Talk:Spanish language

Scope of speakership

User:Salvabl, in again restoring the text Spanish is spoken across all consonants, gives the rationale Spanish, like French, is spoken across all continents. However, the sentence that the user Largoplazo is defending is objectively false, since Spanish is an official language in Europe, the Americas, Oceania and Africa.

Spanish is not a language of anywhere in Oceania, unless one counts the trivial case of Easter Island, but Oceania isn't actually a continent.

Salvabl, for that matter, ignores Antarctica.

Salvabl seems to be misunderstanding the meaning of the word "across". A language spoken by around one-fourth of one percent of the people of Africa in a few spots that are all along the continent's northwest coast is not spoken across Africa. A language spoken by a remnant community in the Philippines is not spoken across Asia.

The text I'm objecting to conveys the impression that Spanish is spoken in appreciable numbers in locations ranging from Cairo to Cape Town, from Beirut to Beijing, from Perth to Pohnpei, from Madrid to Moscow. That impression is false. Largoplazo (talk) 18:10, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Spanish is one of the languages of Oceania, since it is an official language on Easter Island. This is uniform with the information that can be found, for example, in the Oceania article's infobox. And I think that labeling it as "trivial" is just subjective pov. What is the reason for that? its size? Would it be appropriate to label the Vatican City State as "trivial"?

Apart from that, you have stated that "Oceania isn't actually a continent". I know that the way to distinguish/count the continents varies, but if you consider that the continent is Australia (and not Oceania), then.. in which continent are the Pitcairn Islands located?

And regarding the meaning of the word "across", no misunderstanding will occur, as the context provides enough information. It is as if we read the sentence "There are approximately 3,500 species of snake spread across all continents". It is correct, but it does not imply that there are snakes on the island of Ireland, in the Svalbard archipelago or on the vast frozen plains of northern Canada (but on the continents on which they are located).

The sentence is about the continents where Spanish is spoken, not where it is official, and this should not be changed if consensus is not reached. But in this case, the main reason why I object the change is because it is not accurate, due to the different ways of distinguishing/counting continents, as well as for ignoring the Easter Island, which breaks the uniformity of information with several Wikipedia articles such as Polynesia (where Spanish, just like French, is one of the languages included in the first footnote of the article), Oceania, etc. Salvabl (talk) 11:47, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

The Pacific Islands aren't located on any continent. Continents and countries have nothing to do with each other. A continent is a geological feature. Countries are political entities that occupy space. A country can be entirely within one continent, be split over multiple continents, or not occupy space on any continent at all. Oceania is a conventional grouping in the same way as a couple of its parts are, like Polynesia and Micronesia, or in the same way as the West Indies.

As for "across", it doesn't make sense to say that something that's false should be in the article as long as the true information that makes its falsehood plain comes later. In your snake example, "across" is appropriate. It indicates that, despite exceptions, snakes are found in most areas. If, out of all of Europe, there were snakes only in the Alps, then to say they are found "across" Europe would be false. In Asia, Oceania, Africa, and Europe, the places where Spanish is spoken are the exceptions. Saying that Spanish is spoken "across Asia" because a small community in the Philippines speaks it it isn't at all like the snake example, it's nonsense. "Across" doesn't mean whatever you want it to mean. Largoplazo (talk) 13:02, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Whether or not Oceania is a real continent doesn't matter - Spanish is in fact spoken (non-trivially/by significant numbers) on at least some portion of every other continent.

Even if we decide against saying that Spanish is spoken on every continent in the lede, we should still avoid counting continents. In some areas it's conventional to consider the Americas a single continent, in others they're two different continents, this article's lede doesn't need to take a side.

I think Largoplazo might be right to object to the word "across" (although the same wording is also found on French language) – there shouldn't be any problems with replacing it with something like "on", right? Erinius (talk) 09:24, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Also, seeing as this dispute is basically about how to quickly go over the geographical extension of Spanish, I thought I'd see how some other sources do this. This is basically a list of convenience, from whatever sources I had on hand.

