Revision as of 06:12, 15 October 2007 editMatt Lewis (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers9,196 edits →Population question← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:48, 15 October 2007 edit undoMatt Lewis (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers9,196 edits →"White British people are in an ethnic minority" !?: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
Why not link to ] then too if it's so 'simple'? Minority means a lot more than just an opposite to majority. --] 06:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC) | Why not link to ] then too if it's so 'simple'? Minority means a lot more than just an opposite to majority. --] 06:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC) | ||
== "White British people are in an ethnic minority" !? == | |||
Going by the quoted figures, this line should read 'White people ''of British decent'' are in an ethnic minority'. The original line without the 'decent' qualifier is just untrue. | |||
I'm changing the paragraph - if anyone changes it back please can they explain here why I'm wrong. The population figures and categories were too inexact anyway, and the citation given was incorrectly made and a dead link too. (Note that Haringey council's own figures are slightly out - but only fractionally, so all the figures won't quite add up to 100%!). I'm assuming the figures about age and house-owning were broadly correct - so I've left them for now. | |||
So my main reason for revision is that the other "third of white people" (20.3% of Haringey) are surely "White ''British'' people" too (or will be in the vast majority, for the sake of argument). Also, saying that "White British people" are "''just'' 45%" has an unpleasant overtone for me. Simply put, around '''65.7%''' of Haringey citizens are white ''and'' British first and foremost - and other details such as their heritage, Britishness or legality should be addressed at a later juncture, and only if relevant. | |||
To try and avoid future conflict here, I've improved the accuracy of the initial figures and citation, and inserted another paragraph stating the 45.3% figure, briefly explaining that people are for and against ascribing importance to it. '''Please consider this''' before removing the paragraph (or look for a good citation for it if you want to help keep it). I have moved the uncited comment on whether the 2001 census underestimated Haringey's population figures to the bottom of here, and made it a more honest comment (merely to save somebody less sensitive from doing it). | |||
If racism/cultural tension is an issue in Haringey, perhaps the contentious issues above could be included instead under another sub-heading dealing with that? In my wiki experience they won't go away, so are best dealt with rather than simply removed/reverted/removed etc! | |||
ALSO NOTE - the Haringey article is currently labelled: "To comply with Misplaced Pages's quality standards, this article may need to be rewritten." - so it needs some more good contributions! --] 06:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 06:48, 15 October 2007
London Start‑class High‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Names
I'd be interested to know the significance of the two names Harringay and Haringey. Maybe this could be mentioned in the article? Duncan Smith 10:48, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- this might provide some explanation Mrsteviec 11:31, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Haringey Harringay
Excellent article - thanks for that. Looks like there is a good case for going back to calling it Harringay then! Duncan Smith 11:52, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I enjoyed the article too..although the big mistake in it was stating that Harringay pre 01/04.65 was part of the old Borough of Hornsey... it wasn´t, it was part of the Borough of Tottenham!! Maybe this is the reason that Harringay can´t be easily defined ..say like Tooting or Walthamstow IsarSteve 16:15, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Population question
How can white British people be a(sic) ethnic minority when they make up 45% of the population if the next largest ethnic group makes up only 20%? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.18.73.199 (talk • contribs) 22:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Simple, a majority is, by definition, over 50%, and since 45% is less than that, it is a minority. The largest minority, to be sure, but a minority all the same. -- AJR | Talk 23:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Why not link to minority then too if it's so 'simple'? Minority means a lot more than just an opposite to majority. --Matt Lewis 06:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
"White British people are in an ethnic minority" !?
Going by the quoted figures, this line should read 'White people of British decent are in an ethnic minority'. The original line without the 'decent' qualifier is just untrue.
I'm changing the paragraph - if anyone changes it back please can they explain here why I'm wrong. The population figures and categories were too inexact anyway, and the citation given was incorrectly made and a dead link too. (Note that Haringey council's own figures are slightly out - but only fractionally, so all the figures won't quite add up to 100%!). I'm assuming the figures about age and house-owning were broadly correct - so I've left them for now.
So my main reason for revision is that the other "third of white people" (20.3% of Haringey) are surely "White British people" too (or will be in the vast majority, for the sake of argument). Also, saying that "White British people" are "just 45%" has an unpleasant overtone for me. Simply put, around 65.7% of Haringey citizens are white and British first and foremost - and other details such as their heritage, Britishness or legality should be addressed at a later juncture, and only if relevant.
To try and avoid future conflict here, I've improved the accuracy of the initial figures and citation, and inserted another paragraph stating the 45.3% figure, briefly explaining that people are for and against ascribing importance to it. Please consider this before removing the paragraph (or look for a good citation for it if you want to help keep it). I have moved the uncited comment on whether the 2001 census underestimated Haringey's population figures to the bottom of here, and made it a more honest comment (merely to save somebody less sensitive from doing it).
If racism/cultural tension is an issue in Haringey, perhaps the contentious issues above could be included instead under another sub-heading dealing with that? In my wiki experience they won't go away, so are best dealt with rather than simply removed/reverted/removed etc!
ALSO NOTE - the Haringey article is currently labelled: "To comply with Misplaced Pages's quality standards, this article may need to be rewritten." - so it needs some more good contributions! --Matt Lewis 06:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Categories: