Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Cop

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Mailer Diablo 03:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Black Cop

Original research. The "black cop" is such a broad category of characters that I don't see it as an actual archetype. A Google search for "black cop" archetype doesn't turn up any discussion of such an archetype, and certain clues in the text (ie, no possible origin for the archetype offered) makes me think someone is trying to advance an idea without the serious scholarly homework needed to do so. hateless 08:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep At least for now. This is not neccessarly OR, but certainly lacks references. Google is not holy, especially with difficult search terms like these. Especially in the context of "white cop" "black cop" partnerships, this can be considered a real character type in movies. Should be given the benefit of the doubt for now. Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 09:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Respectfully, I disagree. This article is entirely original research (Wikispeak for "he made it all up!"). It appears to be nothing more than one writer who sat down one day and wrote about a trend he thinks he's personally noticed in films lately. Since Wikipedia is not a source for unpublished personal research, this isn't a practice we'd like to encourage. Additionally, since the trend itself is not particularly well-defined or (in my insufficiently humble opinion) worth remarking upon, I very much doubt we'll ever have anyone attempting the "serious scholarly homework" Hateless (talk · contribs) refers to. As such, it shall always and only be original research. This "archetype" is not worth an encyclopaedia article just yet, and I doubt it ever will be. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 10:04, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • I understand your opinion, but actually I have read articles about this subject in notable magazines and newspapers (I live in Europe btw, don't know if that matters), suggesting that the author of this article is not alone in his opinion. I'll try to find some sources. Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 10:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Well, if there's sources out there, then I'm wrong about nobody ever attempting to define the archetype of the article :-). I look forward to seeing what you can dig up. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 12:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • A quick search has me to admit that reliable sources are difficult to find. No change of mind yet though. :) Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 12:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete Original reasearch, no sources and most of all, ill-defined. Does everytime a black actor play a cop fall into this category or does the black cop have to exhibit certain traits? "many viewers poked fun at Bill Duke's appearance in 50 Cent's Get Rich or Die Tryin as the leader of a gang by referring to him as "Black Cop".... Although, Duke often plays cops I doubt if "many viewers" were doing this. Maybe he and his friends did and he decided to write an article about it. PLUS, user added category of "Notable Niggers" to the Denzel Washington article and I am afraid this may be part of some kind of personal agenda. MrBlondNYC 11:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, but rewrite. The article contains Original Research, but the archetype the article describes is most definitely a valid one. Sources need to be found and cited for this article, but a deletion isn't needed. Dark Shikari 12:52, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:OR and WP:V. Poorly written and unsourced at this time. This may be a genuine phenomenae, but article cites no sources and ignores earlier examples (Yaphet Kotto in Homicide: Life on the Street and S. Epatha Merkerson in Law & Order ) in order to mention a slew of recent movies. This could be re-created with better WP:V and far less WP:OR. As written, it's just somebody's unsourced opinion that barely scratches the surface of the last five years of films and TV. Not encyclopedic Scorpiondollprincess 14:04, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Hold on Allow me a day to cite my sources and revise the article. --Stukov 14:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Typical AFDs lasts five days, you should have time to find sources if they're there. hateless 15:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete It seems to be just an attempt at formalizing an opinion about a trend in movies. There are several bold, unsourced claims made, such as the first appearance of the black cop. The black cop doesn't even seem to have any relevance- I sure wouldn't write an article about the Mexican gardener or the teenage pool boy. Wafulz 16:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Dark Shikari, but as long as the article is rewritten. --Bigtop 16:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Update Source has been added. Will continue to search and verify everything in the article. Origin of the archetype has been added and verified. Wafulz, the difference between the Mexican gardener and the teenage pool boy is that the "Black Cop" archetype is one of the most used cliches in the "Cop Movie" genre. In the last two decades it's in almost every popular cop movie. I Robot, Die Hard, Miami Vice, Lethal Weapon, Exit Wounds, Red Dragon, etc. I can come up with an entire list if it will help change your view. --Stukov 16:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep As long as the article is sourced, I see no reason to prevent its inclusion into the Wikipedia database. This IS an archetype I have witnessed commonly in "buddy cop" movies and television dramas. There always seems to be the one sergeant or superior who is African-American and plays a stereotypical "stern father" role so to speak. I've found several essays regarding it on the web as well. Continue the discussion though.JaysCyYoung 16:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Comment OK I've actually read the sources. The essay "Black People as Scenery" definitely has merit. The very brief mention in the Narc (film) review does not. You may need better sources than that. Plus, I seriously doubt there's any source to the "Bill Duke/Get Rich or Die Tryin' (film)" claim besides you and your friends at the movies. MrBlondNYC 17:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep since it is evidently a growing trend in entertainment. There is some OR but I'm sure the authors can eliminate that given the described prevalence. I would also suggest looking into adding content about any possible trends of black and white cop pairings (Lou and Eddie on The Simpsons, for instance, or Smitty and Swanny on Sanford and Son.) SliceNYC 19:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as wholly WP:OR. A blog does not a WP:RS make. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 19:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and be allowed to organically grow. GrapePie 20:21, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep The black cop is a common archetype in modern films wether the critics of this article would accept it or not, while the persona may not be Jungian in origin, it has evolved in modern film and needs to be recognized. User:Shadow387 19:00, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as original research on user-defined archetype that doesn't actually exist. Is there a similar article on "white cop?" (another, far more regularly used, archetpye I could make up an article for and slap a few afterthought "reference" links on to try and keep from deletion). --FuriousFreddy 01:03, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Does a black character being a cop automatically make him a character stereotype? Maybe the gruff black lieutenant or captain (48 Hrs., Starsky and Hutch, Homicide: Life on the Street) would qualify as a stereotype. The first two predate the example given as the "first" in the article. The pic on the page is of a character who was a sergeant, therefore not in charge, and was pretty nice. But just any cop who's black regardless of personality or rank is automatically a stereotype, huh? OK. MrBlondNYC 07:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, per SliceNYC. -/- Warren 05:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.