• "...there are more than 400 million native or near-native speakers of Spanish in the world, distributed across every continent except Antarctica. Spanish is the official language in twenty-one countries plus Puerto Rico; is the de facto first language for most of Gibraltar (Fierro Cubiella 1997; Kramer 1986); still maintains a small foothold in the Philippines..." John Lipski, "Geographical and Social Varieties of Spanish: An Overview", in The Handbook of Hispanic Linguistics
• "Spanish is spoken in Europe, Latin America, certain areas of Africa, the United States, and to some extent in the Philippines." Manuel Díaz-Campos' introduction to the Handbook of Hispanic Sociolinguistics
• "Spanish is a world-wide international language spoken on four continents and is established as the official language in 22 countries: Spain; Mexico, ... and Panama (Latin America); Equatorial Guinea (west Africa); and the Philippines (south-east Asia)" - Elena Fernández de Molina Ortés and Juan M. Hernández-Campoy, "Geographic Varieties of Spanish", The Cambridge Handbook of Spanish Linguistics
• "It is an official language in Spain, nineteen Latin American republics and Puerto Rico (see Map 22.2), as well as Equatorial Guinea in Africa. There is residual use in the Philippines and frequent use in many parts of the USA..." - Tuten, Pato and Schwarzwald, "Spanish, Astur-Leonese, Navarro-Aragonese, Judaeo-Spanish", in The Oxford Guide to the Romance Linguistics
• "Spanish has today become a world language with more than 350 million speakers who are concentrated in Spain and the Americas, but who are also to be found in Africa and Asia" - Ralph Penny's A History of the Spanish Language, 2nd edition, Introduction chapter

Erinius (talk) 04:27, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for providing such valuable information.

Apart from the problem caused by the different ways of distinguishing/counting continents, that make the number variable.. even if the continents where Spanish is an official language were listed one by one, there would still be a part of Chile (the Easter Island) that would not be covered in the list, and where Spanish is an official language.

But, apart from that, there is no need to further complicate this, since at no time has there been a consensus for the initial sentence of the fourth paragraph to address the continents where there are countries in which Spanish is an official language. The sentence is about where the Spanish language is spoken, not about where it is official.

However, I consider appropriate the suggestion made by @Erinius to replace the word "across" with "on", since reducing a possible ambiguity always improves the article. Salvabl (talk) 02:09, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm glad we could reach a consensus on "on". @Largoplazo: do we also have a consensus on not counting/numbering continents? Erinius (talk) 18:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

It isn't spoken in Australia. There's no sense in having the article say something that will strike many readers as false outright, in the vain expectation that they'll come here and find this special pleading for the fringe convention of treating Oceania as a continent while pretending Australia isn't one, and that they'll buy into it. And all because one person wants to make this superlative claim about the speakership of the language despite the reality that it falls short, even if just by a little bit. Largoplazo (talk) 20:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, "Spanish is spoken on all continents" is either false by the usual (anglosphere, at least) listing of continents or it's vacuous (sure, there are some Australians who can and do speak Spanish when Down Under, and at any time there are bound to be some folks in Antarctica who speak Spanish). The statement is puffery, reads like PR promo. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 21:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I was actually willing to concede Antartica (for "on", not "across"), insofar as Argentina and Chile claim chunks of it and, more to the point, have resident populations there, including families and schools. But I can understand if others are reluctant. Your last sentence is what I was driving at; I agree. Largoplazo (talk) 00:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Right. And the question about the Chilean and Argentine populations is how permanent the residents are. Supposedly there have been only 11 people born in Antarctica, suggesting a) that families don't stay long, b) there's little -- more likely no -- native population. Unsurprisingly, populations greatly reduce during the winter. I suppose the issue turns on what the definition of "Spoken on continent X" is meant to be. It's easy (and facile) to engineer it to include or exclude Spanish on Antarctica. Native American code talkers served in the Pacific, North African, and European theaters in WW2, and no doubt chatted amongst themselves. Was e.g. Navajo spoken in/on [overseas location]? Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 18:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

"Spoken on all continents" is not real information, it is rather a slogan for some sort of linguistic jingoism. --Jotamar (talk) 23:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Largoplazo: Good point on Australia – I hadn't really thought too hard about considering it as a continent.

