Talk:Puerto Ricans/Archive 1

Archive 1

Language

I found this section particularly incorrect. It is not clear who uses such terms as “lunchiar” which I’ve never heard before. Almorzar is the correct term, at least in Puerto Rican Spanish. I believe no one uses this word in Puerto Rico, so it should be specified if this term is of Puerto Rican-American or “spanglish” origin. Also, “goleta english” is not a dialect. It is a colloquial term to describe when someone does not speak English well. Also, it should only be stated that Spanish in Puerto Rico has many words and phrases coming from English, due to US influence of over one hundred years in the Island. Solcita (talk) 18:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I have undone an edit that eliminated the idea that since 1901 English is taught and spoken throughout the island. That reference is followed by data from the ACS that clarifies that a large number of Puerto Ricans speak little, no, or less than perfect English. The data is not incompatible with the idea that was attempted to be stricken. Pr4ever (talk) 23:32, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Merge

An article called Puertorrican people has recently been created. I would like reasons for both articles to exist. As I see it both articles could be merged into one article. Since Puerto Rican was created first and is the more common/accepted spelling/pronnunciation I believe that Puertorrican people should be merged into it. Any ideas, thoughts? Joelito 04:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the articles should be merged. There is no justification for this information to be split in different locations. Consolidation will provide a more authorative source for locating this information and allow contributors to more easily participate without having to make redundant entries.--Samunoz1 20:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

"Puertorrican" atrocious spelling

"Puertorrican" is, to me, an atrocious spelling of the word. The articles may be merged, but I'd redirect the misspellings to "Puerto Rican" demf 17:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Personally, no. Puertorrican is "spanglish" for Puertorriqueno(a). Also, Boriqua (not boricua) is the proper spelling. The island's Taino name is Borinquen.

Remember, Escuela (school) and Esquela (announcement of a death, obituary) do not share same definition or pronunciation (some people pronounce it the same).

Note: Words requiring special symbols (ex. Taino) was not inserted because I don't remember how. ^^

Alexzandro Rivera Aug. 31, 2006

---

Also, Boriqua (not boricua) is the proper spelling. The island's Taino name is Borinquen.

Since these are Taino words of which there is no known written language we can only approximate the spelling as understood by the Spanish. Boriken/Borinquen and Boricua/Boriqua are all acceptable spellings in common usage.--Samunoz1 21:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

"Boriqua" is grammatically wrong in Spanish...

Creo que debería figurar que en español también es correcto decir portorriqueño.

Keep as it

Hi, I would like to recommend it stay its own article. I found it because I wanted to know the origin of the term Boricua, which is one quarter of my personal heritage (grandfather on mother's side). Even he didn't know who Puerto Ricans are referred to as Boricuas, and Cubans are only referred to as Cubanos. Same with Cuban people I have asked - no one knew. So having this be a separate article helped me to understand the term itself without having to wade through material not directly relevant to my search. 67.49.8.191 23:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)Cheeop

There is an article on the term Boricua. I'm not sure I see the relevance of the term on the merger discussion.--Samunoz1 18:37, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Roberto Clemente

To Whom it may concern: There is no mention of one big PUERTO RICAN : ROBERTO CLEMENTE —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.118.56.146 (talk • contribs) .

The Honorable Clemente has his own page. He need not have a specific mention in a general discussion about Puerto Rican people.--Samunoz1 19:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I think he means a pic of him on the box to the top right. If so I agree.

Reorganize

There is a need to separate the sections relating to Puerto Rico and Puerto Ricans in the United States (outside of Puerto Rico) (or what I call Stateside Puerto Ricans). Those sections relating to Puerto Rico should be incorporated into the article on Puerto Rico. A new article title, Puerto Ricans in the United States (Stateside Puerto Ricans) should be created to include sections on the migration to the US and Puerto Ricans communities in the US.--Prpolicy 18:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree that sections solely dealing with the Island of Puerto Rico should be moved to that article. No need to duplicate effort and content, not to mention clutter. However, I think "Stateside" Puerto Ricans should be kept in the Puerto Rican article. Again the goal is to make this page one stop authorative spot for all Puerto Rican people. --Samunoz1 18:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

What?

The beginning of the 2nd paragraph could be improved. Please read the following:

In other parts of the Spanish-speaking world, depending on the presence of native indigenous populations that existed prior to European colonization and subsequent introduction of Sub-Saharan West African slave trade and the immigrations from Europe, Puerto Rico's census in 2000, reflects that the population is said to be (81%) of European (Spanish) descent according to U.S. census records.

There is no elaboration or clarification of why the sentence starts with "In other parts of the Spanish-speaking world". We are talking specifically about Puerto Rico here. The paragraph mentions indigenous populations, European colonization, and slave trade and somehow haphazardly continues onto 2000 US census. It almost seems like something was accidentally chopped of by another contributor. I'll most likely edit it if the original contributor does not fix it.--Samunoz1 19:25, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Expand Puerto Rican migration template

Please add new articles on other migrations to Puerto Rico. There were Greeks, Italians, Maltese and Portuguese settlers. The articles in need are taken down for not "appearing" in the first place (red links). Let's get it started and include them in the template. I re-edit a few things in the article, but be careful on how "hate groups viewed" Puerto Ricans, not as people is more appropriate and sensitive than "as animals". To type it in is going to pull people's chains or push emotional buttons, so I don't want that in here on an encyclopediac article. The article hasn't stated racism against Puerto Ricans and Latinos as a whole has been on the wane, but the stereotypes depict Puerto Ricans are a problem, like how some view Jews and black people in horribly distorted ways. + 63.3.14.1 08:48, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. There were definitely Portuguese immigrants. In fact, my great-great grandfather was a Portuguese settler, and my first surname is Portuguese. I've also heard about English and Croatian immigrants (In fact, the surname Wiscovitch can be found in the island, and is said to come from Croats who immigrated to PR in the early 19th century).--67.224.249.69 (talk) 20:20, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

