Jump to content

Talk:African Americans

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dumaka (talk | contribs) at 23:05, 22 May 2008 (→Crime). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive
Archives
To the archives: /Archive - the directory of archives.
Ancillary talk archives
  • /Archive:West Indies (21 November 2004 - 14 April 2006) archive of several past discussions on Talk:African American about people in the U.S. of African ancestry via the West Indies and whether the label "African American" would apply to them
  • /Archive:White South Africans (creation - 21 January 2005) archive of several past discussions on Talk:African American about White South Africans on and whether the label "African American" would apply to them
  • /Archive:Do not feed the trolls


lead

People need to watch this page. Nothing about Hispanics should be in the lead. This article is about AFRICAN AMEREICANS..Period. African Americans are still the largest racial minority as opposed to hispanics who are the largest ethnic minority. If hispanics want to let it be known thier the largest ethnic minority it should be done on thier wiki page, not the African American page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Therock40756 (talk • contribs) 01:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no rule saying Hispanics can't be mentioned in this article. It is notable that Hispanics have eclipsed African-Americans as the largest minority group (albeit ethnic). I've reworded the passage to distinquish between ethnic and racial. OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:51, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I summarized the article in the lead. The lead could use some more information. Leads should be able to stand alone as concise summaries of their articles. (See WP:LEAD.) Misinformed editors sometimes delete additions to the lead because they're "redundant," but the lead actually should touch on the points covered in the article. So next time you see a lead that doesn't summarize the article, please build it up. Leadwind (talk) 01:59, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page on the definition of African American can be greatly improved by adding a few major details about the people in the United States who are termed African American. These people as a group are descendents of the original natives of America, Africans, Europeans and in some cases Asians, to put it broadly. Adding this information will give a more truthful, accurate definition of the these people who range in physical appearance from having very fair skin with blonde hair and blue eyes, to a very dark brown complexion with kinkier hair and darker eyes. Most families under this term have members that vary in physical appearance from one extreme to the other and every look in between. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.176.124.126 (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC) The Honorable Marcus M. Garvey was convenietly omitted from the list of great americans, though his accomplishments and leadership far surpassed the records of any of those "chosen". His UNIA claimed a membership in excess of 6 million members of the Negro race. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.245.224 (talk) 20:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oprah picture

I'm not sure what a better alternative would be, but Oprah (currently the only picture in the income section) is pretty unrepresentative of typical African Americans' income situtation. Where much of the African American community is struggling with issues of poverty etc. the picture of Oprah gives the impression that most blacks wear fancy suits and carry designer handbags. 71.233.79.11 (talk) 13:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image of Oprah is in the article because she is the richest African American. I don't believe an image of a black person in poverty belongs in this article. That would after all, just be feeding into an old stereotype. Not to say there isn't black poverty, but we shouldn't promote that stereotype. Yahel Guhan 23:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

African-American or African American?

I've noticed an inconsistency among other articles that use the term and I think it needs to be clarified in this article. Anybody have thoughts? --Jophus00 (talk) 22:45, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a broader hyphenated American issue. Since hyphens are often used indifferently one way or the other, and they've been considered offensive by at least a few people (especially in the organized Japanese American community), our Wikipedia standard is just to drop them.--Pharos (talk) 04:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tiger Woods is not African American

Therefore, he should be removed from the list of most influential Americans who are African American near the end of the article.

Regardless of how the Discovery Channel might have identified him, Tiger Woods has said that he does not consider himself African American. And that should be respected.

Since racial identity is primarily a social construct, how one self-identifies racially should not be contradicted by others who would like to judge by phenotype. Many people that call themselves "African American," as the article states, have up to three different racial groups represented in their ancestry. Consequently, many people who consider themselves African American can be very "light-skinned" (so light brown as to be nearly yellow in tone) or very close to white. And these people are African American because they say they are African American not (directly) because of the one drop rule.