I guess the current claim does seem like puffery and should probably be removed – also, it's not like "nationsonline.com" is the best source to use, nor does it support the "all continents" claim anyway. Do we want to keep some kind of brief overview of Spanish's geographic distribution in the lede? It already mentions Spanish originating in Spain and then being introduced "to overseas locations, most notably to the Americas". Is that enough? Erinius (talk) 03:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

The easiest solution might be to just remove "Spanish is spoken on all continents" and move what would then be a stranded footnote up into the appropriate spot in the first paragraph. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 05:36, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Erinius (talk) 20:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Where do we stand as of now? @Salvabl: I'm good with Barefoot through the chollas' suggestion, and I imagine everyone else who commented here would be. There's no longer any consensus in favor of keeping "spoken on all continents" it seems. What do you think? Erinius (talk) 01:43, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

As you says, consensus is against Salvabl's position, and that's all that's required to proceed. Let's remove the sentence, and I'm fine with Chollas' specific recommendation. User:Barefoot through the chollas, do you want to do the honors, finding a suitable spot for the footnote? Largoplazo (talk) 02:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Done. Deleted the continents bit, and moved the note to the end of the sentence beginning Spanish is the official language of. If anyone has a better place for it, by all means feel free to adjust. (Separately, I executed what might pass superficially as a stylistic tweak: vocabulary derived from Latin to Latin in origin. If anyone disagrees, we can discuss it and find better wording; I'm aware that in origin can be as misleading as derived from.) Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 16:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

If there is sufficient common consensus to reduce any possible ambiguity or inaccuracy, then such a change should be implemented. I have no problem with that. The point is that I considered the existence of different ways of distinguishing/counting continents sufficient reason to keep the disputed statement, taking into account the notion of Oceania as a continent (which, although not common, also exists in the English-speaking world).

In any case, this criteria shall then be taken into account also for other articles of languages that can be regarded as global (similar wording can be found on the article of French language), in order to avoid any possible bias; since it would not make sense that a change implemented in order to make this article's content more accurate, could result in a biased lack of uniformity of criteria.

I am going to add a link to this discussion in the French language article (in a edit summary), as it is necessary to remove the analogous statement in that article, since French language is not spoken on the Australian continent. Salvabl (talk) 02:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Spanish in Philippines

Given that Spanish holds constitutional recognition in the Philippines, it would be appropriate to reflect this in the Quick Facts dropdown. I suggest creating a new category within the infobox to properly display this information. A similar approach has already been taken on the Arabic language Wikipedia page, as Arabic also enjoys constitutional recognition in the Philippines.

On another note, considering the unique role and constitutional recognition of Spanish in the Philippines, it may be worth reflecting this on the language map. While it shouldn’t be shaded the same as countries where Spanish is currently official, perhaps a distinct color or pattern (e.g., stripes) could be used to denote its significance. Alexigj (talk) 23:19, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

As a Filipino and Spanish speaker, I agree. We should just shade the entire country of the Philippines as the lightest blue that there is to denote "cultural significance". It's enshrined in the constitution that Spanish is a voluntary language to use all over the country, and we speak words of it every day. With a movement of youth rediscovering Spanish, as well as Spanish being the most popular taught foreign language in schools, it really plays an importance to our country, history, and identity.

If Ladino Sephardic Jews can hold on to their culture, then why can't we Filipinos do the same? If Belizeans can have their country shaded light blue, then the Philippines should definitely have it shaded as well!

And if no one will do it, then I will! DavaoDude (talk) 23:15, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Already done! I can't wait on people to debate on something so obvious.