NPOV issues (e.g. woe is the immigrant Puerto Rican; discrimination everywhere)

Please, keep the bleeding hearts out of the ethnicity articles. I grew up with Puerto Ricans in my Middle and High schools in Hartford County, CONN. I can attest to good and bad sides from interacting with them, the things they have brought to and taken from my state. The good things you don't have a problem hearing; neither do I. The fact remains is that they have dilapidated the City of Hartford and environs, a Puerto Rican mayor further proof of the blind eyes to this issue. Hartford was a safe and clean place, progressive and in the lead. Hartford is now stagnant and backwards, with vandalism and violence strewn across the streets. Notice how the culprits are not African-American, nor were they ever? My grandmother's family founded Hartford, so all we are asking for is respect. Who are the victims in this instance? Is this the price to pay for welcoming you into our homes? Please, get over yourselves! Les Invisibles 07:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from soapboxing... that is not what we are here for. If you have any reliable and verifiable sources on this regards, please feel free to include them. Otherwise, please keep your opinions for your blog or KKK bulletin board, not wikipedia. Thanks! --Cerejota 03:14, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

You know Les Invisibles actually proves something; that Puerto Ricans live in Puerto Rico. His senseless ranting just makes it clear that you have to separate Puerto Ricans born in the states from those born in the island. The unjust stereotypes that some people have toward Puerto Ricans should be mentioned and it should be stated that those stereotypes actually originated and directed towards Puerto Ricans from the states. The bottom line is a Puerto Rican-American is not the same. He might share some of the values and culture but he lives in a different environment and speaks a different main language. Pveagle019 1:12, 13 Jul 2007 (UTC)

Mexican-Puerto Rican rivalry?

Is there an known rivalry between the two, as I've heard people from both groups saying that they find it particularly offensive to be mistaken for the other group? If so, should this be added into the article? I ask this because on the article of Selena, it's mentioned that when Jennifer Lopez was selected to play the character of Selena, there was a brief controversy because of JLo's Puerto Rican heritage and Selena's Mexican heritage.Jlujan69 21:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Puerto Rican Citizenship

I belive there is a misunderstanding, Maybe someone should do a bit more research and edit a bit the "Political and international status" section. Puerto Ricans do not have the same natural-born citizenship guaranteed by the constitution that people born in the states do. they have a second-class citizenship, which congress can take away as long as puerto rico is not a state.

--Someone google up territorial clause, and puerto rico and citizenship

The Jones-Shafroth Act of 1917 granted all persons born in Puerto Rico American citizenship. There is only one class of American citizenship, and all American citizens have the same rights, whether one is born in the States, born in a territory or naturalized. The only distinction is that only native-born citizens can be President. Whether those born in territories are considered native-born is still an unanswered question as all presidents so far were born in the Union, although Barry Goldwater who was born in Arizona before statehood and John McCain who was born in the Panama Canal Zone challenged for the presidency without major questions on their eligibility.

Your point that Puerto Ricans are not guaranteed citizenship by the Consitution is an interesting one. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees citizenship to all persons "born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction of". Whether "United States" refers only to the 50 States or includes the territories over which the Union has jurisdiction is an issue that has not been challenged and most likely will never be, as it is unlikely that the statute which grants citizenship to Puerto Ricans will be repealed. Kraikk 08:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

There is debate around this question, and it is a political, not legal one. Legally, US citizenship of Puerto Ricans born in Puerto Rico ceased to be statutory after the first generation: Jones-Shafroth Act of 1917 not only extended citizenship but also explicitly included Puerto Rico under the Fourteenth Amendment's "subject to the jurisdiction of" clause (the Foraker Act explicitly excluded Puerto Rico in this sense, while extending the full force of federal law: problems in the Courts regarding citizen rights in part led to the Jones-Shafroth Act itself!). This is why only Puerto Rican adults born before the Act came to force had the option to not be US citizens: no Puerto Rican can legally resign US Citizenship to become a Puerto Rican citizen. This question is beyond settled in the Courts and in Law.

To date, no Puerto Rican US citizen has been denationalized, or even attempted to be denationalized, and naturalization laws that apply to children of foreign citizens born in the States of the USA apply to those born in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. There is not a single verifiable and reliable source that states that the US citizenship is in any legal sense a "second-class" citizenship, or even an statutory one.

A debate does exists as to the NATURE of the jurisdiction, and this is obviously a political, not legal question.

Also a political question is the issue of access to federal benefits, presidential voting rights and other such questions. Interestingly, this same debate goes on in other jurisdictions, including the District of Columbia.

We could have a section or page on properly sourced material on this debate, but we have to be careful in wikipedia not to soapbox for one or the other POV. And we must also be careful to separate the legal, de jure or de facto, from the political.--Cerejota 03:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Since 2007 Puerto Ricans have the Puerto Rican citizenship recognized by the government of Puerto Rico. [1]--Royptorico 18:25, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Since Puerto Rico now gives out Puerto Rican citizenship certificates, I think it should be noted that anyone who is considered a Puerto Rican citizen is a Puerto Rican. Therefore, children born in the United States with one parent born in Puerto Rico should be known as Puerto Ricans since the government of Puerto Rico recognizes those people as Puerto Rican citizens.

