Talk:Argentina/Archive 2

Improvement Drive
South America and Developing countries' debt is currently nominated to be improved on This week's improvement drive. You can support the article with your vote.--Fenice 12:14, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Information source

 * Info
 * Info
 * Info+Maps
 * Geography+turism
 * History+Geography+Literature+Biographies
 * History
 * Monographies

-Mariano 09:44, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism by User:200.82.111.81 and User:200.127.54.33
The anonymous user with IP is most likely a vandal, though we still have to wait a bit more to make sure according to policy. See Vandalism for details on how to deal with vandalism. I'm placing a warning on the corresponding talk page. Here is a site you can use to resolve the IP into a domain name. This one is a telecom.net.ar address.

This IP and its host are different from the "other" vandal also lurking near this page, but it's entirely possible that they're both the same person. Both come from .ar domains, to be sure. --Pablo D. Flores 16:38, 16 August 2005 (UTC)


 * They are probably not the same person, as 200.82.111.81 is a Telecom client, whereas 200.127.54.33 is a Telefonica one. (sorry for editing your text). -Mariano 06:56, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Population Density
The population density ranking appears to be wrong. Based on the values of the countries on either side of it in the list, it should be ranked 200th I believe.

Map caption
Map's caption says "''[...]including Argentina's claimed territorial sovereignty over the British Falklands (Malvinas) Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands[...]". That part of the sentence could be read as stating that Falkland Islands (Malvinas) are otherwise undisputed British territory. I would suggest changing the wording to "[...] including Argentina's claims over the Falklands (Malvinas), South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands (disputed with the United Kingdom) [...]". That wording would follow more closely the UN standards (see this link. Alternatively, a side note as suggested in the French note of the above mentioned page could be used: "Sovereignty over Falkland Islands (Malvinas) is the object of a dispute between the Government of Argentina and the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland". Cinabrium 00:27, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

for me it is ok but just keep it shorter than the article itself. instead of "Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" just put uk. Argentino 18:49, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Genetics
This Information about genetic studies proves to be short lived as no one else has reported your findings i am reverting the page. Thank you. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by XXGustaXX (talk &bull; contribs) 20 sep 2005.


 * Clarin has posted the findings. Please don't base yourself in just the "BA Herald", it's not even close to the best paper in Argentina. If you have proof, show it, otherwise is Original Research and will be reverted as vandalism.
 * PS: Please sign your posts with 3 or 4 tildes ( or ~ ) so we all know who made the comments
 * --Sebastian Kessel Talk 00:45, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * It was also published by «Página 12» here. Moreover, the research team was led by Daniel Corach, one of the most respected geneticists of Argentina (just google for his name), Director of the Genetic Fingerprints Service, School of Pharmacy and Biochemistry, Universidad de Buenos Aires. Cinabrium 01:27, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * FWIW here there is the abstract of a previous ('99) paper by Corach:
 * The population of Argentina is mostly composed of people of European ancestry. Aboriginal communities are at present very reduced in number and restricted to small geographically isolated patches. I couldn't find any other reference to his latest results besides Clarin group's newspapers.
 * Ejrrjs | What? 13:11, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Funny... But I would tend to trust the later study and also Clarin, who may be biased sometimes but it is a qualified source... Studies change, findings change, who knows. --Sebastian Kessel Talk 15:28, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I think we are mixing 2 different things. The fact that "56% possess at least some Amerindian ancestry" doesn't mean much by it self. It doesn't mean that 44% are "pure" European, but not that the other 56% are "pure" aboriginals. If of your 16 grand-grand-grand parents one was an aboriginal and the rest pure Europeans, you will (almost) definitely look pure European. If instead of 4 generations we look further behind, this grows exponentially.
 * Can you call "aboriginal" to someone who had a single aboriginal ancestor 6 generations back?? I don't think so.
 * Then, it is true that in Argentina, and specially in Buenos Aires, there is a majority of European "looking" people, 44% of which are pure European.
 * Question is: how to write this in an Encyclopedic way? Mariano (t/c) 08:05, 22 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I think it would be better to change the order of the paragraphs, and separate the Spanish conquistadores from the mostly Spanish/Italian immigrants of the late 1800s and later. See if this works:


 * Unlike most of its neighbouring countries, Argentina's population descends overwhelmingly from Europeans. The basic demographic stock (88% of the population) is made up of descendants of the colonial Spanish settlers, augmented by descendants of later Italian and Spanish immigrants. However, according to genetic research, around 56% of Argentinians possess at least some Amerindian ancestry, due to mestizaje (mixing of Spanish settlers and Amerindian natives) during the colonial period.