We have the Real Academia and the IC just how Spain has them too. Why the eF were we still not represented? Yeah... changed that! It's time for the world to REALLY see the global power of this language in this day and age. No more ignorance from the Hispanophone world of just Europe and Latin America. We exist too, and don't get me started with Spanish in the Pacific... DavaoDude (talk) 23:54, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Only 4,584 speakers in Philippines in 2024 (page 52 of the PDF)?! I understand that 117 million people live in the Philippines, which is approximately 0.004% of the country population. The Cervantes Institute, by the way, is quite something when it presents these kinds of statistics. It doesn't even deserve to be shown in blue on the map. Taichi (talk) 19:54, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Taichi, with all due respect you're being disingenuous with the numbers you're touting around. There are 4,584 native speakers of Spanish in the Philippines in the IC report, and even then they actually caveat that they use INE and embassy registration data which does not fully represent the number of Spanish speakers out there in the country. The IC's numbers, in fact, do not fully reflect the extent to which Spanish is spoken in the Philippines, precisely because numbers are hard to come by due to a variety of factors which I even tried to explain in the Philippine Spanish article.

That said, I must also point out here that I don't appreciate how you and other non-Filipino Spanish-speaking Wikipedians have tried time and again to minimize Spanish-speaking Filipinos as some anomaly that doesn't deserve to have even a minimally meaningful presence on Wikipedia. May I remind you that we can't even call things the way we call them because you don't want us to. There are still Spanish-speaking Filipinos out there, whether you like it or not, and we deserve meaningful representation too. This has been one of my biggest gripes with the Spanish Wikipedia community as one of the few Spanish-speaking Filipinos contributing to the project, as if you have any right to dictate to us what we can speak and what we can't speak.

While I sympathize with DavaoDude's frustration as a fellow Spanish-speaking Filipino, I was actually perfectly fine with the previous consensus of reflecting the Philippines with a dot, even if I actually wanted the entire country colored in. You unilaterally changed the key to remove the "cultural language" designator without seeking proper consensus when I, Moalli, Salvabl and others have already agreed – even if I wasn't happy with the final consensus – to how the Philippines should be represented on the relevant map and in the infobox back in 2023-2024. To that end, I will be reverting your changes to the previously-agreed upon version (and the previous map too, as I think the changes were poorly made), and if you really think the Philippines shouldn't be there at all, then convince us. Whether it be on the Spanish Wikipedia or here, I and others remain unconvinced. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 10:52, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

I will only respond to the second paragraph because you are simply revealing your frustration with the Spanish Wikipedia (which is irrelevant to this topic). You are trying to reduce to zero a valid reference from one of the main institutions of the Spanish language. I doubt the institution included that figure for mere amusement, and you, as a Filipino, must surely be extremely frustrated. That is a fact, and there is no greater refutation than personal opinion.

But what I cannot allow is for you to project your frustration with the Spanish Wikipedia onto me, especially regarding "how you and other non-Filipino Spanish-speaking Wikipedians have tried time..." I am basing this on information I found myself; no one commissioned me or met with anyone to do this, so stop generalizing.

But it is even more disappointing that, based on your authority as a sysop, you pressure and co-opt the discussion, reducing the matter to "I, as a Filipino, have more authority than what the Cervantes Institute source says." I'm not going to engage in an ego battle. I repeat: if you have a problem with the Spanish Wikipedia, I invite you to take it elsewhere. Vent your Filipino nationalist grievances there, but don't pretend you can raise a flag here and have anyone who dares to refute you resort to the refrain of "this is the fault of non-Filipino Spanish speakers." This is a general encyclopedia, not a nationalist one.

And it's good that you agree with the other user, because on the Spanish Wikipedia he even threatened death for not accepting his ideas. I can see the level of standards you consider acceptable. I won't continue this debate. Taichi (talk) 13:11, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

First off, nowhere did I suggest that the IC's data is invalid, because it is valid. However, the IC's own footnotes specifically state that they're counting Spanish citizens in the Philippines, plus numbers from the other embassies whose citizens are registered with them. There's a reason why numbers from various sources are cited because merely relying on a single source is incomplete. That doesn't make the data any less invalid, but let's not distort the numbers to fit your narrative. You're the one touting the IC's numbers as proof that there are only ~4,000 Spanish speakers in the Philippines, and we should leave it at that, when the data shows there are more when you also start counting second-language speakers, which you're discounting entirely. My personal opinion doesn't matter here. (Also, please. I know enough so-called "Hispanistas" who want to exaggerate the numbers even when the evidence shows that at most, only around half a million speak the language fluently. If you think I'm one of them, you're sorely mistaken.)