Senorcanadiense 19:12, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe the article already states that anyone born in Puerto Rico or has Puerto Rican parents are called Puerto Rican. It even goes so far as to mention that they are rarely called Puerto Rican-Americans but rather just Puerto Ricans. They have U.S. citizenship as well. Kman543210 (talk) 23:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

"related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 16:55, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Patrilineal ancestreal of African Males in Puerto Rico is 20%,European males 5%!!!

If Puerto Ricans are definently of European descent as said on the Puerto Rican page. Then why is it the Mitrochodreal DNA (from the maternal ancestor) was found to be 27% and the Patrilineal (of the male ancestor) is of 20%, in fact the lowest percentile of DNA os from European ancestors. There was actually more DNA of Taino ancestors than any other type of dna. If you type in the topic of Puerto Rican in answers.com you will find the actual findings from the National Science Foundation. This study was done in in 2003 . This was also written properly until someone actually changed the Puerto Rican page on 21 of May , in 2007. They also spelled Puerto Rican absolutely wrong. Why would anyone change the numbers to Say European are they ashamed of something??

There were an estimated 20-50,000 Taino Indians in Puerto Rico in 1508, 4,000 by 1515, 60 by 1554. Disease, forced labor and genocide eradicated the native indigenous population. Although many Puerto Ricans may have distant ancestry written in their DNA, this does not mean that most Puerto Ricans register as Indigenous Taino.

I do not know the estimates on African slaves but the number of slaves in Puerto Rico rose from 1,500 in 1530 to 15,000 by 1555. Eventually this stopped.

Puerto Rico saw more European immigration then any other group. New opportunities, the Royal Decree of Graces of 1815, Franco Francisco, wars all played a part. Puerto Rico was home not only to migrants from Spain but immigrants from Portugal, France, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Malta, Germany, the Netherlands, and even modern day Lebanon, Syria, Palestine. The island was purposely white washed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.1.37 (talk) 10:52, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Puerto Rico Canarians

Sorry the Puerto Rican Canarian article shall be added to this page. Canarians (Canary Islanders in Spanish) emigrated to Puerto Rico in big numbers and specially in the north the Canarian ascendancy is very noticeable in the "Guanche" words and in some candies like the tosted corn flour with sugar called "El Gofio" common in Canary Islands. The term "guagua" instead of bus or buseta came from canary island also. It is very important to complete the history of this important inmigration to Puerto Rico. -signed by an anon IP

I corrected the spelling of his/her comment above me (my apologies), but there's a special need to describe the impact of Canary Islander settlement in Puerto Rico. They are part of Spain for over five centuries, but the Canarians are a subculture differing from those in Castille Spain or in the mainland (Europe) since the Canaries are off the coast of Africa by 200 miles. Canary Islanders are especially selected by the Spanish empire in their 400-year rule of Puerto Rico, the same way Spain picked some Azoreans from the Azores islands but they are under Portugal.

I came to notice the Corsican immigration to Puerto Rico an ideal method of describing a people settled the island. Corsica is a legal part of France since 1769, but are of Italo-Mediterranean origins with a close kinship with Italy and their language is modeled on Italic spoken by Italians but the Corsicans are related with Sardinians in the island of Sardinia under Italy to the south. The Spaniards knew the Corsicans are used to island life, so were the Azoreans and Canary Islanders in Puerto Rico. + 71.102.53.48 (talk) 08:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Nationality

It needs to be included in the article. Puerto Ricans form a nationality, they are not a tribe or a community. This needs to be clarified.--Royptorico 18:21, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Interesting thought. Look at the Spanish American page as they act in PC fashion and did not clasify us as Spanish American white. The worst part is we argue amongst ourselves when even the Dominican page does'nt have these problems shame. We really need help getting along among all of us no matter what we classify as, and respect each others opinion .Others have aready identified us for themselves.

The problem is Puerto Rico is not a country, and it never was. A general culture exist, but no more then the American south. How would you label that? Puerto Rican-American?

History of Latinos and Hispanics

Please consider contributing to the article entitled History of Latinos and Hispanics. Thank you! --JuanMuslim ^1m 02:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Us/Canada

Why is it that countries such as Puerto Rico, Cuba, and other former Spanish colonies have 'people', while Canada and the United States, former English colonies, noly have 'demographics'? 12.218.145.112 02:06, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Olga San Juan

The article states a Puerto Rican is a person BORN in Puerto Rico, and lists (with pic) Olga San Juan as an example. Yet Olga San Juan's article states she was born in Brooklyn, which I believe is correct. Either the picture goes or the text gets corrected. As I believe most people will agree a Puerto Rican is also one born of Puerto Rican parent/s (that is born of someone who was born in Puerto Rico). I am correcting the text to reflect this (Or diagree and let the war begin - heehee) By the way, this was probably also the most likely reason Olga San Juan was included in the pics to start with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob99324 (talk • contribs) 06:01, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

True..It'll be sorted out..read more on her and realised that she wasnt raised in PR which thought she was.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.172.36.59 (talk) 19:33, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

The Language Connection

Removed distracting language statements. The statements do not add any value to the article. If anything they may bring forth confusion. At a minimum they distract from the subject matter of the article. So the two statements/statement fragments regarding language were removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob99324 (talk • contribs) 23:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Section titled Boricua needs serious editing

This section needs to be corrected in order to meet a more rigorous standard. Right now it is not written in an encyclopedic manner. The references are also not correctly integrated and there seems to be a unexplained reference to a Taíno language website that is unrelated to the sentence where it appears.--Lawrlafo (talk) 19:46, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree. I am going to edit this now, actually. It looks like someone took a fairly neutral and informative section about the root of Boriken that didn't have any citations and used it to editorialize his/her dislike of Puerto Ricans. You can still see the original entry in there, however. I am going to cut out the crap and look for a good source for the meaning of Boriken. Dwharrington (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:11, 11 November 2009 (UTC).

