarly mainstream understanding of the concept, by which we understand that what is required here is a review of what all the sources say, not cherry picking sources that seem to agree with us (but may not if we read them in full).
• THIRDLY, we should not need to cite anything in the lead if the lead is properly a summary of the main text, where the information is cited. This per MOS:CITELEAD. Inserting this in the lead with citations reveals that it does not, in fact, properly summarise main text and so it does not belong there.
• FOURTHLY, there already is a summary of what the main text does say about ethnicity being a social construct, so your addition is repetitive in what is already a long lead.
• FIFTHLY, you tried an edit and it has been reverted, and now it is incumbent on you to gain a consensus before retrying it. Per WP:ONUS, this text stays out until their is consensus on what should be there.

For all these reasons I have reverted the addition. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:16, 24 April 2023 (UTC)