Talk:Mixed (United Kingdom ethnicity category)

Spelling Changes

Many of the ethnicities were spelled wrong, like Phillipino and Nivisian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.91.225.13 (talk) 21:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

British people and European immigrants of Mediterranean complexion

There are certain areas and pockets of britain where the people right away become dark haired, dark eyed and olive skin as opposed to the nordic stock of most british people. These include areas such as wales, look up mediterranean race. Infact, Greek cypriots in britain are mediterranean and have been mistakened as Pakistanis or British asians. Watch this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClgGgKKF1Ik — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.173.174.134 (talk) 03:31, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Veracity

What is the "Offical" status of the term? I've never heard of the term and I've lived here for 25 years and work in Local Government, so I am usually up-to-date with official terminology esp sociological ones. I know Google is not to be relied upon 100%, but searching for "Mixed British" finds nothing relevant. I've commented out the section of the article which claims that the term is officially recognised in the Census - it is not. The Census 2001 Ethnic Codes article makes no mention of it. This article needs to be properly sourced. It seems to me that somebody has decided to make it up, or has used a neoligism and tried to make it "official". The two articles used as "references" do not even mention the term.  — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 22:28, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

As a way forward, would you accept a name-change to 'British Mixed Race'. 'Mixed' very clearly exists in the 2001 census codes you mention, and the 'British' part would be necessary to distinguish this group form mixed race populations in other countries. The opening blurb would then make it clear that 'Mixed' is the term used in the census. Indisciplined 00:23, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

I would be happy with anything which is an official term.  — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 21:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

History

I am removing the entire 'History' section from this article due to massive factual inaccuracies. There was a substantial black population in Britain before the Empire Windrush, and therefore a mixed-race population (especially in cities such as Cardiff, Bristol and London). It's claims also backed up with no sources whatsoever. The use of the word 'Negro' in this day and age is also quite startling. Indisciplined 18:18, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Do you have citations for these "substantial black populations". I don't remember any, and I was there (London). The term "negro" was used in its scentific sense - the human race being divided into three major groupings: negroid, caucasian and mongoloid. (And several minor groupings as well of course.) A euphemism would be inappropriate in this context. Markparker 13:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Classification and Legal Status

Also, can we get an urgent citation for the claims being made in this section that ethnic minorities receive preferential treatment on training schemes. As far as I'm aware, this is nonsense. Indisciplined 18:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

See here: http://www.ofmdfmni.gov.uk/positive-action Markparker 13:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

USAGE OF TERM `Mixed-Race'

In the UK, I have noticed the term `mixed race' has been used synonymously with the 'black' and 'white' mix and seldomly including Anglo-Indians or Eurasians. I am proposing Nasser Hussains image to be deleted. He would identify as fully Caucasoid. Cat Stevens (Greek/Swedish) identifies as mixed race on his own website. If I added his name to the list I am sure it would be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.176.52.112 (talk) 22:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes. Despite what Cat Stevens says, he is not mixed race, he is fully Caucasoid. Greeks and English are both white so really he is not mixed race, rather multiethnic. But seriously, just leave Nasser; I highly doubt any white British person is ready to include South Asians into their racial status, even though most South Asians are Caucasian in race. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.154.247 (talk) 14:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Read Black Athena Greeks are themselves mixed race. The police Identity Code in Britain identifies Mediterraneans as a seperate category from 'white'

Nasser Hussain is fully Caucasoid as well and can claim Aryan Heritage and looks whiter than Cat Stevens. Look Here : Nasser Hussain http://static.ecb.co.uk/images/width140/nasser-retirement-2-810.jpg and Cat Stevens http://www.knowprose.com/images/Yusuf_Islam.jpg Hence I have no objection to Cat Stevens being included on the list. look up Mediterranean race and both Indians and Greeks are included.

For one thing, the Mediterranean race is not a solid foundation. Hec, even the Welsh are considered a Mediterranean people. Just look at the Mediterranean race page. Nasser Hussain is not fully European, but Cat Stevens is, and that is the issue...Britons are more likely to accept a Greek as white than a Indian/Pakistani.