Sotomayor?

How can any article about Puerto Ricans not mention Sonia Sotomayor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.243.26.24 (talk) 19:16, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, most of the prose here preceeds her latest achievements. However, she is broadly featured in Puerto Ricans in the United States. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

DNA section needs to be simplified/explained

Raw data with no explanation is useless. So the DNA test tell me the majority of Puerto Ricans have an Indigenous ancestor of some kind. What about some more explaining? I know it's pretty obvious Puerto Rico is a mostly multiracial society but it's pretty obvious genetics for most lean way more to the European/White side of things than the Black, Indigenous, or Asian. That should be explained in more detail. It's not called the Whitest island in the Caribbean for nothing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.111.19.166 (talk) 13:15, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Protection of Article

I am sick and tired of seeing this article vandalized but some idiot. I am requesting a formal protection request today. Enough is enough!--XLR8TION (talk) 23:31, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Just a question; the page was vandalized because of unneeded changes of Regions with significant populations? JMBZ-12 (talk) 16:36, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

That question has to go to the vandal; only he/she can answer why he/she vandalized the article. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 03:39, 26 January 2011 (UTC), and I approve this message.

What if the vandal does not answer his question? 63.245.95.2 (talk) 13:27, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Patrilineal DNa of male African Ancestors is 20% , 5% is of European ancestors!

""less than 5% were shown to have had a male African ancestor, which explains the abundance of European surnames within Puerto Ricans (tradition calls for children to receive their father’s surname). Nevertheless, the study concluded that Native American (Arawak/Taíno) or/and African ancestry are common among Puerto Ricans, even those who identify as “White”, after four centuries of intermarriage between the island's racial groups. However, the studies did prove that the most abundant chromosomes in Puertoricans are, indeed, of white European ancestry." This statement is false!!!! Got to answers.com to find out about Patrilineal DNA.

I do not know who wrote this but the study of has the male ancester of African orgin to be as high as 20% not less than 5% . also for the female of African descent it is as high as 27%. Many of your darker brtheren found this to be absolutely insulting. If you want you can go to his website http://cacreview.blogspot.com/2005/01/taino-dna-studies-in-puerto-rico.html, among countless others to realize that we are comprised of half native blood the other half African not mostly European ancestry.Puerto Ricans are indeed of white ancestry is completely absurd. I am a Professor of caribeean history and Boricua myself .According to the study funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation, 61 percent of all Puerto Ricans have Amerindian mitochondrial DNA, 27 percent have African and 12 percent Caucasian. (Nuclear DNA, or the genetic material present in a gene’s nucleus, is inherited in equal parts from one’s father and mother. Mitochondrial DNA is inherited only from one’s mother and does not change or blend with other materials over time.) The study concluded most Puerto Ricans are comprised mostly of Native Taino dna not European!

Patrilineal Y chromosome, showed that 75% of all Puerto Ricans possessed a male European ancestor, 20% had a male African ancestor and less than 5% were shown to have had a male Amerindian ancestor. These combinations vary as Puerto Ricans can be of any variety of combined ancestries. Native American (Arawak/Taino) or/and African ancestry are common among "white" Puerto Ricans after four centuries of intermarriage between the island's racial groups. Dr. Jose Tomas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.238.242 (talk • contribs) 22 May 2007‎

None of this can be true because in order to get numbers from a mixed-race population, you have to test ALL of the people, not a small sampling. Also, while some try their best to make PR's white, there are other forces trying to make them natives when anyone even slightly familiar with PR history knows that most of the natives were killed off before the nation began! The one group that both sides keep trying ti minimize is the one group that not only makes up most most of the non-white (as if the Spaniards were ever pure anything) element of the PR's and almost 100% of it's culture - the African!

I do not need DNA tests to show that PR culture is African from the food, to the dancing, to the music and yes - even the Spanish language! I'll let you PhD's look that one up! As for PR's continuing to chase that mythical Taino dream - keep dreaming! There are very few PR's that have even the slightest resemblance to natives, and that is being generous. Most PR's look mulatto and most are mulattoes who mix with each other in hopes of trying to dilute or erase their African blood. What's left is what many refer to as a fixed mulatto type. One with African and "European" features combined, usually kind of straight hair, full lips, non-white to very dark skin or curly hair. Of course there are variations as some are more white looking and other are more African looking. Note that you will hardly find any who are native looking because they do not exist. How many PR's do you find who look Mexican or get mistaken for one? OK, so that put's that Taino fantasy to rest.

As far as the DNA test is concerned, let's say you tested 1,000 PR's and 800 of them looked white-like, 150 looked African-like and 50 looked like something you cannot put a finger on. What might you expect the results to show from that? Having some native in your DNA only means a native presence - not ancestry or a mix! If you did a DNA test on everyone in the world, you will find a little of this and that, although some will try to relate "this and that" to something white if they could help it. Spain was never a white nation from the start and never homogenous. Not to mention 700 years of BLACK African rule, then how could anyone call them white? Have you seen their paintings from the colonial era? --99.8.197.169 (talk) 07:08, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Croatian immigration to Puerto Rico

I am wondering if Croats should be documented in the page, since there has been some evidence of their presence in the island. The Wiscovitch surname can be found on the island, and is said to have come from Croatian immigrants who settled in PR in the early 19th century. You can look up "Wiscovitch Puerto Rico" or a similar search on Google and find hints, evidence and people discussing the topic. Should they be added to the page? --207.204.146.202 (talk) 20:53, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

No.

