Talk:Interracial marriage in the United States/Archive 1

673:"Unions between Black and White individuals are the lowest percentage of intermarriage, with the latest figure of 11.9 percent." This is an updated quote from 2013, which is more relevant than statistics from 2009. "Black/White intimate relationships first occurred under the umbrella of slavery and most were nonconsensual." This tells the story of how interracial pairings first began in the United States between blacks and whites and can ultimately relate to interracial pairings in modern times. Critical race theory should also be defined in order to understand black and white interracial pairings. "Two of the theory's main assertions are that racism is a common, everyday lived experience for people of color and that individuals and their specific roles in society are socially constructed based on a system of power relations that favors Whites." This can explain the different views of interracial relationships and marriages. This article could also explain representations of interracial relationships or marriages between blacks and whites in mass media, such as television shows, movies, magazines, books, or other types of media. "The first Black/White intimate kiss to take place on television was in an episode of the science fiction television series Star Trek." This could show first cases of interracial intimate relationships between blacks and whites represented in television. "One of the earliest mixed race couples to appear on television was Tom (White) and Helen (Black) Willis on the popular sitcom 353:

look at the 2010 census for your data on that subjects. Overall the statistical data is good, but there is clearly some political correctness involved. When it comes to black/white marriages you talk about the difference in Black Male/White Female, marriages compared to White Male/Black Female, but then you say a bunch of things to try to even things out. As far as the ratio goes. BM/WF marriages outdid WM/BF marriages by a decent amount from 1880 until the mid 1900s when things began to even up. The 1960 census the advantaged switched to black female/white male marriages(26,000-25,000). Things changed and BM/WF marriages gained significant advantage in the 1970 census and even greater in 1980 when they outdid WM/BF marriages by a ratio of 3.48/1. The ratio dropped some in the early 80s, but since then has been consistently around 2/1. So the ratio has not been in a steady decline. Of course if you take the year when it was at it's highest, you are going to get a decline. By the same token if I were to start things from the 1960 census, we would have an increase. The ratio has not show a consistent pattern of going either up or down. Also why wouldn't that part mention the statistics from 2010, where the ratio was 2.32/1.

1205:"Nearly 20% of Black-White couples divorced or separated compared with 13.5% of Hispanic-White couples and 8.4% of Asian-White couples. Furthermore, consistent with the third homogamy hypothesis, both White-Black and Hispanic-White couples were more likely to divorce or separate than endogamous couples from either of the origin groups (10% of White-White, 16% of Black-Black, and 9% among Hispanic endogamous couples). For Asians, however, the results were consistent with the ethnic convergence hypothesis (Hypothesis 4). Roughly 8.3% of Asian-White couples separated or divorced, a level that falls between the relatively high rates for White couples and the relatively low rates among Asian couples (1.4%). The descriptive results thus suggest that interracial couples, especially those involving Blacks and Hispanics, are more likely to divorce or separate than same-race couples. " 1922:

divorce, particularly for those marrying during the late 1980s. Compared to same-race white-white couples, they found that Black male–White female marriages and Asian male–White female marriages were more prone to divorce. Interestingly, those involving white male-non-white female marriages and Hispanic-non-Hispanic marriages tended toward lower risks of divorce. Researchers continue to focus on understanding these more fragile interracial marriages. While they cannot conclude that race is the cause per se of divorce, it does seem to be associated with higher risk of divorce or separation (Zhang and Van Hook, 2009). One notable finding is that there is a consistent elevated divorce rate for white females in interracial marriages.

1869:

acknowledges that Hispanic is an ethnicity but it’s also the most intermarriage with White at a much higher rate than all else, however most of those Hispanics would be Mexican Americans which are European/Native mixed and the article does not discuss that. The article “Interracial Marriage” seemed to primarily only expand on specifically Chinese and White women intermarriage and leaves out almost any information on all other intermarriages. The source used for it leads to a paragraph that has almost zero relation to why was written in the article. I have a feeling an Asian man wrote this specifically to make Asian men seem more wanted.

564:

of their first marriage lasting 20 years, while black men had a 53% chance of their first marriage lasting 20 years. The data is only about first marriages, but it probably would give a good indication of overall marriage stability for both groups, and it's the best data post 2002 that I have found. Most blacks who marry outside of their race in the United States marry white people. If marriages involving black females, and white men were so much more successful than those involving black men and white women, you would suspect that black women would have a greater chance of their first marriage reaching 20 years.

2321:. The reality is it wasn't really the "race" which was in the minority but rather the "race" perceived and treated as being "inferior". The idea was to avoid "tainting" their "race" with these "inferior" people. While minority was accurate in the US in so much as once these really begun to be applied, it was always the majority towards the minority it doesn't have to be beyond the difficult a minority can have subjugating a majority. An obvious example is if we look outside the US, while in South Africa they handled things somewhat different for most of the time where legal racism was prevalent with the 2368:

they've actually stopped discouraging such marriages in the recent past. The statement does say "unequivocally condemn all racism" which should mean they no longer discourage such marriages, but it's easily possible to see that the church might argue it's not racism to discourage such marriages. Whether the church refuses to directly say they no longer discourage interracial marriages because they want to pretend they never did after they stopped saying they were a sin, or it's because they still do, who knows, but it's their decision not clearly say such marriages are no longer (or not) discouraged.

1428: 1344: 1062: 2184: 2325:"race" being used for most of those who were mixed, we can be sure if they did implement such a thing, they wouldn't be making the children of white South Africans and a black South Africans as white because whites were in the minority. We need to accurate reflect what the practice was, while making it clear what reality is. (I.E. That it was the race treated as inferior in their social order but that there is no such thing as an inferior race.) And lower status seems an adequate way to reflect this without needing to get into the nitty gritty. 924: 646: 90:. Its largest issues are the inclusion of points of view from non-academic personnel, the excessive quoting directly from source material, and the inclusion of synthesis which was often unsupported by said source material. Two of the largest paragraphs also were not directly relevant to the topic of interracial marriage. I found the sub-section to require so much work to be brought up to Knowledge standards I felt it was best to simply trim it down to its current size until these updates have been made. 846:

and Asians, intermarriage rates between White and Hispanic newlyweds do not vary by gender. The combined median earnings of White/Hispanic couples are lower than those of White/White couples but higher than those of Hispanic/Hispanic couples. 23% of Hispanic men who married White women have a college degree compared to only 10% of Hispanic men who married a Hispanic woman. 33% of Hispanic women who married a White husband are college-educated compared to 13% of Hispanic women who married a Hispanic man.

741:

193:) 21:35, 27 October 2009 (UTC) take out the filipino because by culture Filipinos are actually of any race to tell the truth not all filipinos are asian. But some that are not like to think that the philippines is 100% Asian when really it's not. If you go there I've seen Filipinos of different cultures I know all this. It's asian by geography. But by culture all kinds of races. Don't insist it's not true cause it is so stop thinking you delusions and look in! 31: 2348:

Priesthood" specifically states "Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form."

