Talk:African Australians

Untitled
Note: The keep closure of the deletion discussion above was appealed at deletion review, the results of the discussion was No consensus; default endorsement of keep closure.  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 02:28, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Leroy Loggins.jpg
Image:Leroy Loggins.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

What happened?
Who fucked up this page? it was fine how it was until is was COMPLETELY edited several months ago. Niether Afircan American, African British nor African Canadian refers to white people. It is refering to Citzens who have black African backgrounds whether they be distant or not. African Ausralian should only be refering to people of african roots not European. steve76859 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 03:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * That is your view but it needs to be supported by citing reliable sources in accordance with Verifiability --Matilda talk 07:23, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Harry O'Brien
Yeh BrainyBabe, your right, sorry my bad. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 12:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

African Australian, not Black Australian
The intention of this article is to discuss Australians from Africa or of African ancestry. The text and statistics provided make this assumption. "Black Australian" to most people would suggest indigenous Australians, which is not what this article is about. The definition should include persons from Africa irrespective of 'colour', as is our practice with other articles. Kransky (talk) 12:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree, Black Australian to most people suggests exactly what this article used to say. Which is that it is used to refer to African Australians. It is only used to refer to indigneous Austalians as a self indentity. Aboriginals are not of African ancestory and alot of them are very light coloured. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 13:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Google "Black Australians" and you will discover that the term is only used in reference to aboriginal Australians. Kransky (talk) 13:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

African/black
why is there a picture of a white man? This article doesnt refer to White African Australians, but Australians of black/afro heritage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.108.35.141 (talk) 07:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * A good question, and it deserves a good answer.


 * I have reworked the definition to be as inclusive as possible, to cover persons who were born in Africa or are of indigenous African descent (and who were not necessarily born in Africa)
 * The majority of Africans in Australia are white South Africans and white Zimbaweans. A smaller but growing number are Black Africans.  The number of Afro-American, Afro-Brazilian, Afro-British are comparatively small.
 * White South Africans and white Zimbaweans born in Africa generally regard themselves as African, as do Indian Kenyan or Arab Egyptian. The definition is of course based on geography, not race, for the same reason a white Queenslander usually would regard him/herself as Australian, not European.
 * The Australian Bureau of Statistics, the only authorative source of data we have, only records people according to birthplace, and ancestry (as how people describe themselves). If we stick to a racial definition of Africa, we will not be able to use these statistics.
 * If we revert to a racial definition of Africa it will just lead to further questions on who can or cannot be considered. Algerians?  Sixteenth-African?  Why don't we apply this principle to Australians living abroad and remove everybody in American Australian who is not aboriginal???
 * JM Coetzee grew up in Africa (ironically he got his Nobel Prize for a book he wrote on what it was like to be an "outsider"). Marcia Hines probably has never been to Africa, and her cultural background is based on her experiences growing up in the United States, not Africa.  But in both cases their claims to this category are legitimate. Kransky (talk) 09:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeh, I have noticed this.


 * You have changed the whole article around to be an article of nationality regardless of race. And not on one in which it used to be as "Black African" regarding African race comparable to the article Anglo-Celtic Australian. I don't know how much of an improvement this is but oh well it's done now.
 * This point is true
 * I don't know where you got this conclusion from. It is true most South Africans, Indian Kenyans and to a lesser extent white Zimbaweans regard themselves as African, but this is mainly based on continental nationality and not ethnicity or racial reasons. Although alot of Indian Kenyans prefer African or Black to Indian, as it is not "cool" to be Indian and it is "cool" to be black. But Egyptians never really consider themselves African, they consider themselves by their nationality (Egyptian) or ethnicity Arab, not as African like you say. A white Queenslander, this is kind of confusing a confusing point, I mean first and foremost every Australian regards themselves as just that, Australian, which is based on nationality not race.
 * This point is true, although I do think it would be possible to reference, just extremely hard.
 * This is another confusing and seemingly pointless point. I mean anyone who identifies as 1-16th African obviously has racial insecurities. It will not lead to these questions as these are plain stupid. I mean I am around 10% native american, but I don't go saying I'm a Indian to people as this is just stupid. And why did you mention this sentence on Aboriginals? Aboriginals are Australian, but this is completely unrelated and it is not even the same principle.
 * Based on your reworking of this article this point is valid. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 10:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for being receptive to my reasons.
 * The article still isn't based on nationality; it is based on people with Australian citizenship having a geographic link to Africa.
 * As agreed
 * First point we are agreed. On the second point I concur that many in North Africa feel themselves to be more akin with the Middle East, due to their ethnic, religious and language ties.
 * Nope - it is impossible using the ABS data to discern race, including using the ancestry data
 * Exactly - the 1/16th African point is meant to illustrate how fruitless it would be to categorise people purely according to ancestry. My point is that if African Australian only included persons who are indigenous Africans, then why not say Australian American can only include persons who are indigenous Australians?
 * As agreed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kransky (talk • contribs) 11:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Reply —Preceding unsigned comment added by TeePee-20.7 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, yeh you are right, but this seems to make this article even more confusing as you have chosen to keep people like Marcia Hines and other African Americans who have no real geographical connection to Africa. I think if you choose to keep this reworked version of this article then they should deleted, as they have no relation in the context you're specifying.
 * Yep
 * Yep
 * Really? Wow I did not know this. Are you sure though?
 * Ok, we agree on this first point but it would not draw questions, because as I stated before it's stupid and like you said "fruitless". If it went back to a racial related article it would not include your examples because even if they did want to identify as African they would be considered multiracial, or being African would not even be notable. This second point I understand what you are saying, but even though it is very similar in idea it is also different. In terms of geographical context what you are saying is very valid and true. Because like you said "if African Australian only included persons who are indigenous Africans, then why not say Australian American can only include persons who are indigenous Australians". It is different because the race of the continent Africa are considered "Africans", but the race of the continent Australia are not considered "Australians", they are considered "Aborigine".
 * I withdraw this comment due to your explanation of a geographical link to Africa. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 11:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually I am not in favour of having Afro-Americans etc in this category at all, as they can be accomodated with American Australians. Others might have a different view.   Kransky (talk) 12:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Then you should delete them. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 13:44, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