I personally try to stay away from mentioning nationalities in this context because it's just a matter of time before there is enough evidence to list immigrants from all 200+ countries of the world. IMO, if we dig long enough we will find immigrants from virtually every place on earth in PR. Of course, the argument made is that there are some countries where people immigrated in larger numbers than others,,, and this is precisely wherein the caveat lies. Namely, where do you draw the line as to which group is "large enough" to deserve inclusion? For instance, if you can locate 1 family with last name from Afganistan (or Iceland, or Mauritania, or where ever) that have resided in the town of Comerio since the the 1800s is that worth mentioning? How about 2 families? or 4? or 10? maybe 20?????... Where do you draw the line? So, to me, it is enough (as well more accurate and smarter) to just say something like "in the 1800s there was a great influx of immigrants, mostly from Europe, to Puerto Rico" or even more general if possible. BTW, genealogy.com is not a reliable source anyway, and "hints" are not of encyclopedic value. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 01:14, 4 May 2012 (UTC), and I approve this message.

I pretty much agree. I know there wasn't any significance like other groups, but still worth a mention about it in the talk page, anyway--207.204.146.202 (talk) 19:15, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Update Puerto Rican population in the USVI

According to this, there are 10,981 Puerto Ricans in the US Virgin islands, as of 2010 http://stthomassource.com/content/news/local-news/2013/02/05/us-census-shows-vi-aging-growing-more-hispanic Update it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.194.239.174 (talk) 22:22, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Puerto Rican citizenship issues

Per WP:OR, I am reverting edits to the article by Senorcanadiense. He is arguing that a Puerto Rican is a person with a certificate of Puerto Rican citizenship. (Apparently he is not aware of the article Puerto Rican citizenship.) He is also arguing that a Puerto Rican is a person who is a citizen of Puerto Rico, but presents no citations to support that. As such, he is additionally in violation of WP:RS and WP:V. In his edit summary HERE he further states that "Citizenship determines nationality. Puerto Rican citizenship has been proven to exist and determines nationality. People born in Puerto Rico and outside of Puerto Rico with one parent born in Puerto Rico are Puerto Rican under the law" which reinforces the fact that he is pushing his own WP:POV. Mercy11 (talk) 13:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I am fully aware of the article on Puerto Rican citizenship, however this article is misleading. The implication is that only a person born in Puerto Rico is Puerto Rican. This is simply not the case. The Puerto Rican government officially recognizes Puerto Ricans through Puerto Rican citizenship, which is also how every country in the world recognizes their people. The government therefore acknowledges any person born in Puerto Rico and born outside of Puerto Rico in the first generation to be Puerto Rican citizens, and thus Puerto Ricans (with Puerto Rican nationality). It is inaccurate to state that a Puerto Rican is simply someone born in Puerto Rico when the government also recognizes those born outside of Puerto Rico in the first generation to also be Puerto Rican. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senorcanadiense (talk • contribs) 13:57, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

The Government of Puerto Rico, in Law 132 of November 17, 1997, recognizes any United States citizen who lives in Puerto Rico as a "citizen of Puerto Rico", which is a domiciliary citizenship. The text states: "Toda persona que posea la nacionalidad y sea ciudadano de los Estados Unidos y residente dentro de la jurisdicción del territorio de Puerto Rico será ciudadano de Puerto Rico.", just as a PRican who moves to Florida or New York instantly becomes a citizen of Florida or a citizen of New York and acquires voting and other rights. From a strictly legal standpoint, birth or parentage is not an issue, only whether you are a US citizen or not and reside in PR.Pr4ever (talk) 05:36, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

"Misleading" is an opinion, not a fact. In Wikipedia what counts is following policies and one of them, WP:RS, deals with facts. The edits made have no RS, as such they constitute a violation of WP:OR. Including RSs, shows that edits have support beyond an editor's claims. This is not the case here so far. Mercy11 (talk) 19:21, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Per WP:OR, we are not allowed to put our own "stuff" into Wikipedia. If someone finds a citation for "''Citizenship determines nationality", then fine, it can go in. Pr4ever, for example, found a citation that says "Toda persona que posea la nacionalidad y sea ciudadano de los Estados Unidos y residente dentro de la jurisdicción del territorio de Puerto Rico será ciudadano de Puerto Rico", so fine, that goes in. But unless we can find a citation for stuff like "just as a PRican who moves to Florida or New York instantly becomes a citizen of Florida or a citizen of New York and acquires voting and other rights" we cannot put that stuff in, per WP:SYN.