The preamble to the article refers to the British census definition of mixed race. This specifically included people of mixed Asian/European origins. It is not exclusively reserved for people of mixed European/African descent. So all the mixed European/Asian people mentioned CLEARLY fall within the definition of the article. Indisciplined (talk) 18:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Myleene Klass is mixed RACE as filipinos are a separate entity to Indo-Aryans. As Asian is an inhabitant of Asia. By your faulty logic, someone who is half English and half Russian (still fully white) should be classed as mixed-race as much of Russia is in Asia! Census definitions are usually based on what people identify themselves. Most white Britons I know would only consider a Southern European as `white' on a case by case basis depending on the individuals appearance. I have known many dark southern Europeans in the U.K. who have often experienced prejudice and been mistaken for South Asian or Middle Eastern (i.e. they've been called P**i!). They may be classed as `white' in the British Census but not always in society. Hence I have no objection to the offspring of a Mediteranean/Nordic identifying themselves as mixed race. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.187.202.216 (talk) 06:42, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

That's your opinion. This is an encyclopedia. We need facts. The census constitutes evidence that can be cited, so forms the factual basis of this article. Simple as that. Indisciplined (talk) 18:55, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

No Its not my opinion, it's what experiences i've known.

Back it up with evidence, or it has no place here.Indisciplined (talk) 20:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

According to Indisciplined someone who is half Syrian and half Korean is not mixed race on the grounds that they are still fully 'Asian' by continental definition. Err... last I knew one is Caucasoid and one is Mongoloid.

Not 'Indisciplned's definitions', but (and if you'd like to read the beginning of the article yet again, as that's what we are talking about here, the Census 2001 Ethnic Codes) which form the official statistical definitions for the UK Census. Amongst the definitions for mixed race, you will find that there is scope for people to define themselves as mixed 'Asian' and 'Chinese' or 'other mixed' if they are from a less common combinationm like the one described above. So yes, a person half-Syrian and half-Korean would absolutely and emphatically be covered by the census definiton used in this article. Once again, you have no argument. This article is about the UK Census definition, as clearly stated in the opening pre-amble. Indisciplined (talk) 20:41, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Well the last time I checked the Welsh and Cornish was considered part of the "so called Mediterranean race." Remind me to identify someone who is half Welsh half English as worthy of being mixed race. Utter foolishness! People of southern European descent who are supposed to be "Mediterranean" like the Italians for example, also have very substantial Alpine and Dinaric elements as well, subgroups found from Britain to Germany to Russia, to Spain....cant you see the fallacy of the Mediterranean race debate? And considering that Italians, Spaniards, Frenchmen, Irish and the Englishmen are all one race, Caucasian, people of these combined ethnicities do not fill the bill of mixed race. People of south Asian heritage are predominantly Caucasian as well, but they have substantial Mongoloid traits as well! 24.36.207.146 (talk) 17:33, 26 November 2008 (UTC)Galati

Southern Europeans are mixed race. There is a significant amount of North African ancesry in them with significant amounts of Negroid admixture, so there! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.127.216.102 (talk) 03:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Read the above posts again. This article is based on the British census definitions PERIOD. It really is that simple. Indisciplined (talk) 21:20, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

British Mixed-Race

Where is the American and Canada mix race wiki? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.99.161.109 (talk) 18:33, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Here's the American one, Multiracial American, not sure if there is a Canadian one. Indisciplined (talk) 21:20, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Caucasians

Please note that Caucasians mixed with Caucasians are not mixed race. Non-European Caucasians and European Caucasians are the same race. The borders of Europe do not define race, they define Europe. Izzedine (talk) 21:51, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

This article is only organized in terms of the UK Census, not in racial/scientific/anthroplogical terms. The term "Caucasian" is not recognized by the UK Census, which only uses "White" to refer to people of European descent, while people of West Asian descent fall under "Other Asian" in the UK Census. In other words, a person of both European and West Asian descent would fall under mixed "White and Asian" in the UK Census. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 21:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

That it offered "White and Asian" as an option under mixed is not to be taken that all Asians are non-white, persons of European and Iraqi descent such as myself, select category 19, "White Other", as we are not mixed race. Iraq is only a few hundred miles south of the Caucasus Mountains. It is untrue and offensive to conjecture that white people beyond the frontier of Europe, mixed with Europeans, are "mixed race". Members of my Iraqi family have blond hair, green eyes, and look like Northern Italians. People of the Near East are mostly light skinned Caucasians. Izzedine (talk) 00:24, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

You may have chosen "White Other" when you filled out the Census, but the fact of the matter is that many other Iraqis chose "Other Asian" in the UK Census. Besides, the argument you are using here could equally be applied to fair-skinned Pakistanis, some of whom could also pass for Italians. If someone has a white parent and a fair-skinned Pakistani parent, they would fall under "British Mixed" without question. However, I think the problem here is with the title of this article. As far as I remember, the UK Census did not refer to "race", but rather mixed ethnicity. I think this article should be renamed to simply "British Mixed" or "Mixed British" to reflect this. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 03:55, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Why?

I think the article needs an explanation on why the UK registres its citizens on grounds of "race" (even if only for statistical reasons). I find it extremely odd since a) the concept of dividing individual human beings into races is highly controversial and b) I can't figure out any practical reason for this type of registration. Could anyone help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.163.93.206 (talk) 10:22, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

People aren't "registered" by race. The Office for National Statistics does, however, collect data on what it terms ethnicity, by which it effectively means race. It might be interesting to discuss this, but it would be better at Classification of ethnicity in the United Kingdom than here. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Bob Marley

I looked at the list of mixed raced people and can see that Bob Marley is not there. Just to say that he was English/Jamaican.

(TheGreenwalker (talk) 14:00, 8 November 2009 (UTC))

Yes, but this article is about British people of mixed race, and Bob Marley wasn't a British resident or citizen so I don't think it's relevant. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Propose deletion of Images and name listing.

This article is barely an article and just a listing of people who are contentiously "alleged" to be Mixed-'race'. By looking at the disagreements and disputes on this discussion page I would like to comment on the following. Who is socially regarded as "white" in the UK? In this article by Liam Donaldson and Raj Bhopal, it states that in practice "white refers to people of European ancestry with fair complexions" http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/reprint/88/9/1303?view=long&pmid=9736867 this is proven to be valid as the police IC codes categorise Mediterranean people (Dark European) as being a separate category from white see here:http://www.tilehurst.net/infopool/ic.html

By this logic,Yusuf Islam would CLEARLY fit the category of Mixed-Race (as he self-identifies on his website), but there are those who would refute it. As it is, the census is based on self identification and hence there is NOTHING preventing him doing so.

South Asians mixed with "whites" are classed as being Mixed-'race' despite being fully Caucasoid, Aryan, Indo-European and a significant portion belonging to the Mediterranean race yet there is no objection including them here. Socially South Asians are not classed as "white". Many Middle Easterners are Caucasoid, but they too are not considered "white" in the UK. There has been objections to their mixed offsprings with Europeans being listed in this article where the census would include them (Other Asian).

I have backed my argument up with evidence, hence I think we can all agree that the listing of people and their images should be removed and just keep this a simple article with statistics to avoid dispute and controversy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.40.62 (talk • contribs)