African Australian, not Black Australian
This article should focus on Australians with a link to Africa. "Black Australian" could encompass indigenous Australians, Melanesian Australians as well as African Australians, and the three have very little in common with each other. The majority of African Australians are white ex-South Africans and Zimbabweans - excluding the most notable portion of the population is not appropriate. Kransky (talk) 23:56, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

white people in South Africa / Zimbabwe are European, not African. It is quite stupid to consider whites as African-Australian. Search African American/Canadian/British.......im sure they dont include whites as being African. There some food for thought —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.106.253.153 (talk) 14:04, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Definition
the article says There is no clear definition of what constitutes being an "African Australian" please provide WP:RS to define the term. Gnangarra 17:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * but there isn't a definition to work off. However Wikipedia has two definitions for "African" one based on birthplace, another on ethnicity.  This article was written to accomodate both definitions.   Kransky (talk) 10:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
 * As there is no definition, please do not remove the paragraph that points out that lack of definition and refers to ABS ancestry data--Matilda talk 22:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

<--

Reverted to the There is no clear definition of what constitutes being an "African Australian" as there is no definition please provide a WP:RS for the definition. Gnangarra 15:13, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Notable People list
I have hidden the list, for the time being please provide sources for the claim that they are African Australians, for BLP's the source should be where the person recognises/acknowledges themselves as an African Australian. Gnangarra 17:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * This is going to be tricky as few people are ever asked about their ethnicity unless it is perceived to be borderline (Tiger Woods, Barak Obama). Ironic that Coetzee won a Nobel Prize writing autobiographically about his own identity. Kransky (talk) 11:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * This also applies to the addition of images of people, I have again reverted as unsourced BLP material. Gnangarra 12:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I concur with the approach of Gnangarra. I have no difficulty with the inclusion of Coetzee or Selwyn - both from Africa (born there) now living in Australia.  I do have a difficulty with Symonds and Billy Blue.  In the case of Symonds the article states One of Symonds' biological parents was of Afro-Caribbean background - it seems a stretch to make him an African Australian because he has West Indian blood (acknowledged in the source) but "It is not an aspect of his heritage he has ever chosen to explore".  African does not seem to enter into the equation.  Billy Blue was similarly from Jamaica.  I would not object to either being placed in an article on Jamaican Australians.  Ethnicity linking the Caribbean to Africa in my view is borderline to make somebody African Australian.  The same applies to Marcia or Deni Hines - no direct links to Africa and therefore borderline.  The analogy would be to make everybody who has very blond hair and blue eyes a Scandinavian Australian just because they look like that.  I don't think by the way Obama's ethnicity was ever borderline. --Matilda talk 21:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I kind of agree with this approach. Previously I was trying to be inclusive to one user who defined African Australian on race rather than birthplace.  Your Scandinavian Australian analogy is not accurate though, since Billy Blue and Marcia do have kinship to Africa (albeit tenuously) Kransky (talk) 14:24, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I have some difficulty with the inclusion of Coetzee and Selwyn even though both are from African countries now living in Australia. The reason is that African Australian is an undefined term, its this being undefined thats the problem. The use of African in other articles like African American is in relation to people only of Negro/Black ancestry. Then there's the ambiguous linking that includes people like Symmonds and Hines, what is the criteria that decides because according to Human  DNA evidence indicates that modern humans originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago in the extreme all Australians are African Australians. Gnangarra 14:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * One presumes that a person with reasonable judgement and intelligence can discern the difference between somebody who is perhaps half a dozen generations out of Africa (like Hines), and somebody whose ancestral links to Africa is pre-historic. Kransky (talk) 10:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * But we dont make presumptions based on how reasonable and intelligent a person maybe, we only describe verified facts from reliable sources.  As for Hines is there such a source that describes her as being half a dozen generations out of Africa. Gnangarra 15:32, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * For the same reason that there is no good reason to exclude Asian Australian migrants from the Asian American page, people like Marcia Hines, explicitly identified as of African ethnicity in sources like this: http://www.milesago.com/Stage/hair.htm, should not be excluded from the African Australian page. That would be arbitrary. I notice Australian-born Terence Tao is in the List of Chinese Americans despite being Australian born, and this is reasonable as to exclude him would also be arbitrary.User:Heisoutofsight —Preceding undated comment added 00:02, 19 November 2013 (UTC)