IAE, let's not lose track of the issue here. My objection is to the fact that Senorcanadiense has attempted (knowingly or not) to make Puerto Rican citizenship as the determining factor to being a "Puerto Rican" ("''Citizenship determines nationality") and that just isn't so. A U.S. citizen that lives in Alaska and who is an Anglo-Saxon, from Anglo-Saxon parents and Anglo-Saxon grandparents, etc., does not become a Puerto Rican simply by moving to sunny Puerto Rico. What makes you a member of the "Puerto Rican people" group has nothing to do with where you reside but with whether or not your parent/s were born in Puerto Rico, or if not born there, with whether the person was brought up with a Puerto Rican culture (which occurs when at least 1 parent was born there). So Rosello's law might extend Puerto Rican citizenship to an Anglo from Alaska, but it does not make such Anglo part of the Puerto Rican people. (The reverse of this is that a Puerto Rican doesn't become an American simply by moving to the States. If that was the case, there would be no Puerto Ricans in the US!) Only Puerto Ricans, as defined in the lede of this article, can be part of the group called "Puerto Rican people". While it does not hurt to mention, in this article, that there exists a Puerto Rican citizenship and a certificate to that effect, it does interfere with truthful encyclopedic reporting to try to make the citizenship issue the center stage of the article. Such center staging belongs at Puerto Rican citizenship article, not here. Mercy11 (talk) 15:24, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to the see the official documents because from what I've read a Puerto Rican citizen is a person who meets one of the following criteria: person born in Puerto Rico; person born outside of Puerto Rico with at least one parent born in Puerto Rico; or a person who holds US citizenship and resides in Puerto Rico for a minimum of one year. Therefore, it is not merely a residential citizenship because any US citizen moving to Puerto Rico is not automatically a Puerto Rican citizen. Furthermore, no US state recognizes a person as a citizen of that state through lineage. These are laws that are standard forms of nationality law by other countries. Moreover, there are additional benefits to having Puerto Rican citizenship for natural-born Puerto Rican citizens (e.g. person born in Puerto Rico or a person born outside of Puerto Rico with one parent born in Puerto Rico). Those people are considered to be Iberian-American nationals, which Spain has allowed only those Puerto Rican citizens (and not Puerto Rican citizens who acquired citizenship based on residency for one year) to have the benefit of applying for Spanish citizenship after only two years of legal residency and also able to maintain their natural born citizenships (which would not be the case for Puerto Rican citizens who acquired citizenship through one year residency since they would still have to meet the 10 year legal residency requirment and also renounce prior citizenships).

Also, in the official Government of Puerto Rico citizenship application, it clearly states that those people that may receive citizenship certificates are people who were born in Puerto Rico, were born outside of Puerto Rico to a parent that was born in Puerto Rico, or an American citizen with ONE YEAR OF RESIDENCY. It is not the same as state citizenship because simple residency does not mean you're a citizen and there are special benefits for natural-born citizens that are recognized by a foreign country (Spain), which do not exist for local states.

Also, all Puerto Ricans are US citizens, and therefore Americans (with U.S. nationality) because upon birth U.S. law officially recognizes this to be the case. The lead sentence is problematic because it states that a Puerto Rican is someone born in Puerto Rico when there are many Puerto Ricans not born in Puerto Rico who are also Puerto Rican. Moreover, citizenship is one way to define who a group of people are. Under the law, people with citizenship are considered to possess that country's nationality. Legally, they cannot be prevented from being included in that group since the government recognizes them as people who maintain that nationality. Your argument is flawed because then for other countries, such as the United States, since you would not include American citizens who relocated to America and gained citizenship through naturalization simply because they are not American-born or ethnically American. Yet those people under the law are just as American as natural-born Americans.

Therefore, it might make more sense to change the lead sentence to be more broad and maybe include a more clear explanation of different views of how people may be considered Puerto Rican through ethnicity, citizenship, cultural traditions, or even self-identification. This is not a personal argument, but the article is misleading and could use a clearer explanation of the various ways to define who is a Puerto Rican. Again, the lead statement seems to indicate a bias, in that, it states that Puerto Ricans are people born in Puerto Rico, when there are many people considered to be Puerto Rican and who consider themselves to be Puerto Rican through ethnicity, citizenship, and even through self-identification.

Official applications that specifically states the requirements for approval of citizenship (mere residency is not one of them) http://www.pr.gov/Attachments/pdf/023%20-%20solicitud%20de%20certificado%20de%20ciudadan%C3%ADa%20puertorrique%C3%B1a.pdf

Article about a legitimate benefit of the citizenship that is recognized by a foreign country (Spain). http://aldia.microjuris.com/2013/08/30/la-eficacia-y-alcance-del-certificado-de-ciudadania-puertorriquena/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Senorcanadiense (talk • contribs) 19:13, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Again, per WP:WEIGHT, this stuff doesn't belong here. It belongs in Puerto Rican citizenship. Bring it up there. Mercy11 (talk) 02:30, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I am removing the claim that you continue to make. First, it failed verification - what you are claiming is not in he source you are citing. Nowhere in that Certificado de Ciudadania Puertorriqueña does it say that a Puerto Rican is someone who has that certificate. It doesn't says that a Puerto Rican is someone who is a citizen of Puerto Rico (the claim you continue to make). I hope I have made this clear if it hasn't been so far. I suggest you stop making that edits you have been making and take a look at WP:BURDEN. You are violating the WP:OR policy. Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 02:41, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

as of 2010 census, there is now over 10,000 PRs in the USVI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.194.239.162 (talk) 14:21, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Update

There are 10,981 Puerto Ricans in the US Virgin Islands according to the 2010 US Census, and 4,416 Puerto Ricans in Dominican Republic according to the 2012 Dominican Census http://stthomassource.com/content/news/local-news/2013/02/05/us-census-shows-vi-aging-growing-more-hispanic http://www.diariolibre.com/noticias/2013/05/01/i381577_mas-medio-millon-inmigrantes-residen-pais.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.194.239.162 (talk) 02:33, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

