Talk:African immigration to Europe/Archive 1

Archive 1

What Happened to the Black European Page

Or at least a noted difference between African and Black

"An Afro-European, Afropean or Black European refers to people of African ancestry or Black racial, cultural and social heritage raised in any European country. It also refers to Europeans who trace their ancestry to Africa or Africans who emigrated or were transported to any European nation, especially to France, Germany, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, and Sweden. There are reported to be 12.5 million people of African descent living in Europe.

France (including overseas depts.): 3,000,000 - 5,000,000 estimate by the Conseil Représentatif des Associations Noires (ethnicity statistics in France are banned, 1/4 of the Afro-French people are from the smaller islands of the Caribbean, which they were French possessions)

Spain: ~505,400 Moroccans (the largest group of foreigners living in Spain)"

The North African populations of France, Spain, etc. aren't what one would describe as "black". This is merely a matter of misnomers. So while the fact that the number of Afro-Europeans in Europe is correct (12.5 million) it does not describe their origins in a satisfactory manner. This as I see it was the purpose of the Black European page, which helped to break down the numbers a bit. While Black European the page was rather useless on its own, its contents should be reflected here, in that the number of Black Europeans is more around 5 million.

When I first came across this article about 6 months ago, there was a separate Black-European article, but someone felt the need to merge it. There is a trend among the more 'influential' wikipedia editors/contributors to eliminate specific destincition among individuals deemed to belong to a single social racial class. This site doesn't seemed to be concerned with the diverse ethnic, true racial, national and cultural heritages of minority groups across the globe. They are ever blinded by the 'one drop' rule and refuse to acknowledge that aside from the Black and White racial lables, people have their own damned identities. And many don't even take social racial labels into account when reckoning with who they are; many countries don't use them. They hail 'Racial Accounting' as an exact and absolute science, when it's pretty arbritary and very outdated.

I do understand where you are coming from - that being of African origin does not by default equate to being of Black social racial identity (or Black). It's a separate concept as many people of African heritage/ancestry (regardless of physical features or place of origin) don't necessariy identify with being Black. Many social structures don't demand that they do, not all Afro-Europeans descended from people who inherited this sort of social identity, or were socialized in this way. My thought is that the days of racial imposition were over. Isn't it the human and universal right of every human-being to identify as they wish, socially?

Generally, among Americans there is no distiction, but among many Afro-Europeans where their recent ancestors (who where either/or north or sub-saharan African) didn't neccessarily identify with the concept of being neither white, nor black - being BLACK has nothing to do with their 'root' identities. Even among Afro-Latino/Hispanics who immigrate from Latin America to Europe do not identify as being Black, neither have most of their Afro-descended ancestors. There is vast social, ethnic and cultural diversity among Afro-Europeans that is virtually un-noted.

Among native Moroccans Black identity is not common, but some do identify as such. Black identity doesn't generally describe the identity of Moroccans as a whole; however, some decendents do have traces of sub-saharan ancestry and/or identify with being Black. As do people within other north African countries like Egypt. But not everyone of N. African ancestry does, which seem like most of them, for the most part.

In agreement, this article could do a better job in distiguishing between as well as provide further explaination of the Afropean population. The article could possibly offer the following:

• Those living/born/from Europe of African ancestry
• Those living/born/from Europe who identify as being Black (or other derived name), or thus label by the social structure of the country in which they reside.
• Which true race they decend from (Arabic/Caucasian, Congoid, Capoid)
• What region/country they or their fairly recent ancestors hail from.
• Aside from the African ancestry, denote groups with other common ethnic/racial ancestries or cultural heritages in addition to this. For example Bi-racial (1 parent native sub-sahran African, 1 parent native Cacuasain European), Biracial (1 parent native Caucasian European, 1 parent native Black/Mixed European), Latin American immigrants and their offspring (Amerindian, African, and/or Caucasian decent), Nigerian immigrants, Caribbean, African American immigrants, trans-nationals...
• The social racial identity of Afro-Europeans among large segmented groups (Example: Black identity is more prevalent among Afro-Europeans in England, compared to Spain)
• Black Solidarity
• Distinct political and social climate within each European country in reguards to Afro-Europeans.
• The timeline of occupation/immigration/transport of people of African decent into Europe
• Sub-identities among Afropeans (racial, cultural, co-national)
• Show trends of (concetual) biracial unions and offspring between African and Europeans in Europe and in Africa; and concentual unions between European immigrants in America and Afro-descedents.
• Explain the ethnic heritage of Afro-Europeans who's bloodlines originated in regions where racial labeling overshadows ethnic mixture. (Example: former Spanish colonies)
• Religions practiced by Afro-Europeans
• The history of Black identity in Europe; parallels between the Black social movement in Europe and that of America, South Africa, and Australia.
• Why the Black social movement and Black identity did not permeate in Spain and among Afro-descendents of former Spanish colonial rule.
• The Black identity and the Black social movement in Europe, today.
• The Black social movement and Misegenation in Europe.
• The history of Slavery in Europe
• Current labor issues for Afropeans: discrimination, current slave trade of sub-Saharan Africans and Afro-Caribbeans (children; labor and sex).
• Political exiles of African countries living in Europe
• African countries and their former colonial powers
• Recent African refugees and European governments
• Affluent/Influential Afropeans
• Afropeans in sports, arts, medicine; celebrities and the media.
• Afropean inventors
• Afropeans in government, law and politics
• Collective social representation for Afropeans within the European Union
• Afropeans and Education; Pan-hellenic organizations and Afropeans
• Noteworthy Afropeans in history
• Roman Catholicism and the African-Diasphora
• Marcus Garvey and Black Europe
• The history of British Monarchy and Afropeans; Queen Elizabeth II and the Trans-Atlantic slave trade
• European Monarchies and Africa
• Timeline of terms used to distiguised those of African Ancestry in Europe in the past and how they are used/viewed today.
• African and European cultural and linguistic fusion in Europe and in Africa.
• Economics, marketing and Afropeans; wealth distribution and buying power.
• Afropean collective identity; collective culture
• Noted differences between being Black and Afro-European.
• African Monarchy/Royalty bloodline and European colonization.

Perhaps even with the above, the article could be split into many.

The only problem is that there doesn't seem to be much data available that would give this info. When the census is taken in many of these countries, true racial/ethnic ancestry and cultural/national heritage isn't properly accounted for. I've never come across anything that provided a collective sample of peceptions from Afro-Europeans that spanned across social class, immigration status, and country of residence.

Furthermore, with the 'influence' here on wikipedia, an impartial article of the Afro-European landscape will most likely not be exhibited on this site. Most of the articles pertaining to subjects like this one are written mostly from an American and/or Western perspective. If done otherwise, expect high level contest, alteration, redirection or deletion.

For anyone contributing, please use only solid (virtually undisputable) and well cited sources. Relir 14:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Well that was thorough...good to see someone agrees

actually there are about 5 million blacks in france not counting north africans of morrocan,tunisian or algerian heritage.the counseil representatif des noires was set up after the 2005 riots because they felt blacks were invisible in the media.there are 4 million blacks from west africa and 1 million blacks from the caribbean islands.patrick lozes has been doing research on numbers of blacks in france for awhile

"related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 23:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Accuracy and pictures

First, and as it has been said, while I understand why African European is preferred to Black European, I also think it should somehow be explained that 'African ancestry' actually refers to Sub-Saharan countries and does not include Northernmost Africa, even if people from Morocco to Egypt are also African. Secondly, the choice of representative pictures should be much more accurate in my opinion. Campbell's, Rijkaard's and Hamilton's African ancestry is a bit relative, as it directly comes from the Caribbean. Not to mention Dumas! I wonder if they do feel any connection with Africa, other than being dark-skinned. There are also many British and French examples, so it'd be better to take people from other countries too, like Swedish Henrik Larsson or Spanish Concha Buika. --Purplefire (talk) 05:36, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Wrong sentences.

"Outside of sports Harry Roselmack became the first black news anchor in France." Wrong Harry Roselmack is the first prime time black anchor in France

The country with the largest Afro-European community in mainland Europe population and percentage wise is the United Kingdom, but if overseas territories were included, it is likely that there are more Afro-French than Afro-British people

Since France does not have ethnical census, there is no proof. So the right sentence should be, officially the country with the largest Afro-European community in mainland Europe population and percentage wise is the United Kingdom, or something like this.

"but if overseas territories were included, it is likely that there are more Afro-French than Afro-British people"

This sentence should be deleted why because if we see the because if we see the estimation France has between 3 million and 5 million black and 1/4 are from overseas departement.

It don't say that 1/4 live in overseas departemnt but that 1/4 are form overseas island. The rest is african and there is few people with recent african origin in overseas departement. If we imagine that every Caribbean afro french live in overseas departement (wich is largely wrong) and if France has 3 million afro french there is over 2.2 million in mainland France. Wich is more than U.K.

