Jump to content

Talk:Asian people/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Semantic hypocrisy

I agree with the not-worldwide-view flag because the article definitely has the tone of being predominantly written by an American. The term Oriental is all but taboo in North America as somehow being offensive because it is Eurocentric, yet the same people who eschew it find nothing wrong with saying Middle-East. (One would think this attitude by Americans of obsequiousness to Orientals and abasing Middle-Easterners would make sense given the political climate and international relations, however as the article stated, the conference took place in 1968, long before either the U.S.’ insurmountable debt to China or its ablating relations with the Middle-East.)

That hypocrisy has always irritated me, especially since in North America, the term Asian is used pretty much exclusively to refer to the Far-East (which I suppose is, or at least should be as “offensive” as Oriental). This co-opting of the term that should refer to anyone from the largest continent on the world by one half of it (no matter how many people may be packed into it) is more offensive than any Eurocentricity since it is basically an affront to people from dozens of countries across the rest of the continent.

(Of course, I grew up and learned the names of the continents before the explosion of over-political-correctness that infected North America later on. Aside from the hypocrisy, personally I like the term Oriental because it has that exciting air of mystery whereas Asian is so bland.)

I apologize for essentially ranting, but I had to raise the two points about the hypocrisy in regards to Eurocentricity and the issue of ignoring the rest of the largest continent on Earth. I’m not sure if those points can be fit in the article, but I thought I’d bring them up in case someone thought they are relevant somewhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Synetech (talk • contribs) 02:36, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Asian in the UK

I think the article may be a bit outdated. In the UK there are now more and more East Asian people calling themselves Asian along with South Asians. Forms now include the normal White, Black and whatever else in them but they now list Chinese under Asian. Basically the subheading is Asian and under that, Bangladeshi, Chinese, Indian, Pakistani and Other Asian are all listed so I think an edit needs to be made saying something like Asian in the UK refers to East, South, Southeast and Central Asians. Middle Easterners are usually seperate whilst there is nothing for West Asians so I'm guessing they count themselves either in the Other Asian or Other White European. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.152.29.242 (talk) 13:45, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

People from all over Asia may generally refer to themselves as "Asian", but the fact remains that if you say "Asian" in the UK without further qualification you're almost exclusively going to mean (and be understood as meaning) South Asian. I'm a police officer and therefore hear and give radio descriptions of individuals all the time: we use "Asian" for South Asian and "Oriental" for East Asian, everyone knows what we're talking about, and nobody is offended. People who are themselves of East or South Asian descent generally use the same terminology as anyone else. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:43, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Rushton, Beals, etc.

I don't think this belongs here at all, particularly since it was presented in a pov manner. If people really think Rushton's racist stuff is must be in here, see for instance p. 139 and on at[1]. Beals has been used without any of the responses[2] and in any case he warned against using the findings as indicative of racial traits, "If one merely lists such means by geographical region or race, causes of similarity by genogroup and ecotype are hopelessly confounded". - from History of anthropometry. In any case, East Asia is only abut 28% of Asia, so what is this doing here anyway? 11:07, 2 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs)

"Physical features" and "DNA"

These sections make no sense, because Asians aren't a distinct ethnic group. It can include Pakistanis as well as Melanesians living in Indonesia.

It should be deleted or moved to Mongoloid race, because that's where it belongs.--2A00:1028:83CC:42D2:7CF8:FE8E:C1:D48 (talk) 18:26, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

The problem is that the article is trying to be too many things at once, some of them quite contradictory. It probably SHOULD be deleted, and replaced with individual articles covering the various topics mixed up in this one. These might include People who live in Asia, People who live in certain parts of Asia, People who live elsewhere but whose ancestors came from Asia, People who British people call Asian, People who Australians and Americans call Asian (very different from the previous grouping), and maybe several others. HiLo48 (talk) 01:04, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Boldly removed the entire physical descriptions section, renamed DNA section to "DNA studies of Asian populations". Dougweller (talk) 09:25, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Asian is a common synonym for the Mongoloid (e.g. in USA), but that section needs a separate article or it's better move to related primary article. --Zyma (talk) 10:49, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