There are 10,981 Puerto Ricans in the US Virgin Islands according to the 2010 US Census, and 4,416 Puerto Ricans in Dominican Republic according to the 2012 Dominican Census. http://stthomassource.com/content/news/local-news/2013/02/05/us-census-shows-vi-aging-growing-more-hispanic http://www.diariolibre.com/noticias/2013/05/01/i381577_mas-medio-millon-inmigrantes-residen-pais.html 68.194.239.162 (talk) 21:16, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Partly done: I updated the information for the Virgin Islands, but your source for the Dominican republic didn't load for me. Please re-open the request if you have another source. Thanks, Celestra (talk)

http://www.diariolibre.com/noticias/2013/05/01/i381577_mas-medio-millon-inmigrantes-residen-pais.html This is the link 4416 as of 2012 DR census. Hopefully, you can read spanish. And the number for the US Virgin Islands, is as of 2010 US census. Read it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.194.239.162 (talk) 23:09, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Also there are now 4.9 million PRs in the US, as of 2012 estimates. http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.194.239.162 (talk) 23:14, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

I can read Spanish well enough to verify the number. I can't make the change right now, but I re-opened the request so that it doesn't get lost and I will make the Dominicam Republic change if no one else has by tomorrow. The factfinder2.census.gov link doesn't work, though. I think it depends on some cookie they left on your browser. Regards, Celestra (talk) 01:08, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Done Done with the original request. If you can provide a better link to a source, please open a new request. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Blacks

Under the "Blacks" section there is a link that says:

Main article: Black history in Puerto Rico

Can someone change it to:

Main article: African immigration to Puerto Rico

"Black history in Puerto Rico" redirects to "African immigration to Puerto Rico". 50.48.33.121 (talk) 09:22, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Done — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 15:01, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 November 2014

There are over 100 Puerto Ricans living in Kuwait. How can that be verifed? 37.231.36.110 (talk) 00:07, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Does Kuwait have a census? Stickee (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2014

Yes it does but it does not factor in ethnicity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.231.36.110 (talk)

Then unfortunately without a source we cannot add it in. Plus I'm not sure 100 people qualifies for "Regions with significant populations"; I'd want to get rid of the other countries in the list with <1000 too possibly. Stickee (talk) 01:52, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Belizean people which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:00, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2015

Delete Gina Lynn from the important Puerto Ricans. 64.237.231.103 (talk) 19:09, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

• Not done: Why? Nobody is just going to remove information without any reasoning behind it. --Stabila711 (talk) 20:02, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Pictures of notable Puerto Ricans in info box

For the sample photos of notable Puerto Ricans in the info box, Why do you guys intend on putting the whitest-looking Puerto Ricans up there??? As if there are no mixed-looking Puerto Ricans or Afro-Puerto Ricans who are notable, famous, and worthy of recognition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spreadofknowledge (talk • contribs) 06:37, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Spanish

please change ((Spanish)) to ((Spanish language|Spanish))

 Partly done - the link to the disambiguation page was incorrect, but [[Spanish language|Spanish]] is already linked and we don't duplicate links - although Puerto Rican Spanish was used on the page it was hidden behing a pipe from Spanish, so was not an obvious, different, link. I have, therefore, removed the link to the DaB page and added a visible link to Puerto Rican Spanish - Arjayay (talk) 15:51, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 September 2017 - Reference update

Please replace

<ref name="wapo-2017-coto-danica">{{cite news |last=Coto |first=Danica |date=February 3, 2017 |title=Puerto Rico gov approves referendum in quest for statehood |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/puerto-rico-gov-approves-referendum-in-quest-for-statehood/2017/02/03/ddea7392-ea54-11e6-903d-9b11ed7d8d2a_story.html |newspaper=[[Washington Post]] |location=DC |access-date=February 17, 2017}}</ref>

With

<ref name="wapo-2017-coto-danica">{{cite news|last=Coto|first=Danica|date=February 3, 2017|title=Puerto Rico gov approves referendum in quest for statehood|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/puerto-rico-gov-approves-referendum-in-quest-for-statehood/2017/02/03/ddea7392-ea54-11e6-903d-9b11ed7d8d2a_story.html|newspaper=[[Washington Post]]|location=DC|access-date=February 17, 2017|dead-url=yes|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170204020835/https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/puerto-rico-gov-approves-referendum-in-quest-for-statehood/2017/02/03/ddea7392-ea54-11e6-903d-9b11ed7d8d2a_story.html?utm_term=.87f464290ebc|archive-date=February 4, 2017}}

This adds the dead URL param as well as the link and date to the archived article. Thanks! 192.88.255.9 (talk) 15:47, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Done without the utm parameters in the archive url. Thanks. – Nihlus (talk) 19:37, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! 192.88.255.9 (talk) 20:54, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

EARLIER Jews in Puerto Rico than mentioned here

The Ancestry section here currently says, at the end, chronologically, 'During the early 20th century Jews began to settle in Puerto Rico.', but there is a Wiki site about the History of the Jews in Puerto Rico which says there were Jews who accompanied Christopher Columbus on his second voyage (though they had to keep their Jewish faith secret, due to the Spanish Inquisition). I'm not sure how to include this information in this article's Ancestry section, but I think it should be? UnderEducatedGeezer (talk) 00:38, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Puerto Ricans

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Puerto Ricans's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "PopEstUS":

• From Puerto Rico: "QuickFacts Puerto Rico; UNITED STATES". 2018 Population Estimates. United States Census Bureau, Population Division. February 26, 2019. Retrieved February 26, 2019.
• From New York (state): "Table 1. Annual Estimates of the Resident Population for the United States, Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2018". U.S. Census Bureau. January 4, 2019. Retrieved January 4, 2019.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 03:59, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Minor but key factual corrections re: US naturalization law

