User talk:201.43.16.177

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] March 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from One-drop theory. Please be more careful when editing articles and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. EdwinH 21:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice
This is not an accident, the affirmations you make are false. The source you provide isn't anything more than a mere opinion. Please remove it or come up with good sources.
Race is a social construction so all views on race are opinions. In this case the opinion is from a highly respected newspaper and thus meets wikipedia's standard for a reliable source. If you continue to vandalize and violate the 3 revert rule you will be blocked Influencey
The "one drop rule" is a very real historical fact, still applied in some places, with a very well defined basis, which was the racial theories of the past. In this context opinions aren't valid. Unless you can prove that the exact same ideas occurred in Brazil, with historical and trustworthy sources, then it's not valid. The impression the reader will get from this text is wrong, as if the exact same ideas are applied in Brazil but in the reverse.
I repeat, unless you can prove this historical fact with trustworthy sources, i.e., historical sources not opinions, then this is nothing more than "wishful thinking".
And more, the "one drop rule" implies an imposition from racists, a form of excluding others. There never was any form of racist imposition in Brazil because people are free to indentify themselves as they wish..
The one drop rule used to have a very strict legal meaning; today the term is used in a much less formal sense, as simply a rough and ready way that people label race. This article is not simply about how the concept was applied legally & opppressively, but also the impact it had on how race is socially constructed in America. Today the one drop rule has become a symbol for African-American unity so concepts chnage. The fact that Brazil socially constructs race in the opposite way is thus both relevant, interesting & cited by a reliable source. Influencey
Being different doesn't mean that it is the opposite. By saying "opposite" you are implying a relationship where one's values are the opposite of the other, but the circumstances involving both societies and culture are completely different. This is not interesting, it's simply false, shallow and it disinforms more than informs. There's no such thing of one drop of anything here, black people can have white children, white people can have black children, and people identify themselves as they wish and it's more related to how they look instead of ancestry. If you wish to know "different constructs" then I suggest you research everywhere because you will always find different ideas about it. There's no reason to single Brazil out in this matter or to cite it under "one drop rule" article if all you want is to show "different racial constructs".
The truth is that brazilians aren't as obssessed with race as you are, and the very fact that you believe people should have this or that stance in this matter is biased. If you read the text of the "reverse one drop rule" you will see that in its flawed logic it assumes that everyone else in the world should think as you do, and if they don't then they are "the opposite". Wrong assumptions, wrong conclusions, bad sources.
The entry is specifically about "one drop rule" and unless you have the evidence, in the strict sense of it, of this concept in Brazil then it's just an opinion, not a fact.
We have a reliable source saying that in America if you are not quite white you are black, but in Brazil if you are not quite black you are white. That's direct evidence of a reverse way of drawing the racial line. Just because you think Brazilians are so much more advanced than Americans that they couldn't possibly care about anything as petty as race, does not give you the right to censor and vandalize articles Influencey


You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on One-drop theory. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Thank you. Will (aka Wimt) 22:32, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice

[edit] An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button Image:Wikisigbutton.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 03:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. ViridaeTalk 03:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)3