Someone forgot to sign their post. Ethnic Iranians (not just national Iranians) from Northern and Central Iran are Aryan/white and are classified as white. Northern Indians also have some Aryans that are not really mixed either - compared to similar mixtures of Eastern Europeans, Iranians, Greeks, heck most people in the world. Semitic people are Caucasian, but not Aryan, and not always white because of African ancestry in their blood. Many South Asians that aren't from the Northern part of India are mixed with Dravidians or an Australoid people, so they are classified as South Asian and not White. Iranians aren't really middle eastern. The term only refers to Iranians in the last half of this century really. They are mostly European and geographically Eurasian. Mediterraneans are Greeks, Spanish, French, Persian, Armenians etc. There are some Arabs who have mixed with Mediterranean peoples, but they are not fully Meditteranean; only some have mediterranean blood. Persians, like their German cousins, are Alpine, but Persians are also Mediterranean, some Nordic blood as well. Aryans originate from the Ukraine region or the Caucasian Steppes. Nordic Europeans - some, like the Irish have some mediterranean blood, and are not as Nordic as Scandinavians. Iranians are an Indo-European Aryan people, and many Europeans, like the Nordic ones, are a mix of Aryans and proto-Europeans (the native Europeans). --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 12:24, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion, however, Iranians and Middle Easterners are NOT classed as "white" in the UK census. Look up British Asian. Many Iranians and other Middle Easterners identify as "Other Asian". Furthermore, don't get me started with this "Dravidian" mix among Indians. Look up the Dravidian people page and you will see that there also is a significant presense of Dravidian admixture on the Iranian Plateau look up R1a1. I have provided references to my arguement. West Asians are NOT socially considered "white" in the UK anymore than South Asians are. Please back your argument with references of the BRITISH usage of white before contending who is "white". Here are some images of mixed British and Indian offsprings all of whom look "white". Anthropologically and genetically they are not really mixed-'race' rather multi-ethnic:

http://l.yimg.com/t/movies/movietalkies/20070813/10/karankapoor-1b-1_1186980344.jpg

http://thedubliner.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/04/03/andrea3.jpg

http://www.lovenikkibedi.com/Gallery/Nikki_Bedi_20_main.jpg

http://www.indiaeducationdiary.in/image11/omar.jpg

And YES! These people are 50/50 mix with one "fully blooded" Indian and one "fully blooded" British parent! They are still fully Caucasoid and Indo-European/Aryan. They would be classed as mixed "race" according to the logic of this article and the census although technically they are not. The purpose of my argument was to remove ALL listings of names and images and just simplify the article to just the written text and statistics to avoid dispute and controversy as to who is and who is not "mixed-race". Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.40.62 (talk • contribs)

If Yasmin Le Bon is " white" then so is " Adanm Bedi Agreed? Images to prove!

http://www.leninimports.com/yasmin_le_bon_gallery_8.jpg

http://x71.xanga.com/fd7a72655173373037437/z49202373.jpg

Notable Britons section

I've removed this section. As discussed above, and also for the following reasons.

• We have no idea whether these people chose to define themselves as 'Mixed' in the last census, which is what the article is supposed to based on.
• Anyone's racial definition should be based on what they personally self-identify as, not what someone on Wikipedia as worked out.
• It is almost entirely uncited.
• Race definitions are, as ever, very problematic and often people are included in a section based on the nationality of their parents. This is not the same thing as 'race'.
• The term 'notable' gives no indication who qualifies to be on this list.
• The article's title is not "random list of ethnically mixed Britons'.
• This list is never going to be anything like all-inclusive, and if it was it would be infeasibly long. So it is ultimately pointless.

All in all this is chiefly a collection of uncited original research that has no business being on this article. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 02:15, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Would CreativeSoul7981 please address the points above. Thanks. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 02:45, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

You didn't discuss anything. You just blanked out a whole section of an article. None of this is even my research or edit. This article is on my watchlist. Blanking out sections without discussion can be considered vandalism. Various articles that have been sourced on Wikipedia on these Notable Britons mention their mixed heritage. There is no reason to delete this section. If you'd like to start a discussion, you are welcome to without destroying the works of others or part of an article. Thank you. --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 04:56, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

CREATIVE SOUL. Back your arguement up with evidence, not your opinion or it has no place here - PERIOD!! Provide external resourses!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.40.62 (talk) 08:42, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

CreativeSoul7981, please read this article on Wikipedia. I have been bold, you have reverted. I'm now asking you again to discuss and address the points I have made above. Your understanding of what is vandalism is also flawed. Please read this Wikipedia policy on what is not vandalism. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I have read the page. You just blanked out a chunk of an article without a consensus. I disagree with your edits and stated my reasons, however, they aren't my edits. You or I aren't a consensus. It's not a small edit. It's only fair that before a major edit is made, time is allowed for other contributors to join the discussion. I'll look for a mediator on this subject. And please sign in when you make edits or post comments. Are you 58.169.40.62 (talk)  ? --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 21:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

By your arguments, several pages of mixed people categories should be deleted because we don't know the Census statistics or how each person feels about racial identity. That would mean deleting a whole lot of categories on Wikipedia - a broad sweep. The articles on the people on the list have sources indicating the mixed heritage, some sources are even interviews with the person where he or she mentions his or her heritage. I don't get it. If a person is of African and English heritage, they don't identify as mixed? Explain that. I know that there are black Americans who are mixed but see themselves as more black than white - that is a cultural thing, but they are still considered mixed race. This isn't a page on nationality as I see it, but race. Again, I'm not trying to argue. Please allow other editors who have contributed to article page (especially registered users) to join the discussion. A consensus should be reached before a major overhaul of an article is made. Mediators are welcome. Happy New Year.--CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 21:34, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm happy to await further editors thoughts on this. I'm asking that the article which is about a census category does not attempt to speculate and categorise what some people have returned in that census. I'm asking that this article does not attempt to further sub-categorise these people according to editors own original research and personal opinions. The discussion above about your thoughts on the ethnicity of Iranians makes it abundantly clear that you are indulging in original research, which is simply not permissible. I have also pointed you to a few articles (and there are many more) where the article either does not mention or does not cite anything at all about the person's supposed racial category, despite your claims to the contrary. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 01:00, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

What I said on Iranians isn't original research. I was discussing, NOT providing a source. Ethnic Iranians are Indo-European and white. Why don't you check the White People article on Wikipedia or the books on Indo-Europeans, etc. There are tons of sources and links right on here. Iranians and Iranian-Britains, etc. celebrities are listed as white on Wikipedia. It seems as if you're just trying to argue for the sake of arguing. Why not start a Greeks aren't white, Spanish aren't white, etc. argument. It's a bit ridiculous. ETHNIC Iranians in Iran and around the world are recognized as white. I don't need to provide a top ten list of sources to show that an Indo-European people are white. Ethnic Persians are white, and I mentioned that every country has various races. You obviously confuse ethnicity with nationality. Not all Iranian nationals are ethnic Iranians. Where they are not, that person's background is mentioned on his/her article page. Check the sources on the Iranian people page on here that mentions the various demographics. If you're going by what you say, let's see the sources on all Greeks being white, and the rest of the mediterranean peoples. Come on now. This is getting silly. I must reiterate that I have no issues with this page, only that sections were blanked out (other editors' works) without discussing it with other people. How can one justify taking chunks of an article page out without a consensus. You must apply the same rules to all the article pages on Wikipedia that relate to the discussion - fair is fair.--CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 01:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

If this is the case then why have you not pushed to have mixed "white and South Asians" deleted from this page? Did the images I provided in my posts not look white? Do you have the same opinion that Indians and Pakistanis (Indo-Europeans) should not be classed as Asian and be included in Britain's white population? THIS IS THE UK CENSUS!! NOT THE US CENSUS!!. Iranians are NOT classed as white in Britain - Period. Mediterranean Europeans are classed as "white" in the Census but not always in society as I had stated in the documents I provided. Go to the whites page and look up its usage in the UK. Southern Italians themselves are mixed-race ith North African blood in them as well as the Portuguese having large sub-saharan African DNA (seeMiscegenation). Until we have all the listings and images deleted, Mixed-race offsprings of whites and Middle-Easterners should also be included in other mixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.40.62 (talk) 03:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

WRONG. Ethnic Iranians and Mediterranean people are white. Britain classifies different whites outside of the British Isles - but then that rule would also apply to Mediterraneans of French, Spanish, Italian, Greek, Persian, etc. descent. Different ethnicity is not always a different race. Many Northern Indians may be Aryan and very well white, but Indians are classified as Asian. I don't disagree with the difference. There is the "British Isles" white and other white, but it's still white. Some 'Asians' like Northern Indians may be Caucasian, but they are classified as Asian. Please don't forget to sign your posts. And if you are another user, please sign in. If you're the other user making the same blanking out edits, you should know that it is a violation of Wikipedia's policy to do so, and IP Addresses can be traced. If you're not the other person, I apologize. Also, please refrain from blanking out the article page without a group discussion, and remember the three revert rule.--CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 05:24, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