 * As the section has been uncommented out by another editor, I have added a table form to allow the facts to be placed before the reader and the reader can decide. WP:V and WP:NOR apply. --Matilda talk 01:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I have removed entirely as it unsourced original research with BLP violations as discussed above. Gnangarra 12:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Listing persons of African descent, or Pokimon characters, or the bank notes of Botswana is not original research. However I agree it is a problem is when people try to define what something is by adding in examples which complements their viewpoint.  What if we just listed persons who were born in Africa? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kransky (talk • contribs)


 * The problem is trying to define the article, thats what needs attention forget lists. The term "African Australian" is undefined until that is addressed how can inclusion of any person can be addressed. Gnangarra 13:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge with Black-Africans in Australia
This article should be merged with Black-Africans in Australia. The Ogre (talk) 21:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That article has been deleted per AfD discussion --Matilda talk 23:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

"African Australians" vs "Australians of African Descent"
A user called Blackable2323 wants this article to be called "Australians of African Descent", because It's the Correct term for people of sub african descent. I have no idea what a person of sub african descent is. However this name fits with other ethnicity in Australia articles (German Australian, Japanese Australian, Danish Australian) etc. Why should this be different? Kransky (talk) 10:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * presume the intent is sub-saharan decent but that isnt the focus of the article, in its many forms it has included americans, south africans of eurpoean decents, egyptians and peoples of the middle east. I think that the articles intent was to include all people who are decended from people who immigrated(voluntary or forcibly) from any african country irregardless of their nationality. There also seams to be a historical cut off time for inclusion criteria to those that immigrated on or after about 15th/16th century. As for calling it "Australians of African Descent" one then ask questions as to what criteria is used to define a person as being "Australian". In short my standard response, provide a reliable source to define the term first then all other issues can be easily resolved. Gnangarra 12:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. "African Australian" is a neutral term that could encompass the two meanings that have been debated (and it fits existing naming conventions).  "Australians of African descent" could encompass African-American Australians (with virtually no connection to Africa) and exclude Egyptian Australians or white South Africans (who are the vast majority of African Australians).  Blackable2323 and Unknown have presented no reason why one definition should carry more weight than the other.  Kransky (talk) 23:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

A source :-)
Other than the ABS data which had to be aggregted to produce the statistics for this article and therefore was a potential breach of SYNTH and a handful of other links that really didn't seem to meet WP:RS and didn't help difinitionally, I have now located a source that I think meets some concerns http://www.att.org.au/documents/att_report.pdf. It is a reoport of a workshop sponsored by Workshop sponsored by the Victorian Department of Immigration, Victorian Multicultural Commission, and the Department of Victorian Communities and conducted by African Think Tank Inc. It starts "More than two thirds of the migrants who settle in Victoria under Australia’s humanitarian and refugee programs now come from African nations, and for many of these groups the resettlement process is confusing, even traumatic. It is increasingly important that new arrivals are given support to successfully integrate into the broader Australian society, however. Issues affecting resettlement and integration of African migrants were identified by representatives of African communities at an Initiative Workshop Auspiced by the African Think Tank Inc in Melbourne on 16 February 2006. Participants stressed that many families experience ‘culture shock’ on their arrival in Australia and, without appropriate support, find it difficult to understand and adapt to mainstream Australian values and norms. Cultural differences increase pressures on families and communities, and have serious implications for refugees’ on-going physical and psychological wellbeing and for their engagement with other Australians and mainstream institutions. The workshop highlighted the following interconnected themes for consideration at the forthcoming national conference on African re-settlement: � African values, and the positive contributions African-Australians can make to Australia; � cultural differences and how these impact on family and community life; � gender, role differentiation and family relationships as they affect both men and women; � content and delivery of health education and services, especially around mental health, communicable diseases, diet and lifestyle, and vitamin D deficiency; � specific problems African-Australian youth face in being “caught between two cultures”; � adult education, training and employment opportunities; � educational needs of African children, from pre-school to tertiary; and � the ignorance of the broader Australian community about Africa and African-Australians." I think we have a source that substantiates the aggregation of an African Australian experience. There are some issues to be sorted out but we have a way forward in my view. There are some other sources indicated that may be worth following up in relation to the national conference mentioned.--Matilda talk 00:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The national conference proceedings are at http://www.att.org.au/documents/African%20Resettlement%20Report.pdf (6+MB) It was held April 2007 and coveed African resettlement in Austrlaia. At page 35 in the introduction to helath issues: "African-Australians are not a homogenous group, but include people of diverse cultural, linguistic, religious, educational, and employment backgrounds, with a variety of pre- and post-migration experiences. However, most recent African arrivals from the African continent are typically from a refugee background. Common refugee experiences include torture, war or civil unrest, the loss of family and friends through violence, dislocation and prolonged periods of deprivation. These experiences can have major implications for refugees’ health, with ramifications for the delivery of health care services." --Matilda talk 00:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

