Talk:African immigrants to Australia

Untitled

Note: The keep closure of the deletion discussion above was appealed at deletion review, the results of the discussion was No consensus; default endorsement of keep closure. Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 02:28, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Leroy Loggins.jpg

Image:Leroy Loggins.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

What happened?

Who fucked up this page? it was fine how it was until is was COMPLETELY edited several months ago. Niether Afircan American, African British nor African Canadian refers to white people. It is refering to Citzens who have black African backgrounds whether they be distant or not. African Ausralian should only be refering to people of african roots not European. steve76859 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 03:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

• That is your view but it needs to be supported by citing reliable sources in accordance with Wikipedia:Verifiability --Matilda ^talk 07:23, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Harry O'Brien

Yeh BrainyBabe, your right, sorry my bad. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 12:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

African Australian, not Black Australian

The intention of this article is to discuss Australians from Africa or of African ancestry. The text and statistics provided make this assumption. "Black Australian" to most people would suggest indigenous Australians, which is not what this article is about. The definition should include persons from Africa irrespective of 'colour', as is our practice with other articles. Kransky (talk) 12:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, Black Australian to most people suggests exactly what this article used to say. Which is that it is used to refer to African Australians. It is only used to refer to indigneous Austalians as a self indentity. Aboriginals are not of African ancestory and alot of them are very light coloured. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 13:31, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Google "Black Australians" and you will discover that the term is only used in reference to aboriginal Australians. Kransky (talk) 13:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

African/black

why is there a picture of a white man? This article doesnt refer to White African Australians, but Australians of black/afro heritage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.108.35.141 (talk) 07:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

A good question, and it deserves a good answer.

• I have reworked the definition to be as inclusive as possible, to cover persons who were born in Africa or are of indigenous African descent (and who were not necessarily born in Africa)
• The majority of Africans in Australia are white South Africans and white Zimbaweans. A smaller but growing number are Black Africans. The number of Afro-American, Afro-Brazilian, Afro-British are comparatively small.
• White South Africans and white Zimbaweans born in Africa generally regard themselves as African, as do Indian Kenyan or Arab Egyptian. The definition is of course based on geography, not race, for the same reason a white Queenslander usually would regard him/herself as Australian, not European.
• The Australian Bureau of Statistics, the only authorative source of data we have, only records people according to birthplace, and ancestry (as how people describe themselves). If we stick to a racial definition of Africa, we will not be able to use these statistics.
• If we revert to a racial definition of Africa it will just lead to further questions on who can or cannot be considered. Algerians? Sixteenth-African? Why don't we apply this principle to Australians living abroad and remove everybody in American Australian who is not aboriginal???
• JM Coetzee grew up in Africa (ironically he got his Nobel Prize for a book he wrote on what it was like to be an "outsider"). Marcia Hines probably has never been to Africa, and her cultural background is based on her experiences growing up in the United States, not Africa. But in both cases their claims to this category are legitimate. Kransky (talk) 09:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeh, I have noticed this.

• You have changed the whole article around to be an article of nationality regardless of race. And not on one in which it used to be as "Black African" regarding African race comparable to the article Anglo-Celtic Australian. I don't know how much of an improvement this is but oh well it's done now.
• This point is true
• I don't know where you got this conclusion from. It is true most South Africans, Indian Kenyans and to a lesser extent white Zimbaweans regard themselves as African, but this is mainly based on continental nationality and not ethnicity or racial reasons. Although alot of Indian Kenyans prefer African or Black to Indian, as it is not "cool" to be Indian and it is "cool" to be black. But Egyptians never really consider themselves African, they consider themselves by their nationality (Egyptian) or ethnicity Arab, not as African like you say. A white Queenslander, this is kind of confusing a confusing point, I mean first and foremost every Australian regards themselves as just that, Australian, which is based on nationality not race.
• This point is true, although I do think it would be possible to reference, just extremely hard.
• This is another confusing and seemingly pointless point. I mean anyone who identifies as 1-16th African obviously has racial insecurities. It will not lead to these questions as these are plain stupid. I mean I am around 10% native american, but I don't go saying I'm a Indian to people as this is just stupid. And why did you mention this sentence on Aboriginals? Aboriginals are Australian, but this is completely unrelated and it is not even the same principle.
• Based on your reworking of this article this point is valid. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 10:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for being receptive to my reasons.

