Talk:Salvadorans

Unsourced content
The sections "Pipil resistance battle" and "Lenca resistance battle" contain a lot of errors (sentences ending with no punctuation, verb tense all over the place. etc.) and are entirely unsourced. These were added a year ago by a new editor who has not been very active since. I've cleaned up the grammar and punctuation a little, but these sections may need to be rewritten or perhaps even removed if not sourced. Can anyone who knows about the topic take a look? Thanks. Jessicapierce (talk) 19:21, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

‘In the case of these Arab-Salvadorans, although not all the families arrived together, they were the ones that lead the economy in the country.’

Where is the source for the assertive assertion that this particular minority ‘lead the economy’ in the country? While it’s true that several Salvadoreans of Arab ancestry have done quite well in business, there are many more Salvadoreans of other backgrounds with successful businesses as well so it's highly unlikely that that claim is correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.117.190 (talk) 14:09, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

, I've tagged a couple more sections as unsourced. In these edits in 2017:, user added a huge amount of content that was completely unsourced. They also removed a significant amount of sourced content. It doesn't look like anyone has really dealt with this in the meantime, and tracking down sources is not a project I can take on. Unless sources for it can be provided by Alloyblue, I propose removing the content. See WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:BURDEN, etc. I'm also concerned about possible copyright violations, given the distinct differences in writing style and English usage between some of the sections added. --IamNotU (talk) 17:06, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:52, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Ana Villafañe.jpg

indian reservations
Are there any indian reservations?--Kaiyr (talk) 11:44, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:07, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Bukele Conferencia.png

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hala Ayala at volunteer appreciation event.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:22, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Gabriela de Bukele.jpg

CIA World Factbook Reliabilty
As discussed a number of times The CIA World Factbook is not used as a Reliable Source on Wikipedia since it does not cite its sources nor can be independently verified. Also there is no ethnic division in Latin America between self-defined Mestizos and Whites. It is pointless to provide estimates.Huasteca (talk) 16:57, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Mestizo vs White
As mentioned, there is no reliable source either official nor unofficial which divides Salvadorans between two distinct white and mestizo ethnic groups nor gives figures for either. Beyond the entire notion being creepy and racist, it is simply unsourceable. If you want a section on the overall genetic make-up of Salvadorans, I have no issue with that. Otherwise creating false racial internal boundary is simply not possible. --Huasteca (talk) 15:54, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Huasteca it is obvious that you are targeting Salvadoran pages in specific and not the other Latin American pages with your racial beliefs. The Census in El Salvador has in fact allowed it's citizens to identify themselves with different ethnic groups of El Salvador. It is also obvious that you are bent in erasing African contributions in El Salvador. El Salvador, Mestizos and Whites are not combined as the same people. Mestizo Salvadorans have indigenous ancestry while white Salvadorans do not. Rather than erasing all of the information, you should instead look for better sources. Cobaltous (talk) 18:52, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Very few European-looking people in El Salvador would not have indigenous ancestry. El Salvador isn't the US or parts of Brazil and Argentina where large waves of European migrants arrived in the 1800s which made it possible for these migrants to find espouses within these new communities.


 * I am not bent on anything except avoiding fantasy editing and Original Research. Central America has large Afro communities, they are simply not in El Salvador. There is no ethnicity known as Pardo in El Salvador you have literally made that up. Its as if I decide to add the ethnicity "Tellytuby" to an article about the Demographics of the United States. You may have your own perfectly respectable ideas. Just please don't try to impose them on Wikipedia which is supposed to reflect exactly what reliable sources say. In terms of ethnic groups in El Salvador, we don't have much information except the percentage of indigenous people and black people which are 0.23% and 0.12% respectively. Attempting to divide the rest of the population racially is extremely subjective and ideological. For example, Mexican anthropologist Francisco Lizcano Fernández estimates that the "white" population is 1%. You may say its 10%. Others may consider its 50%. Its silly and harmful. And yes, Whites and Mestizo are typically combined in Latin America as belonging to the dominant ethnicity. Surely you know this if you live in Latin America. Huasteca (talk) 19:44, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Where have I stated that El Salvador has large Afro communities? Again, this is a false accusation, I have never implied that. In fact quit the opposite is stated. Also where have I stated that people identified as Pardo? This also is a false accusation. It is clearly stated that the word Pardo WAS used in colonial times, implying that the word has fell out of modern use. You say that Mestizos and whites are the same thing yet you only target the Salvadoran pages. I will believe you when you combine Mestizos and Whites in the Mexican demographic page and the rest of Latin America https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Mexico. Explain to me why the Mexican Demographic page separates Mestizos, Indigenous, and white Mexicans? Yet right now you are bent in targeting the Demographics of El Salvador only. Combining Mestizos and whites is erroneous. Similar to how the U.S classifies all Latin Americans as white, despite most being of indigenous Mexican and Afro Caribbean heritage. Cobaltous (talk) 03:46, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