The paragraph that begins under "Political and International Status" is wrong and misleading in several aspects. "This law remained in effect until the 1950s, although its enforcement was tightened in the late nineteenth century regarding Asian immigrants, and by the Johnson–Reed act of 1924 imposing immigration quotas." This sentence confusingly conflates citizenship and immigration which are not intrinsically linked, and quite explicitly separate for much of American history. The laws in the 19th century were explicitly targeting the Chinese. Japanese and other ethnicities continued to have an effectively unlimited right to live in the US while not being eligible for naturalization, while their children became citizens automatically per the 14th Amendment. Secondly naturalization was extended to blacks after the civil war. Military veterans of all races were made eligible following WWI, and in any event local bureaucrats frequently ignored Congressional restrictions and gave citizenship to Asians. Hence "until late in the twentieth century, only immigrants of the White "race" could hope to become naturalized citizens" is totally wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.202.213.211 (talk) 04:34, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Key factual corrections re: Ethnic Demographics

Add to the Demographics section (Puerto Rican ethnography needs more of an in depth description here): According to many genetic studies, the most numerous racial group are mixed people (mulatto / mestizo), followed by whites, and followed in smaller quantities by black people. It is estimated that the ancestral DNA of the average Puerto Rican is 56% European, 28% African and 16% Taino.14​ Although more than 75% self-identified as white, most of the Puerto Rican population is mixed race. Puerto Rico underwent a whitening process under Spanish and American rule. Puerto Rico had laws such as the "Regla de Sacar", among others, a law where mulattos (mixed people) were considered legally white, as opposed to the "One drop rule" law in the United States. Blehbla (talk) 20:16, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:27, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

"nominally..."

@The Sr Guy: @Sundayclose: Quoting part of a statement from a book from 2005 that said. "Most Puerto Ricans are nominally Roman Catholics, although Protestant denominations and Pentecostal sects have been growing on the island since about 1900.(Fitzpatrick, 1976)." is not honest. If 15 years ago that was the statement made in the book why would you only add "Most Puerto Ricans are nominally Roman Catholics."  ? That was 15 years ago... so if you were to include the complete quote.. then we'd probably be able to surmise that the first part of the quote no longer holds water. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 18:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 May 2020

Puerto Ricans are USA citizens. 142.196.122.7 (talk) 02:35, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. This article seems to be about people of "Puerto Rican descent"; which does not necessarily imply US citizenship (in the same way that having, say, Irish descent does not imply Irish citizenship, or any other example country you can come up with) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:35, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 June 2020

As a Puerto Rican I do not agree with the claim in that article that "45%-50% of Puerto Ricans have high West African admixture" since it's very misleading and contradicts the multiple genetic studies that state that the admixture of the majority of Puerto Ricans is 65% Southern European, 20% African, and 15% Native American. I tried to post multiple links that confirmed my claims here, but for some reason, they did not go through.

But if one researches our genetic studies thoroughly, the highest African admixture is about 20% in general consensus. That does not therefore constitute our main admixture nor constitute a "mulatto" population (which is 50% African, 50% European). And the only times our European admixture is lower than 65% and our African admixture higher than 20% is usually when North African admixture is included which ranges from 3% to 11%.

We are tri-racial with European being our main admixture by far, and our African admixture only slightly higher than our indigenous admixture. So please remove or edit that claim to better reflect more recent genetic studies. 69.119.56.142 (talk) 03:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 10:42, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Puerto Ricans are African, Spanish, French descent. The people of P.R speak primarily English and Spanish. Spanish is derived from Spain and its accent is from French derivative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:6000:5107:9700:7971:5C6C:47C8:225F (talk) 10:32, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Huge Mistake

This article says there are 3.9m Puerto Ricans in Puerto Rico, when this is the population of the island, and not everyone in the island is Puerto Rican. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.23.253.222 (talk • contribs) 10 June 2007‎

Amerindian influence

Anyone who goes to Puerto Rico can see that the Taino/Amerindian (Native American)presence lives. Lets not be so careless in such an important aspect of our ancestral history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.112.103.196 (talk • contribs) 27 November 2006‎

DNA citations

Hi guys, there are not many references. This peer-reviewed article deals with the dna issue.

Martinez-Cruzado, Juan C. (2005). "Reconstructing the population history of Puerto Rico by means of mtDNA phylogeographic analysis". American Journal of Physical Anthropology: pp. 131-155. doi:10.1002/ajpa.20108. {{cite journal}}: |pages= has extra text (help); Cite journal requires |journal= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) -- Luis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dizpater (talk • contribs) 3 January 2008‎

Racial drivel

I have noticed that this entire article has been designed by an editor on the general theme "Puerto Ricans may say they are white, but they really aren't" - It is laced with OR, NPOV statements, factual inaccuracies and sub-standard sources to draw rather stretched conclusions. The entire article is oddly race obsessed. I don't know if the author is an Anglo white supremacist or a Puerto Rican wigger. It doesn't matter. Entire sections trying to guestimate how mixed the blood of Puerto Ricans are, is ridiculous. Genetic studies show Puerto Rican's genetic make-up roughly coincides with its ethnic breakdown. Do we need much more race stuff than that? Since I have been reverted in blanking the more outrageous sections of this article, I will proceed sentence by sentence, removing statements not supported by sources and sources below Wikipedia standards.Asilah1981 (talk) 08:05, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

miscegenation

I just came here to note the use of the term "miscegenation" in the first sentence of the Ethnogenesis sub-section. Considering that Wikipedia itself defines that term as pejorative, it seems very out place.208.163.133.252 (talk) 20:58, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

I agree, done. —valereee (talk) 10:51, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

There is no unmixed African

There are no Afro-Puerto Rican with unmixed ancestry, the last ones died in the 1920s. Salina828 (talk) 21:42, 26 November 2022 (UTC)