Tiger Woods shouldn't be forced to be African American based on the one drop rule either and/or his phenotype either. Tiger Woods isn't African American because he says he isn't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TafkaInvisible (talk • contribs) 16:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for that? African Americanism is a matter of race. People are African Americans because they were born into it, not because they choose to be so. Yahel Guhan 16:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tiger Woods is of one-quarter African American ancestry. Apparently, he prefers not to be described as just "African American" [1]. But, he supports multiple identities [2]. BTW, I'm not sure why the Discovery Channel would be the ultimate arbiter on African American greatness anyway.--Pharos (talk) 17:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That is a good question. Do you know of a better example of what would be a better arbiter of African American greatness? Yahel Guhan 17:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! You just inspired me to create 100 Greatest African Americans. I guess that's a more scholarly list, and one that's more on-topic (it's not ranked, however). Still, I don't really think we should be using any "official" list. Instead, I think in an article like this we should just mention "great" people as they happen to fit into the narrative (and we already have a collage of some of the "great" people in the {{African American ethnicity}} infobox anyway).--Pharos (talk) 19:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to add a link to the source of this list. Yahel Guhan 23:00, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The source is the book itself, as I've now explained on its talk page. Thanks.--Pharos (talk) 18:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is Barak Obama "African American"?

He is half White and I have never seen any source call him "African American" or "Black" so why is he listed here as "African American"?

I shouldn't even be wasting my time explaining this to you but anyone who has ancestory from Africa in America is considered African American. Not to mention that Obama's father is African.Dumaka (talk) 01:19, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
By that same logic, anyone who has ancestry from Europe can be European American, so he is European American as well? It's not wasting your time, it was a legitimate question since the majority of the U.S. considers him biracial. Kman543210 (talk) 12:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The guy is African-American. Years ago during Jim Crow and slavery he would have been considered black and would have had to go to the "colored" restroom. Almost every black person in America has at least some European blood running through them. If we were to take it into that context then there would be no African-Americans. There would only be Biracial-Americans. Who is to say what the dominate gene is when it comes to race? If a person can trace their ancestory to Africa in the U.S. then they are considered African-American. It does not matter how many other races they may be mixed with. His father was African his mother was American, so he is African-American. Dumaka (talk) 23:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Years ago during Jim Crow and slavery he would have been considered black and would have had to go to the "colored" restroom. Good thing we've moved past those days...or have we? I agree that he is considered black because of the predominant features and the fact that his father is African. You can still be biracial and African-American though. Not all biracial children have the same predominant features. My nephews' father is white and mother is black (from the Caribean), but they do not identify as "African American". Most people know they are "mixed" right away, and they had more problems in a predominantly black school in Louisiana then a predominantly white school in Oregon. My point is that I agree with you on Obama as he self-identifies as that, but I do not believe it to be as clear cut as some people state. Kman543210 (talk) 01:19, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I agree. Dumaka (talk) 19:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criticisms of the Term African American

This entire section seems to be supported solely by weasel words, especially the opening line: "To be African American, some argue that an individual would have to be born in Africa." I'm aware there is issue with the term in that sense among lay people on the internet, but unless there's actual academic debate over the label, I don't think that that needs to be reflected in an encyclopedia entry. I deleted the section in light of its lack of references to support it (the only cite in the paragraph was to an article describing an incident that amounts to a "fun fact" where the term was misappropriated). As it stands, African-American is the most official term to describe Americans of African descent, whether or not that pleases those uncomfortable with its etymology. Snackmagic (talk) 19:14, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is African American?

There should be something in this section about the racial status of Tiger Woods, and White Africans. Rds865 (talk) 19:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More About (West-?)African Origins?

I'm not going to do it now (way too tired), but has anyone considered adding more info (stats, etc.) about *where* in Africa the majority of African-American slaves (or their ancestors, as the case may be) came from? It seems very significant to this entry and would be a great help to any African-American student (or anyone else) just beginning to think about African-American genealogical topics, even if just in a general sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seethaki (talk • contribs) 21:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"survived" changed to "were freed after"

A Change from survived to were freed after is necessary. saying "survived" doesn't give a clear description of how slavery ended in history. And using words like "survived" can be taken as un-neutral or bias. This is what the statement say, with my revision added in italics and bold:

  • Most African Americans are the descendants of captive Africans who survived were freed after the slavery era within the boundaries of the present United States, although some are — or are descended from — voluntary immigrants from Africa, the Caribbean, South America, or elsewhere.

--Cooljuno411 (talk) 22:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comment: User:Malik Shabazz, judging by your username and profile i can assume this may be a sensitive topic for you, as is I. But please do not make up lies and false pretenses to revert my edits. Like you did by saying : Reverted 1 edit by Cooljuno411; Rv edits that are imprecise and becoming disruptive. (TW) [3] --Cooljuno411 (talk) 22:24, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
When your changes have been reverted by two different editors but you insist on making them a third time, that's disruptive editing. So don't accuse me of lying when I've accurately described your actions.
Second, your description is incorrect. African-Americans are descended from Africans who were enslaved, but not all of them "were freed" at the end of the Civil War (an expression that makes them passive objects in somebody else's drama). Some had freed themselves, whether through escape or by purchasing their own freedom. But all of them had, in fact, survived the slavery era.
PS - If you have a personal comment about my Username or my User page, make it on my Talk page. Don't presume what is or isn't a "sensitive topic" for me, and I won't presume that your subsitution of Michael Jackson's mugshot for his photo indicates that you're a complete jackass. Instead, I'll assume good faith. Thank you. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 03:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Exsume me, NO, This is not how it's going down. How dare you be through'n insults my way, Sorry that i actually follow the whole concept of Wiki by trying to implement "UP-TO-DATE" content. Maybe if you read a talk page or two you would see that we already agreed to use another picture of Michael Jackson. Sorry, out-dated pictures from 1984 just don't fly up with me. And back to the topic at hand, duh they weren't freed after the civil war, i have been in a high school history class, last time i checked it was this lovely thing called the hmmmmm...... what is again, OH YEAH, The Thirteenth Amendment. And the sentence has a great precursor "Most African Americans are the descendants of captive Africans...", and how did the majority of slaves become free, from that amendment. By saying survived it doesn't even empliment any historical reference. All i see is someone trying to "get back at modern white people for actions by past white people" through a sneaky bias statement, i believe slavery is wrong but we can't hold grudges from over 100 years. If you don't like my idea of what should replace that portion, then maybe instead of being aggressive you should be proactive and suggest something else. I'm sorry to tell you but that word "survived" is going, it highly un-neutral and doesn't have any historical value, and personally it very offensive to modern white people. So be a leader and suggest another snippet to replace it. Would you like this phrase, "Most African Americans are the descendants of captive Africans who were freed after the emplimation of The Thirteenth Amendment...". And i think your part about buying their freedom or running away can also fit in the statement as well, i am fine with historical truths but hiding the truth through bias word such as "survived" doesn't fit in my boat. --Cooljuno411 (talk) 03:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your attempt at "Black English" is just too, too precious. There was no discussion here about replacing Jackson's photo. And there is absolutely no consensus, except in your overheated imagination, to replace the word "survived". (And by the way, maybe you should read an article before you link to it. According to Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, "Prior to its ratification, slavery remained legal only in Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, and New Jersey; everywhere else in the USA slaves had been freed by state action and the federal government's Emancipation Proclamation.") — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 05:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Yeah i know about that, the slaves states that remained with the union (border states) were permitted to keep slaves and basically the Confederate states were subject to the Emancipation Proclamation. Yeah i know, like i said I've been in a High School American History Class. And how i type is irelavent, the subject at hand is replacing "survive" with a more in depth description. So unless you suggest a replacement sentence that goes into much greater detail then "survive", i will take into my own hands and you will be in contempt if you try to revert it. I am trying to collaborate with you but you are sure making it difficult. --Cooljuno411 (talk) 07:24, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll "be in contempt"? Ha ha ha. Why don't you brush up on WP:3RR, Mr. High School American History. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 08:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Yep... cool... 3 reverts got it. So are you going to collaborate or not. Through out this whole talk you have not yet tried to even to collaborate. So are you going to express your opinion of a replacement or continue to be ignorant. --Cooljuno411 (talk) 09:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have a nerve, ignorant, i specifically remember you saying over at the michael jackson page, "I can just about handle your black pride but...." , ha , im not even black, but ignorant people suck as yourself cant realise that its ok to like and support other races, im hispanic, i think black people are cool, it doesn't make me black though. Such ignorance. Realist2 (talk) 09:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the words of Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?" Fclass (talk) 14:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cooljuno411, please be advised that Wikipedia works by consensus. If you are unable to persuade a change in consensus, do not attempt to "take it into your own hands" with edit warring or you will be in violation of Wikipedia policy (even if you are not guilty of breaking WP:3RR). About your arguement, as a white person I see nothing personally insulting to white people and find Malik's arguement that the description of African Amercians simply being freed "makes them passive objects in somebody else's drama" and not descriptive of the whole story quite persuasive. Also, you have given no evidence that this is "someone trying to "get back at modern white people for actions by past white people" through a sneaky bias statement;" how did your mind even link the present to the past for this statement anyway? Lastly, inserting a police mugshot of all things into a section about those voted to be the 'greatest African Americans'[4] and then complaining that the article is not neutral and somehow biased against whites reeks of hypocrisy. Don't be ignorant of your own prejudice. Cigraphix (talk) 14:41, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He tries inserting that mugshot picture where ever he can, i expect to see it on the Cup cake article next. Realist2 (talk) 20:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CoolJuno411, I am also a "modern white person" and "survived" seems like the appropriate word to me. I fail to see how it is biased. "We're freed from", on the other hand, implies that some unnamed third party released the African-Americans from slavery, which does not strike me as accurate - it denies the role and agency of African-Americans in their own emancipation, which has been documented, it is vague about who did the freeing (if the African-Americans had no part in it), and it is grammatically confusing. You mentioned earlier that the fact that not all slaves "were freed" is covered by the word "most". But "most" refers specifically to the phrase "captive Africans", in which the exceptions to "most" are "voluntary immigrants from Africa, the Caribbean, South America, or elsewhere". It does not refer to "were freed", in which the exceptions to "most" are "slaves that weren't freed". Readers will not assume that "most" applies to "were freed" because that's not how the whole sentence is structured. And please be civil and assume good faith. --130.63.128.248 (talk) 01:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Ivey

