This is the current revision of this page, as edited by HiLo48 (talk | contribs) at 02:34, 20 December 2024 (Reverted edit by 210.3.243.147 (talk) to last version by Lowercase sigmabot III). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 02:34, 20 December 2024 by HiLo48 (talk | contribs) (Reverted edit by 210.3.243.147 (talk) to last version by Lowercase sigmabot III)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Skip to table of contents |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Black people article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
Misplaced Pages is not censored. Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Misplaced Pages's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 2007-03-18. The result of the discussion was Speedy keep. |
This level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Black people: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2020-09-23
|
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
Black as a Social class in South Africa
In 1950, the Apartheid government of South Africa introduced the Population Registration Act No.30 which effectively forced the Xhosa people and other nations organic to the land to be registered under the National Socialist system into either one of four categories, Black, White, Colored and Asian.
This Act effectively alienated the Xhosa people from their collective identity as a nation unto themselves and forced the label "Black African" on them as a social and legal status.
This Act not only alienated the Xhosa from their collective identity but also from their resources and property as well with the implementation of the Black Codes from the 1913 Black's land Act and Groups Areas Act.
This has been the cause of cultural erosion in this community and has prevented the redressing of many injustices that were committed against the Xhosa people. Benjamin knox (talk) 23:34, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- Is this text you wish to add to the article? If so, do you have sources for the above? I can add it if you do, and if it still needs doing. Lewisguile (talk) 19:53, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
"Blacks"
Want to recommend that someone with more access than me double-check this article to ensure that the preferred term "Black people" (or another noun as appropriate in place of "people") is always used over "blacks," except in context like quotes, titles, or the South Africa section where Blacks had a formal legal status. The US National Archives defines "blacks" as an offensive term that should always be capitalized and replaced with "Black people." TheMiddleWest (talk) 18:28, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Really? This older Australian (who doesn't want to offend anyone) truly finds it hard to keep up what's OK and what's not in America. When did "blacks" become offensive? HiLo48 (talk) 06:00, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- I guess that calling black people "blacks" has the same kind of vibe as calling the Aboriginal people in Australia "Aborigines". While we might not see any real issue with it, the people it's used to refer to might have their own reservations about being called such. I will admit that America's increasingly common and almost impulsive "knight in shining armour" response to anything considered offensive nowadays is more than a bit excessive, but here, I see no real problem here with @TheMiddleWest's request from the perspective I just presented. Sirocco745 (talk) 06:09, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- I understand and accpt hat language changes. MY real question was, when did this particular change in acceptability happen? HiLo48 (talk) 07:18, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- I dunno, when was the last time you heard "blacks" used commonly in everyday life? To be honest, I can understand why a black person might not want to be just called a "black". I'd be more than a bit annoyed if someone called me a "white" instead of making even a half-hearted attempt to refer to me by any other defining characteristic. Sirocco745 (talk) 07:23, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- I've no real personal insight here, but these things aren't binary switches. What is observed as a sea-change is instead like reaching critical mass, maybe as the direct result of many people becoming aware or changing their mind in a short amount of time, but likely just as much if not more some mere signal of preexisting perspectives catching on in the media. A thinkpiece, a sitcom quip, whatever—unfortunately those are the events people notice as regards these things. What I'm saying is there's potentially no answer for you—different folks have different feelings and different explanations. From what I intuit from reading memoirs, it was always possible for this choice of language to confer this particular meaning. Remsense ‥ 论 07:26, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- I understand and accpt hat language changes. MY real question was, when did this particular change in acceptability happen? HiLo48 (talk) 07:18, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- It doesn't seem particularly contingent or peculiar to me that a mass noun-as-demonym can become offensive. I really wouldn't read much more than that into it, it's not particularly complicated or particularly American. I'll steal these citations from wikt:black#Noun:
- Merriam-Webster Online: Use of the noun Black in the singular to refer to a person is considered offensive. The plural form Blacks is still commonly used by Black people and others to refer to Black people as a group or community, but the plural form too is increasingly considered offensive, and most style guides advise writers to use Black people rather than Blacks when practical.
- Oxford Learner's Dictionaries: Using the noun black to refer to people with dark skin can be offensive, so it is better to use the adjective: black people • a black man/woman. It is especially offensive to use the noun with the definite article ('the blacks')
- Dictionary.com: As a noun, however, it does often offend. The use of the plural noun without an article is somewhat more accepted (home ownership among Blacks); however, the plural noun with an article is more likely to offend (political issues affecting the Blacks), and the singular noun is especially likely to offend (The small business proprietor is a Black). Use the adjective instead: Black homeowners, Black voters, a Black business proprietor.
- AP Stylebook: Do not use as a singular noun.
- Remsense ‥ 论 06:19, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- I guess that calling black people "blacks" has the same kind of vibe as calling the Aboriginal people in Australia "Aborigines". While we might not see any real issue with it, the people it's used to refer to might have their own reservations about being called such. I will admit that America's increasingly common and almost impulsive "knight in shining armour" response to anything considered offensive nowadays is more than a bit excessive, but here, I see no real problem here with @TheMiddleWest's request from the perspective I just presented. Sirocco745 (talk) 06:09, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
Why don't we have a picture of some black people in the info box?
for example how the page for "'''human'''", or "'''woman'''" or "'''child'''" has a picture of what they look like Finnigami (talk) 02:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Which ones? HiLo48 (talk) 03:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Pls review MOS:PEOPLEGALLERY.
- Moxy🍁 04:03, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages objectionable content
- B-Class level-5 vital articles
- Misplaced Pages level-5 vital articles in Society and social sciences
- B-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
- B-Class Ethnic groups articles
- High-importance Ethnic groups articles
- WikiProject Ethnic groups articles
- B-Class African diaspora articles
- High-importance African diaspora articles
- WikiProject African diaspora articles
- B-Class Africa articles
- High-importance Africa articles
- WikiProject Africa articles
- B-Class Anthropology articles
- Mid-importance Anthropology articles
- B-Class Alternative views articles
- Low-importance Alternative views articles
- WikiProject Alternative views articles
- Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics