File talk:Map-Hispanophone World.png/Archive1

Hispanophone world map

I'm not working on this map anymore. Most of the misunderstanding come from the unclear definition of "native speaker", please work to improve the legend before to ask anyone to improve the map. Yug (talk) 21:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

• See Image talk:Map-Hispanophone World.png#1/ Improve the legend first ! for more.

Request

Hi! I saw your picture for the Hispanophone world map. Could you make the entire archipelago light green, please? You just highlighted only Luzon. Thanks. --w:User:Christopher Sundita 00:56, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Re the same map, I noticed some of the comments had slightly odd grammar (and "enter" doesn't mean the same as French "entre" :) so I took the liberty of fixing it. Hairy Dude 18:17, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Re the same map. I've been to Brazil and found that the entire population can understand Spanish and knows how to speak in a manner to be understood by a Spanish speaker. This suggests to me at least some shading of light color recognizing this fact. (As well as Portugal itself. Perhaps Macau is too big of a stretch now since it has been fully taken over by the Chinese to become their Monte Carlo/Las Vegas equivalent).

Also, for the same map, I'd suggest that New York City has a large population of Spanish speakers and should be recognized. Little Colombia in Queens, New York City comes to mind as a place where even the billboards are in Spanish everywhere.

Also, for the Francophone map, the US state of Louisiana officialy recognizes French as a secondary language. The entire state probably deserves the light shade of color indicating so, similar to New Mexico for the Spanish map although not with the dark color that NM deserves. (although the small square is there, which is good)

You are greatly mistaken about Brazilians knowing Spanish. The percentage of the Brazilian population that can actually speak proper Spanish or have any formal training in that language is at best insignificant. Portuguese and Spanish happen to be however two very closely related languages that are largely mutually intelligible. Most likely, when you visited Brazil and spoke Spanish to the natives, they either replied in Brazilian Portuguese properly or in some form of spontaneous (i.e. unsystematic and not formally learned) Spanish-Portuguese mix like portuñol, but you probably couldn't tell the difference and mistook what they were saying as being Spanish. 200.177.11.126 22:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Spanish language Map

Hi! I'm writing you because there have been some complains regarding Image:Map-Hispanophone World.png, concerning the northwestern Brazil. Please, take a look at the talk page. Thank you very much, Mariano 07:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

We all know this map is Aztlan-mongering bullshit. IP Address 07:04, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for this construction opinion. Improve the legend is an other way use by peaceful and efficient people. Yug (talk) 17:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

1/ Improve the legend first !

Hello, I'm the former maker of this map. This map was [is?] a disputed one because of its unclear legend, and the unclear definition of "Native speaker", and "Hispanophone [native] country" / "Heavy hispanophone minority" and "Important minority". This had [have?] to be clearified before to work on this map, otherway the map will change every week. I'm not able to do this work, but I think :

• "Hispanophone [native] country" : More than 50% are spanish native speakers, dreaming using spanish, living using spanish, etc.
• "Heavy hispanophone minority" : between 20% to 50% of the country people are spanish native speakers, dreaming using spanish, living using spanish, etc.
• "Important minority" : about 10-20 % of native speakers.
• About 5% it's a community like many others in the country.

After, if we admit a more clear legend like this, or an other legend, we can work (almost) peacefully on this map. Who is able to choice this, because We have to improve the legend first. Yug (talk) 17:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

2/ Collect opinions => facts ?

In a second time, we have to collect opinions to obtain accurate facts.

• Collect these opinions from en:Talk:Spanish_language, and copy/past in the section :

* Section and information about the map, collected to [[:commons:Image talk:Map-Hispanophone World.png]] ~~~~

Evident countries

List shows countries obviously spanish speaker and fully (more than 80-90%) spanish speaker :

• Spain, Chile, Argentina, Mexico, Cuba, Peru, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Venezuela, Ecuador.... <to be completed>

The Falkland Islands are colored green as though they are a part of Argentina and use Spanish as the official language. This, however, is not the case, and the Falklands should not be included on this map (for the sake of accuracy... this shouldn't be a political issue). --72.76.157.163 02:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Northern Brazil opinions

I noticed that the world map featured in the article has the western half of the northern Brazilian state of Amazonas colored in light green, indicating a "sizeable minority of Spanish speakers". That is factually inaccurate and should be corrected. The aforementioned colored area is actually a very sparsely populated region of Brazil inhabited mostly by native Amerindians or isolated rural communities of mixed European/Amerindian descent. Most people in those communities are native speakers of either some Amerindian language or some form of uneducated Brazilian vernacular (a semi-creolized version of standard Brazilian Portuguese). One would be hard-pressed to find even a handful of people in that area with the ability to speak and/or understand Spanish, much less a "sizeable minority" of native Spanish speakers. 00:18, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I never noticed before! I'll contact the creator of the Map for references. Mariano(t/c) 07:04, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Paraguay opinions

According to Demographics of Paraguay, only 75% of the population speaks Spanish, as opposed to the 90% that speak Guarani; thereby meaning that Spanish is not "the main language" in the country. Because of this shouldn't Paraguay be in green instead of dark green on the map? --Krsont 20:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, I doubt only 75% speaks Spanish, and Spanish is actually more official than guaraní oregarding official papers. Mariano(t/c) 09:54, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Turkey and Israel opinions

• Turkey 150,000 of 60 000 000.
• Israel 100,000 of 7 005 400 israelinas = 1 spanish speaker for 70 isralelians. See en:Israel

0,25% and 1,43% on each case. Hardly significant minorities. --JorgeGG 18:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

United States of America opinions

Why an earth is the entire USA Higlighted in Light Green. Over 80% of the Spanish Speaking Population is Concentrated in the Handful of States. I was living in Montana, and the Spanish Speaking Population is a Mere 1-2%, a large % of these are "Seasonal Workers".

As I have said Numerous times, the Majority of US-Born Hispanics are English Dominant. Spanish in the USA, is Pre-dominantly an Immigrant language concentrated in Immigrant Hubs/Enclaves/Regions (EG - US South West/South Florida Etc...).

US-States (Hispanic Population Via States) - NOTE "US-Hispanic" Does not = Spanish Speaker)

Hispanic Popualtion in the United States:

New Mexico (823,352) 43.27% California (12,442,626) 34.72% Texas (7,781,211) 34.63% Arizona (1,608,698) 28.03% Nevada (531,929) 22.80% Colorado (878,803) 19.10% Florida (3,304,832) 19.01% New York (3,076,697) 15.96% New Jersey (1,294,422) 14.90% Illinois (1,774,551) 13.94% Connecticut (371,818) 10.63% Utah (253,073) 10.45% Rhode Island (111,823) 10.35% Oregon (343,278) 9.56% Idaho (123,900) 8.88% District of Columbia (47,258) 8.53% Washington (526,667) 8.48% Kansas (220,288) 8.06%

[1]

You Can see from the details, that over 85% of Spanish are Concentrated in just 10 States in the USA, predominantly the US-Southwest + Florida/Illinois/New York & New Jersey, And even within those states the Spanish Speaking Population is Higly regionalized (EG-South Florida / South California / SFV / Part of NY Etc...)

I hope you will change the Map (Green shade), and mention though there are 32 Million Spanish Speakers in the US, they are Concentrated in several states + it is predominantly a immigrant language... This would help clear up.clarify the article.

Let me end by mentioning, Its Ironic Wikipedia has been deemed as Highly "Americanized", however this Article is Overly "Hispanicanized" - The facts are subjective @ best and erronoes at Worst. The "Editor/Administrators" seemt o be more concerned about the Spanish Speaking population in Non-Spanish Dominant Countries, if the Article is about SPANISH then FOCUS on Spanish-Domiannt Countries.

Finally another thing, really the 3 Million span speakers in the Phillipines (were did that figure come from), as for the WESTERN SAHARA, just check out the Article on WESTERN SAHARA on Wikipedia (English), the is hardly any mention of Spanish, in fact Arabic is the Soul Official Language, followed by Local Languages, there were 20,000 Spanish Citizen, most of whom left when it was De-Colonized.

IN GENERAL THIS "SPANISH LANGUAGE" ARTICLE Has Factual errors/and data is subjective at best.

Suggest The Mods + SENIOR MODS look + this and Change the Article + them LOCK/RESTRICTS the Article from Future Edits.

Finally within Latin America, there are approximately +40 Million Native Language Speakers, in Some Countries, EG (Peru / Bolivia / Paraguay - Etc...) they form a large percentage of the Population.... No Mention of them???

Look forward to your response - globalnetw@aol.com (or Reply via Wiki)....

Thanks Again

Map of Hispanophone World

I thought that mapmakers should be aware of this debate going on at Spanish Language. SpiderMMB 01:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I think the map of the hispanophone world should be changed. I don't know when it happened, but the previous map only highlighted certain states within the U.S. I think Spanish in the U.S. is important and should be documented, but this map is highly misleading. Spanish is not spoken extensively in every American state, but this map leaves that impression. Judging from this map, it would seem that Spanish is more important in Montana and North Dakota than it is in Brazil or certain European countries, which I seriously doubt is the case. In my opinion the map should be colored, at most, different shades of green to reflect the top 10 Spanish speaking states in the U.S. To highlight the entire United States, however, is very inaccurate.