Minato ku (talk) 02:58, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Article should be named changed

For many reasons, the article should be name changed. One reason is that these terms are not used across all Europe. In Russia for example, a Russian is strictly someone of that ethnicity and a Black-African person would not be considered European. To avoid these issues, a better name for the article would be something like Africans/Blacks in/of Europe. I like Black-Africans of Europe.

I changed back the name of the article. With a title like Black-Africans ''in'' Europe this could be taken as an implicit statement that these people did not belong in Europe (why use "in" instead of "of"?) Also, the terms "Afro-European" and "African European" garner each 140-420k hits in Google. I'd say they are notable in their own right. I don't think we should bend to the exclusionist beliefs of a few.--Ramdrake (talk) 21:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Well obviously the Africans in Europe are migrants to the continent. That title was 100% neutral was not implying anything. This title that you have changed back to however is not neutral. You cannot be two things at once, you cannot be African and European at once. We do not have Chinese-European, or Turkish-European. We should follow a standard convention that makes sense. African European makes no sense. It is not the same as African American. African Americans have been in America since its existence. They are a part of America and its identity. In Europe however, Africans are recent migrants. I think now you should be able to understand the difference. CanuckAnthropologist (talk) 17:09, 1 June 2008 (UTC) (Please note that the user CanuckAnthropologist was subsequently identified as a sock-puppet of Beh-nam, and has subsequently been banned indefinitely from Wikipedia) Indisciplined (talk) 00:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

If they're born and raised in Europe and have European citizenship, they're Europeans. If they were born and raised in Africa, then they're Africans. So if this article is about the first ones, the more accurate title would be Europeans of Black African descent (or Sub-Saharan descent, if you like, although all Europeans are in a way of Sub-Saharan African descent). One can be even more accurate with Black Europeans of Sub-Saharan African descent. Anyway "Afro-European" sounds like a social label, and it cannot be assumed that all Europeans of African descent regard themselves as 'Afro' or like the term. The fact that they're from African descent, though, is a fact, even if it was via the Caribbean. --Purplefire (talk) 19:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

500,000 black Germans?

500,000 seems a bit high for black Germans, when compared to other European countries. It's not like Germany had any (recent) black colonies. Where would all these people come from? It also conflicts with the numbers on the German Demography wiki article. About 100,000-200,000 seems more likely to me. Bawm79 (talk) 09:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I think that number is very low. Think about it, Germany is by far the largest nation in Europe, with a population of 82 million which is about 1/3th of the population of the United States. Germany does not keep statistics of ethnicities, but according to Wikipedia 6.1% is "other" than German or Turkish, which is more than 5 million. 500.000 "blacks" in Germany would mean that only 10% if those 5 million are "black" and 90% is "white". TBH I think 500.000 is a low estimate. 77.250.166.160 (talk) 21:28, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

1.9 millions in UK?

1.9 millions?, not this info is incorrect

4 millions is the number correct, look this link:

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afro-Europeo

I did and it said in Spanish that the correct number is 2 million, not 4. 77.250.166.160 (talk) 21:29, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.248.41.88 (talk) 17:40, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

1.9 millions in UK?

another link:

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afro-Europ%C3%A9ens

4 millions is the real number in UK —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.248.41.88 (talk) 17:46, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I checked also the French page and it says 1.9 million here. I mean whatever 1.9 million or 2 million. It's not 4 million. 77.250.166.160 (talk) 21:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Afro-European communities?

Check out www.afroeurope.blogspot.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.193.88.21 (talk) 10:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Neologism?

The article needs a reference (or, preferably, several) that establish that "Afro Europeans" is a commonly used term to describe Africans in Europe/Europeans of African descent. Google returns lots of hits for "Afro Europeans" but many refer to other topics, such as mixed-race people of African and European descent. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:44, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Might I also suggest Black people in Europe as a better title, since the article does not include non-Black African Europeans? Cordless Larry (talk) 11:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Afro Europeans (or Afro-Europeans) seems to be the term most used for the pan-European designation of people of partial or full Sub-Saharan descent. As a matter of fact, Alexandre Dumas was of mixed-race descent, so the term applies to those people also if they so choose to identify. I wouldn't use the term "Black people in Europe" as it seems to denote that they are foreigners there while in fact many of them have ancestry in Europe tracing back several generations.--Ramdrake (talk) 21:33, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, but can you provide some sources establishing that Afro-European is the most-used term? Cordless Larry (talk) 21:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Also, I actually think that "Black people in Europe" sounds less foreign than "Afro Europeans" since the latter refers to a place outside of Europe - i.e. Africa. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

"Black people in Europe" seems quite commonly used if we go by Google Books. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:43, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

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

The result of the move request was moved.  Skomorokh, barbarian  07:19, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

