Jump to content

Talk:Carlos Santana

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nomination of Portal:Santana for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Santana is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Santana until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page.

Dual nationality

[edit]

Hi Geraldo Perez, you seem to have misunderstood what I was trying to say regarding Santana's nationality. When someone is of Cuban descent, it is written "Cuban American", without a hyphen. When they have dual nationality, a hyphen is inserted, like so: "Cuban-American". Someone of dual nationality isn't Cuban and American, that is unnecessary and clunky. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 18:10, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No that is the difference between the use as an adjective and a noun phrase. Example "person is a Cuban American", noun phrase, or "Cuban-American person", adjective form. In both cases this is an ethnicity description meaning an American with Cuban ancestry which, of course, includes dual nationals but not exclusively. Using a conjunction removed the ambiguity and makes the dual nationality clear and unambiguous. Also is it correct grammar to use a conjunction between adjectives of similar weight in a description. A test is if you can invert the order of the words and have the same meaning. See the article Mexican American for the meaning. It does not mean the same thing as American Mexican. American and Mexican does mean the exact same thing as Mexican and American though. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:56, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]


It seems that the majority of opinions support the idea that Santana should be considered a Mexican and American guitarist. Looking at the edit history, most (if not all) changes to revert the use of both nationalities come from a single user, Geraldo Perez. The page shouldn't reflect the opinion or interpretation of Wikipedia's guidelines of a single user. There are multiple arguments that support the idea that Santana should be considered a dual citizen. Here are some:

  • As explained in the article, Santana started his career in Mexico. He learned how to play music and guitar in Mexico. He performed in several bands while living in Tijuana, including the band of Javier Bátiz, a notable guitar player. These facts are relevant to the subject's notability.
  • The subject (Carlos Santana) conceives himself as Mexican. There are several sources that demonstrate that, including an interview "Carlos Santana se siente más cómodo siendo Carlos, el mexicano sin galardones". Telemundo. Retrieved 22 May 2024., or his own biography The Universal Tone. The manual of style is clear that editors should consider whether the subject has a preferred nationality by which they identify [1].
  • Santana's Wikipedia pages in other languages commonly mention the dual nationality in the opening paragraph. I don't see why the English version should be different.
  • It is very common to identify people by dual nationality when they spend significant time in the country where they were born, including part of their training in their career (as Santana did). Examples of this include scientists (Erich Leo Lehmann), musicians (Lars Ulrich, Serj Tankian,Gloria Estefan), etcetera.

    • — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdar2789‎ (talk • contribs) 06:17, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Next section following this goes into lots of details of why the intro and lead is the way it is. If he had had a notable career in Mexico it would be listed in the intro sentence. He didn't, his notable career started in San Francisco. His musical background in Mexico is mentioned appropriately in the second sentence of the lead. See previous discussion in the talk page archive and on this page. We have a Manual of Style. The appropriate section is MOS:CONTEXTBIO. The fact that some other articles don't follow it does not set a precedence for this one to ignore it. Other language wikis have their own rules that don't apply to enwiki. Being a dual national is not being disputed, what is at issue is how he is described in the intro and lead. Geraldo Perez (talk) 06:36, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You seem to be ignoring important facts and subjectively interpreting the Manual of Style. The Manual does not require a notable career in Mexico, it requires to be relevant for the subject's notability. The training of a musician is definitely relevant. You did not mentioned anything regarding the fact that the Manual of Style explicitly mentions that the preferred nationality by which they identify is important. The opening paragraph also mentions his career in the US, so I don't see why this is a reason for omitting his Mexican nationality. The fact that other articles point out second nationalities, especially for artists and musicians, suggests that this background is relevant for the individual's notoriety. Finally, I want to reiterate that there seems to be a consensus here on what should be considered relevant for subject's notability, yet, you are the only user reverting changes to nationality. Jdar2789 (talk) 06:59, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Manual of style requires notable activities in country of birth for birth country to be considered for inclusion in intro sentence. When just related to notability a mention in the second sentence of the lead is appropriate and as such it is mentioned there in this article. See example in MOS for Asimov for similar situation. Identification note you linked to is related to how Brits want to be identified for their nationality, not a general statement about self-identification. The fact that other articles don't follow the Manual of style isn't guidance. Consensus in discussions has led to the article the way it was before your edits. My involvement is maintaining the article to conform to the MOS and interacting with people who argue for changes that conflict with it. Article historically rotates between all possible variations of nationality context in intro. Check the discussions in the archives and on this page for background. Geraldo Perez (talk) 07:36, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You seem to be mistaken in the interpretation of notability for nationality. The manual of style doesn't require notable activities in a given country. Instead, it requires the country to be relevant for subject's notability: Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, neither previous nationalities nor the country of birth should be mentioned in the opening paragraph unless relevant to the subject's notability. Do you agree with this? Jdar2789 (talk) 07:46, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    MOS:FIRSTBIO talks to what goes in the intro sentence. Context (location, nationality, etc.) for the activities that made the person notable That is the reason for "American" and not "Mexican" in the intro sentence. If country of birth is of defining importance per the example at Asimov These details can be introduced in the second sentence if they are of defining importance. which is why Mexico is mentioned in the second sentence. Both countries are mentioned appropriately in the lead. The only point of contention in this discussion and in general is what goes in the intro sentence. Geraldo Perez (talk) 08:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    Nationality in lead should just be American

