Talk:English-only movement

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2022 and 6 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sepetras (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Jhoey 1, Akornowski.

Texas

“If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it ought to be good enough for the children of Texas.” Miriam A. Ferguson 170.140.150.50 (talk) 13:58, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

A great line, but almost certainly misattributed to Ferguson. See http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Miriam_A._Ferguson   Will Beback  talk  17:56, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to note that many of the citations for this page are dead links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.218.72 (talk) 19:46, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was no move. There is no consensus supporting a page move at this time. PeterSymonds (talk) 09:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

English-only movement → English language-only movement of the United States —

There have been English people only movements in US history, advocating exclusion of those who were not of English stock, like the Irish, etc. There are also English language only movements in countries other than the United States. This article should be renamed.

76.66.197.2 (talk) 05:15, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Survey

To voice an opinion in favor of or opposition to the proposal, place it here, with a rationale in to support your position

Discussion

To voice a comment related to the rename, place it here

• On the proposal's first point, I'm not aware of an "English-only movement" in U.S. history that referred to English people. As to the second point, if there are English-only movements in countries other than the U.S., that info can be added to this article under the current name without problem. Station1 (talk) 05:52, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
  • This article is only about the US, other movements should not be drowned out by the content of this page, so moving this page would allow another article to be situated at this current name that is not unbalanced by the amount of US material. This article is substantial already, so adding to it would only result in a split sometime soon anyways. 70.29.209.121 (talk) 05:13, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

• Not convinced. Is the author refering to natvism with his first point? If so, it is already covered there. In that case, I don't even think a disambiguation page is necessary, a hatnote would probably do. Moogwrench (talk) 23:51, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, I was referring to a type of nativism involving descendants of the ethnic English colonists of the US. I will also note that there are (and were) also such movements in other countries, as the nativism article points out. 70.29.209.121 (talk) 05:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

• I don't object, but is there any evidence of these movements in other countries?   Will Beback  talk  06:19, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Unreliable source

Cross-checking the facts on proenglish.org I have noticed some biased information. This source uses its own interpretation of laws when stating the English as Official language information for states. Before adding each individual state, that states laws should be cross-checked individually to make sure they infact have an official language. Specifically I noticed the Massachusetts information was incorrect, a similar discussion is also taking place on the Massachusetts talk page.--Extrabatteries (talk) 00:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Extrabatteries! I was just coming to this page to make the change in light of the discussion on the Massachusetts page. Tfolkman 17:27, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

This is actually a serious problem. I came here after working on a somewhat related section in Languages of the United States. I'll begin to tackle it soon, but would appreciate anyone else jumping in. Cheers, ClovisPt (talk) 17:52, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Dade County

This edit came up on my watchlist. I noticed the {{citation needed}} and did some googling. I found some sources, but they seem to cherrypick the info presented according to their "take" on the subject. I don't have the time right now to sift something supportable and coherent which avoids WP:SYNTH out of the sources I found, so I'll just list what I've found here in case someone else wants to do that.

• Ronald Schmidt (2000). Language policy and identity politics in the United States. Temple University Press. p. 2. ISBN 9781566397551.
• Joan Kelly Hall; William Eggington (2000). The sociopolitics of English language teaching. Multilingual Matters. p. 58. ISBN 9781853594366.
• David M. Reimers (1998). Unwelcome strangers: American identity and the turn against immigration. Columbia University Press. p. 120. ISBN 9780231109574.
• Dennis Wepman (2007). Immigration. 339. Infobase Publishing. ISBN 9780816062409. {{cite book}}: External link in |series= (help)
• Matt Meltzer (July 16, 2007). "The Dade County English-Only Ordinance". miamibeach411.com. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
• "Board in Miami Repeals an English-Only Law". The New York Times. May 19, 1993.

Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 21:22, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Missouri has an official policy

We voted for an English only amendment back in 2008 and it passed. Here is a website that shows states that have such laws.

Here is another link: 1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.91.177.81 (talk) 23:31, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Breaking the Law.

According to the article states like Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida or Montana have declared English as the only official language of the state. My question is how officials make references to the States themselves while conducting official business without breaking the law? I mean, those names are all Spanish names. Do they break the Law when they mention their own States? Should they not change those names to English names if English is the only official language? Pipo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.48.77 (talk) 02:35, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Louisiana

Currently the Louisiana entry says English is the sole official language of Louisiana, but Louisiana has no official language, and recognizes both French and English as working languages. The source cited is referenced as stating that English has been the official language since 1811, but the same website has a page specifically for Louisiana that contradicts that. Hangmanwa7id (talk) 20:44, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on English-only movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.adelaideco-op.familyhistorysa.info/germanplacenames.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.law.miami.edu/studentorg/interamerican_law_review/pdf/ialr_symposium_01302007.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080421145728/http://www.lsadc.org:80/info/lsa-res-english.cfm to http://www.lsadc.org/info/lsa-res-english.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on English-only movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718172400/http://www.proenglish.org/about-us/mission to http://proenglish.org/about-us/mission
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060601222708/http://www.us-english.org/inc/about/ to http://www.us-english.org/inc/about/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://tennessean.com/article/20090123/NEWS0202/901230395
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lsadc.org/info/lsa-res-english.cfm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090105211509/http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/cor/Pubs/eolep.php to http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/cor/Pubs/eolep.php
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/2/26/164010.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:12, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Move to "Official English"?

Would it not be more appropriate to use "Official English" for the primary name of this movement rather than "English-only", since that's what they call themselves? Proponents of this movement find it misleading when people say "English-only", claiming that it implies they want to ban the use and study of other languages, which they don't. They do advocate that English should be the only official language, so the "English-only" name really isn't that inaccurate, but don't groups and movements have the right to choose what other people call them? Does Wikipedia have a policy for this? Justin Kunimune (talk) 23:15, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

The policy is at WP:COMMONNAME, which says we should generally use the name most often given to the topic by reliable sources. Station1 (talk) 06:00, 31 May 2018 (UTC)