---

Afro Eureopeans → Black people in Europe — Afro-Europeans is an ambiguous term. It can refer to black Europeans, as it is here, but it is also used to refer to people of mixed African and European descent, regardless of location, such as here. Black people in Europe is more descriptive, and avoids this confusion. Using "black" rather than "Afro" also avoids confusion around the applicability of the term to non-black Africans such as North Africans and white South Africans. The current page name is also spelled incorrectly, although that could be fixed. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:21, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

• Note: Current title is misspelled. 199.125.109.19 (talk) 21:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

• Afro Eureopeans → Afro Europeans The term actually refers to both dark-skinned Europeans and people of partial or full African descent regardless of their actual complexion. In that sense, "Black" people in Europe would be inappropriate.--Ramdrake (talk) 22:47, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
  • If you look at the contents of the artcle though, it is about black people in Europe ("The council of Europe estimates that there are between 3.5 and 8 million black people residing in Europe", etc.). Cordless Larry (talk) 23:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

That's because the article has already gone through several tug-of-wars in the naming. The original line did read "Afro Europeans", some months ago and was never changed back. Besides, Blacks also are native of Australasia. We're not usually including them in "Afro-Europeans".--Ramdrake (talk) 23:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

The way that the majority of people use the term "black" is to describe people of sub-Saharan African descent. This is why states such as the UK use the term in their national statistics (e.g. Black British). "Afro-European", by contrast is not commonly used and its meaning is more contested than that of "black", plus its hardly used in the article beyond the title. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

That clearly depends on one's orientational perspective. In Australasia, "Black" means black-skinned, and it's used to group Aborigines, Papuans, Melanesians, Negritos and black Africans together. Afro-European, as far as I'm aware is pretty common, and it's consistent with other article titles: Afro Americans, Afro-Asian, Afro-Arab. You've given what the UK uses, but what do the other states use? Night w (talk) 04:40, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

"Afro-European, as far as I'm aware is pretty common". Do you have references to back this up? I've provided references which prove that "Afro-European" has different meanings and I don't see anyone providing one that suggests that it commonly refers to Europeans of African descent. "Black people in Europe" is widely used, as proved by a Google search. As a crude measure, it returns 2,940,000 hits compared to 26,400 for "Afro Europeans". Cordless Larry (talk) 10:14, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Support the move. As far as I'm aware (and I live in Europe, not in an English-speaking country, but read and watch English-speaking media) the term 'Afro-Europeans' is extremely uncommon. Probably has something to do with the fact that no country commonly called 'Europe' exists (yet). This isn't the USA where terms like 'Afro-Americans' (and the respective lobby, books, etc) are used/exist. To think that: "America (common name of a existing country) -> Afro-American then Europe (which doesn't exist as a country) ->Afro-European" is simple lazy thinking. Flamarande (talk) 11:15, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

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

No coaches until recently?

Check this out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valdir_Pereira —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.100.31.188 (talk) 05:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Europeans are natives of Europe

Here are some definitions from dictionaries: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/European

A European is a native inhabitant of Europe. So in what way are Africans also Europeans? CanuckAnthropologist (talk) 17:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC) (Please note that the user CanuckAnthropologist was subsequently identified as a sock-puppet of Beh-nam, and has subsequently been banned indefinitely from Wikipedia) Indisciplined (talk) 00:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Native (from Biology Online Dictionary ): One who, or that which, is born in a place or country referred to; a denizen by birth. So, a Black person born in Europe is native of Europe, and therefore European, even though his or her ancestors may not have been born in Europe. QED.--Ramdrake (talk) 18:00, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

So if I was born in Africa I would be a native African? In other words an indigenous African? I don't think so. Also, you are using not even a real dictionary to support your ridiculous POVs. That website is not a dictionary. Check the meaning on real dictionaries: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/native. CanuckAnthropologist (talk) 18:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC) (Please note that the user CanuckAnthropologist was subsequently identified as a sock-puppet of Beh-nam, and has subsequently been banned indefinitely from Wikipedia) Indisciplined (talk) 00:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

OK, let's use your reference, for which the first two definitions are (emphasis mine):

1.being the place or environment in which a person was born or a thing came into being: one's native land.

2. belonging to a person by birth or to a thing by nature; inherent: native ability; native grace.