So a Baluchi tribesman from Pakistan is Asian but a Baluchi from Iran is white? - Rubbish. The British Asian page makes references to Iranians as Other Asian. Read the census status PERIOD. Only a self-hating ethnic Iranian race-traitor would identify themselves as 'white'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.40.62 (talk) 05:41, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Baluchi are Iranian. There are Iranian ethnic tribes - insular, and living in other regions. Most Parsis have retained their Iranian heritage. I never said there weren't Northern Indians who were not white. There are some who aren't mixed with Dravidians. I'm just saying that is how it is seen in Britain. Also, much of the Mongol blood is diluted, but in India, except in parts of the North and certain areas, there is Dravidian admixture. Again, not saying there aren't white Indians. However, that is how Britain sees it. The British classify whites outside of the British Isles as other white, but they are still white. It could very well be that some of the Northern Indians are classified as white in Britain, but according to the classifications, not sure if it's because they think of the admixture or not, Indians are considered Asian. In that sense, white doesn't refer to Caucasians. I agree it's complicated. But that is their classification. --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 06:35, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

The above clearly demonstrates what I have said about the difficulties of Wikipedia editors working out how to categorise people's 'race' and it is why these things are generally decided by what the individual themselves self-identifies as. It is not anyone's responsibility here to determine for them. And, as I have said before, a person's nationality, or that of their parents, says nothing about their racial identity. I ask you again to cease this original research, produce cites, or remove this section. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 12:32, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Again, what original research? This is a discussion. I am defending the works of other editors on this page because you keep blanking out sections of an article page without a consensus. This isn't my work. You should wait for other people, not just one person, before making a major edit. This page isn't a nationality page. Looking at the British Census, Britain considers any non British person who is white, as white other (for ethnicity) - including French, Persian, Greek, Polish, some Arabs and Jews, etc. Strange, but even whites outside of the British isles are considered white other. This is according to the Census. Indians and other Asians are classified as Asian.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Other_(United_Kingdom_Census). Read the whole article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Asian --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 19:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes but what is your point of including these articles? You really are humiliating yourself CreativeSoul7981 ! The White Other page has NO inclusion of Iranians on it and the British Asian page has a section revrting to Iranians in the UK and states that Iranians Identify as Other Asian.

The original research is many-fold. As an example, we have Ryan Giggs categorised under Mixed Other Black and White. Where is this coming from? It is not cited here, and the Ryan Giggs article merely cites an article that mentions a black father of an unspecific background. Where is the "Mixed Other Black" coming from?

I realise what you are discussing about Iranians isn't in the article, but you appear to be in the process of forming a case for individuals being one categorisation or other by combining sources. This is original synthesis. You cannot hunt around to define what is race is Iranian, then what nationality someone's parents were, and therefore combine the two to determine what categorisation of 'Mixed' you wish to place someone in. As I said above, in matters like race what's paramount is how someone self-identifies and producing a cite that says this. So you can quote any number of other Wikipedia articles you wish, and cite any number of census categories. Working out what racial classification someone is is original research and is not permissible on Wikipedia. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 22:12, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree that you can't hunt people down. However, most non-ethnic Iranians identify as another race. Black Iranians are never ethnic Iranians, and mongolians identify as such. Ethnic Iranians, like Greeks, etc. are classified as other white in Britain. First, the Census is used as a source, then it isn't. There are other categories on Wikipedia, not just Mixed Britons. And the Census seems to be used for these classifications, as well as background information on the people with sources included. That is not a violation. I don't see how other editors have violated any rules on here. Now, as to the Mixed Other Black - I have no idea about Ryan Giggs as I never added this person to the list. I only know that most of the people on the list have articles on here with references to interviews or articles in which their mixed background is mentioned. You can message me on my talk page if you have a list, perhaps including Ryan Giggs, that you'd like to go over? Some on the list perhaps have a mixed race background that includes black, white, and some other mixed heritage, where other comes in.--CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 22:20, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