African Prescence on the First Fleet
The Book Black Founders by Samantha Pybus presents conclusive evidence that there were people of recent Subsaharan African; African American and Afro-Caribbean descent on the First Fleet. So I think that the sentance "Historical archives suggest that convicts transported to Australia included Afro-Caribbeans" should be changed to "Historical archives show that convicts transported to Australia included Afro-Caribbeans and Afro-Americans" but no-one should forget Black Caesar. Just my thoughts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.175.57.11 (talk) 02:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree, and I was going to mention this book as well. My first ancestor to come to this country was a black African convict, I have his convict record. So saying that it is a recent thing is a bit misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.45.222 (talk) 12:24, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

In his book, 'The Forgotten Australians: the non Anglo or Celtic convicts and exiles', James Hugh Donohoe states 'Over three hundred Negroes arrived as convicts. Eleven of these came with the First Fleet.' (p.86) Negro here referring to people of Black African descent. Guantai5 (talk) 09:09, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Template
Could the person wanting the photos and template removed please state their reason(s)? Thanks. Kransky (talk) 11:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Merge from Afro-Australians in Australia
Black people in Australia has been deleted through AfD and has now been recreated at Afro-Australians in Australia. I propose a merge of that article into this article. Comments? Donama (talk) 23:57, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Other article now deleted. No potential to merge. WWGB (talk) 02:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Timomatic is more notable than any of the African Australians pictured in the article, why is he not pictured?
Why is the picture of Timomatic not included, and why is he not mentioned?

In fact, I ask that this article be unlocked and updated by the community. There is no need to lock this article, it should be free for people to edit, as this is not an article that is of one person or event in history, but of a demographic in the population of Australia. A demographic that is growing by the day and should be updated accordingly.

In my opinion, this article is very underdone and quite outdated.

Just as the articles on African Americans and Black British, this article should also make note of more African Australians and their involvement in the Australian society. Jas315 (talk) 19:47, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The article is only page move protected, it is not locked against editing. WWGB (talk) 01:44, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:White people#Discussion on direction of article
There is an ongoing discussion on the "Black people" and "White people" articles about whether these terms can only mean "race" or can be used as description of skin color. Relevance is given as "Black Australians" are also discussed in the Black people article. You are welcomed to participate. You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:White people. FonsScientiae (talk) 12:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

African Immigrants
This page was established to be about Australians with identified African heritage, that is what the first line established. Did I miss an agreement somewhere on Wikipedia that unlike the Asian Australian page or the Arab Australian page it be made about immigrants and not ancestry? Why change it? User:Heisoutofsight
 * There will necessarily be some overlap between the Arab Australian page and this one because many of the immigrants from the Arab world in Australia hail from African countries (e.g. ). The headquarters of the Arab League is, in fact, in Cairo, Egypt. That said, it makes no difference what the page's scope was all those years ago when it was started as an editorial stub. The Australian government defines "African Australian" first and foremost as consisting of Australian citizens and residents born in or with recent ancestors from Africa. This is made clear on its African Australians Project. That is what the actual government population and migration stream statistics pertain to, not to non-Africans from the Americas or elsewhere. Middayexpress (talk) 14:56, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * That is incorrect. The government also collects statistics about Australians with African ancestry. Therefore the idea that government population statistics relating to Australians identified also as African only refer to migrants is factually incorrect. For example, over 13,000 Australians were described by the government's census as being 'African' (without further specification) in ancestry (nowhere does it specify recent ancestry) here:


 * The African Australians Project you cite itself states at the top that it is "an independent piece of research and reflects the views of the individual author only." Therefore it is not the view of the government, it's just one guy.


 * Furthermore, you yourself appear to agree with me to an extent. You advocate a definition of ""African Australian" first and foremost as consisting of Australian citizens and residents born in or with recent ancestors from Africa." Thus those with African ancestry only are, by your admission, equally African Australians. Thus we are in agreement that 'African immigrants' is not a term interchangeable with 'African Australians' as they denote different things.


 * I think there may be a miscommunication here. Since you do not appear to be suggesting that being 'African Australian' is synonymous with being an 'African immigrants to Australia', I suggest the page be altered to read "African Australians are Australian citizens and residents born in, or with ancestors from Africa. A large proportion are African immigrants to Australia." The current statement "African Australians, also known as African immigrants to Australia" implies the terms are interchangeable, which they are not as it appears we agree.Heisoutofsight (talk) 03:14, 21 November 2013 (UTC)


 * The 2006 census did have supplementary entries for "African", "Creole", "Asian", "Eurasian", "European", "Caucasian", and "Inadequately described", a number of which overlap. However, the government defines "African Australians" specifically as consisting of Australian citizens and residents born in or with recent ancestors from Africa. While one author did prepare the African Australians Project, it was actually commissioned by the Australian Human Rights Commission. This is stated at the top of the report ("this background paper was commissioned by the Australian Human Rights Commission"), and noted by the Commission's address and url at the bottom of the pdf's first page . The author is also a government member and a specialist on demography in Australia . That makes it a government publication, which is why it is published on the government's servers. All of the statistics on the African Australians Project pertain to immigrants from actual African countries, not to non-Africans from other areas. This obviously implies recent immigration from Africa (not historic or prehistoric) since most African nations did not come into existence/gain independence until the 1960s. Other government papers that are exclusively on African Australians likewise pertain to immigrants or descendants of people from actual African countries (e.g. ). Same goes for government consultations with African Australian communities . Middayexpress (talk) 14:52, 21 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Australia's official submission to the UN OHCHR refers to Australians of African descent as African Australians, as seen here. This is a more appropriate source than the  African Australians Project linked to earlier, as it does not have a disclaimer stating it is the views of an individual only, rather is an official submission by the Australian Human Rights Commission to an international human rights body. The AHRC wished to "develop concrete strategies to improve the human rights outcomes of African Australians" because "racism, xenophobia and discrimination against people of African descent still exists in Australia".(Same source, see sections 2.3, 2.4)