 * The (purer?) indigenous population, poorly estimated between 500,000 and 2,000,000, is concentrated in the provinces of the north, northwest, and south. As of 2001, 2.8% of Argentine households host a person that claim to belong to, or to descend from, the indigenous peoples.


 * Waves of immigrants from other European countries arrived in the late 19th and early 20th centuries...


 * ... And so on. We simply delete the separate section for indigenous peoples. I think this does justice to the original inhabitants, we keep a chronological sequence, and we leave the details of immigration for the last part. Do we have to mention how people look like? --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 10:41, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Could be, en either case, the Genetic topic doesn't belong here but to Demographics of Argentina. Mariano (t/c) 11:07, 22 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I think it does belong, though maybe we could summarize it more (just mentioning the 56% as an aside). I'm all for reducing sections already covered in main articles. Like this:


 * Unlike most of its neighbouring countries, Argentina's population descends overwhelmingly from Europeans. The basic demographic stock (88% of the population) is made up of descendants of the colonial Spanish settlers, augmented by descendants of later Italian and Spanish immigrants. Around 56% of Argentinians possess at least some Amerindian ancestry, due to mixing during the colonial period.


 * But that's just my opinion... --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:37, 22 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I like the last one, it summarizes and I think more accurately reflects the truth. --Sebastian Kessel Talk 15:16, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

[Back from indentation] Just a few remarks: Regards from the South in a blossoming Spring, Cinabrium 16:41, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The mixing of genetical stocks ("mestizaje") did not happen exlusively during colonial times, but also (and prominently) during the heavy foreign immigration waves of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. If you take the immigration stats, you will see that male immigrants grossly exceeded female ones. In the northeast of the country is quite common to see people with blond hair and blue/gray eyes, whose faces clearly recall their Guarani ancestors. Corach's 2004 study shows that aboriginal ancestry is more predominant in mitocondrial ADN traces, i.e., in inheritance from maternal lines. Two other factors contribute to genetic mixing: internal migrations from rural areas to the cities during 20th century, since many of the migrants came from areas where indigenous population was above the general average, and migrations from neighboring countries witn significant indigenous populations, as Bolivia and Paraguay.
 * Please note that we are talking about genetic stock here. Therefore, if just one of your 32 5th generation ancestors (let's say, your grandgrandgrandgrandmother) belonged to an aboriginal people, the trace is still present... and coincides quite well with the current estimates of an indigenous population of about 3% :)
 * Both Corach's studies are not contradictory. The fact that 44% of the population has no indigenous ancestry at all shows an overwhelming presence of the "foreign" element, consistent with the relatively low numbers of indigenous peoples. Take into account that the number of individuals in the sample showing genetic traces of indigenous ancestry is around 5.6%, and that figure means that the individual got that genetic stock both from his/her mother's maternal line and his/her father's paternal line (but still half of his/her ancestors could be non-indigenous).


 * Could you integrate that into Demographics of Argentina? And a summarized version here too. I think the article as it stands now conveys the message correctly in general, except for the "colonial period" part which I've just deleted.


 * A blossoming spring indeed. If only it could stay sunny for a whole day... --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:27, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Comment: No wonder Argentina is so much more successful and modern than other Latin American countries, the population is white/European and not extremely poor like the Indian countries like Ecudor, etc. Argentina, Uruguay, South Brazil all have very high white populations which is why they are successful unlike the other nations. by anon user. ( Mariano (t/c) 07:50, 26 October 2005 (UTC) )

THIS PART OF THE ARTICLE IS WRONG
It is a gross overstatement to say that 56% of Argentines (NOT ARGENTINIANS) are of Amerindian Descent. What genetic research are they referring to?

"Around 56% of Argentinians, however, possess at least some indigenous Amerindian ancestry (as discovered by genetic research). Those who claimed their ancestry as Spanish — or Spanish and another ancestry, such as Spanish-Italian — were most likely to have some remnant Amerindian ancestry due to long term colonialization; a legacy of the almost complete absorption of Argentina's colonial mestizo majority by the post-colonial mass migratory influx of Europeans."
 * Read the article's sources, please. And "Argentinians" is a valid demonym. Sebastian Kessel Talk 19:57, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

== THE CIA WORLD FACT BOOK (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ar.html) STATES:

== '''Ethnic groups: white (mostly Spanish and Italian) 97%, mestizo (mixed white and Amerindian ancestry), Amerindian, or other non-white groups 3% ==''' ==


 * Please go into Demographics of Argentina. This link will help you out. Sebastian Kessel Talk 00:28, 27 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Of course after 700 years there is one great-great-great grandfather that is half indian. White people are 97% of population. How many in USA have ANY relative that came from Africa in the last 700 years?