The examples I'm giving are only that; examples. They demonstrate the fundamental folly of what this list is attempting to do and why it shouldn't be attempted. So I see little point in debating specifics about individual cases. Besides anything else, this article is not the place for this list. The article is about the census category, it is not a about a list of random people. The only way I can see this list being valid if it was an article to itself and every single mention was cited with the individual stating "I am mixed black Caribbean / Asian / whatever." Otherwise it can't fail but be the irrelevant opinion of someone else, and often factually inaccurate or even personally offensive. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 00:10, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

IRANIAN DNA = INDIAN DNA see here r1a1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.223.197.86 (talk) 14:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

---

Just a note to remind CreativeSoul7981 that I still regard the list of individuals on this article to be fundamentally original research until cites can be produced that identify these people (and preferable self-identify) with the census category. CreativeSoul7981 wished to wait for input from others, but it would appear that no-one else is interested. I would therefore say that, following basic Wikipedia principles and policies, these lists be removed until cited.

Also, just to emphasise, I am not interesting in debating the racial status of Iranians. This side issue is a symptom and evidence of original research. Resolving it does not address the root of the problem. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 20:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC).

Well take it up with Wikipedia administrators regarding the other lists. The lists does not violate Wikipedia policies and the British Census itself lists those White populations outside the British Isle (including French, Greek, Spanish, Iranian, German, etc. ) as White Other. All of these people are WHITE. None of this information is original research when it is listed in sources, interviews with said celebrity and provided on the person's article page.--CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 00:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

That's not strictly true about the census. The census form allows people to classify themselves however they wish. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:48, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Exactly, and no where is it cited that these people completed the census as "Mixed" as, of course, how they completed the census is confidential. Are we then agreed that if a listed person here has no good solid cited reference to them being "mixed" in their article, mention of them here should be removed? And that specifically excludes cites that merely mention the nationality/ethnicity/race/colour/whatever of their parents. This because that 'working out' someone's ethnicity from their parents' is synthesis and, just as importantly, a matter of opinion that they may not share. As Cordless Larry explains above, people can classify themselves however they wish, regardless of how you might want to determine their 'mixed' ethnicity according to a set of rules. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 17:03, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't see a problem in removing categories where there is no source on the person's article page about their ethnicity or an interview. I think leaving their country of origin or parents' ancestry is fine. For instance, British with Nigerian ancestry (if there is such a category). Though, I don't think anyone who is half English and half Japanese would disagree that they are mixed. Please pose this question to a few administrators. --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 21:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I think I made it clear that you need to discuss with Wiki administrators before removing such categories. I have no problem with it, but as it is the work of others, please contact administrators first. --CreativeSoul7981 (talk) 18:41, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

DARIUS DANESH! Half Scottish (white) half "Ethnic Iranian". Listed as Multiracial here: http://www.allstarpics.net/pic-gallery/darius-danesh-pics.htm Stop contending false statements CreativeSoul7981!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.223.197.86 (talk) 01:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

And to add to that, when Darius was on Popstars he said something about how he resembled Saddam Hussein.

I agree with Escape_Orbit that the list of people be removed. This article is about the 'Mixed' category in the Ethnicity part of the 2001 UK census where people self-identified their background. It is not an article listing people of mixed ethnicity.

Also, Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid are out of date terms that are no longer considered scientifically accurate and are not used by anyone in the UK.

• • • • —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.233.201 (talk) 03:11, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

This is long overdue, but Darius Danesh does not identify as "mixed". Having multiple ethnicities does not mean one is multiracial. If one is half German and half Iranian, he or she is still white. Darius could have been joking about the Saddam Hussein comment - especially considering how most Iranians hate that crazy man. User 86.139.233.201 is obviously not very educated, otherwise he or she would know that 51% of Iran is made up of ethnic Iranians (who are white), especially those in the north and central Iran. So are the nomadic tribes still living in the countryside. Sorry, but most people, including anthropologists, historians and sociologists consider Iranians to be white. 69.149.77.224 (talk) 11:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Here is the Statement by Darius Danesh about self-identifying as being mixed-race as well as the 'Saddam' comment and about how he was a victim of racism at school!http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Darius+has+the+last+laugh%3B+Despite+being+bullied+at+his+exclusive...-a0107839305 Please do us all a favour and call it quits with your false contentious claims that Iranians are "white" ok? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.221.255.158 (talk) 19:32, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Under the category of East Asian british mixed the TV presenter Alexa Chung would be appropriate. Her father is Chinese and her mother is English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.77.213.205 (talk) 19:01, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

She was listed there but a vandal had removed the section. I've now restored it. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:06, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

"torqouise"

Thats been deleted as it shouldnt be included in the article especially such a short one —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.194.154.216 (talk) 22:20, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Fastest growing ethnic minority group

The 2011 census [1] suggests the fastest growing ethnic minority group in numerical terms was "Other White" (i.e. not British/Irish/Gypsy) and in proportionate terms "Other Asian" (not Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi/Chinese/Arab), "Other Black" (not African/Caribbean) and "Black African".

Identifying as "Other White" does not imply a person is mixed-race though.Ananagram (talk) 21:41, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Indeed not, but it grew faster than all the mixed groups added together. --Rumping (talk) 23:31, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

The persons mixed with white British and other

Well, In the article, It defines mixed people of "British citizens or residents whose parents are of two or more different races or ethnic backgrounds", so, I wonder what ethnicity is for the persons born to a white mother and a mixed father(means three-quarter white and one-quarter other)in the UK census,What would these people consider Their ethnicity are in the census?White or mixed;another thing puzzled me is that we all know Asian British usually refers specifically to people of South Asian ancestry(see Asian British https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Asian)such as Iraqi and Iranians are not Included in it,so the persons mixed with west Asian/Near-east and white british would be count as what?For example:Andy Serkis What would him filled himself in the census,White british or mixed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.172.9.118 (talk) 07:43, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

As you seem to be aware, the UK census and other surveys rely on self-classification, so it all depends on how the person concerned sees themself (see the explanation here). The census is also confidential, so we could only know how Andy Serkis answered the ethnicity question by asking him. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:08, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

This page needs to be improved, and a standard applied to British people on wikipedia.

I came here looking for clarification on the issue, as many British mixed people are classified using US systems. This is wrong, American-centric and there should be efforts to correct this across wikipedia. These are British people, so British customs should be used. For example, right now Corinne Bailey Rae is listed as black, but on what grounds? There is no evidence to suggest she identifies that way, nor is she. But this is the US system in action. MarshallMolasses (talk) 09:57, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

The only place I see her listed as 'black' is on the Black_British_singers category. I suggest you take your concerns about this up on that category's talk page. She shouldn't be in it unless there is some evidence she identifies as a Black British Singer. But it doesn't concern this article. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:49, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mixed (United Kingdom ethnicity category). 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/20100107095528/http://www.statistics.gov.uk/about/data/harmonisation/downloads/P3.pdf to http://www.statistics.gov.uk/about/data/harmonisation/downloads/P3.pdf

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) 23:38, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

"Fastest growing ethnicity"

This is incorrect so I removed it. The source was an article from 2009 predicting that by 2020 multiethnic would be the fastest growing ethnicity. This does not mean it 'is' predicted to be the fastest growing. There isnt even a census in 2020. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalta (talk • contribs) 14:06, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

'Fastest growing ethnicity'. I removed this section from the introduction as it is incorrect. Caballero and Aspinall (2018) clearly show that during 2001–2011 the ‘Other Black’ group grew substantially faster (191.9%) than the ‘Mixed’ group. The 2021 Census data may show that the Mixed group is now the fastest growing group, but until we have that data we cannot make this claim. C at TMM (talk) 14:43, 2 November 2022 (UTC)