1748: 2236: 2136: 1379: 1272: 1003: 877: 594: 2290: 780:

Knowledge.Of approximately 275,500 new interracial or interethnic marriages in 2010, white/Hispanic couples accounted for more than four-in-ten (43%), white/Asian couples made up 14% and white/black couples made up 12%. Intermarriage rates among white and Hispanic newlyweds do not vary by gender. Intermarriage rates among white and Hispanic newlyweds do not vary by gender.

1212:

white husand / black wife and black husband / white wife couples are more proned to divorce that white / white couples. Both asian husband / white wife and white husband / asian wife are less proned to divorce than white / white couples. However, interracial asian / white couples (both combinations) are more proned to divorce than same race asian /asian couples.

402:

not going to go through the data and figure out the methodology employed, how it might be biased, etc., but I just find the concept highly dubious. There are many factors involved in the success of interracial marriages (specifically how they define them), and I wonder if they controlled against all of the other factors. Anyone else have thoughts on this?

1944:

addition, white female/black male and white female/Asian male marriages were more prone to divorce than were white/white couples. Couples with non-white females/white males and Hispanic/non-Hispanic individuals had lower rates of divorce. Gender appears to play a role, such that white female/non-white male marriages are at a greater risk for divorce.

1104:

specifically about Asian and White marriages. Furthermore, the source claims that Indian men actually marry white women less than Indian women marry white men. Therefore, placing the claim that Indian men marry non-Indian women more than Indian women marry non-Indian men under the Asian and White sub-section is also misleading.

1752: 1932:

For example, interracial couples that consist of White female/Black male and White female/Asian male were more likely to divorce than White/White couples (Bratter & King, 2008). White/Latino marriages were also at a higher risk for marital dissolution than homogenous Latino marriages, with Latino

1649:

The last paragraph in Asian and White is wrong according to the referenced source. In the source, the figures cited are for outmarry rates, not interracial. The authors have 3 different groups: outmarriage, inmarriage, and interracial. Outmarriage and inmarriage refers to ethnicities such as Japanese

1410:

Change the section on marriage squeeze to include not only African American women, but also Asian American men. Since Asian American women intermarry at much higher rates than Asian American men do, and women of other ethnicities categorically reject Asian men as romantic partners, Asian American men

514:

Undue weight refers to isolated studies by professional researchers that have not yet been vetted/have not yet been peer-reviewed/did not achieve consesus in the scholarly community. As stated, the cited article is peer-reviewed and has been published on a government educational website, establishing

311:

This article uses several weasel words and subtleties to in bias of promoting interracial marriage. Please unlock the article so I can change the graphic of the US showing the dates that interracial marraige was made legal in the states. Earlier dates are shown in GREEN which signifies good to most

1142:

purports to show "interracial marriages from pairings that are most likely to divorce to the least likely" but what it actually shows is what percentage each parings make up of total interracial marriages(notice they all add up to 1). Table 3 has the information relevant for comparative relationship

1034:

I propose the conclusions stated in Asian male/White female marriage divorce rates to be changed as the sample size provided in Jenifer Brater's text is way too small and was done during a time where systemic intonations against asian men still exist, and systemic suggestions of yellow fever + white

748:

Also fro the Pew social trends: In 2010, seven-in-ten (70%) new intermarriages involved a white spouse. Of approximately 275,500 new interracial or interethnic marriages in 2010, white/Hispanic couples accounted for more than four-in-ten (43%), white/Asian couples made up 14% and white/black couples

563:

Another important detail about the data is that is taken from 2002 National Survey of Family Growth, which means the data is over a decade old. I found the homepage of the National Survey of Family Growth, and found some interesting data from their 2006-10 survey. Black women had just a 37% chance

541:

On a related note, the plaintiff highlighted the controversy & sensitivity which seems to continue to surround the topic of interracial marriage, and its dynamics. It underscores the necessity for us to use the most reliable source material that is available. Peer-reviewed studies that have been

497:

Material such as an article, book, monograph, or research paper that has been vetted by the scholarly community is regarded as reliable. If the material has been published in reputable peer-reviewed sources or by well-regarded academic presses, generally it has been at least preliminarily vetted by

401:

I find the section on marital instability among interracial couples to be highly dubious, especially the conclusion that white women marrying black men are the most unstable. I suspect any sort of study that was commissioned to get at these statistics was designed toward a particular outcome. I'm

352:

You do realize that the Interracial marriage vs cohabitation section is from the 1990 U.S. Census. You can read the 36th reference(I got to the article, it doesn't stay on for long), or reference article 37. It is talked about as if it is current data, when it is over 20 years old. Maybe you can

268:

A lot of people don't seem to realize that when the federal courts strike down a law, that law actually remains on the books. It is merely deemed unenforceable. The legislature may go on to formally repeal the law or not, at its discretion. A formal repeal is basically a symbolic measure, but it

1921:

Moving beyond interracial–interethnic communication styles and response to transgressions, Bratter and King (2008) used data from the 2002 National Survey of Familial Growth to examine divorce rates for interracial couples. The study revealed that, overall, interracial couples have higher rates of

1807:

that it's about Americans, so it literally goes without saying that the reference is not to a distant war in China or Finland. It's a well-known writing principle that you don't repeat a word in a sentence like this unless you have a point to make about it, and the point that this article is about

1211:

The wikipedia article states that all interracial couples (involving a white spouse) are more proned to divorce than white husand / white wife couples with the only exception of white husband / black wife couples who are 44 percent less likely to divorce. The chart in the link says otherwise. Both

1112:

The whole second paragraph in the "Culutral Background" section and the entire "Education and interracial marriage" section fail to provide any citations. Citations are necessary to avoid plagiarism, copyright infringements, and to ensure that the article provides actual information (not someone's

845:

Of the 275,500 new intermarried pairings in 2010, 43.3% were White-Hispanic (compared to White-Asian at 14.4%, White-Black at 11.9%, and Other Combinations at 30.4%; other combinations consists of pairings between different minority groups, multi-racial people, and American Indians). Unlike blacks

779:

We are in 2010 and the new 2010 information came out. You are still in 2008. The US Census was on 2010 and the report came out. Indians are consider Asians for the Census. We are in 2013.Many of your resources are old and fake. nOt being offensive just want you to improve. You know anyone can edit

740:

625:

The article vaguely states that outmarriage among Asian Indians is higher for Indian males than Indian females without pointing out the dissimilarities which are : outmarriage to white Americans and African Americans is higher among Indian females whereas outmarriage to Hispanic and other Asian is

1943:

Bratter and King (2009) examined whether crossing racial boundaries increases the risk of divorce. They compared the likelihood of divorce for same race couples to interracial couples and found that interracial couples (particularly those who married in the 1980s) have higher rates of divorce. In

2347:

This article cites to decades old sources from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints website instead of more recent ones, incorrectly insinuating that the LDS church actively prohibits or discourages interracial marriage. More recent sources, such as the Church's article "Race and the