• The article still isn't based on nationality; it is based on people with Australian citizenship having a geographic link to Africa.
• As agreed
• First point we are agreed. On the second point I concur that many in North Africa feel themselves to be more akin with the Middle East, due to their ethnic, religious and language ties.
• Nope - it is impossible using the ABS data to discern race, including using the ancestry data
• Exactly - the 1/16th African point is meant to illustrate how fruitless it would be to categorise people purely according to ancestry. My point is that if African Australian only included persons who are indigenous Africans, then why not say Australian American can only include persons who are indigenous Australians?
• As agreed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kransky (talk • contribs) 11:02, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply —Preceding unsigned comment added by TeePee-20.7 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

• Hmmm, yeh you are right, but this seems to make this article even more confusing as you have chosen to keep people like Marcia Hines and other African Americans who have no real geographical connection to Africa. I think if you choose to keep this reworked version of this article then they should deleted, as they have no relation in the context you're specifying.
• Yep
• Yep
• Really? Wow I did not know this. Are you sure though?
• Ok, we agree on this first point but it would not draw questions, because as I stated before it's stupid and like you said "fruitless". If it went back to a racial related article it would not include your examples because even if they did want to identify as African they would be considered multiracial, or being African would not even be notable. This second point I understand what you are saying, but even though it is very similar in idea it is also different. In terms of geographical context what you are saying is very valid and true. Because like you said "if African Australian only included persons who are indigenous Africans, then why not say Australian American can only include persons who are indigenous Australians". It is different because the race of the continent Africa are considered "Africans", but the race of the continent Australia are not considered "Australians", they are considered "Aborigine".
• I withdraw this comment due to your explanation of a geographical link to Africa. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 11:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually I am not in favour of having Afro-Americans etc in this category at all, as they can be accomodated with American Australians. Others might have a different view. Kransky (talk) 12:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Then you should delete them. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 13:44, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

African Australian, not Black Australian

This article should focus on Australians with a link to Africa. "Black Australian" could encompass indigenous Australians, Melanesian Australians as well as African Australians, and the three have very little in common with each other. The majority of African Australians are white ex-South Africans and Zimbabweans - excluding the most notable portion of the population is not appropriate. Kransky (talk) 23:56, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

white people in South Africa / Zimbabwe are European, not African. It is quite stupid to consider whites as African-Australian. Search African American/Canadian/British.......im sure they dont include whites as being African. There some food for thought —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.106.253.153 (talk) 14:04, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Definition

the article says There is no clear definition of what constitutes being an "African Australian" please provide WP:RS to define the term. Gnangarra 17:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

but there isn't a definition to work off. However Wikipedia has two definitions for "African" one based on birthplace, another on ethnicity. This article was written to accomodate both definitions. Kransky (talk) 10:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

As there is no definition, please do not remove the paragraph that points out that lack of definition and refers to ABS ancestry data--Matilda ^talk 22:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

<--

Reverted to the There is no clear definition of what constitutes being an "African Australian" as there is no definition please provide a WP:RS for the definition. Gnangarra 15:13, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Notable People list

I have hidden the list, for the time being please provide sources for the claim that they are African Australians, for BLP's the source should be where the person recognises/acknowledges themselves as an African Australian. Gnangarra 17:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This is going to be tricky as few people are ever asked about their ethnicity unless it is perceived to be borderline (Tiger Woods, Barak Obama). Ironic that Coetzee won a Nobel Prize writing autobiographically about his own identity. Kransky (talk) 11:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