And then you need to define "Mongoloid", and not offend anyone... HiLo48 (talk) 20:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
You're right, but many people use the name "Asian" for just Eastern Asians or some ethnic groups with specific facial features and skin color (e.g. Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Thais and etc.), not Middle Easterns or peoples like Pakistanis and Indians. Is Asian a synonym for the all people of Asia in other English-speaking countries? e.g. in UK and Australia? --Zyma (talk) 06:16, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Australian common usage is similar to that in the US. It came into use during and after the Vietnam War when many different insulting names for such people arose. It was meant to be non-derogatory, but for some it's definitely meant as an insult. It's certainly not much more than a description of facial characteristics. In the UK "Asian" means someone who looks like their ancestors came from the Indian/Pakistani sub-continent, so completely different again. Then there's the unarguable, logical definition that Asian means anyone from Asia. This isn't simple. HiLo48 (talk) 06:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
need to add: Uyghur girl in Turpan, Xinjiang, China - she's a natural blond with Epicanthus

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.218.23.54 (talk) 08:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 June 2015

asian people are asian they have many traditions and jacki chan is an asian heres a photo of him David klien (talk) 09:33, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

 Not done — there is no request in your post. If you would like to make an edit request, please state what in the article you would like changed, e.g. "change X to Y". dalahäst (let's talk!) 09:35, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Gulf states

In the Gulf states, the term "Asian" generally refers to people of South Asian and Southeast Asian descent due to the large Indian, Pakistani and Filipino expatriate population in these countries.[1][2][3] However, there are instances where the term is used solely to refer to those of South Asian descent.[4]

121.214.174.47 (talk) 04:25, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ The source discusses car accidents amongst Asians, Emiratis and other Arabs in the UAE.
  2. ^ "Kuwait Asians" is a community website for the Indian, Sri Lankan, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Filipino expatriate population in Kuwait.
  3. ^ The source discusses the Asian Town complex in Qatar that was created for the Asian expatriate community from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh and the Philippines.
  4. ^ Time Out Dubai is a book written by local experts on travel in the UAE and the authors use the words "Asian" and "Filipino" separately.

Semi-protected edit request on 14 January 2016

Can this be added to the article to the the "Definitions by country" section please?

Not done for now: Why and where would this be placed in the article? Please be more specific. Open this request again once you have answered those questions --allthefoxes (Talk) 04:32, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for that I forgot to state where, it should be added to the "Definitions by country" section. (121.214.174.47 (talk) 04:38, 14 January 2016 (UTC))
Done Eteethan(talk) 01:04, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Asian people. 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:

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

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 21:01, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Asian people. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 16:02, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Japanese

Japanese are technically Pacific Islanders, not just geographically but also racially (i.e. Ainu people- the original Japanese) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.253.70.70 (talk) 00:57, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

That just highlights the stupidity and uselessness of "Asian" as a label for anything. Thank you. HiLo48 (talk) 03:36, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Photos

Asian photos should be photos of ASIANS, not of Asian Americans, who are a tiny percentage of Asians. It's WP:UNDUE. Why must we whitewash an article about Asian people? 71.31.30.66 (talk) 22:41, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Out of four photos, three are for Westernized Asians. So, Asians are only notable if they reside in the West? 71.31.30.66 (talk) 22:45, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Can you supply or suggest such photos? HiLo48 (talk) 05:03, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Pakistan has significant population

Shouldn't Pakistan be included in the box since it's population exceeds 200 million? ARC (talk) 12:38, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Colors

The colors in the map seem incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6001:E103:3F00:9DFE:F9D3:7C71:9F81 (talk) 00:08, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

"Yellow people"?!

Is not slightly, um, racist that "yellow people" redirects here? Crazy Eddy (talk) 16:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC) "Yellow people" is no more or less racist or offensive than "white people" or "black people", no matter how much some people want it to be.2600:1700:5DD0:60A0:2C36:B3D7:4376:A0DE (talk) 15:06, 10 March 2020 (UTC) That gave me a laugh, alright. Perhaps Yellow people should redirect to The Simpsons instead. 75.164.165.133 (talk) 19:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

i dont know who are writing these articles but most likely not europeans because the term oriental is still used to describe arabs, and usually only arabs, whereas asians are more used to describe yellow/mongoloids. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.86.14.213 (talk) 21:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the Spanish speaking world and the UK use Oriental to refer to East Asians and the Portuguese speaking world uses "amarelo" which means yellow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fernirm (talk • contribs) 03:19, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic#RfC: Formatting of sentence about xenophobia

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic#RfC: Formatting of sentence about xenophobia. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 11:57, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

The RfC has now been updated to include a specific question on how to describe the subsection of Asians that have faced the brunt of the discrimination. Your perspectives would be much appreciated. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:38, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Anglophone section

I was dismayed to see that the 'Anglophone' views represented were basically 'white' views, to the exclusion of non-white English speakers. I have corrected this now.

In India, which has the largest number of English speakers in Asia, and the largest number of non-white English speakers in the world, the word Asian is uniformly used in news and other media to refer to people from all parts of Asia, with terms like 'West Asia' or 'South Asia' used where greater precision is desired.

Additionally I also qualified the paragraph dealing with the exclusion of West Asians (Middle-Easterners) to make clear that the paragraph reflects a US-centric view.

Splitpeasoup 22:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Hopefully, you'll be able to source this POV.----DarkTea 14:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, it really cannot be argued that this is anything but a U.S centric view. One only need to compare the definitions of neighboring Canada to see the difference in definition and usage. Padishah5000 18:15, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Here you go, DarkTea:
http://socialtext.dukejournals.org/cgi/reprint/24/1_86/55.pdf
http://www.colorq.org/MeltingPot/Asia/IndianWestAsians.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Asian_cinema
http://www.saja.org/stylebook.html
http://india.indymedia.org/en/2003/09/7571.shtml
http://www.asiantruth.com/
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2005/03/29/stories/2005032902030200.htm
*Now* are you going to remove that OR tag?
-Splitpeasoup 18:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I feel that the Menon source is very relavant to this issue about the "Asian" in Europe. In it Menon claims that Asia was concocted by a European imagination. It says that Russia and the Middle East were considered part of Asia because they were not part of Europe. Although not granted the status of a European, Russians and Middle Easterners were never labeled as Asians in Europe.----DarkTea 02:22, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Menon also says that the Middle East is a region of the original conception of Asia, but not a region of America's USA's current conception of American U.S. Asia. S/he contends that America's USA's Asia includes the Far East, Southeast Asia and to a marginal degree the Indian Subcontinent. S/he claims that there is a large desire for South Asian U.S. American non-Muslims to distance themselves from Pakistanis and Middle Easterns (and Afghans). Although a type of shared identity may be formed with South Asian U.S. American who look like Middle Easterns (edit: that's because those that look like them are descended from them ( e.g. Aryans)), Menon concludes that West Asians/Middle Eastern U.S. Americans are not considered to be Asian U.S. Americans (edit: what a bunch of stupidities, no offense!).---DarkTea 02:22, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Menon says that in "Asia", there is no Asian identity (edit: because there is no Asian continent!). S/he claims that WWII Japan developed an "Asian identity" as a front for their desire to conquer Asia. Other than that s/he says their is no "Asian identity" in Asia.----DarkTea 02:22, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
The other links only suggest that in India there does not exist an American conception of Asia, but they don't discuss the issue.----DarkTea 02:22, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Gonna need a better source for [[3]] as it's from a blog, and not a scholarly source! Kezo2005 (talk) 19:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Northern Asia and Ethnic Russians

The total population of Indigenous peoples of Siberia in Siberia itself is around 4,500,000. Which is under 10% of the total population of Siberia, putting the whole population of Siberia, which is around 33 million, and which is also around 85-90% Russian - who are White Europeans, and are an East Slavic ethnic group from Eastern Europe, who emigrated from the historical European part of Russia to Siberia after Russia expanded into Northern Asia, is totally absurd. Read European emigration. Horope (talk) 11:11, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