243:

The source indicated is just a copy of Census Bureau data, with a gross misinterpretation which has mislead you. These are not data on "biracial marriages" but on "married couples" (60.6 million marriages in 2007 is 121 million newly-wed in one year!). They are not census but Current Population

2367:

This doesn't seem to address what our article currently says which is that even after the LDS stopped saying it was a sin, they still discouraged it. There's nothing in that statement which clearly disavows this stance, and our article suggests the church has been fairly wiffy waffy on whether

184:

for asian man to marry a white women is 1.94 times likely than white man to marry a asian women. Ther is 5 different groups. Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, and Filipino. My sum is 66% white husband with asian women, 34% asian man with white women. Asian man with white women is not that

1868:

This article brings in the divorce rates but focuses hugely on Asian men marrying White women, later in the article it states that White/Asian intermarriage was the most common but does not acknowledge that White men and Asian women is the most common of the two. The data used by pew research

1613:

There is nothing in Judaism against interracial marriage. Once a person convert his/her religion to Judaism, that's 100% acceptable. No one cares if that person is African/Asian ect. There is no opposition to *interracial* marriage. (race is not a factor). Can someone add that to the article?

704:

All quotes and information come from: 1.Luther, Catherine A., and Jodi L. Rightler-McDaniels. "More Trouble than the Good Lord Ever Intended": Representations of Interracial Marriage in U.S. News-Oriented Magazines." Journal Of Magazine & New Media Research 14, no. 1 (Summer 2013): 1-30.

288:

Should there be some mention of the current (As of April 2012) President of the U.S.A. being the product of a interracial marriage and arguably being a half of one (I say arguably because President Obama has stated, I believe, that he primarily identifies as an African-American.)? Would it be

93:

As a general rule of thumb, it's best to simply stick to quoting facts, figures and conclusions of established researchers who have seen their work published within mainstream media, government and science outlets, and to avoid including direct quotations as well as editorial points of view.

1042:. It has a larger AMWF sample size, and in fact concludes that it has the lowest divorce rates. If Knowledge is indeed the impartial encyclopedia it claims to be and not the closet white dominated pool pushing an agenda that I sometimes suspect, this should definitely be taken into account. 1303:

in the chart labeled "Married couples in the United States in 2010" the combination of "White Wife" with "Other Husband" is listed as 44%. When all of the %'s in the column are added up it exceeds 100%. In the text immediately below it in the last line of the first bullet point it reads

1103:

The source used for citation note 16 claims that Indian men marry non-Indian women more than Indian women marry non-Indian men, "non-Indian" referring to: non-Indian Asian, White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Multiracial & All Others, and therefore should not be placed in a sub-section

1124:

The site referenced, "Model Minority," appears to be a fringe forum of a few regulars posting vile hateful racist diatribes against non-Asians. Not a good look for WIKIPEDIA. Perhaps a trusted source can be found? I am new here and not comfortable with editing articles yet, thanks.

1465:

While I understand the consensus on wikipedia is that Middle Easterners and North Africans are white, we should maybe mention how children who are half European descent (Italian for example) and half Middle Eastern (Ashkenazi Jewish for example) could be seen as bi-racial.

1325:

I don't blame you for reading the table the way that you did. It's a confusing table, and it only makes sense if read from left to right (I added a note to indicate such). The columns are only useful in that they provide context for the rows. The columns alone mean nothing.

1158:

It shouldn't have taken so long to fix this issue, but you are correct. I have not created a new table using the data from Table 3 of that paper, and I'm not sure how clearly it can be explained to the average person reading the page. Thank you for pointing this issue out.

1562:

The Married couples in the United States in 2010 chart is not gender equitable, breaking out percentages for husbands by race, by not for wives by race. For some reason, those who are horizontal in these matters are added; those are vertical in these matters are not. —

752:

Among whites and Hispanics, there are no gender differences in intermarriage rates. About 9% of both male and female white newlyweds in 2010 married a nonwhite spouse, and about a quarter of both male and female Hispanic newlyweds in 2010 married someone who is not

1795:, then arguing that his crusade is about systemic bias. In fact, it's simply unnecessary changes and clunky prose. This is an article whose named topic is the United States of America. No one reading it would think that "Civil War" would be a reference to the 978:

This entire section appears to be OR and is completely unsupported by citations. I'm going to delete it. If someone wants to restore it, with WP:RS and non OR language, that's great. But as of now it is not appropriate according to WP standards.

1700:

Interracial marriage in the United States has been legal throughout the United States since at least the 1967 U.S. Supreme Court (Warren Court) decision Loving v. Virginia (1967) that held that "anti-miscegenation" laws were unconstitutional.

1673:

1215:

Same race hispanic / hispanic couples are less proned to divorce than same race white / white couples . However, interracial hispanic / white couples (both combinations) are more proned to divorced than same race white / white couples.

2318:. I have not checked the source but while I agree the original wording was problematic in that it failed to make it clear we're talking about perceptions, it was also IMO far more accurate that "whichever race was the minority" 1827:

Agreed, this is a completely unnecessary change. It is clear from the context that this is in reference to the American Civil War, and as long as it is linked to the correct article there should be no confusion. I don't see a

841:

I agree your sources are wrong. Maybe you shoul use the information from the Pew Report on intermarriage instea o writing an article about what you want it to be.//www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-1-overview/

1195:

The statistic of the divorce rate of the different types of interracial couples in this article is taken from only one study. There is another study that shows something different. This one has a larger sample size.

542:

conducted by social scientists and which have achieved scholarly consensus (either through publication in acadamic journals or in official government sources) are the most solid reference points for this purpose.

1791:(the fully disambiguated name for the article). Now User:SuperSkaterDude45 has repeatedly changed that to "Americans before the American Civil War", over my objections, ironically justifying this "fix" by citing 1893:

I have looked over the article and it does have a strong bias. Rather than pointing fingers or alleging agendas its best to read the sources given, and check them against other sources, preferably secondary.

1653:

Either the paragraph needs to replace interracial with outmarriage, or the data points need to be updated. Either way, the last sentence does not correctly state how the authors define interracial marriage.

2093:

I am wondering if any of the states where interracial marriage was prohibited until the Supreme Court legalized marriage nationally in Loving have since either codified this or if any have not. Thank you!

224:. Changing the table would be easy enough, but the body text will need updating as well, which involves some calculation effort. I'll try to get round to it one of these days if no one else has a go. -- 2065: 2013: 269:

can be an important piece of symbolism. So I think the article should discuss when, how, and whether states have chosen to do this--I know that the issue has in fact cropped up in several states.

476:

The source provided is a peer-reviewed study conducted by social scientists that has been published on a government educational site. No type of source material is more reliable, as outlined in

1913:

In fact, there is nothing in Zhang and van Hook that claims to "contradict" anything, and several secondary sources support Bratter and King, including one that discusses both of these studies.

2274: 959:

Did this article take the issue of black women finding it difficult to marry out of their race and make it about white men? Seriously? I'm deleting this unless an authority states otherwise.

1728: 136:

This interracial gender gap is even sharper among black-white couples who cohabit without being married. Five times as many black men live with white women as white men live with black women

1787:

There has been a sentence in the "Historical background" section for the past two years that refers to the views of "Americans before the Civil War", with the last two words pipe-linked to

333:

this article seems to focus on interacial marriage post 1967. some states have allowed it for at least 126 years, and a few states never outlawed. this article should discuss this more.--

1650:

and Chinese, not race. Only interracial considers marriage between a non-Asian. The correct interracial figure are 49.9% Japanese, 30.2% Chinese, and 19.2% Korean as per the source.

956:" It may be in part due to the still lingering effects of social ostracism, to which European American men who married African American women were heavily subjected in the past." 1100:

sub-section: "Indian Americans were also the only Asian American group with higher outmarriage for men, whereas all other Asian American groups had higher outmarriage for women."

1208:

Place close attention to the chart in the link that says: "Table 3. Hazard Ratios From Cox Proportional Hazards Models of Marital Dissolution by Race and Gender of the Couple"

312:

people and later dates are shown in RED which has a heavy negative connotation. These colors need changed to more neutral colors that do not promote any kind of bias.

810:

Your information needs a update. WE are in 2013 not 2008. Even the US Government update their information because it was wrong.The Update was in 2010.Hope this help.--

47: 17: 2039: 2109: 1981:

interestingly, pew did another study in 2017 on the subject, and a large portion differs from what's in this wikipedia article. here is the updated study:

1904:"This study's sample size of White wife/Asian husband marriages was 5 couples and therefore not of a reliable statistical strength to draw any conclusions." 74:

I've had to delete virtually the entire sub-section due to its failure to comply with a multitude of Knowledge guidelines, specifically those detailed in

2382:

There is no evidence or source that the church discourages interracial marriage, so labeling it as such is unfounded and the passage should be revised.

1963:

Forgot to mention: this article should talk about why these couples have an elevated divorce risk. It's closely tied to discrimination by the sources. -

1909:"The Bratter and King study is not statistically valid for Asian-white pairings, particularly those in which the male is Asian and the female is white," 454:

What is clear is that the poster here is uncomfortable with data he does not want to see. Facts are facts, if you can't accept them, well please leave.

2246: 2146: 1764: 1389: 1282: 1013: 887: 604: 1982: 1449: 1435: 2361: 2074: 2048: 2022: 1144: 120: 2349: 1544: 1498: 1311: 960: 658: 630: 441: 334: 315: 200: 1708: 1681: 1520: 1473: 853: 760: 186: 147: 2278: 677:(1975-1985)." This shows one of the earliest cases of interracial relationships between blacks and whites showcased on television. 1732: 796: 1633: 385: 2214: 2167:

Black men are not twice as likely to end in divorce as black women. The book listed stems from a survey over twenty years old.

721: 693: 626:

higher among Indian males according to reference 14 : Asian nation,landscape of Asian Americans already given in the article.

1751:

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available

1081: 1359: 1121:″Of cohabiting Asian men, slightly over 37% of Asian men have white female partners and over 10% married to white women.″ 113:

The black and white section of this article looks like it needs more detail and information regarding that combination.

2391: 2377: 2334: 2309: 2282: 2220: 2176: 2121: 2103: 1993: 1972: 1958: 1878: 1855: 1841: 1821: 1776: 1736: 1716: 1689: 1663: 1637: 1600: 1586: 1567: 1552: 1528: 1502: 1481: 1454: 1420: 1363: 1335: 1319: 1234: 1182: 1168: 1152: 1085: 1068:

Please mention the specific changes you would like to make in the format of "Change X to Y". Also, you need to obtain a

1054: 988: 968: 945: 916: 861: 819: 800: 768: 725: 697: 662: 638: 579: 551: 524: 463: 445: 425: 411: 389: 342: 323: 299: 278: 257: 237: 208: 169: 155: 128: 103: 629:

I feel this is an important piece of information so as to not deceive people and construct non-existent stereotypes .

1727:

In the “Marital stability” section, the name of the author of the quoted 2009 study is Yuanting Zhang, not Yaunting.

2195: 1489: 1444: 75: 38: 1225:

I moved this comment here because it was originally posted above all the other comments. I have left it unsigned.

930:

it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.

1989: 1983:

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/05/18/intermarriage-in-the-u-s-50-years-after-loving-v-virginia/

1900:. Not only do these articles hijack the narrative, they contain copious original resewrch with statements like: 1355: 124: 1148: 652:

it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. —

1315: 964: 634: 338: 319: 2242: 2142: 1712: 1685: 1659: 1548: 1524: 1477: 1385: 1278: 1009: 883: 600: 204: 1252: 1200: 1173:

Done. I have used model 4 from table 3 because (at least according to the authors) it is the best control.

1129: 1039: 912: 2357: 1985: 1574: 857: 764: 421: 407: 274: 190: 151: 1874: 2172: 2117: 2099: 1851: 1817: 1493: 1439: 1416: 832: 815: 792: 653: 436: 139: 1655: 212:

Reply: Actually, the intermarriage rate for white female/Asian male is much lower, more like below 20%

2350:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng

1412: 908: 811: 788: 1897: 1704: 1677: 1629: 1625: 1621: 1596: 1592: 1516: 1469: 1219:

Other studies should be used in the wikipedia article because other studies show someting different.

849: 784: 756: 709: 681: 575: 571: 381: 377: 373: 295: 196: 116: 1888: 1870: 1139: 713: 685: 143: 2387: 2373: 2330: 2210: 2168: 1968: 1954: 1792: 1069: 1046: 717: 689: 543: 516: 459: 290: 253: 95: 1896:

As an example, I looked at the divorce section you mentioned in both this article and its parent,

1837: 1829: 1788: 1772: 1582: 1331: 1230: 1178: 1164: 1077: 1050: 984: 547: 520: 362: 356: 245: 231: 99: 745: 2273:“lower” Without context this comes off as generally accepted fact or language; which is wrong. 1128:

EDIT: Here is the source. ALso suggests that AMWF relationships have the lowest divorce rates

2353: 2071: 2045: 2019: 417: 403: 270: 416:

Actually, all of that section is indexed to one section. Isn't that a red flag of some sort?

367: 2305: 2191: 2113: 2095: 2041:

Biracial Families: Crossing Boundaries, Blending Cultures, and Challenging Racial Ideologies

1847: 1813: 828: 1113:

say-so) - this can only be done if we can verify the sources and assess their credibility.

2190:

it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a

1577:. I'm not sure what purpose that will serve but if you feel it's necessary then go ahead. 432: 2108:

To answer my own question, all states have codified the decision by the early 2000s. See

2296:

Spirit of request fulfilled but with phrasing different from what was presented above. —

1310:

This directly contradicts the information in the chart. I believe the 44% is incorrect.

