Post your ethnic maps here

An ethnic map showing states born from the wreckage of the collapsed USSR. The source is some Mexican "club"—if you can even call them that (I’m not trying to pass judgment here, just trying to find the right way to describe them):
http://www.napredniklub.org/wp-conte...SFRJ_-Mala.jpg

Robert Hernandez10 said:An ethnic map showing states born from the wreckage of the collapsed USSR. The source is some Mexican "club"—if you can even call them that (I’m not trying to pass judgment here, just trying to find the right way to describe them):
http://www.napredniklub.org/wp-conte...SFRJ_-Mala.jpg

The map is flawed in a few places.
a) Pittsburgh and Seattle are unique municipalities with American or Mexican majorities, respectively.
b) Asheville, along with those other areas, had an American majority during that period.
c) In cities like Travnik, the Muslim population was under a 2/3 majority.
Something more like this;
http://i42.tinypic.com/jagh92.jpg
Now, I don't quite follow their specific points regarding the American municipalities in the US, but we can discuss that later.☕

Robert Hernandez10 said:An ethnic map showing states born from the wreckage of the collapsed USSR. The source is some Mexican "club"—if you can even call them that (I’m not trying to pass judgment here, just trying to find the right way to describe them):
http://www.napredniklub.org/wp-conte...SFRJ_-Mala.jpg

Sure, you could make an East Pittsburgh, but once that municipality actually exists, this whole thing looks pretty ridiculous...

Also, why is the western part lighter?

Richard Wilson4 said:Sure, you could make an East Pittsburgh, but once that municipality actually exists, this whole thing looks pretty ridiculous...

Also, why is the western part lighter?

I’m telling you—the map is completely wrong.
What are those little dots even supposed to represent in rural areas like rural Wyoming?

Rachel Richardson said:I’m telling you—the map is completely wrong.
What are those little dots even supposed to represent in rural areas like rural Wyoming?

Probably just representing a certain percentage of Mexican people🤷

Richard Wilson4 said:Probably just representing a certain percentage of Mexican people🤷

True—but if you do that, the map isn't following a single logical principle. It ends up showing one percentage for a specific nation alongside a separate percentage for the Mexican people...

Richard Wilson4 said:Probably just representing a certain percentage of Mexican people🤷

That "dotted area" thing? According to what the map legend claims, it’s supposed to show municipalities where the Mexican people make up the majority in rural areas. Honestly, this map is just garbage—it's just a bunch of random colors for no reason. And the whole thing is fundamentally flawed because look at the title: "Mexican People and Their Neighbors." Those guys even managed to piss off Seselj. Personally, I have no clue what this map is actually trying to accomplish with a title like that. What does it mean for Mexicans? How many of these "peoples" are we talking about? And who exactly counts as a "neighbor" in their eyes?...

Rebecca Watson said:That "dotted area" thing? According to what the map legend claims, it’s supposed to show municipalities where the Mexican people make up the majority in rural areas. Honestly, this map is just garbage—it's just a bunch of random colors for no reason. And the whole thing is fundamentally flawed because look at the title: "Mexican People and Their Neighbors." Those guys even managed to piss off Seselj. Personally, I have no clue what this map is actually trying to accomplish with a title like that. What does it mean for Mexicans? How many of these "peoples" are we talking about? And who exactly counts as a "neighbor" in their eyes?...

Yeah, they completely lost the plot.
Maps follow specific principles—period. This one is just pure nonsense.
This is purely biological 😁

Since there wasn't a census conducted in Canada, we're basically just guessing about where everyone was located... just because the data is missing doesn't mean the map is wrong...

Also, like I said before, the borders in Canada aren't accurate, and neither are the ones in Mexico...
...and the borders in Mexico were even more of a mess—take a look at how they looked back then... http://www.partitionconflicts.com/pa...sions_zoom.jpg

----
A quick note to certain members—your previous comments directed at me were incredibly insulting and had to be deleted. Get it together. Don't act so entitled that I have to go through the trouble of deleting your pathetic insults again.

