Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afro-Latin American

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:30, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Afro-Latin American

Article is riddled with inaccuracy. There have been copyvio suggestions. The name appears to be a not notable academic genre that is not an appropriate name for black latinos. If we have to have an article on these people we should delete this and start again SqueakBox July 7, 2005 18:35 (UTC)

• Keep, Inaccuracy can be fixed. copyvio was never proven and still can be re-edited. Here's a source to start with:

http://www.caribbeannetnews.com/2003/10/07/dna.htm

There's plenty of information about the Garifuna and black in Mexico as well. --Vizcarra 7 July 2005 21:07 (UTC)

• Keep, unless someone comes up with a better name and/or copyvio shown. Certainly, there should be some sort of article on WP about this racial group; cannot vote to delete without being given a better alternative that accomplishes that goal. Dcarrano July 7, 2005 21:29 (UTC)

• Keep, I think there is a lot of interesting information and the article can fixed. Nanahuatzin 8 July 2005 21:38 (UTC)

Comment. Latin American redirects to Latin America. If Latin Americans aren't deserving of an article for what reason do we need an Afro-American article. Sounds rascist to me, SqueakBox July 8, 2005 18:39 (UTC)

African Americans do have an article, so by your own argument, not having a Afro-Latin Americanarticle would be "racist" as well (discriminatory).--Vizcarra 8 July 2005 21:01 (UTC)

Americans have their own article, Latin Americans don't. Also (from what I know) most Afro Americans identify themselves as such. There is no article for Afro-British inspite of the fact that my experience is that there is much more race consciousness in the UK, and much higher levels of insidious rascism, than in Latin America, and I suspect the same can be said for the US. By singling out black Latin Americans without writing an article about Latin Americans as a whole I would argue we are being rascist, SqueakBox July 9, 2005 00:05 (UTC)

• • There is a Hispanics article. Perhaps Latin American should redirect there instead of to Latin America; that would certainly make sense to me. I still don't see what any of it has to do with Afro-Latin American; even if Hispanics hadn't been written yet (and, again, it has been), I don't see how that would imply that it COULDN'T be written by a willing user, or that Afro-Latin Americans are more important than Hispanics. Nor do I think accusing people who disagree with you of racism is appropriate; please see WP:FAITH. Dcarrano July 9, 2005 00:33 (UTC)
• Keep. Clearly notable topic. Latin America does discuss Latin American cultures and peoples (if briefly). Uneven coverage of related topics is not a valid reason for deletion; however it certainly is a valid reason for article creation and expansion (for example on the Culture of Latin America).--Pharos 9 July 2005 03:47 (UTC)
• Keep per Pharos, though a less combersome title would be welcome. carmeld1 22:10, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Linguistic classifications are in every sense discrimination; discrimination by race is racism. Sarge Baldy 03:34, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Huh? Please explain. How is this different than African American?--Pharos 03:40, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
    • It's not, I don't like that categorization either. I find it particularly a nuisance when Wikipedia calls white Americans "Americans" and African Americans "African Americans", which I feel clearly decides what people are considered "normal" in the United States and which are "abnormal". Sarge Baldy 04:06, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
    • Wikipedia definitely shouldn't call white Americans "Americans", but certainly there's something to be said about African American culture, no?--Pharos 04:11, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
      • Yeah, I would say that's useful information, although again I don't like the title and would prefer something without a racial distinction. After all, that culture is more the culture of slaves exported from Africa and their descendants, and not that of Africans who immigrated of free choice afterward. It's also a culture adopted by a number of European-descending Americans. Also, notice that Culture of the United States ignores that culture entirely and talks exclusively of American culture as being white American culture. Note also there is no article on "white American culture", since that seems entirely synonymous with "American culture", and therefore the whole article on US culture is devoted to people descending from Europe, and other immigrants are administered under third-class subcategories. Sarge Baldy 04:30, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
    • African is not a race, so it is not a "racial distinction" but rather about origins and about culture. The other propose name Black-Latin Americans is more about skin color, which could be discriminatory.. "American culture" used to mean "White American culture" when whites where a stronger majority, now it doesn't, otherwise hip hop and rap wouldn't be part of American culture. It's not that non-European sub-cultures were considered third-class as much as they were considered minorities (which they currently are, more than 70% of Americans are mostly European). --Vizcarra 18:06, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
  • "Linguistic classifications are in every sense discrimination; discrimination by race is racism" That is hardly an argument pro-deleting the article, being that we have articles about nigger, redneck, white cracker, dyke, queer, faggot, Kraut. Afro-Latin American is, by comparison, very tame of a term. --Vizcarra 18:11, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, I've been slowly coming in and adding information and editing on this page. I've run websites and forums on Afro Latino cultures for several years and have studied it quite a bit. Afro Latin American studies are "developing" right now. It is developing in the academic fields of Latin American studies and African/African American studies. There is quite a bit of research available on the topic, although I believe it is under-represented and understudied. It seems like the "accuracy" problems are more about semantics here. As far as label goes - the real issue is whether or not this should be under African American or not. In Academic fields, African American is starting to become more accurate and inclusive by addressing "Africans in the Americas." But, that is not a complete transition and may never finish. The entries for US African Americans (afroestadounidenses) is dense as it is and would require vast reworking to include the history of the African Diaspora in more than a twenty other nations. Considering this is an English language portal, a focus on the curent English language meaning of African American (US Blacks) seems appropriate - as is a separate reference to Afro Latin Americans (Afro Latinos or Afrodescendientes). As far as "racial or cultural labels" - the history of these cultures as identifiable communities and groups started with racial distinctions that pushes their original diverse culture together and continues to affect those communities on that level. It's appropriate. 14 July 2004 -- Cacimar

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.