This also applies to the addition of images of people, I have again reverted as unsourced BLP material. Gnangarra 12:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

• I concur with the approach of Gnangarra. I have no difficulty with the inclusion of Coetzee or Selwyn - both from Africa (born there) now living in Australia. I do have a difficulty with Symonds and Billy Blue. In the case of Symonds the article states One of Symonds' biological parents was of Afro-Caribbean background - it seems a stretch to make him an African Australian because he has West Indian blood (acknowledged in the source) but "It is not an aspect of his heritage he has ever chosen to explore". African does not seem to enter into the equation. Billy Blue was similarly from Jamaica. I would not object to either being placed in an article on Jamaican Australians. Ethnicity linking the Caribbean to Africa in my view is borderline to make somebody African Australian. The same applies to Marcia or Deni Hines - no direct links to Africa and therefore borderline. The analogy would be to make everybody who has very blond hair and blue eyes a Scandinavian Australian just because they look like that. I don't think by the way Obama's ethnicity was ever borderline. --Matilda ^talk 21:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I kind of agree with this approach. Previously I was trying to be inclusive to one user who defined African Australian on race rather than birthplace. Your Scandinavian Australian analogy is not accurate though, since Billy Blue and Marcia do have kinship to Africa (albeit tenuously) Kransky (talk) 14:24, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I have some difficulty with the inclusion of Coetzee and Selwyn even though both are from African countries now living in Australia. The reason is that African Australian is an undefined term, its this being undefined thats the problem. The use of African in other articles like African American is in relation to people only of Negro/Black ancestry. Then there's the ambiguous linking that includes people like Symmonds and Hines, what is the criteria that decides because according to Human DNA evidence indicates that modern humans originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago in the extreme all Australians are African Australians. Gnangarra 14:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

One presumes that a person with reasonable judgement and intelligence can discern the difference between somebody who is perhaps half a dozen generations out of Africa (like Hines), and somebody whose ancestral links to Africa is pre-historic. Kransky (talk) 10:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

But we dont make presumptions based on how reasonable and intelligent a person maybe, we only describe verified facts from reliable sources. As for Hines is there such a source that describes her as being half a dozen generations out of Africa. Gnangarra 15:32, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

• As the section has been uncommented out by another editor, I have added a table form to allow the facts to be placed before the reader and the reader can decide. WP:V and WP:NOR apply. --Matilda ^talk 01:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I have removed entirely as it unsourced original research with BLP violations as discussed above. Gnangarra 12:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Listing persons of African descent, or Pokimon characters, or the bank notes of Botswana is not original research. However I agree it is a problem is when people try to define what something is by adding in examples which complements their viewpoint. What if we just listed persons who were born in Africa? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kransky (talk • contribs)

The problem is trying to define the article, thats what needs attention forget lists. The term "African Australian" is undefined until that is addressed how can inclusion of any person can be addressed. Gnangarra 13:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge with Black-Africans in Australia

This article should be merged with Black-Africans in Australia. The Ogre (talk) 21:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

• That article has been deleted per AfD discussion --Matilda ^talk 23:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

"African Australians" vs "Australians of African Descent"

A user called Blackable2323 wants this article to be called "Australians of African Descent", because It's the Correct term for people of sub african descent. I have no idea what a person of sub african descent is. However this name fits with other ethnicity in Australia articles (German Australian, Japanese Australian, Danish Australian) etc. Why should this be different? Kransky (talk) 10:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

presume the intent is sub-saharan decent but that isnt the focus of the article, in its many forms it has included americans, south africans of eurpoean decents, egyptians and peoples of the middle east. I think that the articles intent was to include all people who are decended from people who immigrated(voluntary or forcibly) from any african country irregardless of their nationality. There also seams to be a historical cut off time for inclusion criteria to those that immigrated on or after about 15th/16th century. As for calling it "Australians of African Descent" one then ask questions as to what criteria is used to define a person as being "Australian". In short my standard response, provide a reliable source to define the term first then all other issues can be easily resolved. Gnangarra 12:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. "African Australian" is a neutral term that could encompass the two meanings that have been debated (and it fits existing naming conventions). "Australians of African descent" could encompass African-American Australians (with virtually no connection to Africa) and exclude Egyptian Australians or white South Africans (who are the vast majority of African Australians). Blackable2323 and Unknown have presented no reason why one definition should carry more weight than the other. Kransky (talk) 23:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