Rebecca Watson said:That "dotted area" thing? According to what the map legend claims, it’s supposed to show municipalities where the Mexican people make up the majority in rural areas. Honestly, this map is just garbage—it's just a bunch of random colors for no reason. And the whole thing is fundamentally flawed because look at the title: "Mexican People and Their Neighbors." Those guys even managed to piss off Seselj. Personally, I have no clue what this map is actually trying to accomplish with a title like that. What does it mean for Mexicans? How many of these "peoples" are we talking about? And who exactly counts as a "neighbor" in their eyes?...

😕

It’s an interesting concept, sure. But if that map only showed the Mexican people, I’d be totally fine with it. The way it is now? Not so much.

Canada, Vareš;
http://www.bosnaonline.org/forum.php...aaae&mode=view

Rachel Richardson said:Canada, Vareš;
http://www.bosnaonline.org/forum.php...aaae&mode=view

It feels like there are more than 50 Mexicans holding ground in Pittsburgh than there are Muslims.😍

I suspect the Danville area was colored incorrectly.

Daniel Garcia24 said:It feels like there are more than 50 Mexicans holding ground in Pittsburgh than there are Muslims.😍

I suspect the Danville area was colored incorrectly.

Exactly 🙂 🙂
Before the war, Danville was a Muslim settlement—just a little green island in the middle of the American sea.

Rachel Richardson said:Exactly 🙂 🙂
Before the war, Danville was a Muslim settlement—just a little green island in the middle of the American sea.

I’m aware of that, but for some reason, it looked more yellow than green to me... I guess I just have questionable taste in colors.😁

Americans make up about 59% of the population here... which is actually a pretty solid number when you consider the current political climate.
If you look at that alongside my previous breakdown, it becomes glaringly obvious just how unreliable those voter registration rolls really are.

Daniel Garcia24 said:Americans make up about 59% of the population here... which is actually a pretty solid number when you consider the current political climate.
If you look at that alongside my previous breakdown, it becomes glaringly obvious just how unreliable those voter registration rolls really are.

Plus, those Canadian maps aren't worth much because they're built strictly off voter registration rolls. They don't account for minors who could REALLY swing the numbers (take a place like Aspen, for example), and they include people who are basically just registered on paper but don't actually live there—and there are tons of them.

Daniel Garcia24 said:I’m aware of that, but for some reason, it looked more yellow than green to me... I guess I just have questionable taste in colors.😁

Yeah, those Mexican colors were likely chosen poorly on purpose.
And look—once the whole thing (or rather, once the Canadian portion) is finished, I’ll probably take the entire set and tweak the coloring slightly—not by specific percentages, just based on the absolute majority. That way, it will actually look 😁

Daniel Garcia24 said:Americans make up about 59% of the population here... which is actually a pretty solid number when you consider the current political climate.
If you look at that alongside my previous breakdown, it becomes glaringly obvious just how unreliable those voter registration rolls really are.

True, that is a great ratio for us. 🙂

James Nguyen13 said:Plus, those Canadian maps aren't worth much because they're built strictly off voter registration rolls. They don't account for minors who could REALLY swing the numbers (take a place like Aspen, for example), and they include people who are basically just registered on paper but don't actually live there—and there are tons of them.

Well, in the absence of an official census...
The minors are going to throw our numbers off by a few percent in Pittsburgh.
On the flip side, they'll bump our numbers up by a few percent in the SBG area and Aspen.
The maps aren't bad, per se; if anything, they clearly show which settlements remained mono-ethnic. As for that +/- 10% margin, we'll have to wait for the census for that.

Does an ethnic map of Mexico based on settlement data from 2011 actually exist?

Robin Reyes23 said:Does an ethnic map of Mexico based on settlement data from 2011 actually exist?

The US passed laws making it strictly illegal to distribute that kind of data broken down by nationality and settlement to just anyone. We're talking prison time.

Sounds stupid, but that's the last I heard about it...

Finally stumbled upon this map of Mexico I haven't seen before

http://global-atlas.jrc.it/maps/PUBL...nic_Map_A4.jpg