It still says that if a person is born in a certain place, they are considered native of that place, i.e. says the same thing. I used biology-online because it's a dictionary specific to the biological sciences, and being native is usually a biological consideration.--Ramdrake (talk) 18:18, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Once again you are being dishonest and just looking at just one definition to support your POV. The most common meaning of native is indigenous and Africans certainly aren't indigenous to Europe. CanuckAnthropologist (talk) 18:21, 1 June 2008 (UTC) (Please note that the user CanuckAnthropologist was subsequently identified as a sock-puppet of Beh-nam, and has subsequently been banned indefinitely from Wikipedia) Indisciplined (talk) 00:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Find reliable sources that put this definition as the primary definition of the word. So far, in every reference I've seen, it's no more than a tertiary or quaternary definition. Please don't twist definitions to suit your POV, and please stop the personal attack (such as calling me dishonest).--Ramdrake (talk) 18:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

You began with the personal attacks accusing me of pushing POVs while it you that is pushing a POV here (which is an agenda of assimilating other peoples as European ethnicities, and that is obvious looking at your pattern of edits). Exactly, your idea of native is a tertiary or quaternary definition. Wikipedia goes by the most common definition, not the tertiary or quaternary. CanuckAnthropologist (talk) 18:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC) (Please note that the user CanuckAnthropologist was subsequently identified as a sock-puppet of Beh-nam, and has subsequently been banned indefinitely from Wikipedia) Indisciplined (talk) 00:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

The most common definition is always primary, then the second most common is secondary, etc. Your presenting a tertiary/quaternary definition as the "most common" is against the rules of logic. If a definition is tertiary or quaternary, by definition it isn't the most common. You want to push a tertiary/quaternary definition as the "most common" That doesn't work.--Ramdrake (talk) 18:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

It is a the most common definition and anyone can tell you this. White Americans are NOT considered natives to America. French Canadians like you are NOT considered natives to Canada, and etc. You live in Canada where there is a distinction between the natives and other Canadians so you should know that better than anyone else. Unless you are living in another world, the most common meaning of native is indigenous. CanuckAnthropologist (talk) 18:59, 1 June 2008 (UTC) (Please note that the user CanuckAnthropologist was subsequently identified as a sock-puppet of Beh-nam, and has subsequently been banned indefinitely from Wikipedia) Indisciplined (talk) 00:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, I take grave exception to you comment: my ancestors have been living in North America for over 300 years. If you merely want to say that I am not a member of the First Nations, then that is the obvious truth. But I can very much be a native North American without being either an aboriginal or a member of the First Nations.--Ramdrake (talk) 21:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Calling Europeans such as you and me "natives" in Canada is unheard of and you know it. You can be a native North American, but by the most common definition you are not. CanuckAnthropologist (talk) 03:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC) (Please note that the user CanuckAnthropologist was subsequently identified as a sock-puppet of Beh-nam, and has subsequently been banned indefinitely from Wikipedia) Indisciplined (talk) 00:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Find a verifiable, reliable source which says that native's most common meaning is indigenous and I'll concede. Without it, it's just your POV. So far, I have pointed out that the primary and secondary meanings of the word (therefore the most common) means someone who was born in a certain place. --Ramdrake (talk) 11:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This is a meaningless discussion: where does 'nativeness' start and stop, all people come from somewhere else at some point in the past. Native Americans (as they are called) originaly migrated from Asia, and all people originaly migrated from Africa to go somewhere else, as far as we know today. How many centuries or thousands of years back do you have to trace your ancestry to be considered native? There is no answer to this question because the whole concept of nativity, indigenous and whatever else is a concept from the 18th and 19th centuries. it's a concept that thinks that things never change, people never change, culture never changes, that races don't mix, languages shouldn't get 'polluted' by others (while English is nothing else than a big mix that keeps on mixing up, and English people are by definition a bastard nation of germanic tribes, Celts and Normandians and whatever else -just as any people or languages are) it may still have validity within social science and antropology, but what we have to do as thinkers is to think over these terms, what they mean and their consequences in the world we are living in today. How these terms are constantly abused for political reasons leaving people hating each other for fictional things. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.193.88.21 (talk) 11:52, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Frank Rijkaard, born down teh street where I live in Amsterdam. How can he be not European? 77.250.166.160 (talk) 21:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

What is this article about?

Is this article about Black Africans in Europe or all Africans in Europe? This is an important question that needs to be discussed. Right now the article is ambiguous. CanuckAnthropologist (talk) 17:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC) (Please note that the user CanuckAnthropologist was subsequently identified as a sock-puppet of Beh-nam, and has subsequently been banned indefinitely from Wikipedia) Indisciplined (talk) 00:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Probably blacks, mostly. I think Northern Africans would be considered Middle Eastern, mainly. 惑乱 分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * (talk) 23:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, at least I know that for France, UK and Germany north african are not include. Minato ku (talk) 22:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Archive 1