 * One half-Amerindian 'great-great-great grandfather' over 700 years (or the less than 500 that Europeans have been in the Rio de la Plata area) would not be statistically significant in the genetic testing, I think the threshold is around 2% of one's ancestry. So the figure may actually be higher. This is a matter of interest precisely because some people seem to be so offended by the thought that not all Argentines are pure-bred Europeans. Personally I'd be only too happy to find that my criollo ancestors came from a variety of backgrounds and can give me an interesting range of stories and histories to claim as my own. Argentina is a richly-textured country, please stop removing what is only one, albeit interesting, part of that story. Mtiedemann 09:28, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Infobox Tfd
See Templates for deletion as it reklates to the infobox on this article, SqueakBox 22:35, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Exclave?
According to the first sentence of the article "Exclave", islands don't count as exclaves, but this article counts an island as one. Which article needs fixing? --Brian Z 03:00, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but the difference between normal islands (like the example of the Hawaii islands) and Martín García is that Martín García is surrounded by uruguayan territorial waters. Argentino 20:02, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Middle class
''Compared to most Latin American countries, and even today, while it is recovering from an economic crisis, Argentina has a very large middle class. Many of these middle class people work in industry, own small businesses, or have government or professional jobs. They live in tall modern apartment buildings or bungalows that have small yards or gardens. Wealthy Argentines and business executives live in mansions and luxurious apartments in the cities or in fashionable suburbs.''

I strongly disagree with this statement, as it fails to see the economic reality in Argentina. Before editing it, though, I decided to provide some data to prove my point, and to have a discussion. Qualitatively speaking, Argentina had a strong middle class, and a very strong economy (one of the strongest in the world)which attracted immigration in the early 20th century. After WWII, however, the economy stagnated at first, and receded in the 70's and 80's. When comparing poverty in Latin America to that in Argentina, it does have, on appearance, a different look, as poverty in Argentina is urban (while in LA it is mostly rural), it affects the former middle class (which means, they live in apartment buildings as oposed to rural indigenous communities in LA). That is the OUTLOOK of poverty, not the LEVEL of poverty. How can it be said that Argentina, compared to other LA countries has a strong middle class when, using CIA Factbook data, 43% of Argentines live below poverty line, while it is 40% Mexico, 22% in Brazil, 21% Uruguay, 20.6% in Chile, 18% in Costa Rica? Don't trust CIA data, let's go the World Bank: in 2004, poverty in Argentina had been "reduced" to 40.2%, while in Mexico rural porverty in 2004 had been drastically reduced to 27.9%, and urban poverty to 11.3% , and in Chile overall poverty to 17%. When using this data, the "strong middle class that lives in apartment buildings and owns their own businesses" represents only a SMALL percentage of the total population that lives pretty good, while 43% of them live under poverty.

Do you want qualitative data? Fine. Percentage of cell phone lines with respect to total population: Argentina 16.6%, Mexico 26.5%, Brazil 24.8%, Chile 40.2%. Percentage of internet users with respect to total population: Chile 22.6%, Brazil 7.7% (quite low), Mexico 10.3%, Argentina 10.5% (while it is not lower than the rest of LA countries, it is on average... no difference, not better).

There would be more data to support my point, even though percentage of population below the poverty line should be enough. How can a country have a strong middle class when 40.2 percent to the population lives under poverty? How can it be "stronger" than the rest of LA if population under poverty is half in Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, and Costa Rica according to CIA, and we should include Mexico, according the new data for 2004 provided by the World Bank! &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.119.32.17 (talk &bull; contribs) 14:47, 3 November 2005.