Second, I use admin rights on the English Wikipedia extremely rarely, and not once in the years I've been involved in discussions on Wikipedia about this topic, or any other topic for that matter, have I even used that as so-called "leverage" to get what I want. If I did, the Philippines should be fully colored in, but consensus dictated that a colored dot is sufficient and I accepted that consensus because that was what was decided on, even if I disagreed with it. If you want to change the consensus to remove the Philippines entirely, you're more than welcome to do so. I will disagree with it, but if that's what people ultimately decide, who am I to say no?

Finally, sympathy does not equal agreement. I don't agree with the other user threatening death to anyone on the Spanish Wikipedia (and, in fact, I didn't know they did that until you brought it up here) because that's morally reprehensible and shouldn't happen in any circumstance, but I can nevertheless sympathize with the frustration he shares because I am in enough Spanish-speaking Filipino circles to know that this sentiment is something that is not isolated to a couple of people. But don't you dare claim I agree with killing people as a sentiment. Not once did I say that nor agree with that.

I actually find it amusing that you're claiming this is a "Filipino nationalist" thing: actual Filipino nationalists actually believe the exact opposite of what you're implying. Actual Filipino nationalists actually claim Spanish was never spoken in the Philippines and is dead, full stop. I'd recommend you read into the literature before you start throwing ideas out there. In any instance, with all due respect you're NOT engaging in good faith. You're more than welcome to not engage any further as that's your right, but I encourage you to reflect. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 13:54, 20 March 2026 (UTC)

It's fine @Taichi You can keep spreading the lies that you want. It's such a shame that you refuse to see past other cultures besides Latin America and Spain.

While @Sky Harbor and I will continue to spread awareness and continue to respect our country's rich Hispanic culture - even richer than Panama's tainted Hispanic culture with more Yankee influence than ours, we will continue to promote Philippine Spanish at all costs. In other Wikipedia pages too.

We will not argue with a Panamanian who cannot understand the loss of indigenous cultures as Panama doesn't have any left anyway to cherish thanks to the Spanish.

It feels great to disrespect and deny other cultures doesn't it? Just remember, Philippine Spanish and the Real Academia de Filipinas exists - and WE EXIST. We will continue to exist! Continue to act like the colonisers who threw away your indigenous culture, because we will always exist. DavaoDude (talk) 16:11, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

@Taichi - I will alway be make the change to remove "culturally important" on the map because if it is culturally importantm, then the Philippines MUST be included. Why else would our 170+ languages and the Real Academia and Chavacano exist?

But, it's okay - you will never understand that because your culture has been erased. DavaoDude (talk) 16:14, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Okay, enough. Let's not resort to personal attacks, please. I have disagreements with Taichi on both here and the Spanish Wikipedia as much as you do, and I don't like that he put words in my mouth, but let's not get carried away here. You can disagree with the action, but responding through personal attacks is unwarranted and unhelpful. This is Wikipedia, after all, and we must always respect other Wikipedians first, even those who we disagree with. (I have yet to check what was actually said on the Spanish Wikipedia, but making death threats isn't going to help your case either. If you actually did make them, then you rightfully deserve to be called out for them.)

I don't know enough about the history of Panama to be able to make any sort of judgement about indigenous history there, but I cannot countenance any attacks made in the name of Filipino Hispanism towards any country. It's wrong and, as I've said earlier, unhelpful. If you really want to sell people on the worth of Philippine Spanish, the use of our terminology on Wikipedia, etc., then please engage with them in good faith. We are better than that.