435:, and the fact that it relies on a single source. Let's see if anybody else comments. — 2383: 2369: 2326: 2203: 1964: 1950: 1756: 1540: 455: 249: 166: 2315: 1833: 1768: 1578: 1351: 1327: 1226: 1174: 1160: 1073: 980: 477: 226: 146:

of white male to marry black female is 117/403 didn't mention what the article said--

87: 79: 220:

There are more up-to-date (2007) figures on biracial marriages in America available

1949:

Thus no published secondary source is coming to the same conclusion as the Wiki. -

940: 83: 1117:

Fringe Asian-supremacy hate site being cited here, eroding WIKIPEDIA's credibility

431:

You've raised good points. I've tagged the section for POV problems, specifically

1513:

Moses had a black wife, and king Solomon had many. I think it worth mentioning.

568: 2297: 1933:

husband/white wife intermarriages at the highest risk (Fu and Wolfganger, 2011).

1747: 1564: 181: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

221: 1846:

I think that's a sufficient time waiting for anyone to support this change. -

1618:

Why? Is there anything against interracial marriage in any other religion?

1143:

stability(but I don't think it really a good idea to put that on the wiki).

705:

Communication & Mass Media Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed May 4, 2014).

2289: 753:

Hispanic.Source://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-1-overview/

2322: 1864:

This article and the “Interracial Marriage” article seem to have a bias.

1307:

1.0% of married White women were married to a man classified as "other"

1253:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00582.x/full

1201:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00582.x/full

1130:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00582.x/full

1040:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00582.x/full

1092:

Incorrect And Misleading Use Of A Source In Asian and White Sub-Section

933: 161:

Note that the section you quote is specifically regarding cohabitation

70:

To the author of the "The Effect of Racial Stereotypes" sub-section

1072:

on the talk page of this article before you make an edit request.

289:

relevant, to show interracial marriages in society and politics?

180:

Is the data on article quite right? Becasue when I calculate on

2067:

The Cambridge Handbook of the International Psychology of Women

1539:

Shouldn't the history start with before the laws were enacted,

2314:

I've changed it to 'lower status' similar to the wording used

2230: 2130: 1373: 1266: 1108:"Cultural background" and "Education and interracial marriage" 997: 871: 588: 363:

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0060.pdf

357:

http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/race/interractab1.txt

25: 2267:

Change “lower racial category” to “Non-white” or “Minority”

746:

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/chapter-1-overview/

1411:

are facing a marriage squeeze as well in the United States.

2352:

This should be updated to match currently taught doctrine.

2038:

Roy, Roudi Nazarinia; Rollins, Alethea (12 December 2018).

1573:

Feel free to create the table yourself. The information is

368:

http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/ms-la/tabms-3.txt

2343:

Comments on Church of Jesus Christ's stance is outdated

2319: 515:

scholarly consensus. The tag therefore is unnecessary.

2012:

Ting-Toomey, Stella; Dorjee, Tenzin (23 August 2018).

1812:

confused about what civil war this was referring to? -

1783:

Belaboring the fact that this article is about America

669:

More information needed for section on Black and White

2064:

Cheung, Fanny M.; Halpern, Diane F. (6 August 2020).

1742:

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

1509:

Religious opposition to interracial marriage is odd

329:

why not talk history of interracial marriage in USA

2270:or something that does not imply diminished value 264:Formal repeal of laws against interracial marriage 1808:America is already well established. Was anybody 348:Cohabitation vs Marriage and Some More Complaints 733:Please correct the Article and include Hispanics 1696:Semi-protected edit request on 10 February 2021 1669:Semi-protected edit request on 10 February 2021 1263:Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2017 18:Talk:Interracial marriage in the United States 2227:Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2022 2015:Communicating Across Cultures, Second Edition 1941: 1930: 1919: 1461:Jewish (Middle Eastern) & White Marriages 1438:that support the change you want to be made. 569:http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr049.pdf 8: 2110:Anti-miscegenation laws in the United States 1558:Married couples in the United States in 2010 994:Semi-protected edit request on 10 March 2017 585:Semi-protected edit request on 26 April 2014 2127:Semi-protected edit request on 24 May 2023 1702: 1675: 1619: 1514: 1467: 1370:Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2018 1038:I present a more modern research article, 974:Education and interracial marriage section 868:Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2014 2247:Interracial marriage in the United States 2147:Interracial marriage in the United States 1765:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment 1390:Interracial marriage in the United States 1283:Interracial marriage in the United States 1014:Interracial marriage in the United States 888:Interracial marriage in the United States 737:From the Knowledge Latino and Hispanic : 605:Interracial marriage in the United States 2004: 1763:Above undated message substituted from 1245: 1135:Divorce Rates By Pairing chart is wrong 2070:. Cambridge University Press. p. 980. 1035:worship have not yet been manifested. 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2275:2601:143:8000:B5C0:119E:1BB1:AF25:4F3 2018:. Guilford Publications. p. 364-365. 1723:Minor editing request: Name of author 7: 1729:2607:9880:3628:96:D8A0:A703:2B3:BFBB 775:Old information not longer reliable 2342: 1191:Moved comment from January 2, 2015 24: 952:On the "Marriage Squeeze" section 2288: 2234: 2182: 2134: 1746: 1426: 1377: 1342: 1270: 1060: 1001: 922: 875: 827:what resources are old and fake? 644: 592: 248:, provided up to 2009. Regards. 29: 1492:that describe them that way. — 1488:Only if we can cite mainstream 244:Survey figures. Better use the 2392:21:44, 11 September 2023 (UTC) 820:20:10, 28 September 2013 (UTC) 801:18:33, 28 September 2013 (UTC) 109:More detail on Black and White 1: 2122:05:59, 17 November 2022 (UTC) 1803:Civil War. The sentence even 1717:20:51, 10 February 2021 (UTC) 1690:20:50, 10 February 2021 (UTC) 1664:05:33, 24 December 2020 (UTC) 1364:14:54, 23 December 2017 (UTC) 1336:02:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC) 1320:20:32, 21 December 2017 (UTC) 989:12:56, 29 December 2016 (UTC) 580:18:56, 11 February 2014 (UTC) 390:02:43, 11 February 2014 (UTC) 238:17:39, 28 November 2010 (UTC) 209:16:45, 29 December 2009 (UTC) 2362:22:00, 11 January 2023 (UTC) 1994:11:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC) 1777:00:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC) 1638:21:32, 30 January 2020 (UTC) 1609:Adding Judaism point of view 1601:21:30, 30 January 2020 (UTC) 1235:02:14, 24 October 2017 (UTC) 1183:02:10, 24 October 2017 (UTC) 1169:01:29, 24 October 2017 (UTC) 324:23:04, 14 October 2012 (UTC) 170:16:36, 2 November 2009 (UTC) 156:20:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC) 2378:12:49, 14 August 2023 (UTC) 2335:13:33, 14 August 2023 (UTC) 2310:13:25, 16 August 2022 (UTC) 2283:01:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC) 2261:to reactivate your request. 2249:has been answered. Set the 2161:to reactivate your request. 2149:has been answered. Set the 1553:12:01, 7 January 2020 (UTC) 1543:or even earlier examples ? 1529:01:54, 21 August 2018 (UTC) 1404:to reactivate your request. 1392:has been answered. Set the 1297:to reactivate your request. 1285:has been answered. Set the 1116: 1028:to reactivate your request. 1016:has been answered. Set the 969:01:44, 27 August 2015 (UTC) 902:to reactivate your request. 890:has been answered. Set the 619:to reactivate your request. 607:has been answered. Set the 498:one or more other scholars. 397:Marital Instability section 284:Current presedential couple 279:02:16, 1 October 2011 (UTC) 129:00:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC) 2410: 1938:Again from another source, 1856:17:16, 17 March 2022 (UTC) 1587:01:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC) 1568:19:03, 11 April 2019 (UTC) 1153:21:58, 1 August 2017 (UTC) 1086:21:56, 29 March 2017 (UTC) 1055:19:33, 10 March 2017 (UTC) 663:02:36, 27 April 2014 (UTC) 639:09:53, 26 April 2014 (UTC) 2104:23:50, 21 July 2022 (UTC) 1973:19:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC) 1959:23:54, 21 June 2022 (UTC) 1842:15:55, 9 March 2022 (UTC) 1822:19:43, 8 March 2022 (UTC) 1737:15:33, 29 July 2021 (UTC) 1503:20:15, 14 July 2018 (UTC) 1482:00:10, 14 July 2018 (UTC) 300:19:55, 5 April 2012 (UTC) 104:11:09, 29 July 2009 (UTC) 2221:02:01, 24 May 2023 (UTC) 2177:01:31, 24 May 2023 (UTC) 1879:04:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC) 1455:15:01, 22 May 2018 (UTC) 1421:14:21, 22 May 2018 (UTC) 946:16:36, 7 June 2014 (UTC) 917:16:23, 7 June 2014 (UTC) 862:17:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC) 769:17:24, 4 June 2014 (UTC) 552:11:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC) 525:10:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC) 464:15:35, 12 May 2012 (UTC) 446:21:31, 10 May 2012 (UTC) 426:21:25, 10 May 2012 (UTC) 343:05:30, 6 July 2013 (UTC) 258:17:32, 13 May 2011 (UTC) 726:02:26, 5 May 2014 (UTC) 698:18:09, 6 May 2014 (UTC) 412:19:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC) 2192:"change X to Y" format 1946: 1935: 1924: 307:heavily biased article 1755:. Student editor(s): 42:of past discussions. 1898:interracial marriage 2044:. Springer. p. 99. 1793:Knowledge:NOTBROKEN 1356:Upsidedown Keyboard 216:2007 census figures 176:White-Asian couples 1789:American Civil War 1753:on the course page 2265: 2264: 2165: 2164: 2076:978-1-108-60218-1 2050:978-3-319-96160-6 2024:978-1-4625-3652-8 1799:Civil War or the 1719: 1707:comment added by 1692: 1680:comment added by 1640: 1624:comment added by 1531: 1519:comment added by 1484: 1472:comment added by 1408: 1407: 1301: 1300: 1066:Not done for now: 1032: 1031: 906: 905: 852:comment added by 804: 787:comment added by 759:comment added by 729: 712:comment added by 701: 684:comment added by 623: 622: 393: 376:comment added by 199:comment added by 119:comment added by 67: 66: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 2401: 2302: 2292: 2256: 2252: 2238: 2237: 2231: 2218: 2206: 2202: 2198:if appropriate. 2186: 2185: 2156: 2152: 2138: 2137: 2131: 2081: 2080: 2061: 2055: 2054: 2035: 2029: 2028: 2009: 1892: 1779: 1750: 1490:reliable sources 1436:reliable sources 1430: 1429: 1399: 1395: 1381: 1380: 1374: 1346: 1345: 1292: 1288: 1274: 1273: 1267: 1255: 1250: 1064: 1063: 1023: 1019: 1005: 1004: 998: 943: 939: 936: 926: 925: 897: 893: 879: 878: 872: 864: 803: 781: 771: 728: 706: 700: 678: 648: 647: 614: 610: 596: 595: 589: 392: 370: 303: 234: 229: 211: 138: 131: 63: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 2409: 2408: 2404: 2403: 2402: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2345: 2298: 2285: 2254: 2250: 2235: 2229: 2208: 2204: 2200: 2196:reliable source 2183: 2154: 2150: 2135: 2129: 2091: 2086: 2085: 2084: 2077: 2063: 2062: 2058: 2051: 2037: 2036: 2032: 2025: 2011: 2010: 2006: 1986:ContentRepairer 1886: 1866: 1785: 1762: 1744: 1725: 1698: 1671: 1647: 1645:Asian and white 1611: 1560: 1537: 1511: 1501: 1463: 1434:please provide 1427: 1397: 1393: 1378: 1372: 1343: 1308: 1290: 1286: 1271: 1265: 1260: 1259: 1258: 1251: 1247: 1193: 1137: 1119: 1110: 1098:Asian and White 1094: 1061: 1021: 1017: 1002: 996: 976: 954: 941: 934: 931: 923: 895: 891: 876: 870: 847: 782: 777: 754: 735: 707: 679: 671: 661: 645: 612: 608: 593: 587: 480:. Specifically: 444: 399: 371: 350: 331: 309: 293: 286: 266: 232: 227: 218: 194: 178: 134: 114: 111: 72: 59: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2407: 2405: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2344: 2341: 2340: 2339: 2338: 2337: 2272: 2263: 2262: 2239: 2228: 2225: 2224: 2223: 2194:and provide a 2163: 2162: 2139: 2128: 2125: 2090: 2087: 2083: 2082: 2075: 2056: 2049: 2030: 2023: 2003: 2002: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1979: 1978: 1977: 1976: 1975: 1947: 1939: 1936: 1928: 1925: 1917: 1914: 1911: 1906: 1901: 1894: 1865: 1862: 1861: 1860: 1859: 1858: 1848:Jason A. Quest 1814:Jason A. Quest 1784: 1781: 1743: 1740: 1724: 1721: 1697: 1694: 1670: 1667: 1646: 1643: 1642: 1641: 1610: 1607: 1606: 1605: 1604: 1603: 1559: 1556: 1541:Eleanor Butler 1536: 1533: 1510: 1507: 1506: 1505: 1497: 1462: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1406: 1405: 1382: 1371: 1368: 1367: 1366: 1339: 1338: 1306: 1299: 1298: 1275: 1264: 1261: 1257: 1256: 1244: 1243: 1239: 1238: 1237: 1192: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1185: 1145:208.124.113.16 1136: 1133: 1118: 1115: 1109: 1106: 1093: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1030: 1029: 1006: 995: 992: 975: 972: 953: 950: 949: 948: 904: 903: 880: 869: 866: 839: 838: 837: 836: 776: 773: 734: 731: 675:The Jeffersons 670: 667: 666: 665: 657: 621: 620: 597: 586: 583: 561: 560: 559: 558: 557: 556: 555: 554: 532: 531: 530: 529: 528: 527: 507: 506: 505: 504: 503: 502: 501: 500: 486: 485: 484: 483: 482: 481: 469: 468: 467: 466: 449: 448: 440: 398: 395: 361:Table 60 from 349: 346: 330: 327: 308: 305: 298:comment added 291:KathiravanIsak 285: 282: 265: 262: 261: 260: 217: 214: 177: 174: 173: 172: 140:From this site 121:96.229.189.127 110: 107: 71: 68: 65: 64: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2406: 2393: 2389: 2385: 2381: 2380: 2379: 2375: 2371: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2363: 2359: 2355: 2351: 2336: 2332: 2328: 2324: 2320: 2317: 2316:one-drop rule 2313: 2312: 2311: 2307: 2303: 2301: 2295: 2291: 2287: 2286: 2284: 2280: 2276: 2271: 2268: 2260: 2257:parameter to 2248: 2244: 2240: 2233: 2232: 2226: 2222: 2219: 2216: 2212: 2207: 2197: 2193: 2189: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2174: 2170: 2160: 2157:parameter to 2148: 2144: 2140: 2133: 2132: 2126: 2124: 2123: 2119: 2115: 2111: 2106: 2105: 2101: 2097: 2088: 2078: 2073: 2069: 2068: 2060: 2057: 2052: 2047: 2043: 2042: 2034: 2031: 2026: 2021: 2017: 2016: 2008: 2005: 2001: 1995: 1991: 1987: 1984: 1980: 1974: 1970: 1966: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1956: 1952: 1948: 1945: 1940: 1937: 1934: 1929: 1927:From page 99, 1926: 1923: 1918: 1916:From page 364 1915: 1912: 1910: 1907: 1905: 1902: 1899: 1895: 1890: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1880: 1876: 1872: 1863: 1857: 1853: 1849: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1839: 1835: 1831: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1823: 1819: 1815: 1811: 1806: 1802: 1798: 1794: 1790: 1782: 1780: 1778: 1774: 1770: 1766: 1760: 1758: 1754: 1749: 1741: 1739: 1738: 1734: 1730: 1722: 1720: 1718: 1714: 1710: 1706: 1695: 1693: 1691: 1687: 1683: 1679: 1668: 1666: 1665: 1661: 1657: 1651: 1644: 1639: 1635: 1631: 1627: 1623: 1617: 1616: 1615: 1608: 1602: 1598: 1594: 1590: 1589: 1588: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1572: 1571: 1570: 1569: 1566: 1557: 1555: 1554: 1550: 1546: 1545:194.207.86.26 1542: 1534: 1532: 1530: 1526: 1522: 1518: 1508: 1504: 1500: 1495: 1494:Malik Shabazz 1491: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1483: 1479: 1475: 1471: 1460: 1456: 1453: 1452: 1448: 1447: 1443: 1442: 1437: 1433: 1425: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1418: 1414: 1403: 1400:parameter to 1391: 1387: 1383: 1376: 1375: 1369: 1365: 1361: 1357: 1353: 1352:User:Jay eyem 1349: 1341: 1340: 1337: 1333: 1329: 1324: 1323: 1322: 1321: 1317: 1313: 1312:108.28.67.106 1305: 1296: 1293:parameter to 1284: 1280: 1276: 1269: 1268: 1262: 1254: 1249: 1246: 1242: 1236: 1232: 1228: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1220: 1217: 1213: 1209: 1206: 1203: 1202: 1197: 1190: 1184: 1180: 1176: 1172: 1171: 1170: 1166: 1162: 1157: 1156: 1155: 1154: 1150: 1146: 1141: 1134: 1132: 1131: 1126: 1122: 1114: 1107: 1105: 1101: 1099: 1091: 1087: 1083: 1079: 1075: 1071: 1067: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1052: 1048: 1045:Best regards 1043: 1041: 1036: 1027: 1024:parameter to 1015: 1011: 1007: 1000: 999: 993: 991: 990: 986: 982: 973: 971: 970: 966: 962: 961:117.56.215.14 957: 951: 947: 944: 938: 937: 929: 921: 920: 919: 918: 914: 910: 901: 898:parameter to 889: 885: 881: 874: 873: 867: 865: 863: 859: 855: 851: 843: 834: 830: 826: 825: 824: 823: 822: 821: 817: 813: 808: 805: 802: 798: 794: 790: 786: 774: 772: 770: 766: 762: 758: 750: 749:made up 12%. 747: 742: 738: 732: 730: 727: 723: 719: 715: 711: 702: 699: 695: 691: 687: 683: 676: 668: 664: 660: 655: 654:Malik Shabazz 651: 643: 642: 641: 640: 636: 632: 631:59.92.148.184 627: 618: 615:parameter to 606: 602: 598: 591: 590: 584: 582: 581: 577: 573: 570: 565: 553: 549: 545: 540: 539: 538: 537: 536: 535: 534: 533: 526: 522: 518: 513: 512: 511: 510: 509: 508: 499: 494: 493: 492: 491: 490: 489: 488: 487: 479: 475: 474: 473: 472: 471: 470: 465: 461: 457: 453: 452: 451: 450: 447: 443: 438: 437:Malik Shabazz 434: 430: 429: 428: 427: 423: 419: 414: 413: 409: 405: 396: 394: 391: 387: 383: 379: 375: 369: 365: 364: 359: 358: 354: 347: 345: 344: 340: 336: 335:75.141.115.25 328: 326: 325: 321: 317: 316:98.16.117.181 313: 306: 304: 301: 297: 292: 283: 281: 280: 276: 272: 263: 259: 255: 251: 247: 246:original data 242: 241: 240: 239: 236: 235: 230: 223: 215: 213: 210: 206: 202: 201:222.127.10.50 198: 192: 188: 183: 175: 171: 168: 164: 160: 159: 158: 157: 153: 149: 145: 141: 137: 132: 130: 126: 122: 118: 108: 106: 105: 101: 97: 91: 89: 85: 81: 77: 69: 62: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 2354:Cammywashere 2346: 2299: 2294:Partly done: 2293: 2269: 2266: 2258: 2243:edit request 2199: 2187: 2166: 2158: 2143:edit request 2107: 2092: 2089:Codification 2066: 2059: 2040: 2033: 2014: 2007: 1999: 1942: 1931: 1920: 1908: 1903: 1867: 1832:issue here. 1809: 1804: 1800: 1796: 1786: 1761: 1745: 1726: 1709:70.30.86.158 1703:— Preceding 1699: 1682:70.30.86.158 1676:— Preceding 1672: 1656:Bshshsodbdbd 1652: 1648: 1620:— Preceding 1612: 1561: 1538: 1521:37.142.4.203 1515:— Preceding 1512: 1474:99.23.39.251 1468:— Preceding 1464: 1450: 1445: 1440: 1431: 1409: 1401: 1386:edit request 1347: 1309: 1302: 1294: 1279:edit request 1248: 1240: 1221: 1218: 1214: 1210: 1207: 1204: 1199:Source: 1198: 1194: 1138: 1127: 1123: 1120: 1111: 1102: 1097: 1095: 1065: 1044: 1037: 1033: 1025: 1010:edit request 977: 958: 955: 932: 927: 907: 899: 884:edit request 854:181.66.94.82 848:— Preceding 844: 840: 809: 806: 783:— Preceding 778: 761:181.66.94.82 755:— Preceding 751: 744:Please read 743: 739: 736: 708:— Preceding 703: 680:— Preceding 674: 672: 649: 628: 624: 616: 601:edit request 566: 562: 496: 433:undue weight 418:Jasonnewyork 415: 404:Jasonnewyork 400: 372:— Preceding 366: 360: 355: 351: 332: 314: 310: 287: 271:Kevin Nelson 267: 225: 219: 187:209.129.85.4 179: 165:marriage. — 162: 148:209.129.85.4 135: 133: 112: 92: 73: 60: 43: 37: 2114:TenorTwelve 2096:TenorTwelve 1830:WP:SYSTEMIC 1413:Tobywashere 909:Itzkevinxd1 829:Patapsco913 812:Jenniferone 789:Jenniferone 294:—Preceding 195:—Preceding 115:—Preceding 36:This is an 2251:|answered= 2151:|answered= 2000:References 1626:Wassermaus 1593:Wassermaus 1394:|answered= 1354:'s reply. 1287:|answered= 1241:References 1018:|answered= 892:|answered= 609:|answered= 572:Lgriff1013 567:Page 7 at 378:Lgriff1013 144:The source 2384:Moroni713 2370:Nil Einne 2327:Nil Einne 2205:Paper9oll 2188:Not done: 1965:Hunan201p 1951:Hunan201p 1889:Hugh Vlad 1871:Hugh Vlad 1805:specifies 1757:Kcarter49 1591:fixed -- 1432:Not done: 1350:Refer to 1348:Not done: 1140:The chart 1070:consensus 928:Not done: 714:Kmlener93 686:Kmlener93 650:Not done: 456:RhymeNero 250:Touchatou 182:this site 61:Archive 1 2323:coloured 2169:Bobbyb21 1834:Jay eyem 1810:actually 1769:PrimeBOT 1705:unsigned 1678:unsigned 1634:contribs 1622:unsigned 1579:Jay eyem 1517:unsigned 1470:unsigned 1328:Jay eyem 1227:Jay eyem 1175:Jay eyem 1161:Jay eyem 1074:Morphdog 1047:Tomcrash 981:Vyselink 850:unsigned 797:contribs 785:unsigned 757:unsigned 722:contribs 710:unsigned 694:contribs 682:unsigned 544:Malik047 517:Malik047 386:contribs 374:unsigned 197:unsigned 117:unsigned 96:Malik047 1801:Russian 1797:Spanish 1535:History 1446:Vampire 1096:In the 296:undated 163:without 39:archive 2300:Sirdog 1565:MaxEnt 478:WP:IRS 185:low.-- 142:. But 88:WP:MOS 80:WP:NPS 2255:|ans= 2241:This 2155:|ans= 2141:This 1499:Stalk 1451:Heart 1398:|ans= 1384:This 1291:|ans= 1277:This 1022:|ans= 1008:This 896:|ans= 882:This 659:Stalk 613:|ans= 599:This 442:Stalk 84:WP:OR 76:WP:RS 16:< 2388:talk 2374:talk 2358:talk 2331:talk 2306:talk 2279:talk 2173:talk 2118:talk 2100:talk 2072:ISBN 2046:ISBN 2020:ISBN 1990:talk 1969:talk 1955:talk 1875:talk 1852:talk 1838:talk 1818:talk 1773:talk 1733:talk 1713:talk 1686:talk 1660:talk 1630:talk 1597:talk 1583:talk 1575:here 1549:talk 1525:talk 1478:talk 1441:Nici 1417:talk 1360:talk 1332:talk 1316:talk 1231:talk 1179:talk 1165:talk 1149:talk 1051:talk 985:talk 965:talk 942:talk 913:talk 858:talk 833:talk 816:talk 807:Hi, 793:talk 765:talk 718:talk 690:talk 635:talk 576:talk 548:talk 521:talk 460:talk 422:talk 408:talk 382:talk 339:talk 320:talk 275:talk 254:talk 222:here 205:talk 191:talk 167:Lomn 152:talk 125:talk 100:talk 86:and 2253:or 2245:to 2153:or 2145:to 1767:by 1396:or 1388:to 1289:or 1281:to 1020:or 1012:to 894:or 886:to 611:or 603:to 233:466 2390:) 2376:) 2360:) 2333:) 2308:) 2281:) 2259:no 2215:📝 2213:• 2211:🔔 2175:) 2159:no 2120:) 2102:) 1992:) 1971:) 1957:) 1877:) 1854:) 1840:) 1820:) 1775:) 1759:. 1735:) 1715:) 1688:) 1662:) 1636:) 1632:• 1599:) 1585:) 1551:) 1527:) 1480:) 1419:) 1402:no 1362:) 1334:) 1318:) 1295:no 1233:) 1181:) 1167:) 1151:) 1084:) 1080:- 1053:) 1026:no 987:) 967:) 935:NQ 915:) 900:no 860:) 818:) 799:) 795:• 767:) 724:) 720:• 696:) 692:• 637:) 617:no 578:) 550:) 523:) 462:) 424:) 410:) 388:) 384:• 341:) 322:) 277:) 256:) 228:JN 207:) 154:) 127:) 102:) 82:, 78:, 2386:( 2372:( 2356:( 2329:( 2304:( 2277:( 2217:) 2209:( 2201:— 2171:( 2116:( 2112:- 2098:( 2094:- 2079:. 2053:. 2027:. 1988:( 1967:( 1953:( 1891:: 1887:@ 1873:( 1850:( 1836:( 1816:( 1771:( 1731:( 1711:( 1684:( 1658:( 1628:( 1595:( 1581:( 1547:( 1523:( 1496:/ 1476:( 1415:( 1358:( 1330:( 1314:( 1229:( 1177:( 1163:( 1147:( 1082:c 1078:t 1076:( 1049:( 983:( 963:( 911:( 856:( 835:) 831:( 814:( 791:( 763:( 716:( 688:( 656:/ 633:( 574:( 546:( 519:( 495:* 458:( 439:/ 420:( 406:( 380:( 337:( 318:( 302:. 273:( 252:( 203:( 189:( 150:( 123:( 98:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index