 * There is no way in which a work with a disclaimer stating categorically that it is "an independent piece of research and reflects the views of the individual author only" actually does reflect the views of the government. The African Australians Project linked to earlier does not reflect the views of the government, because that is what it says itself. Please do not inaccurately use this source to indicate government views.


 * If the term "African Australians" is sometimes used to refer to immigrants from Africa to Australia, and other times used to refer to people of African descent in Australia, that indicates these are both acceptable usages of the phrase "African Australians". The current statement "African Australians, also known as African immigrants to Australia" implies the terms are interchangeable, which they are not as the Australian international submission I have cited also indicates. The current page introduction is therefore unclear, inaccurate, and unsuitable.


 * I will insert the rewording in the introduction that I mentioned earlier, as Middayexpress I do not believe it contradicts the point of view you have expressed, and you have not noted any disagreement about it. Inserted: "African Australians are Australian citizens and residents born in Africa, or of African descent. A large proportion are African immigrants to Australia." Middayexpress, please feel free to explain or clarify on this talk page if I have misunderstood you and apologies if I have.Heisoutofsight (talk) 04:50, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


 * There indeed has been a misunderstanding. The African Australians Project was commissioned by an Australian government body, the Australian Human Rights Commission. The brief disclaimer indicating that the paper expresses the views of the author doesn't change that because the author himself is a government employee and a demography specialist at that, preparing a government report. This is actually the official government usage of African Australians, which other government papers on the community likewise specifically adhere to i.e. that the population consists of immigrants from actual African countries and their descendants. This is what the link above also means by "African descent". It does not include, say, people from the Americas who moved to Australia. This is why they and other non-African populations are not aggregated in the government's actual population statistics on African Australians. This is also why that link speaks of "a long history of migration between Africa and Australia". Here's another government link, wherein a civilian wrote in expressing that he "totally disagree[s] with the use of “African Australians” to describe the African migrants or the African refugees" because "to me the use of the “African Australians” is just a reflection or a version of the African Americans", so "a better term to use is “African Communities or African Community in Australia". In other words, the government uses "African Australians" to denote immigrants from African countries and their descendants, though it is an inadequate term for the reasons the fellow in the link points out. Also, please see this briefing  on African Australians by the Australian government's Department of Immigration and Citizenship. Middayexpress (talk) 15:33, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Middayexpress, You assert your opinion of the specific source I have linked with no clear verification that it relates specifically to migrants or recent people. Please point out explicitly where this is stated in the link I earlier provided, I cannot see it.


 * A work with a disclaimer stating categorically that it is "an independent piece of research and reflects the views of the individual author only" cannot be assumed to mean the opposite. The employment status of the author does not change the explicitly-stated purpose of the work.


 * You are constantly reinstating your preferred sentence, in its exact form. I don't see how this is constructive. Have you considered any alternatives? Please explain if any other options may acceptable to you.Heisoutofsight (talk) 01:17, 23 November 2013 (UTC)


 * An additional note - I have already noted that government statistics accept ancestry/descent (with no mention of it being "recent") as denoting an "African" in Australia both here and here Repeating that this is "non-African" is not neutral, it defines Africans in a circular fashion (Africans are people who aren't non-African), and ignores the actual approach of these government sources.Heisoutofsight (talk) 01:23, 23 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Middayexpress, you have deleted my cited source from the AHCR on people of African descent in Australia. This is covered in Tendentious editing. According to that page, "There is guidance from ArbCom that removal of statements that are pertinent, sourced reliably, and written in a neutral style constitutes disruption. Instead of removing cited work, you should be questioning uncited information." Please keep this in mind.Heisoutofsight (talk) 02:02, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

The reason why I reinstated the African Australians Project report is because the first sentence you changed to read "Australian citizens and residents identified as having African descent[...] they may also be Australian citizens and residents born in Africa" misdefined how the Australian government actually uses the term African Australians. By African Australians, the government means immigrants from actual African countries and their descendants, regardless of race, language, culture and religion (please see box below). It does not include immigrants to Australia from the Americas or other non-African areas who trace a part of their ancestry from individuals that migrated from Africa to the Americas/elsewhere centuries ago. Only immigrants from actual African countries and their descendants are aggregated in the government's population statistics on African Australians, and included in the National Consultations on African Australians. This is empirical fact, not opinion.

