Talk:List of ethnic groups in the United States by household income

References

Why is there no reference to Latino Americans? (Mexican, Honduran,Pananma, Argentinian) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.221.38.188 (talk) 16:00, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

IMO this entire page needs to be deleted. There are no references to "Ethnicity". This is only based on Race and Ancestry. I might just edit the title.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattluttrell (talk • contribs) 16:21, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

74.133.170.250 (talk) 22:08, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Croat is 23rd and 42nd?

What's with all the identical references?

This has got to be one of the ugliest list articles I've seen. Basically, there are three lists in this article. Every piece of data on each of the lists comes from the same source. So, three lists, three sources.

However, instead of citing the source at the top or bottom of the list, someone had the great idea of footnoting every single entry on each of the lists.

REALLY? That's just dumb.

Could someone who's good at editing citations please replace the god-awful mess with three simple citations, one per list? I can do simple edits, but I'm worried I'd screw it up.

(To make it worse, one of the lists has two different versions of the same citation.)

The three lists would be even more useful if they were turned into sortable tables.

Thank you, Fredrik Coulter (talk) 20:27, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

The problem has been further compounded by the fact that everything is based on the US Census Bureau Factfinder data tool, but does not express this as being the sole source. The list has not been updated since 2014 using 2011 stats, and American Factfinder data has been moved to a different server, so the links no longer follow through smoothly to the correct corresponding data sets. In fact, the entire list needs to be updated to correct links because so many IP vandals and POV editors have played with the data that I doubt that much of it has anything to do with reality, and there simply isn't anything to verify the content against.

The same problem applies to the sister articles List of ethnic groups in the United States by per capita income and List of countries of birth by per capita income in the United States. Currently, these are not encyclopaedic lists as none of the data can be verified. The likelihood that they are misleading to the point of falsification is extremely high. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:15, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

By Race: White median income

White Median income in the section By Race was changed from 59,698 to 100,698 in contradiction to the reference provided. Change was made on 13:58, 8 January 2017‎ by unregistered user 103.28.133.19. In the absence of supporting references and given that the change is in contradiction to the cited reference I believe this may be an act of vandalism.

Bindatype (talk) 22:02, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of ethnic groups in the United States by household income. 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 http://www.webcitation.org/6gpGlyhlr?url=http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk to http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:51, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Outdated

This article is nearly outdated by two decades. It either needs to be updated or removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweatisoftheessence (talk • contribs) 02:13, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

List by ancestry

Chinese is listed multiple times:

1. 4 says "Chinese American exc. Taiwanese American",
2. 17 just says "Chinese American"

Initially I thought maybe #17 is Taiwanese and non-Taiwanese combined, but Taiwanese American is #2...so the avg of #2+#4 would not be 17th. One is wrong Blinkvark (talk) 21:56, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Who keeps putting Indian and East Asian in the “race” category?

Indian should be put into the ancestry category as Indian is an ancestry/ethnic group. In the United States, the census counts race and gathers information and data about household income on visible (or nationally recognized) racial/ethnic groups such as white, black, latino, asian, Native American and Hawaiian and Pacific Islander. The United States even includes “all races” for American household income. The United States does not count Indian, East Asian and Middle Eastern as their own “races”. Qzonkos (talk) 00:14, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Colombian American household income incorrect

Colombian American household income appears twice under Detailed ancestry, once at rank 6 $94,091 and again at rank 86 $48,000. Unable to view the actual data from the US Census source provided. Kernelopopcorn (talk) 21:43, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Lack of jewish representation?

Any reason why this amazing, influential, and distinct group is missing from the page? It used to be on the page, check the history of it. Are Nazi's trying to hide this information or something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.68.253.44 (talk) 04:05, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

As a Jewish American, I'm highly offended by the lack of Jewish representation here and find it anti-semitic. We are NOT just a religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100C:B0E8:6907:848D:7038:7C4F:BC42 (talk) 10:55, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Oy vey. It sure is a disappointment to see the (((amazing, influential and distinct groups))) from (((Our Greatest Ally™))) not being represented here. 2601:644:9184:5EF0:5A85:FDCC:E14B:10F8 (talk) 14:02, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Recent Changes

Hi Epitome of Creativity,

Several things -

Many of the ancestral groups added to the table do not appear at all in the cited source. There is no "Indian" figure; there are no Asian figures, and several of the Latin American figures such as Mexican or Cuban are not present. If they are being left in the table due to the presence of older material, can you either, A) cite this other material or B) explain why you've decided to leave some groups that do not appear in the source but remove others?

There were already citations present for the previous figures. The table in its current form is not supported by the sources given. Additionally, some of the comments in the endnotes appear to be spurious.

This figure takes into account Basques with ancestry from both Spain and France, and so the Spanish and French figures in this chart excludes their corresponding Basque populations.

The cited table does not include figures for either "Spanish" or "Basque", so how was this conclusion reached?

The data for both Canadian Americans and French Americans factor in the data for French Canadian Americans, who are a subgroup of the two aforementioned groups.

Again, what is the basis of this claim? French Canadians are a distinct ethnic group of people and always designate themselves as such.

This term is mostly used by White Americans who are unaware of their specific European ancestries, and they usually tend to be of British stock.

What is the purpose of this endnote? And, what is "British stock"?

And, the African American page itself clearly states that "African American" is an ethnicity. The "Black" categorization includes all Americans of black heritage. Applying it solely to African Americans is unfounded. "Black" also does not appear in the referenced table as a distinct group. The "Sub-Saharan African" category includes South Africans, who, in the US, are largely not black. The figure given for both "Africans" and "Sub-Saharan Africans" in the referenced source does not match the changes made to the table.021120x (talk) 04:54, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Wealth by race

May I suggest that you include the Jewish people in this category considering that we know most of the wealth is owned by them. As well as the fact that they are in control of the website we're on right now. I just feel like it's anti-semitic to refer to the Jewish people as "some other race". I mean if this is an accurate website let's portray things accurately not biased. 2601:2C5:457F:3010:4CA1:8D56:16C3:2818 (talk) 15:01, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

lol you would be antisemetic even if they included the word jewish because you would feel like someone is targeting you guys. lol you use racism for your own benefit. so calm down 103.68.38.90 (talk) 17:11, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Are the figures in the table correct?

For instance, the American average for 2019 was $61,800 according to the Pew Research. It's listed as $57,761? Koppite1 (talk) 09:32, 29 April 2022 (UTC)