Talk:Argentine-American

Argentine-American
SoP. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:59, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 17:33, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, but this is really a minor part of a much larger set of entries. See . --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 18:58, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete them all. Although I can see reason for keeping one such as African-American as it is specific to the United States and includes people that are only of very slight black African origin, but does not include people from Egypt or descendents of European immigrants in South Africa nor Indians and Asian and possibly not even most Malagasys as they are Polynesian.Lucifer (talk) 21:49, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * For the record, Malagasy is only distantly related to Polynesian languages. It has much more in common with the languages of Borneo. As far as I know, people from Madagascar are considered African American, because some of their ancestry comes from the African mainland. Of course, US racial terminology is pretty illogical and inconsistent, so nothing can be determined 100-percent. Besides, I know people from Madagascar, so I don't really think of them in terms of their racial classification, anyway.Chuck Entz (talk) 22:35, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete SoP. Bad definition anyway. A person born in the US with Argentine parents, or a person born in Argentina living in the US but not yet a citizen, would still be an Argentine-American. It's a cultural definition, and there are endless variations of it, all of which would be SoP.--Dmol (talk) 21:56, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Single word. And all such which are attestable. Ƿidsiþ 08:17, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree, it's two words linked by a hyphen. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:24, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I consider (as is traditional) two words linked by a hyphen to be a single word. Not that I would go out of my way to add many of them, but I see no justification for deleting them. Ƿidsiþ 09:26, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The justification would be that the words are SoP, which was the reason they were listed originally.--Dmol (talk) 10:21, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * At the risk of restarting this whole conversation again, I consider it a single word and therefore SOP doesn't apply. Ƿidsiþ 11:14, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that there's much evidence to be put forward on either side. Interestingly when you say 'as is traditional', um according to who? Maybe that bit you could evidence. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:18, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * It's a truism of teaching, and of writing/editing. Go here, type in ‘I am an Argentine-American’, press submit, and see how many words you've written. Hint: it's four. See also and similar. Ƿidsiþ 16:13, 12 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. Nothing more than "Argentine" + "American". ---&#62; Tooironic (talk) 22:49, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. What's next: Andorran-American, Burkina-Fasoan-American, Tuvaluan-American? Chuck Entz (talk) 22:34, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Can they be attested? This can. Ƿidsiþ 06:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Deleted. — Ungoliant (Falai) 04:32, 16 August 2012 (UTC)