    [edit]

    Following on to the previous discussion. Santana should be described as solely an American guitarist. Per MOS:OPENPARABIO and MOS:ETHNICITY - "... previous nationalities or the place of birth should not be mentioned in the lead unless relevant to the subject's notability". Per the article, Santana moved to the US before he did anything notable. The article notes his origin as a notable guitarist was San Fransisco. All his notable activities were thus in the US, he had no notable activities in Mexico. Therefore Mexico, his place of birth, should not be mentioned in the lead as it is not relevant to his notability. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:17, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    In the style of other similar articles where the BLP is born and spent a significant amount of time in their home country but rose to notability in their country of immigration, I have changed this to "Mexican-born American guitarist" instead of strictly Mexican-American. To my mind Mexican-American would also suffice, but people get rather uppity and pedantic about these sorts of things. CaffeinAddict (talk) 06:38, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    MOS:ETHNICITY is clear about this, per my original contents. His birth location is not relevant to his notability so doesn't belong in lead. The fact other articls are ignoring the MOS does not mean this article should ignore it too. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This argument sounds more like a personal need to depict (and make?) Santana solely "American". The ethics of this are highly questionable. Not to mention that it is a lie. Wikipedia's goal is to provide with legitimate information and not the one that some editors would see fit.
    I consider, as others do here, that purposedly refusing to change his nationality is not only misinforming but also spread the message that it is ok to apropiate and change facts. Ridostas (talk) 20:48, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    We have a manual of style - we are expected to follow it. I gave links to the relevant sections that cover this issue. Nothing his hidden in the article. Personal attacks are uncalled for. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:58, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Note his birth location and Mexican citizenship is covered fairly extensively in the Early life section of the article and is noted in the infobox which is adjacent to the lead paragraph. It is not relevant to why he is notable so doesn't belong in the lead per my comments above but it is not ignored in the article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:08, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    This is incorrect, as a Mexican American it is extremely important to list his nationality as it is, Mexican-American, because of his contribution to Mexican music and rock-and-roll as a whole. He may have not gained notability until he started playing in San Francisco, but it was his father who taught him how to play guitar before they even moved to Tijuana. His guitar play-style is inherently Mexican as the latin style is very present in his play after he moved to America. Please keep in mind this is the description that shows when one googles Santana. The first description one sees about Santana should not be that he is an American guitarist because he…isn’t. It’s sort of offensive to be straight with you. This man revolutionized Mexican rock and rock as a whole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8805:BC82:4600:DCD1:80C1:CC4F:3758 (talk) 21:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Where he gained notability where all his notable activities where is what is important and that is in the intro. His Mexican heritage is well covered in the article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This seems a bit silly for musicians, the world's biggest music industry is in California and virtually any big band moves to California and often lives there. Usually they don't achieve notoriety outside of their home region until they make it in America, but not everyone is an American musician. Poketama (talk) 10:05, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sources exist that classify him as Mexican-American. The USA Today children's textbook The Hispanic American Experience, page 22, uses that formulation. Same with the Marshall Cavendish Publishing book Mexican Americans, on page 61. I don't see why anyone would try and cut out his very important musical roots by negating his ancestry. Binksternet (talk) 22:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree,,,we should just regurgitate what normal sources say "Carlos Santana". BBC. March 10, 2023. Moxy- 22:09, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Mexican Americans are about 11% of the US population. Most modern sources will be sure to identify them as such if they talk about them. Obviously very important to all of them, including Santana. We still don't put an MOS:ETHNICITY tag in the intro sentence, just nationality of where notable activities occurred. A mention in the lead of his Mexican upbringing and musical background possibly included in the second sentence may be appropriate. Article said Mexican and American guitarist for a while but that seemed inappropriate as no notable activities in Mexico. I added some text in the lead about his musical background in Mexico which should make his link to Mexico clear. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:22, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The sources clearly indicate hes also a Mexican national....again fallow what people will see in the vast majority of sources "Biography, Albums, & Facts". Encyclopedia Britannica. August 27, 2009. Retrieved September 12, 2023. Moxy- 22:33, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    They generally say he was born in Mexico, so does this article. Born in Mexico makes one a Mexican national (so does having a Mexican parent BTW). Not really relevant to where he resides and did all his notable work. If relevant to notability birth location generally mentioned in lead, but not in the intro sentence. See examples at MOS:CONTEXTBIO, Isaac Asimov is an example that matches Santana. Geraldo Perez (talk) 22:47, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Not sure how cultural influence is not relevant here. Perhaps an RFC if your not willing to regurgitate what sources say. Moxy- 23:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I did make a change to the article based on the recent comments to address his Mexican cultural influences in the lead. Only issue left, it seems, is people's desire to put an ethnicity tag in the intro sentence, something we are told not to do in MOS:ETHNICITY. We have a manual of style that may differ from other sources, we generally follow Wiki's MOS when they differ. See also MOS:BIO#First sentence. This looks to be one of the cases where that is happening. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:14, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Not sure your understanding that people are talking about citizenship and cultural influence. His ethnicity is clear. People are not a fan of citizenship denial...as seen by this coming up so many times."Appropriation and Appreciation: What's the Difference? Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion". November 1, 2021. Retrieved September 12, 2023. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)Moxy- 23:24, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    From the MOS "Similarly, neither previous nationalities nor the country of birth should be mentioned in the lead unless relevant to the subject's notability." His being a Mexican citizen isn't being denied, he was born there, it is being considered as not relevant to his notable activities. What I see is people don't want to follow the Manual of Style. talk page of MOS:BIO is the proper place to suggest changes. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:35, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps we should fallow how we normally deal with this Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Ryan Reynolds. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Infobox data may also help this coming up all the time and make it look not to be American appropriation. We are talking about one word that is clarifying and is most likely why the sources do it.Moxy- 23:46, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The ones where both countries were listed had notable activities in both countries. The ones where a nationality is unclear usually don't try to cover complexity in the intro sentence. These issues are covered in the examples at MOS:CONTEXTBIO. This situation also happens with articles about people born in the US who only have a notable career in some other countries (Mexicans born in the US with a career in Mexico is common) and people get upset when American doesn't show up in the intro. We try to be consistent, it isn't American appropriation. It is just emphasis on where notable activities took place. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:56, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Your not hearing anyone here. Should do what is best for our readers. Your interpretation of MOS:NATIONALITY in this case is a net negative for our readers. 3 reasonable suggestions to no avail. Moxy- 00:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Suggestions were to change it to Mexican, Mexican-American, or Mexican and American. All conflict with MOS:NATIONALITY. No notable activities in Mexico, Mexican-American is an ethnicity. Also, again, I did make a change in the lead since this discussion started to cover importance of Mexican heritage. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:15, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I guess problem we have is most interpret MOS:NATIONALITY differently...as to why this problem does not come up all over. Agree Hyphenated American is odd to non Americas thus "Mexican-born American guitaris" is perfect. Article needs lots of help and for many this was probably a strong point then they got reverted and gave up. Moxy- 00:30, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Second sentence starts "Born and raised in Mexico ..." so that is covered. Just shouldn't be in the opening sentence as part of context description. Second sentence is fine when it is relevant to notability. This was my attempt at a compromise when I added that. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:48, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Orphaned references in Carlos Santana

    [edit]

    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 Carlos Santana'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 "Grammys":

    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⚡ 23:55, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    including 'devadip' in the lede.

    [edit]

    title essentially explains it. the vast majourity of individuals with nicknames in, well, any field or profession, have their nickname included in the lede. i'm confused why it hasn't been included for santana, and i would rather bring the matter here than trample on some sorta consensus and shit Ayyydoc (talk) 23:36, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Doesn't seem to be commonly used. It is mentioned in the article but doesn't seem lead worthy. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:16, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Carlos santana

    [edit]

    Brother jorge santana of grupo malo famos song such as suavesito passed away 2016 2600:6C51:667F:F276:E0F7:788B:74F6:67E3 (talk) 08:32, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Carlos_Santana&oldid=1233713426"