Talk:Latin America

Missing countries on the list

Falkands Island, Guayana (non-French), Suriname. Daniel Souza (talk) 19:52, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Quebec too. 77.74.98.101 (talk) 12:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Quebec is not in Latin America, at least not according to most definitions of it. Nn88nn88 (talk) 23:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Technically, it could count, but traditionally it doesn't. I guess you could say the same thing about European nations. Evenite (talk) 05:24, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Funny how you always want to overlook Non- lEuropean Countries that are NOT in the Americas. Angola Macau,Goa,east Timor, Mozambique, equatorial guinea to name a few & by the way Quebec is not a country! What in the world is quebec canada have to do with ecuador peru? You can make a bigger case of philippines and guam as big more "latino/Hispanic' but Quebec is as white as it comes. You all want to make Argentina whiter than Canada which is absolutely abomination. In that case let's make Los Angeles Las Vegas & Texas "Latin America" then If you want to play the technicality card. Because los Angeles Is sure as hell ALOT more hispanic than quebec ever was and ever will be. Not to mention it's close to the Mexican border whereas Quebec is thousands of miles in the northeast. By the way, French is spoken in northern New England and Louisiana or are we going to count That as "Latino too"? look at how ridiculous you sound. Ku klux Klan in that region used to speak Cajun French.Even the names in the southwest are mostly Spanish yet you conveniently pretend to overlook it. 2607:FB91:184:BAE:B9C8:7498:69C3:608A (talk) 16:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Well given the fact that Quebec is not a country it's not going to be included. But yes, Quebec has heavy Latin/Latino influences as a providence. Quebec is about as "Latino" as Los Angeles. It has nothing to do with being "White" but being a descendant of a population that uses Latin languages in the Americas. There is White Non-Latino people in South America (Entire isolated German communities in Brazil and Chile), there is also Amerindian people who wouldn't be considered "Latino" either, sense they speak native languages. There is also plenty of White, African and Amerindian "Latinos". The "Latino" designator has 0 to do with race. A White German from Chile, an Amerindian Mexican,an African from Ecuador, and an Asian from Peru could all be considered "Latinos" if they all speak Spanish even though they are all different races. 68.189.2.14 (talk) 21:41, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

This article is about Latin America, a region that comprises countries of Americas that mainly speak languages derived from Latin (in its contemporary definition). The inhabitants of Latin America are Latin Americans because their country is part of Latin America, not because they have some specific cultural, ethnic or phenotipic feature (other than the origin of the main language of their country). The specific cultural and ethnic background of Latin America varies from country to country.

What you are talking about has more relation with how Latino Americans may be defined (individuals from America with origins in Latin American countries), and they are covered in these articles: Hispanic and Latino (ethnic categories), Hispanic and Latino Americans, Latino (demonym). Linkcisco (talk) 18:59, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Belize 2607:FB91:184:BAE:B9C8:7498:69C3:608A (talk) 16:29, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Belize's language is English. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 15:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Those countries use mainly Dutch, English, or a language based in them. Since they are not a Romance language, they usually are not included in Latin America, but in the third definition of this article they are properly included. Linkcisco (talk) 19:12, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Latin America.

Those areas of America whose official languages are Spanish and Portuguese derived from Latin. 157.47.15.27 (talk) 14:47, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

And French (also Latin based) 71.9.141.71 (talk) 16:50, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Improve sentence logic/grammar, and add countries' languages

The sentence "In addition, countries not former colonial powers in the region, but many of which had populations immigrate, there are part of ECLAC, including Italy [...]" is not structurally sound (and also hard to read).

Suggested: "In addition, a number of countries not former ..., but many of which had..., [delete:there] are part of ECLAC, including ..." To be implemented (or further developed) by someone who can verify that the proposal has the correct meaning and is well formed.

Also, the table of countries should include a column of (dominant) language, since that is what assigns countries to the region names in question in the first place! 84.215.2.80 (talk) 20:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

"LATAM" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect LATAM has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 23 § LATAM until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 19:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Overstatement of French and US influence on the term "Latin America"

The explanation of the term Latin America has a much more reasonable and practical explanation than simply that France told all the people in a place where they had very very limited control/influence over to simply adopt this new identity, and everyone just blindly did. Even in Latin American countries where people were threatened with guns to accept a national identity, there were many that didn't and died so they wouldn't have to; please keep this in mind. The people of this region of the world are not sheep.

There is a word that existed during the empire of the Iberians in Latin America called "Ladino" which was used back in Iberia to refer to Christian Iberians who were either of mixed origin ancestrally or culturally with people considered foreign to the Iberians; usually people of other religions. This word transitioned into the empire of the Iberians in Latin America. This is MUCH MORE likely to be the origin of the word, than anything to do with France. You could argue that France helped further popularize the concept, but they did not "invent" it.

Please refer to the following article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladino_people Historybuff545 (talk) 19:22, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Do you have any source for this claim? Moxy🍁 20:08, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

I included a Wikipedia article that links to sources at the bottom of the original post, but I can provide two more:

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indio_ladino

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_ladino

I'm trying to find the paper that talks about the use of the word Ladino in the context of using it for Muslims and Jewish people within the Iberian Peninsula, but I can't find the source for that anymore. If I come across it again, I'll share it.

The definition of "Ladino" aligns almost perfectly with the modern definition of the word Latino within Latin America. (Definition of Ladino: https://dle.rae.es/ladino) People in Latin America use it to describe the masses of Latin America, but often exclude secluded/isolated indigenous communities from that. For example, they use terms like "Indio" to distinguish between them and the culturally/ancestrally mixed majority.

Some governments within Latin America (typically central) even still use the "Ladino" title on their national IDs as an ethnic group. Check the image. (Source: https://agn.gt/mas-de-388-mil-jovenes-deberan-tramitar-su-primer-dpi-este-ano/) They give separate titles for indigenous groups as well.

I think just being realistic and practical, if it was known the Iberians used this word to refer to people who essentially became Iberianized "mestizos" (note that now, Latin America is dominated by the mixed majority, so it is now a "Ladino America") within the times of the empire, long before the birth of Napoleon, why would we think The French had anything to do with the invention of the term? The French and American element just seems more like narrative driven wishful thinking. Again, you could argue they somewhat contributed to further popularizing it for their benefit, but I think that is as far as it can go.

All I'm trying to say, is that at a minimum within the article, this should be acknowledged as a much stronger possibility, and the conviction that France and USA had anything to do with this, should be toned down by a lot. Historybuff545 (talk) 02:37, 3 August 2024 (UTC)