 * I've often thought that paragraph was misleading as well as a bit overgeneralizing. I must note that the definitions of poverty may differ from country to country, though. I'd prefer the following:
 * Argentina has a middle class that has been decimated in the successive economic crises that afflicted the country. In times past, however, the Argentine middle class was very large compared to that of other Latin American countries. Today, while a significant segment of the population is financially well-off, they stay in sharp contrast with millions who live in poverty or on the brink of it. Most middle class people work in industry, own small businesses, or have government or professional jobs.
 * We should mention upper-middle and upper-class people living in countries, closed neighbourhoods and suburbia, as well as the phenomenon of countryside landowners suddenly enriched by the agricultural exports boom. I don't have reliable figures on that.
 * It's very difficult to characterize a whole country in a few paragraphs. For sure, you can walk around some places in Argentina and see a flourishing middle class with spots of poverty here and there. The poverty figures can misleading; distribution of income, and geographic distribution of poverty, may be more important. I believe we have the Gini coefficient somewhere, no? I think we can also get data on poverty by province or region, at least in order to mention them in Economy of Argentina or Demographics of Argentina. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 19:00, 3 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I would agree with your suggested paragraph, with a few changes, though. Definitions of poverty used by the World Bank are universal: percentage of the population that lives under $2 a day. For extreme poverty the definition is percentage of population that lives under $1 a day. Poverty figures are not misleading, they are, in fact, very precise. (I must admit that CIA takes into account each country's own measurment of poverty, that is why I would trust World Bank figures better). Flourishing middle class with spots of poverty here and there... I assume you haven't been to Jujuy, to Salta, or to the villas miseria of Buenos Aires, where people are living in precarious conditions with no sewage systems, no paved roads, brick houses with aluminum roofs (if at all), and a great number living by searching food on garbage dumps. The Clarin newspaper provided a while ago a nice graph with poverty figures across provinces: in Capital Federal poverty was 24%, while in the Buenos Aires Province it was 56%, and in the Northern Provinces 70%.
 * Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that there is no middle class in Argentina. There is, and in fact, it has been flourishing with the impressive recovery of 2003-2004. But to say that this small middle class is representative of the whole population is misleading. If 40.2% of the population lives under $2 a day... I can't say it is "spots of poverty here and there", when they are actually "everywhere".


 * Please, edit my suggestions as you see fit. You have the data at your fingertips already, and that's what is needed. In any case, I do see a problem with the WB definition, since 2 USD is not the same everywhere. Relative prices are different and exchange rates can be severely distorted on purpose (as is painfully obvious to us Argentinians). I'm more than aware of poverty; I live 30 minutes from the centre of Rosario and I only need to walk five blocks to be inside a villa miseria; however, walk another ten or so blocks, and you'll be in a nice avenue, and a few more blocks and you'll find a massive shopping mall always full of well-off customers. That's why I said "some places".
 * If we quote the poverty figures alone, it looks as if Argentina hosts a mass of terribly poor people, plus many others struggling not to fall into poverty, and everyone is ruled by a small upper-class elite (as is the case in some regions). If we mention the traditional strength of the middle class (which was never lost completely), we give the impression of a country that is more or less OK (which is true of other, much smaller regions). A better idea would be to mark the difference between old and new poor (historically marginal people vs. former middle-class people), and talk a bit about upwards social mobility (i. e. how many of those poor people have a chance of leaving poverty behind). Maybe too much for this article, though. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:10, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * All discussions on economic stuff are quite controversial, and non-economists love comparative (and competitive)jargon: they love to talk about the "richest", the "poorest", the "highest GDP", the "best" country etc. As an economist I can say that it is hard to make a qualitative analysis and comparison of the economies of different countries, especially in Latin America. Let me give you my opinion on the matter.
 * Pablo, you are right, 2 dollars can buy a lot more stuff in Argentina than in the US, but ALSO, wages are much lower in Argentina that in the US. In other words, you might adjust for price differences (as with a PPP method if you want to avoid the sometimes "unrealistic" exchange rates), but if you also adjust for wages, it might be the case that even a greater percentage of the population would be under poverty line. The CIA Factbook, for example, uses the PPP method, which means they adjust GDP for price differences: that is why GDP per capita in Argentina is so high with this method (above $12,000), while GNI per capita as provided by the World Bank is less than $4,000. World Bank uses the Atlas method, an average over exchange rate history, in order to avoid differences caused by temporary fluctuations. Also GDP accounts for all production/income within the country (even if foreigners recieve the benefits) while GNI makes and adjustment for income in terms of nationality (after all, foreign firms take the money out of the country, don't they?). Which method is better? I guess there is no answer for that. With the PPP method non-economists say Argentina is the "richest" nation in LA (in fact this figure alone is the most quoted figure when "proving" that Argentines are better-off compared to LA). On the other hand, with the Athlas GNI Method, Argentina would be ranked fourth, and with only half the income per capita that Mexico has (and this income figure is the most quoted figure when "proving" Mexicans are better-off). Who is "better", Mexico, Argentina... or Chile, Costa Rica, Brazil...? I've visited many LA countries and your description of Rosario could very well fit a Mexican city, or a Brazilian city: walk a couple of blocks, and you are in a villa miseria, walk another 10 blocks, and you'll see an impressive shopping mall and beautiful buildings that could rival any American/European city.
 * Personally, I would suggest avoiding competitive jargon ("this country is better than that...", "These live better that those..."), and rather provide neutral and diverse data such asGDP, GNI, HDI, the Gini Index, population below poverty line, population in indigence (extreme poverty), access to education, literacy rate, access to health care, labor by sector, unemployement rate, inflation rate, interest rates, access to private loans and equity, even corruption indices and law enforcement, given the fact all these can hinder/enhance the economic progress of a nation, and let the reader have a complete picture of the economic and social situation of each country. A section on history of the middle-class seems a very good idea too, though it would fit better in the article of the Economy of Argentina. --129.119.25.30 15:27, 7 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I have taken my paragraph above, changed into something more linear and probably more correct, and moved it to the economy section. The previous version was in "urbanization", because of that mention of bungalows and mansions which was rather misplaced. I'll be trying to do some minor work on the article; then we can work on Economy of Argentina with the figures you cited. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 11:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Independence recognition
The infobox tells us that Argentinian independence was first recognized by Portugal in 1821. There is, however, a prior recognition: King Kamehameha I of Hawaii would have signed a treaty of "Peace, Friendship and Commerce" with the then "Provincias Unidas del Rio de la Plata" in 1819. French privateer Hyppolite Bouchard, under the flag of the United Provinces, arrived there in August 1818, and remained in the islands during several months. Unfortunately, we have no direct evidence of this: the original treaty is lost, and the only extant piece of evidence appears in Jose Piris' memories. Piris sailed with Bouchard during his 4-year expedition around the world. But the fact is widely cited: it is mentioned by Bartolomé Mitre in his "Historia de San Martín", in "La historia Argentina que muchos argentinos no conocen" by Armando Alonso Piñeiro (chapter 33), etc. Should we change it? Does anyone have any additional information? Cinabrium 19:15, 10 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Attested official recognition was by Portugal, but the above is very interesting and the source is clearly there, so it should be mentioned (as a note, maybe). A bio article about Armando Alonso Piñeiro, if possible, would add weight to the reference, too. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 12:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I'll try to found some biographical data on Armand Alonso Piñeiro. He's a well known historian, having published 70-something books, and director-founder of the "Historia" journal since 1981. The Hawaiian recognition is also cited by other well reputed historians (beyond Mitre and Alonso Piñeiro), as Felipe Pigna (here, a wonderful site BTW).


 * I made a mistake quoting Mitre. The right source is "El crucero de la Argentina 1817-1819", included in "Páginas de Historia" (freely available online here).


 * There is also a good reason for the original treaty documents not being in the Argentinian archives: Bouchard never came back to Buenos Aires. He arrived on July, 1819, to Valparaíso and immediately joined San Martín's expedition to Peru. Then Bouchard became the first admiral of the Peruvian fleet organized by San Martin with captured Spanish vessels, and served the Peruvian navy until 1828. Once retired from the seas, he remained in Peru until his death in 1837. BTW, Bouchard deserves a better article: when you walk on Santa Barbara's pier (Santa Barbara, CA; I use to go there very often because of academical activities at UCSB), you see a set of flags together with the Republic of California one. Those flags are a memory and a tribute to the powers that once held California, or part of it. And it is indeed a strange feeling to see the flags of the United States, Spain, Mexico, Russia and ... Argentina :). Cinabrium 04:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC)


 * BTW there is also a plaque about Bouchard at Monterey. Ejrrjs &#124; &#91;&#91;User talk:Ejrrjs&#124;What?]] 11:46, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Immigration from Latin America
Besides the fact that the figures should read "between 2 and 4 million" rather than the full numbers with periods instead of commas... What is the source of the estimate of immigrants from other LA countries? I remember seeing this already, maybe in Demographics of Argentina? Even 1 million seems a very large figure. If there's a source among the extlinks, maybe we should also name it in the text ("According to XXX, between 2 and 4 million..."). --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 01:35, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Pronunciation
The audio file which gives the pronunciation of "República Argentina" is wrong according to this:



What's in the audio file is actually "Argentina, Capital : Buenos Aires", not "República Argentina". Can someone record that again?

Unreferenced
The article does not cite the sources for the "2,000,000 and 4,000,000 Bolivians, Paraguayans and Chileans living in Argentina" statements. Someone please include sources. --ShiningEyes 23:34, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * If no sources are stated within the next 7 days, I'll remove both the template and the unreferenced section. Thanks. --ShiningEyes 23:40, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It is well referenced but it does need a citation there, I'll change the article slightly to reflect this. Please don't remove anything. Sebastian Kessel Talk 23:41, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Official and unofficial numers very terrible. For instance: there are officially some 230.000 bolivians, but unofficial sources claim a million and a half. See also Clarin (Official numbers) and La Prensa (Official and Unofficial)