If you read the article on Demographics of Mexico, it explains clearly that Mestizo is more of an ideological concept in Mexico than an ethnic group. This is all the more true in El Salvador where there are no visible ethnic boundaries in the country. Trying to create them is imposing Anglo-American narrative here in Latin America and is basically ideological colonialism and, in my view, racism. There is no such thing as White Salvadorans and Mestizo Salvadorans. There are just Salvadorans. Huasteca (talk) 14:04, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes but I still see Mestizos, Whites, Indigenous and Africans separated in the Mexico Demographics page, also in the rest of Latin American demographics pages. I absolutely agree with you about Mestizo being a ideological concept, since it is a colonial term. The problem is that in reality the people in Mexico, El Salvador and other Latin American countries are majority mixed heritage people. The boundaries that you mention are not always negative, in fact I rather call it designation in this case. For example people from the U.S are all called "Americans" however they have their unique heritage and history. People who are European, African, Native American and Asian in the U.S are all Americans but you can celebrate each heritage without calling it a boundary. In Mexico and the rest of Latin America, Mestizo are a result of the colonization having both European and indigenous ancestry, that is a fact and reality. However they are not the same as indigenous people who still practice their unique culture and speak thier own language. White latin Americans are a small minority of people of European decent in most Latin American countries and their history is completely different from that of Mestizos who are the result of colonization. Mestizos and European Latin Americans have a completely different history. Yes they are all Mexicans and they are all Salvadorans, that is thier nationality, but they also have different history depending on their ethnicity and that is not negative. Indigenous people are Mexicans just like White Mexicans and Mestizo Mexicans, however indigenous Mexicans have their own unique history just like Mestizo and white Mexican do too. Cobaltous (talk) 16:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * The question is what do you consider a "White" Latin American? Someone who has nordic features? Do he have to be blond with blue eyes? Where does he/she stop being white? Because I would say almost half the population of Mexico would pass for a local in Spain or Portugal - a good 50 million of them. And certainly a large majority of the population of these two countries would pass for a local in Mexico or any other Latin American country - and by local I don't mean for the tiny percentage you are categorizing as "white" - but for the general wider population. Because there are millions of people in all of these countries who look mediterranean-iberian yet not necessarily mestizo.


 * So who is white and who is not white? The vast majority of Latin Americans are European-Americans since they have significant European ancestry. What percentage of indigenous blood is required to strip them of their "whitehood"? Or is it visual. Can we have two brothers where one is white and the other is not? The very term Latin American refers to Southern European heritage. Do you understand the problem of how dividing Latin Americans in this racial way is not only unsourceable but also extremely racist? It is colonial in the sense that it is imposing ANGLO perspectives of race Latin America. Race has always been far more fluid in Spanish speaking countries, as it has been in Spain itself. Huasteca (talk) 17:55, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

White is simply someone who's ancestors solely came from Europe. You are saying the vast majority of Latin Americans are European that pass as Mestizos? This is not true. The vast majority of them are mixed. Their European ancestry isn't more special than the indigenous or african blood they carry, that is what I find extremely racist. I disagree with half of Mexico passing as locals from Spain and Portugal, like the Mexican media tries to portray Mexicans. The average Mexican clearly have indigenous ancestry and would pass more in places like Guatemala, Peru and Bolivia. The only Latin American countries that would pass in Spain and Portugal would be Argentina, Uruguay and Chile. The rest of Latin America don't look European at all on average. I think you are basing yourself on what you see in Mexican media where they only put the minority white Mexicans on tv shows and series. The Mexican media hires white Latin Americans from Colombia and Argentina as well, even Spaniards get hired. However the reality is that the average Mexican does not look like that. The same can be said of the media from all Latin America which deliberately and almost exclusively only hire white Latin Americans and pushes back local colored people especially those with indigenous and African background. The term Latin American does not refer to Southern European heritage. Latin is a linguistic term meaning that they speak a Latin based language which is Spanish. French, Portuguese, Italian and Romanian are also Latin languages. Latin America basically means people in the Americas who speak a Latin language, just like Latin Europe means Europeans who speak a Latin language. Latin has nothing to do with heritage or race. Cobaltous (talk) 19:55, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Well clearly you have never been to Spain, Portugal or Mexico if you hold such opinions. Bear in mind that it was a Spaniard, Oscar Jaenada who portrayed Cantinflas in the latest Mexican movie about him - Cantinflas (film).