The parts of the Response to OHCHR Questionnaire link that actually discuss African Australians (beginning on "Question 2") pertain to immigrants from actual African countries and their descendants. This is obvious since those sections allude to the "national consultation with African communities", and "a Discussion Paper in March 2009 – translated into 10 community languages – which called for submissions from African Australians". The link's only cited statistics on African Australians likewise exclusively pertain to immigrants from actual African countries ("248,699 people born in Africa were living in Australia[...] since then, around 50,000 more migrants born in Africa have arrived in Australia"). Nowhere does the link suggest that the government also includes non-Africans in its definition of African Australians.

Here's how the Australian government in its own words actually defines African Australians, from Tom Calma, the Race Discrimination Commissioner and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner :

Middayexpress (talk) 15:48, 23 November 2013 (UTC)


 * You appear to have missed my concerns. I have added sources indicating identified African descent denotes an African Australian. I understand you disagree with this and deleted them. However, I have three questions I would appreciate it if you could answer.


 * Firstly, does a government source explicitly state that identified African descent does not denote an African Australian? If so, please provide an explicit quote, and a page number.


 * Secondly, does a government source explicitly state that an Australian who is not an African immigrant cannot be an African Australian? Does a government source explicitly state that an Australian who is not an African immigrant or of "recent" African descent cannot be an African Australian? If so, how is "recent" defined? If so, please provide an explicit quote, and a page number.


 * Thirdly, have you considered that the current page definition of "African Australians" is simply not clear? It states that "African Australians" are synonymous and interchangeable with "African immigrants to Australia", but that they may also have "recent ancestors from Africa". Are you comfortable with any rephrasing of this statement to make it more precise and less unclear?


 * You have noted a quote saying that "Many of these new and emerging [African Australian] communities in Australia have come from Africa". This underlines my point, as it does not say "all". It does not indicate that an "immigrant to Africa" is interchangeable with an "African Australian." If you think African Australians can also be Australians with "recent ancestors from Africa" are these people also immigrants or not? Where does this specific phrase come from?


 * I have added back in the sources you deleted. You stated "The parts of the Response to OHCHR Questionnaire link that actually discuss African Australians (beginning on "Question 2") pertain to immigrants from actual African countries and their descendants." Please point out where this was explicitly stated. Furthermore, the descendants of African migrants are people of African descent. Please explain how this contradicts the statement you deleted.


 * Since I have been discussing explicit links, here is the explicit, unabridged link between "an Australian of African descent" and an "African Australian", as written in the AHCR submission to the UN here:, see "2.4 Question 4: Planned national measures"


 * (emphasis added)


 * This source therefore explicitly refers to activities intended to stamp out discrimination against people of African descent in Australia as being directed at "African Australians". Thus it explicitly uses the term "African Australians" to refer to people of African descent in Australia.Heisoutofsight (talk) 06:02, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

First off, it's not assuming good faith to accuse other users of tendentious editing simply because they don't happen to agree with your edits. I realize you registered this account only a few months ago, but that is still unhelpful. Second, the actual chain of events was me adding a link to the African Australians Project, then you removing that and later replacing it with the Response to OHCHR Questionnaire link. Only then did I restore the original African Australians Project link. Anyway, that was a while ago, so let us examine what the government sources actually state with respect to "African Australians". The gist of your post above is that there is an "unabridged link between an Australian of African descent" and an "African Australian"", and that "an Australian of African descent" is by extension inclusive of New World immigrants with some ancestors from Africa. However, none of the sources makes this connection, including the one quoted above. Every government source cited on African Australians (notably the 2009 African Australians compendium quoteboxed above) makes it clear through its actual statistics and statements that "African Australians" pertains to immigrants from African countries and their descendants, regardless of race, language, culture and religion. This is what Tom Calma and other government officials mean here by Australians with an "African background" as well as by Australians of "African descent". Here's another contextualized demonstration of this, from the NSW Ministry of Health's STARTTS service and the independent Public Interest Advocacy Centre :

Middayexpress (talk) 15:38, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

I am confused by the way you have interpreted my statements. Here is the the crux of your response:

The gist of my post is not at all that "New World immigrants with some ancestors from Africa" are African Australians. Nowhere did I mention such Australians anywhere in my post. The sourced statement you have deleted from the article is this: "African Australians are also Australian citizens and residents identified as having African descent." The statement as it stood, correctly sourced and pertinent to the definition of the article, cannot be problematic for referencing the New World, because it did not do so. That no sources refer to immigrants from the New World as being African Australians is simply not relevant to this statement at all.

I cited the Tendentious editing rule on this page as an explanation of why I reinstated a source which should not be removed. This was not an accusation. Without informing you of the guideline, how else can I explain my reasoning was based on this guideline? You have now removed that source three times. Please explain why this was necessary. Following your second removal of this source, I remain unaware of your precise reasoning that my sourcing was not "pertinent, sourced reliably, and written in a neutral style". I have now made all my concerns as explicit as I succinctly can, here and on your talk page.

Earlier, before using the talk page, I deleted a source you provided before I was aware such action was inappropriate. I apologise for doing so. I have not made this error again. As a new editor on Wikipedia, regrettably I have not familiarised myself with all its rules, however I endeavour not to repeat mistakes. The AHCR source I added did not replace anything, it was an addition only. This is clear in the edit history of this page, please recheck it.