Won award for Toyota poker player of the year, 9 WPT final tables (a WPT record), top 10 money earning poker players of last 8 years, and is called the "tiger woods" of poker and he is VERY noteable. I'll leave the decision to you guys, hope this info helps. He is a outstanding culmination of some of the heart of african american qualities. His wikipedia page has even way more stuff, and every list of "5 best poker players" no matter which list, always have Ivey. Sentriclecub (talk) 21:54, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Obama image

An editor removed the photo of Barack Obama from the article with the edit summary that the image is "irrelevant". I restored the image and invited a discussion here.

I'm curious why the editor feels the picture of a prominent African-American is irrelevant, and I'm interested in the views of other editors. Thank you. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 03:30, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the photo is very relevant--Obama is one of the most famous Americans of African ancestry in history. Could we vote to have it re-added, or...? Seethaki (talk) 02:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it may be because he is not an African American in the strict sense of the term: Descended from slaves originating in "undifferentiated" Africa, rather than a recent immigrant from a modern country in Africa. His father is Kenyan and his mother is a caucasian American. Roger (talk) 10:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If a person can trace their ancestory to Africa in the U.S. then they are considered African-American. It does not matter how many other races they may be mixed with. The majority of black people today are mixed with so many other races but still are considered African-American. It does not matter if his ancestors were slaves or not. His father was African his mother was American, so he is African-American. Dumaka (talk) 00:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How many black women actually take car eof their children?

I asked here because of the statistic saying that 70% of black children are abandoned by their father. If a child is raised by their grandparents but custody of the child is given to the mother doe sit still qualify as a mother raising her own child? What about the actual time the mother spends with the child? These are important to the statistics.YVNP (talk) 07:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:African_Americans&oldid=214301865"