In any case this is your own definition of white which is not shared by the vast majority of Latin America, or the world for that matter. It is a US-centric one-drop-rule mentality of what you believe it is to be white. I have no doubt in my mind you are from the United States. Having understood the rationale behind your editing which is simply OR I am reverting. Huasteca (talk) 17:54, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

So all of the sudden you know my personal life story of where I've been? That is your argument? You are saying Mexicans are indistinguishable from Spaniards just because A Spanish actor was cast to play A Mexican actor? That is what you are presenting as proof? That is nonsense, in fact there was criticism from Mexicans who did not wanted a Spanish to play a Mexican icon. I could give you another example, like white blue eyed Mexican actor Mauricio Islas playing a historical Mexican indigenous Chichimec man Juan Diego in (Juan Diego: El indio de Guadalupe 2016), and there was a critical response in that horrible casting as well for OBVIOUS reasons. You are the only one using a US-centric one drop rule saying Mestizos and white Latin Americans drop in the "same" ethnicity, even though they clearly have a distinct history. It is ridiculous to believe that someone will go to Mexico and see the population indistinguishable from Spain and Portugal. That is just a blatant lie. Mexico's population is clearly indigenous just like most of Latin America especially Guatemala, Peru and Bolivia. Whites are a minority in these countries. You clearly want Mexico to be a "European" country, when it's not. Your claims are astronomically foolish and extremely racist Cobaltous (talk) 20:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * This is off-topic but the truth is that Oscar Jaenada looks almost indistinguishable from Cantinflas in his role. And no one would consider Cantinflas a "white Mexican" in the US or in Mexico. https://www.diezminutos.es/teleprograma/programacion-tv/a28867231/cantinflas-pelicula-oscar-jaenada-mario-moreno/


 * Incidentally, few people in the US consider Antonio Banderas white in the US either and he is not particularly dark for a Spaniard. So yes, there is considerable overlap between the phenotypes of Spain and Latin America - being White doesn't mean being White in the Anglo-American sense. People with Mediterranean phenotypes are also considered white in Latin America and in most parts of the world. In the US, which is where you are from, it seems to be less clear cut.


 * Having lived in both countries I would say about 50-60% of Mexicans would be recognizable as non-Spaniards in Spain, equally most Spaniards would look indistinguishable from around 40% of the Mexican population.

Revamping article
I have just realized the extent of damage to this article. Cobaltous, I suspect a lot of this text has been introduce by you. I suggest y you take a break from editing wikipedia and read about the rules about editing. Wikipedia is not a platform for us to present our world views. Huasteca (talk) 18:25, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

The header 'Spanish Conquest' should be renamed when in reality the warriors that comprised majority of these Spanish 'armies' where more often than not other local indigenous allies.

Edit warring from a bias nationalist user
Huasteca you are Mexican-based user and nationalist who mainly and frequently targets El Salvador's ethnic composition and edit these pages according to your own personal racial views, yet only apply these views in the Salvadorans pages and not the Mexican demographic pages, you also neglect to answer why you make exception to all latin American pages except for the one's relation to El Salvador. You make unsourced changes to articles relating to Demographics of El Salvador, remove sources that don't fit your personal racial agenda despite advices to find better sources rather than going into a erasing rampage. I tried to act civil but you persistently keep editing Salvadoran pages with valuable information for weeks. When confronted with reliable sources you dismiss these and began on a edit warring rampage over and over again. Cobaltous (talk) 19:38, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Cobaltous, making outlandish accusations is not conducive to anything. As I said, you cannot add unsourced essays reflecting your worldview to wikipedia. I have erased these paragraphs because they have been clearly been written by a single editor and added relatively recently. They are factually incorrect, unsourced, emotional, jingoistic and written like an essay in a style which is not aligned with that of wikipedia. I have saved everything I could and have taken a quite conservative approach to my deletions.Huasteca (talk) 09:57, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Demonyms
Friends, for full disclosure, I am:

1. A White North American male whose heritage is German and British (according to the 23andme website; my "ancient DNA" is Frankish and Celtic according to the "My True Ancestry" website).

2. I first befriended Salvadorans in 1994 and learned Spanish fluently with them; my second wife is a Salvadoran born in Washington, DC of Salvadoran parents and sent back to be raised by her grandmother in Intipucá. She and I have a daughter together, with whom we speak both English and Spanish. When speaking Spanish, I use a Salvadoran accent and grammar, including the use of voseo for the second person and ceceo for the pronunciation of soft c.

3. I presently reside in Northern Virginia, USA, where there is a large Salvadoran community.

Having established the context in which I write and in which I have formed my admittedly outsider experience, I comment anecdotally:

1. I have never heard the demonym "Salvi." As in, never.

2. "Guanaco" is something I still hear frequently, and it is not deprecated in the communities I am a part of.

3. Salvatrucha is something I used to hear among my Salvadoran friends back in the day but generally in relation to gang/marero activity. I haven't heard that term used as a positive self-descriptor in years.

I am just posting this as input for the subject at hand. I have no vested interest in any agenda.