I have made beginner mistakes in my genuine attempt for a productive discussion to improve this page. I apologise if you feel my conduct has been inadequate.

Here's the wikitext you wrote in full: "African Australians, also known as African immigrants to Australia, are Australian citizens and residents born in, or with recent ancestors from Africa. African Australians are also Australian citizens and residents identified as having African descent." From the above, you were clearly referring to citizens and residents of Australia. However, the suggestion that the Australian government means something different when it speaks of "Australian citizens and residents born in, or with recent ancestors from Africa" and Australian residents of "African descent" is inaccurate. The cited Response to OHCHR Questionnaire link certainly doesn't state this anywhere. Fact is, every government source cited on African Australians makes it clear through its actual statistics and statements that "African Australians" pertains to immigrants from African countries and their descendants, regardless of race, language, culture and religion. This is what government officials actually mean here by Australians with an "African background" as well as by Australians of "African descent", as just shown and quoteboxed. Middayexpress (talk) 17:24, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

You seem to believe that if "African Australian" is a term which encapsulates immigrants, it cannot also encapsulate people of African descent who are not immigrants. This is not the case. The term "Asian Australian" can encapsulate both Asian immigrants, and Australians of Asian descent who are not immigrants. The term "African Australian" can be equally flexible, and is used flexibly thus in the sources referred to on this talk page. This source, referring to a government initiative, is another example where "Australians of African descent" is the only definition provided.

Large-scale African migration to Australia is recent. It is therefore logical that most African Australian communities will be dominated by migrants (which will be reflected in government sources on these communities). This in no way whatsoever indicates African Australians must be migrants.

You have still cited no government source that explicitly states an Australian who is not an African immigrant cannot be an African Australian. Whatever you think government officials "mean", you have not established this.

Australian-born descendants of African migrants are not migrants. Why then does the page description indicate "African Australians" is exactly the same as "Immigrants from Africa" if descendants of immigrants are also African Australians as you explicitly state?Heisoutofsight (talk) 01:49, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the lede states that "African Australians, also known as African immigrants to Australia, are Australian citizens and residents born in, or with recent ancestors from Africa." So no, it does not assert that African Australians are exclusively recent migrants from African countries (though they certainly form the majority). The lede acknowledges that there are also a few more established communities from Africa, per the actual government sources. What it does not acknowledge is that African Australians includes people who did not emigrate recently to Australia from an African country nor did any of their ancestors prior to that. This is because the government itself, quoted repeatedly above, does not make this connection. Here's the actual dichotomy between African Australians (i.e. between recent migrant communities from Africa and more established migrant communities from Africa), from the Australian Human Rights Commission :

Middayexpress (talk) 14:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Unsubstantiated Claims about the Special Commonwealth African Assistance Plan
The 'History' section states:

"The Special Commonwealth African Assistance Plan allowed students from West African countries, mostly from Ghana and Nigeria, to come to Australia the mid-1960s. More than 70 per cent of these students remained in Australia following military coup d'états in their countries of birth.[12]"

Could this please be modified to remove the claim that mostly West African countries were involved in SCAAP. (I tried doing this, but my edit was deleted.)

There is no evidence that SCAAP involved people mostly from Ghana and Nigeria. The fact sheet referenced for this information only states that most of those from West Africa were from Ghana and Nigeria. Other countries involved in SCAAP had much larger numbers of white people migrating to Australia, which is a possible reason why there was no mention of SCAAP involvement (only for Black people) in the Australian Department of Immigration Fact sheets for those countries. Guantai5 (talk) 09:33, 17 March 2014 (UTC)


 * The bureau indicates that "students from West African countries, including from Ghana, came to Australia in the mid-1960s under the Special Commonwealth African Assistance Plan[...] more than 70 per cent of these students remained in Australia following military coups in their countries" . Middayexpress (talk) 15:38, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

African Australians, also known as African migrants to Australia
Please don't claim that African Australians are migrants. It doesn't make sense when they have been in the country since 1788. Plenty of people of African descent were born in Australia.Guantai5 (talk) 12:35, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Per the Australian government, African Australians are Australian citizens and residents born in, or with recent ancestors from Africa. Middayexpress (talk) 15:38, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

What about African Americans in Australia and their descendants?
Does the scope of the term "African Australian" include African American emigrants to Australia and their descendants? African Americans have a significant history in Australian basketball, with some becoming Australian citizens and playing internationally for the Boomers. Several have Australian-born children who have gone on to become notable figures in the sport, both in Australia and the States. There may be notable African American Australians in other fields, but I'm most familiar with those in basketball. Examples:
 * Cal Bruton, Cecil Exum, Ricky Grace, Dave Simmons — African American NBL players who stayed in the country
 * C. J. Bruton, Dante Exum, Ben Simmons — Australian-born and -raised sons of the above figures

