Split into 3 different articles

edit

I think that someone is making a little confusion here. This list lists three different things (in no particular order):

  • Cape Verdean people, with Cape Verdean nationality;
  • Cape Verdean people that have a acquired a different nationality;
  • people that are not Cape Verdean, but are of Cape Verdean descent;

I don’t know what’s the relevance of such kind of lists, but since they are here, I won’t contest them. What I really think that it should be done is to split this list into 3 separate things:

  • Cape Verdean people;
  • people from Cape Verdean descent;
  • to be more precise, Cape Verdean people that have changed nationality are, for all purposes, of that new nationality, therefore they should be listed in articles such as, American people, Portuguese people, French people, Swedish people, and so on.

This explanation is to justify the changes I intend to do. Ten Islands 11:16, 20 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Division of Cape Verdean Nationalities

edit

I agree with some of what you say.

1) there are Cape Verdean people, with Cape Verdean nationality - those who never left the island to live elsewhere.

2) Cape Verdean people that have a acquired a different nationality

-- that is also true. However, that is assuming that the person gave up their citizenship, like is required in the United States. However, countries like Canada and Cape Verde still recognize citizenship of their nationals, even though the US does not. Being a citizen of one country does not always negate citizenship to another country. Hence, someone can be both a Cape Verdean and American citizen, but only be recognized as both by Cape Verde and not the United States. That is why I classify these Cape Verdeans under both categories.

3)people that are not Cape Verdean, but are of Cape Verdean descent - I was using Cape Verdean in the broadest sense of the word. Since there are more Cape Verdeans outside the country than inside Cape Verde. However, I will concede on this point.

I can agree to partially agree to two categories:

   * Cape Verdean people;
   * people from Cape Verdean descent;

But not to this one

   "* to be more precise, Cape Verdean people that have changed nationality are, for all purposes, of that new nationality, therefore they should be listed in articles such as, American people, Portuguese people, French people, Swedish people, and so on."

What happens to dual citizens? Why would we be choosing their identification. Why not put under both identification until a citizenship is renounced or the person states their preference?

Josedosanjos 13:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I agree. I see no trouble at all listing people with more than one nationality in more than one list. But it would be relevant to mention the nationality change, though. Ten Islands 07:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

I would like to correct the statement made above regarding holding dual (or multiple) citizenship with the United States and another country. The author above debates under what circumstances a person of Cape Verdean descent or nationality can be considered as Cape Verdean and states that Canada and Cape Verde recognize dual citizenship but that the United States does not, leading to a conclusion that would preclude American citizens of Cape Verdean descent from being considered as "Cape Verdeans" due to their present American citizenship. Well, this premise is false because the United States DOES recognize dual citizenship. This is, frankly, well known and millions of U.S. citizens also hold citizenship in another country. You can see the official U.S. policy on dual citizenship on the State Department web page:

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1753.html

I am a dual U.S.-Cape Verdean citizen of Cape Verdean descent on one side of my family and I have passports for both countries. No law in either country forbids me from exercizing my rights of citizenship in both countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.66.42.18 (talk) 20:33, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Alphabetic order?

edit

I’ve noticed that an editor has requested to put the names in alphabetical order of the last name. In Cape Verde related articles that doesn’t make sense! In Cape Verde (as in most lusophone cultures), famous people are frequently known by their nicknames rather by their real names. Thus, it doesn’t make sense to list a nickname alphabeticaly among a last name ordered list. Examples:

  • Bana’s real name was Adriano Gonçalves; therefore, he should be listed after Firmino;
  • Bau’s real name is Rufino Almeida; therefore, he should be listed before Andrade;
  • Fanthca’s real name is Francelina Almeida; therefore, she should be listed before Andrade;
  • Jotamont’s real name was Jorge Monteiro; therefore, he should be listed after Mensah;
  • Manuel de Novas’ real name was Manuel de Jesus Lopes; therefore, he should be listed after Lobo;
  • Tcheka’s real name is Manuel Andrade; therefore, he shoulde be listed before Mayra Andrade;
  • Tututa’s real name (“Dona” is neither a name, neither a nickname, it’s a title — kinda “Madam” in English) was Epifânia Évora; therefore, she should be listed after Cesária Évora;
  • And I could go on and on...

I propose one of two things:

  1. Listing the names alphabeticaly accordingly to how the person is more known, either real name, either nickname, by the first word it appears; this is how Wikipedia orders its entries.
  2. Listing the names alphabeticaly accordingly to the last name, but putting the real name between parentheses after the nickname. Example:

I would like to hear some opinions about this. If nobody says anything, I will procede to changes.

Ten Islands (talk) 08:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Relationship to Cape Verdean diaspora and other Wikpedia pages

edit

The Cape Verdean diaspora page contains its own list of Notable people of Cabo Verdean descent, and points to almost 20 other pages also with people lists, such as Cape Verdeans in Senegal, Cape Verdean Swedish and Cape Verdeans in Portugal.

These pages do have a role in explaining the history of the diaspora, how people were received in different countries, and how they got on once there. The country lists of notable people then point to more detailed biographic Wikipedia pages which help complete the story. But there is a risk of confusion, overlap etc. with this page.

But having the same people appearing in several places in not the main problem. More serious is too few links, with biographies not showing up on the pages where an encyclopedia user might look to find them.

For example, Cesária Évora rightly appears here on this page among the Cape Verdeans - because that is what she considered herself. And so perfectly logically she doesn't also appear on the Cape Verdean diaspora, Cape Verdeans in Portugal or Cape Verdean French pages.

But hang on a moment, does this actually make sense for an encyclopedia - where people who don't know things yet go to look them up? She made her contribution to the world of music outside the Cape Verde islands. She even got awarded the Legion of Honour by the French!

But a user going to the Cape Verdean French page will find no mention of her. Instead they will learn that women Cabo Verdians typically became domestics, and see a list of five professional male footballers, a rapper and one less celebrated female singer. And that's about it. So unless they already know Cesária Évora's national identity they will get an incomplete picture of Cape Verde's impact on France.

I'm not sure what the best approach is to help Wikipedia users. Duplicating links and pages all over the place is not very neat. But it's probably better than missing stuff out. So perhaps putting in links on all possibly relevant pages and not worrying about the overlap is the best policy.

I've made a small start by adding a link here to the main Cape Verdean diaspora page, and adding Lura (singer) to that page because she was born in Portugal and will have citizenship there. But I haven't added links to biographic pages about any other people listed on this page such as Évora. Will await discussion. Istobe (talk) 14:17, 30 March 2017 (UTC)Reply