Just to be clear: so-called "Hispanistas" on Wikipedia need to cool their horses while on the project, and I won't hesitate to take action against people who distort Wikipedia content to inflate things (or minimize things) beyond what's covered in reliable sources. I already have to deal with someone persistently editing Spanish people of Filipino ancestry to inflate Hispanic influence, when the source material doesn't engage with that topic at all. I don't want to have to deal with this one either. Taichi was wrong to unilaterally change the map and the map legend in the infobox without seeking consensus, but if you're going to insult your way into changing the consensus back, then I'm sorry, but you're in the wrong too. Let's take the time to cool the conversation down so that cooler heads prevail, shall we? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 16:29, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Significant minority

Why is "Significant minority" a thing? This shouldn't be on the infobox. Beshogur (talk) 14:43, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

Why shouldn't it be? It's hard to discuss this with you if you keep your argument for it a secret. 😉 Largoplazo (talk) 15:24, 30 August 2025 (UTC)

@Largoplazo: why should it be? What's next, putting significant minority to every other language? What's significant minority. No official status. Beshogur (talk) 23:01, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Not sure why this is an issue, but perhaps the solution is to drop minority from the label, and make it just Significant language. Spanish is quite significant in Belize and Gibraltar, and not minority according to figures reported, while just barely minority in Andorra. Minority in (most locales of) the U.S, but definitely a significant presence in some areas. The purpose of an encyclopedia is to inform, and the strong presence of Spanish in Belize, Gibraltar, Andorra and some of the U.S. seems to me useful information. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 02:50, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

It's listed on the official languages. There shouldn't be "significant minority/language" on the infobox. There is a separate minotiry language section there. Beshogur (talk) 11:49, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Btw in case someone want to revert me, see Template:Infobox language: nation: list of countries in which it is an official language. Beshogur (talk) 13:14, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Only thing closest to official is New Mexico, but the state has not an official language including English. Beshogur (talk) 20:28, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm aware -- and I'm guessing Largoplazo is, too -- of the status of Spanish in the countries in question, including constituent parts of countries such as New Mexico. Sharing that awareness with curious readers is a good thing, IMO. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 20:57, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

I added New Mexico. Though it has no de jure language, Argentina is also listed here without having a de jure language. Beshogur (talk) 22:10, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

The original reason to delete the significant minority list apparently is that "this is listed on the official language parameter. if there is no official status, it should be removed." However, Spanish is not official in several Spanish-speaking countries in the Americas, and similarly English is not official for instance in the USA or the UK. So I strongly disagree with the reasoning to delete the list. --Jotamar (talk) 22:05, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

The simplest solution might be to just delete Official from the heading of that section. Not an ideal solution, but one that leaves room for listing both officialdom and not. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 16:47, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

No that section is for official languages. For that there is "states" which isn't present in this infobox. Beshogur (talk) 22:44, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Why? De facto official language of a country vs "significant minority" is different. Is Spanish official in Andorra? No. So it doesn't matter if a language is spoken by 1/3 of a country's population. Beshogur (talk) 22:47, 25 September 2025 (UTC)

Actually, it matters very much to the people who live there and to those who consult an encyclopedia article for accurate information. (The previous re "that section is for official languages" etc. is circular.) Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 14:55, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

That's what the infobox template says. Beshogur (talk) 22:41, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Etymology needs cleanup

Whoever contributed this should step up and explain it: Spanish philologist Ramón Menéndez Pidal suggested that the classic hispanus or hispanicus took the suffix -one from Vulgar Latin, as happened with other words such as bretón (Breton) or sajón (Saxon).

Where's the -ón in español? Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 20:17, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

In "Ramón"? [pause for laughter] I dunno, if it's relevant at all, then something's missing from the explanation. Perhaps the hypothesis is that it was, at some point, "Hispanion", after which the "n" became "l" though dissimilation? Largoplazo (talk) 21:59, 6 September 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps. Looks like we'll never know until someone chases down Menéndez Pidal's text. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 02:24, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

How much Spanish vocabulary cmoes from Latin - mistake!

Hello, You write in one passage that 75% Spanish vocabulary comes from Latin and then in the vocabulary passage on your Spanish language site you write that it is actually 85%. I think the latter number is correct and if you want to be considered reliable, please correct you r mistake (75%). ~2025-32879-81 (talk) 22:36, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

• What do the sources say? Because there is no "you" here. Drmies (talk) 22:37, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
• Problem solved. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 22:42, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Map Hispanophone World.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:24, 12 March 2026 (UTC)