This is an area that's not as clear cut as you seem to think. Here in Australia, when we complete our census form, they ask us for our ancestry. I, and over 30% of our population, say "Australian". Only 2.5% of the population is indigenous. So think about what that means. Going back centuries, my ancestry is Scandinavian, French, Scottish, and a few other things, but the only single thing that really makes sense today is that I'm Australian. Now, for someone born in Siberia, they were born in Asia, they live in Asia. And you want to argue they're not Asian. Hmmmmm. HiLo48 (talk) 11:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
Somebody born in Australia is called an Australian, and somebody born in the United States is called an American, even if both of the people have European ancestry. That is because of European emigration, the Americas and Oceania are called the New World, while the continents of Africa, Asia and Europe are called the Old World, because they were already explored at that time, while the Americas and Oceania were explored much later by Europeans, who then decided to live in there. Majority of the Americans and Australians living in both of the countries have ancestors from Europe, who settled in there from Europe hundreds of years ago. Meanwhile, in the case of Siberia, which is a territory of the Russian Federation - a culturally, historically, ethnically and a politically European country which expanded its territory into Asia, if an ethnic Russian is indeed born in Siberia, you are right that he is born in Asia and he even lives inside Asia, but that doesn't make him an ethnic "Asian" and that is what the article is about, it's about "Asian people". Compare a Russian child who was born in Siberia to a Japanese child who was born in Tokyo, it's clear who's actually an ethnic "Asian". Take France - another European country, for example, it has a lot of overseas territories, and French Guiana is one of them, French Guiana is located within the territory of South America, so if an ethnic French child is born in French Guiana and lives in there, he's South American? And also if an ethnic French child is born in Réunion and lives in there, which is located within Africa, he's African? The article is about ethnicity, not continents, in fact it has nothing to do with continents. Read White people, the whole ethnic Russian population living within the territory of Russia is listed there, ethnic Russians are born and live in Siberia (Asia) too, but that doesn't make them Asian. They're still European/White by ethnicity. You have European ancestry, which makes you "White" ethnically and "Australian" nationality wise, same case with Americans, but not the same case with Europeans. Australian and American is a nationality, not an ethnicity, unlike the Russians and other European ethnic groups. Horope (talk) 17:07, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
When I used the word "Australian" above, I was describing how it is used a response to the Census question about ancestry, not nationality (that's a separate question). Are you saying the 30% of Australians who say they have Australian ancestry are wrong? (BTW, Australia makes no official use of the word "ethnicity", so ancestry is the next best thing. Australia also officially gave up use of the concept of race, white or otherwise, nearly 50 years ago.) HiLo48 (talk) 00:23, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2020

Add “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” (or North Korea) to the list of East Asian countries. South Korea is on it, so I think it’s only fair, plus maybe it will cause more people to learn about the crisis there. Meganmalloy6116 (talk) 17:54, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. Your request doesn't have enough information to add an entry that matches the others. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 22:43, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Missing countries

Where is Malaysia in the Southeast Asia list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Phung (talk • contribs) 08:30, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 November 2020

Peter Phung (talk) 08:28, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

^[where is Malaysia?)]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 21:16, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Where is iran

Why Iran is not in it? Iranian are west asians Arianff (talk) 19:02, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Missing countries

According to the significant population category Bangladesh should be there in south asian country. It has approx. 170,060,000 people which is one of the most populated country of the world Naz Nad (talk) 07:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 April 2021

In regions with significant populations, India and Bangladesh are named but not Pakistan. This is a serious oversight... I am misleading (talk) 12:25, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:30, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Add Malaysia

Please add Malaysia in the list of south east countries.

}} 122.110.98.167 (talk) 21:05, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Arab not considered Asians!

Arab nations never considered as asians not by culture or ethinicity as what it's wrote here Eastern world "Arab" or Mena region not part considered as asians or africans please correct the false informations! Mouzac12 (talk) 20:05, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Arabia is part of Asia. HiLo48 (talk) 00:09, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

This article was significantly deteriorated recently

I'm specifically talking about this edit, which removed more than 10,000 bytes of content from the article. I see a user named "Kgwikiedit" tried to reverse this disruption, but it was done once more. The reasons given are extremely vague, because most of this content was added by many different users over months and even years that weren't vandals or blocked. I specifically remember viewing this article a few months ago while browsing, and was shocked to return to this article today and see it significantly deteriorated thanks to this mass removal. What's going on? Is there a solution? AufgenNell (talk) 16:54, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

I didn't make that edit, but I agree with it. The body of the article is about Asian people living outside of Asia, but the former info box listed the populations of the countries in Asia. In my view, that was not logical. --Rsk6400 (talk) 18:00, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
No, this is about talking about Asians themselves, not just their outside perception, so it is necessary to include the infobox, since it is their homeland. Kolknoy (talk) 23:56, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Malaysia before Myanmar

in the beginning of the article, should be in alphabetical order... not a big deal, but I can't edit this article, so yeah...

Turkic peoples

why in "see also" are not mentioned Turkic peoples people?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Asian_people/Archive_3&oldid=1130743989"