I think this map might be a good starting place: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Map-Hispanophone_World%28temporary%29.png. In the meantime I think there should be suggestions as to how to alter the map (I went to wikicommons and have no idea how) or whether the map should be deleted until it can be portrayed more accurately.SpiderMMB 02:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

The way that it is currently, the map makes a three-way distinction and colors American states differently. I don't think that the way it is indicates that Spanish is spoken extensively in every state. It could have changed since you put your comment, but I think the map is currently fine in that it doesn't give that impression of the United States. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 04:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

We're talking about the same map. The problem, I think, is that all the American states are colored some shade of green. In states where next to no Spanish is spoken, the color should be grey like other non-Spanish speaking places. Having a light shade of green for all of those American states while places like Europe and Brazil are grey creates the impression that Spanish is spoken more in those American states than in those other countries, which isn't the case. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SpiderMMB (talk • contribs) 09:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

Oh, I see. Well, that's certainly an idea. What do other people think? Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 19:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Well Spanish isnt spoken in Brazil or Europe outside Spain and Andorra either so they should all be grey including all US states without a significant and sourceablke Spanish speaking population, SqueakBox 19:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting that Brazil or Europe are Spanish-speaking. What I meant is that certain places in Brazil and countries in Europe probably have higher concentrations of Spanish speakers than some of the U.S. states shaded the lightest green. This creates the wrong impression that those light-green American states have higher concentrations of Spanish-speakers. I agree with you that they should all be grey except the U.S. states with significant and sourecable Spanish-speaking populations, such as New Mexico, Texas, and California. This page should provide a good starting point.SpiderMMB 21:52, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've reverted the map to its earlier version. There was dissastisfaction expressed with it here as well as here and on this talk page. No one seems to be able to edit it, so I've reverted it back for the time being to a less controversial version. Hopefully someone can improve upon it.SpiderMMB 19:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

You realize that the map you reverted to has the same problem that you addressed just above, right? Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 20:48, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

It's not as pronounced. The only notable Spanish-language emphasis is placed on Southwestern U.S. states and Florida.SpiderMMB 00:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply: I removed the new map you have provided, due to it's giving out misleading information. We already have a map with fact details and informations, why change the truth. --Cajamarca express 12:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

If you bothered to read this talk page you would know why. There's an entire discussion above. The map inaccurately gives the portrayal that Spanish is spoken more widely in certain U.S. States than in other parts of the world, which is not true. In states where it is hardly spoken at all (like Maryland) it should be grey and not light green. This map gives the impression more people speak Spanish in the Dakotas than in the two counrties that borden Spain, France and Portugal, which I doubt is the case.

I'll repeat it again, I have nothing against the U.S. being represented on this map, especially as it has the fifth-largest Spanish speaking population in the world. But the map as it stands is grossly misleading. I'll provide links, again, to two talk pages, here as well as here that echo these sentiments. If the EARLIER (note, NOT new) map I've provided inaccurately lists Western Sahara, then fine, it is inaccurate. But the current map needs to be changed also. People have also voiced concern that the shaded parts of western Brazil, which mostly contains Amazon territory, should not be shaded either.

Can we intelligently discuss this or is it going to turn into a childish revert war like the Phillippines?SpiderMMB 01:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

...So you reverted to a map that has the same problem but is wrong in other ways? That sounds like you're going backwards. I suggest we keep the newer map until someone can edit it. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 18:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Still waiting for the Map of Hispanophobe World.

Why are the United States all coloured in Green? I thought Spanish was mostly spoken around New York, Chicago and in the southern states. What if you coloured the states where a large majority of the people study Spanish as a second language a different colour? —the preceding unsigned comment is by 211.28.74.218 (talk • contribs)

It depends on the granularity you seek. Why not counties instead of states? Why not cities? Anyhow, it something to propose.--Mariano(t/c) 13:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm of the opinion that the U.S. should be represented on the map but accurately -- the current map creates a big misrepresentation. I think SqueakBox and I agreed it should only be places with a high number or percentage of Spanish speakers. Based upon this page I would suggest lightly shading Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. NY, FL, and IL have high numbers but I'm guessing they're around metropolitan areas, so maybe a green dot in NYC, Chicago, and Miami would do. The problem is changing the actually map, it's not as easy as editing an entry and unfortunately I haven't had time to look into it. I contacted Christopher Sundita, who is an administrator and has edited the map in the past, but never got a reply. SpiderMMB 03:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the map is small enough that coloring only individual cities or counties is a bit extreme. States is fine. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 17:40, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at the maps for Italophone world and Francophone world to see what I mean by dots (actually more like squares). These maps are the same size and template as the hispanophone world, and they show up just fine. The thing is, I think the most important thing for the map is accuracy. SpiderMMB 01:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

All right, but I still think that, especially in the southwest, marking individual American cities only would not be demonstrative of how widespread Spanish is in those areas. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 03:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I agree about the Southwest. If you look back I actually said I think the entire states of TX, NM, AZ, and CA should be shaded (lightly, in order to indicate it is still not the majority language there). SpiderMMB 03:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Then we are in agreement. Onward! Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 05:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Why is the entire US coloured light green? I thought that Spanish was mostly spoken in the South. This map is obviously bias.

Fully agree, SqueakBox 14:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Also agree, and moving this to the bottom and including it with the rest of the discussion. SpiderMMB 01:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Location of Canary islands

On 21:50, 25 July 2006 user Satesclop edited the location of the Canary islands. However, the previous version was, in fact, correct. -Samulili 08:10, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Falklands

Why are the Falklands dark green? Since they've been inhabited by British settlers for at least two centuries now, I can't imagine there's a sizeable Hispanic population there. Not getting into the battle of who it should belong to, but as the current population stands saying the country is heavily Hispanic strikes me as really inaccurate. 69.122.114.225 18:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)