I'd like some Aussies to weigh in on this topic. Full disclosure: I'm American. — Dale Arnett (talk) 20:23, 22 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I know you asked this almost 8 years ago now, but here's my Australian answer: the term "African Australian" isn't very commonly used here, and it doesn't have a clear definition. The US Census Bureau groups people into 5 races, of which "Black / African-American" is one. The Australian Bureau of Statistics doesn't officially classify people by race. It does classify them by "culture/ethnicity", using the Australian Standard Classification of Cultural and Ethnic Groups (ASCCEG). ASCCEG is a three level classification – "broad groups" subdivided into "narrow groups" subdivided into "cultural and ethnic groups". But ASCCEG groups correspond rather poorly to American ideas of "race" (whether popular or offical).
 * ASCCEG's "Ocenanian" broad group includes Indigenous Australians, Maori, Pacific Islanders – but also the majority of Australians and New Zealanders of European descent, whose immigrant backgrounds are sufficiently distant that they no longer identify with them. It classifies African-Americans into the "Peoples of the Americas" broad group – into which it also includes Hispanic and Latin American people, Native Americans, French Canadians, Americans (including its "non-Hispanic White" ethnoracial majority), Canadians (which includes White Anglophones), etc. Its "Sub-Saharan African" category includes all South Africans, regardless of race – the majority of "Sub-Saharan African" Australians are likely White South African immigrants, but nobody knows for sure, because we don't collect racial statistics on our substantial population of South African immigrants. So, Australia officially doesn't have a category of "African-Australians", but if you go by the closest thing in ASCCEG (its broad categories) – African-American immigrants are American-Australians, not African-Australians; whereas White South African immigrants are African-Australians. If Elon Musk moved to Australia, he'd be an African-Australian too; if Barack Obama moved to Australia, he wouldn't be an African-Australian. Or at least, that's the closest thing to an official answer–as always, the average person (who knows nothing about the official definitions of statistics agencies) may not agree.
 * What about popular definitions, as opposed to official ones? If you asked three Australians, you'd probably get three different answers. The fact is, this label is only occasionally used here, and Australians just aren't as used to thinking about people in coarse racial categories as Americans are, they are much more used to thinking of people in terms of nationality/ethnicity labels (i.e. Mexican or Cuban not Hispanic, English or German not White, Sudanese or Nigerian not African, etc).
 * Possibly, American ways of thinking about race are becoming more influential here, with the continuing influx of American culture–something which goes back many decades, but the Internet and social media have greatly accelerated. But even Australians who get hooked on American categories and try to apply them, sooner or later are going to stumble over the fact that they just don't quite work in a very different cultural/historical/social context from that in which they originated. I think this article is a bit flawed, because it reads (in part) as an attempt to map American categories to Australia, without making sufficiently clear just how imprecise that mapping is – but maybe that's an example of an obvious truth (to me at least), which is nonetheless hard to insert into the article, because I just don't know of any secondary reliable source to cite for it. SomethingForDeletion (talk) 12:19, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on African Australians. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/statistics/comm-summ/_pdf/ghana.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on African Australians. 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/20090912130346/http://www.africanoz.com/ to http://www.africanoz.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:19, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on African Australians. 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/20140212100535/http://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/statistics/comm-summ/_pdf/ghana.pdf to http://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/statistics/comm-summ/_pdf/ghana.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:59, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Indicating barter with Africa-based civilizations.
I am not an expert in this field. But I am surprised by this formulation.

It sounds like the Kilwa Sultanate just so happens to be based in Africa but is not actually African.

Is Cook then the first traveler reaching Australia from a Great Britain-based civilization or Janszoon the first from a Europe-based civilization?

The next question I have is around "barter" If I look up the definition I find:

"Barter is a system of exchange where goods or services are directly exchanged for other goods or services without using a medium of exchange, such as money."

Again I am not an expert and I understand that archiologie is probably based on most plausible assumptions. Still without an explanation it sounds surprising to me that discovering Money is an indication for a system of exchange without using Money.

My feeling: if this would have been coins of a European kingdom somewhere else then Australia the sentence would end something like this:

... indicating trade with Europe.

If this is correct I would suggest to replace in this article:

...indicating barter with Africa-based civilizations.

with

...indicating trade with Africa.

And from my perspective I would even add

... indicating trade with Africa as early as the 12th century.

As this would put in perspective the next sentence:

"They are among the oldest foreign artifacts ever discovered in Australia."

With respect to this sentence I followed the reference just after it and was surprised to find in the second paragraph of the article the following:

"By far the oldest foreign artefacts ever found in Australia."

As this seems to be the only reference for those coins probably we should get closer to their judgement?

In total I think the section could read:

Coins minted by the Kilwa Sultanate have been found on the Wessel Islands. This indicates trade with Africa as early as the 12th century. They are the oldest foreign artifacts ever discovered in Australia.[8]

Thoughts? T.pfeiffer (talk) 21:50, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Egypt - Africa 0_0 ...!
Egypt is more Middle East than Africa so learn and don't be ignorant. Is Morocco Africa? - separated by desert and mountains from the rest of the continent sharing part of it's heritage with the Spanish south and it's culture with Middle East. c'mon stop fooling around. 2A02:C7C:A820:6F00:81B6:1C87:5D10:2052 (talk) 16:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Racist Language
In Australia it is considered extremely racist to refer to people "nationality" Australian. The levels of segregation and prejudice required to use this type of language is considered abominable. This entire entry needs to be rewritten by someone who is ethnic neutral. 220.233.8.1 (talk) 07:06, 3 August 2023 (UTC)