A source :-)

Other than the ABS data which had to be aggregted to produce the statistics for this article and therefore was a potential breach of W:SYNTH and a handful of other links that really didn't seem to meet WP:RS and didn't help difinitionally, I have now located a source that I think meets some concerns http://www.att.org.au/documents/att_report.pdf . It is a reoport of a workshop sponsored by Workshop sponsored by the Victorian Department of Immigration, Victorian Multicultural Commission, and the Department of Victorian Communities and conducted by African Think Tank Inc. It starts

More than two thirds of the migrants who settle in Victoria under Australia’s humanitarian and refugee programs now come from African nations, and for many of these groups the resettlement process is confusing, even traumatic. It is increasingly important that new arrivals are given support to successfully integrate into the broader Australian society, however.
Issues affecting resettlement and integration of African migrants were identified by representatives of African communities at an Initiative Workshop Auspiced by the African Think Tank Inc in Melbourne on 16 February 2006. Participants stressed that many families experience ‘culture shock’ on their arrival in Australia and, without appropriate support, find it difficult to understand and adapt to mainstream Australian values and norms. Cultural differences increase pressures on families and communities, and have serious implications for refugees’ on-going physical and psychological wellbeing and for their engagement with other Australians and mainstream institutions. The workshop highlighted the following interconnected themes for consideration at the forthcoming national conference on African re-settlement:
� African values, and the positive contributions African-Australians can make to Australia;
� cultural differences and how these impact on family and community life;
� gender, role differentiation and family relationships as they affect both men and women;
� content and delivery of health education and services, especially around mental health, communicable diseases, diet and lifestyle, and vitamin D deficiency;
� specific problems African-Australian youth face in being “caught between two cultures”;
� adult education, training and employment opportunities;
� educational needs of African children, from pre-school to tertiary; and
� the ignorance of the broader Australian community about Africa and African-Australians.

I think we have a source that substantiates the aggregation of an African Australian experience. There are some issues to be sorted out but we have a way forward in my view. There are some other sources indicated that may be worth following up in relation to the national conference mentioned.--Matilda ^talk 00:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

• The national conference proceedings are at http://www.att.org.au/documents/African%20Resettlement%20Report.pdf (6+MB) It was held April 2007 and coveed African resettlement in Austrlaia. At page 35 in the introduction to helath issues:

  African-Australians are not a homogenous group, but include people of diverse cultural, linguistic, religious, educational, and employment backgrounds, with a variety of pre- and post-migration experiences.
  However, most recent African arrivals from the African continent are typically from a refugee background. Common refugee experiences include torture, war or civil unrest, the loss of family and friends through violence, dislocation and prolonged periods of deprivation. These experiences can have major implications for refugees’ health, with ramifications for the delivery of health care services.

  --Matilda ^talk 00:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

African Prescence on the First Fleet

The Book Black Founders by Samantha Pybus presents conclusive evidence that there were people of recent Subsaharan African; African American and Afro-Caribbean descent on the First Fleet. So I think that the sentance "Historical archives suggest that convicts transported to Australia included Afro-Caribbeans" should be changed to "Historical archives show that convicts transported to Australia included Afro-Caribbeans and Afro-Americans" but no-one should forget Black Caesar. Just my thoughts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.175.57.11 (talk) 02:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Template

Could the person wanting the photos and template removed please state their reason(s)? Thanks. Kransky (talk) 11:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)