Category talk:American people of Swedish descent
Pretty thin Sueco in some
[edit]The were (and still are?) people categorized here whose one grandparent or even great-grandparent only seems to have been Swedish. Those people can hardly be called Swedish Americans. Can we agree that at least one parent or the person h-self should be a native born Swede? SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:05, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
- It really isn't up to use to come up with arbitrary distinctions as to who is a Swedish American and who is not. Someone who is 1/4 Swedish might proudly call themself a Swedish-American, while a second-generation American of 100% Swedish-extraction might simply prefer to call themself an American. But your point is an extremely good one. Frankly, the category should be "Americans of Swedish descent" because "Swedish American" is an identity that people may or may not choose to apply to themselves, and it a term that isn't always applicable when Americans are only part Swedish. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:42, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
- Even somebody with only one Swedish-born great-grandparent would be incorrectly categorized - misleading! - as American of Swedish Descent (I hope you agree), and a 1/4-Swede who calls hself Swedish American may call hself whatever h/s wants to call hself, but I feel strongly that WM projects should reflect facts not what people profess about themselves. Commons is not too tough on requiring sources to substantiate the facts, but when genealogy tells us what the facts are, let's stick to them! SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:40, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
- Of course a 1/4 Swede would be an American of Swedish descent. I'm not sure how that's misleading. If you have Swedish forebears, you are of Swedish descent. That's basic genealogy. A person with 1/4 Swedish blood would also presumably also qualify for other "American of [x] descent" categories, depending on the nature of the rest of their background. I agree with your comment "I feel strongly that WM projects should reflect facts not what people profess about themselves" (which is why "Swedish American" is such a bad category name). But it's also not up to us to determine who is of Swedish descent and who is not. If they have Swedes in their family tree, they qualify.
Having said all that, I think it's fair to remove someone from this category, or similar categories, if their respective article(s) on Wikipedia projects do not identify them as being (whole or partly) Swedish (or something else, as the case may be). --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:31, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, but as to your previous assertions, I obviously do not agree. Interested to know where you would draw the line. I have an American friend one of whose great-great-grandfathers (1746-1819) was German, nobody else. Is he an American of German descent? If I can prove that I descend from one (only one) 14th century Frenchman, am I an American of French descent? How about all of us descending from Africans some million years ago, like they say we do. Am I also an American of African descent? Why get ridiculous with this? SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:08, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- First, you're doing exactly what you were complaining above that others were doing, which is making up your own test of what constitutes a Swedish American. It's fine for a personal opinion, but the categories here are based on objective criteria, not subjective assessments. When you ask "where you would draw the line", the simple answer is that it is not up to me to draw any line. It's not my decision whether an American who is 1/4 or 1/8 Swedish is an "American of Swedish descent" (or a Swedish-American, for that matter). It isn't a subjective determination. As you said above all we can do is stick to the facts. If they are descended from Swedes, they are of Swedish descent. That's what the words mean, by definition. It's not up to us to base categories on our own personal opinions as to whether people are really Swedish or not.
Second, are you worried that there is an image of someone in this category whose only Swedish ancestor lived in the 14th century? Do you think this is a actual problem on the Commons? We can all think of outlandish scenarios that can occur with just about any of the categories here on the Commons, but from a practical perspective none of these are actual existing problems. In any event, the unlikely scenario of someone seeking to include an image in this category of a subject who is 1/32 Swedish is not a reason to start excluding images of people who are part Swedish (of much more recent lineage) and who meet the basic, English-language definition of "descent". If you ever feel that there is a specific image here of someone whose Swedish lineage is tenuous to that extent, you should raise the issue here or at the Village Pump. But I can assure you that the issue is not one we have to worry about too often, if ever. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:51, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- You really like to argue, or so it seems, and are writing everything you can, including an attempt to teach me my own fisrt language, to put me in my place and show how you do not want to see what I mean. What can I do? Give up with you.
- So, to anyone else who may read this:
- It is always misleading, in my opinin (if I may have one that differs from Skeezix's?) to claim that someone who is only 1/4 or 1/8 Swedish is Swedish American no matter what that person wants to be known as. The same pertains to any nationalities. Whoever said we WP-ans decide such things? I certainly didn't. Common sense and dictionaries (facts) are what we are supposed to go by. If I want to proclaim myself King of Sweden, that hardly makes me that. It would be no less misleading to categorize me as such. SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:36, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Whoa. I'm sorry if I have upset you. However, people are entitled to disagree and to explain their position. As I explained above, some things we agree on. All I am saying is that it isn't up to us to personally determine whether someone who is 1/4 or 1/8 Swedish qualifies as Swedish-American or not. I apologize if I came across as patronizing. That wasn't my intent. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 14:04, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
- Accepted. Thank you! Sincerely, SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:02, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
- Whoa. I'm sorry if I have upset you. However, people are entitled to disagree and to explain their position. As I explained above, some things we agree on. All I am saying is that it isn't up to us to personally determine whether someone who is 1/4 or 1/8 Swedish qualifies as Swedish-American or not. I apologize if I came across as patronizing. That wasn't my intent. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 14:04, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
- First, you're doing exactly what you were complaining above that others were doing, which is making up your own test of what constitutes a Swedish American. It's fine for a personal opinion, but the categories here are based on objective criteria, not subjective assessments. When you ask "where you would draw the line", the simple answer is that it is not up to me to draw any line. It's not my decision whether an American who is 1/4 or 1/8 Swedish is an "American of Swedish descent" (or a Swedish-American, for that matter). It isn't a subjective determination. As you said above all we can do is stick to the facts. If they are descended from Swedes, they are of Swedish descent. That's what the words mean, by definition. It's not up to us to base categories on our own personal opinions as to whether people are really Swedish or not.
- Yes, but as to your previous assertions, I obviously do not agree. Interested to know where you would draw the line. I have an American friend one of whose great-great-grandfathers (1746-1819) was German, nobody else. Is he an American of German descent? If I can prove that I descend from one (only one) 14th century Frenchman, am I an American of French descent? How about all of us descending from Africans some million years ago, like they say we do. Am I also an American of African descent? Why get ridiculous with this? SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:08, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Of course a 1/4 Swede would be an American of Swedish descent. I'm not sure how that's misleading. If you have Swedish forebears, you are of Swedish descent. That's basic genealogy. A person with 1/4 Swedish blood would also presumably also qualify for other "American of [x] descent" categories, depending on the nature of the rest of their background. I agree with your comment "I feel strongly that WM projects should reflect facts not what people profess about themselves" (which is why "Swedish American" is such a bad category name). But it's also not up to us to determine who is of Swedish descent and who is not. If they have Swedes in their family tree, they qualify.
- Even somebody with only one Swedish-born great-grandparent would be incorrectly categorized - misleading! - as American of Swedish Descent (I hope you agree), and a 1/4-Swede who calls hself Swedish American may call hself whatever h/s wants to call hself, but I feel strongly that WM projects should reflect facts not what people profess about themselves. Commons is not too tough on requiring sources to substantiate the facts, but when genealogy tells us what the facts are, let's stick to them! SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:40, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
- It really isn't up to use to come up with arbitrary distinctions as to who is a Swedish American and who is not. Someone who is 1/4 Swedish might proudly call themself a Swedish-American, while a second-generation American of 100% Swedish-extraction might simply prefer to call themself an American. But your point is an extremely good one. Frankly, the category should be "Americans of Swedish descent" because "Swedish American" is an identity that people may or may not choose to apply to themselves, and it a term that isn't always applicable when Americans are only part Swedish. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:42, 31 March 2011 (UTC)