The result was speedy keep maddening nomination. Normally I don't care for WP:SNOW but it fits here. Controversy is not a reason to delete. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 23:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Nominating for Deletion Reason: How is this article notable? its about black people like it is a sort of animal or something "special" atleast many people her thinks so when you look at the discussion page. I think this should be deleted ,i also think its strange that it is a "massajman" as a rawmodel for black people and then celebrities and other more notable persons on the White people section. How is a massajman notable? lets here more opinions.should it be kept or deleted? -- Matrix17 17:36, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
*Very Strong Delete I'm tired of all the edit wars and complaining on the talk page. I worked very hard to make sure everything was referenced and make sure all view points were heard, but people are never happy. If you look up the word black in the dictionary it is defined as a member of a dark skinned race especially one of African descent, and yet people are complaining that race is being mentioned in the article. It's like trying to write an article on Chritianity without being allowed to mention religion. One person keeps saying that even 4 year olds know what a black person is. If so, why the need for an article? There isn't much encyclopedic you can say about this topic that doesn't offend people and create edit wars, and most encyclopedias don't include this as a subject. They may include articles about the African diasporas, or skin color, or race, but not about black people. In general I don't think the wikipedia process works well on controversial topics because controversial topics attract people with extreme view points who are trying to push an agenda & such articles are always swinging from one extreme to another depending on which side become more numerous and more determined. Wikipedia works much better for less politically charged topics where editors can work together instead of against one another. In short how can you write an article on black people if editors can't even agree who black people are. You have some editors claiming only people of sub-Saharan African ancestry are black, you have other editors saying Oceanic ancestry is also black, and you have still others saying people from India are black. And don't even get me started on whether Afro-multiracials are black. Iseebias 18:32, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
*Very Strong Delete I also VOTE for deletion. i think as iseebias thinks that it is to many people getting upset and angry on this article. and also on the white and caucasian articles. i dont think you can place PEOPLE in certain categories according to race. I dont see my dark coloured friend as my "black friend" but as only my friend. this article also has many strange opinions in it. and the massaj man is actually not representative for all people. so i say this article should be gone.Their are to many people thinking it shouldnt be deleted if you look at the discussion page to,and the Vanuatu man making food or somthing with a stick is just pure racism in the worst way.--
Matrix17
19:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
reply
Comment: I dont see any of my friend as blacks or white for me people are people. with different personalities. my friend who originaly is from africa dont cook herr food with sticks and hunts in the woods with arrows and dont wear masai clothes like this article seemsto point out. I feel sorry that you cant see that my friend.-- Matrix17 20:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment:Thats just the racist comments i mean. Do you actually think all africans eats with sticks? haha All this articles do is to cause arguments like this stupid arguments due to that people get hurt because of the feeling of being stuck into a certain category by a page written by all people.the vanuatu man making fire with a stick is the worst i have ever seen. pointing out people who is black as fools. my god.-- Matrix17 20:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment what I am trying to illustrate is cultural relativity. What may offend one person may not be offensive to others. If you only have a western view, then there is a vast array of things that will be offensive. There are many people who still live a pre modern existence. to some any mention of them is racist. to others its just a way of life. but we digress. my point is if society sees black and white, why should we pretend not to. for example most social economic indicators still show differences between black and white. Muntuwandi 20:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment Its still wrong, anyway you put it.and just makes unnecssary arguments on the discussion page,Delete page.-- Matrix17 20:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep. An encyclopedia should not delete information and historical accounts on what has been and what is. This and other similar article are not putting a value to a certain skin color or "race" but only describing the cultural heritage and history of mankind - with all the bad sides to it. If this article is deleted then we're on a slipping slope and it could lead to historical revisionism. Closing the eyes won't make any suggested problems disappear - only enlightenment can take care of that. Strangnet 21:53, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
comment the asian people article has been nominated for speedy keep. Muntuwandi 22:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
The result was speedy keep maddening nomination. Normally I don't care for WP:SNOW but it fits here. Controversy is not a reason to delete. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 23:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Nominating for Deletion Reason: How is this article notable? its about black people like it is a sort of animal or something "special" atleast many people her thinks so when you look at the discussion page. I think this should be deleted ,i also think its strange that it is a "massajman" as a rawmodel for black people and then celebrities and other more notable persons on the White people section. How is a massajman notable? lets here more opinions.should it be kept or deleted? -- Matrix17 17:36, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
*Very Strong Delete I'm tired of all the edit wars and complaining on the talk page. I worked very hard to make sure everything was referenced and make sure all view points were heard, but people are never happy. If you look up the word black in the dictionary it is defined as a member of a dark skinned race especially one of African descent, and yet people are complaining that race is being mentioned in the article. It's like trying to write an article on Chritianity without being allowed to mention religion. One person keeps saying that even 4 year olds know what a black person is. If so, why the need for an article? There isn't much encyclopedic you can say about this topic that doesn't offend people and create edit wars, and most encyclopedias don't include this as a subject. They may include articles about the African diasporas, or skin color, or race, but not about black people. In general I don't think the wikipedia process works well on controversial topics because controversial topics attract people with extreme view points who are trying to push an agenda & such articles are always swinging from one extreme to another depending on which side become more numerous and more determined. Wikipedia works much better for less politically charged topics where editors can work together instead of against one another. In short how can you write an article on black people if editors can't even agree who black people are. You have some editors claiming only people of sub-Saharan African ancestry are black, you have other editors saying Oceanic ancestry is also black, and you have still others saying people from India are black. And don't even get me started on whether Afro-multiracials are black. Iseebias 18:32, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
*Very Strong Delete I also VOTE for deletion. i think as iseebias thinks that it is to many people getting upset and angry on this article. and also on the white and caucasian articles. i dont think you can place PEOPLE in certain categories according to race. I dont see my dark coloured friend as my "black friend" but as only my friend. this article also has many strange opinions in it. and the massaj man is actually not representative for all people. so i say this article should be gone.Their are to many people thinking it shouldnt be deleted if you look at the discussion page to,and the Vanuatu man making food or somthing with a stick is just pure racism in the worst way.--
Matrix17
19:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
reply
Comment: I dont see any of my friend as blacks or white for me people are people. with different personalities. my friend who originaly is from africa dont cook herr food with sticks and hunts in the woods with arrows and dont wear masai clothes like this article seemsto point out. I feel sorry that you cant see that my friend.-- Matrix17 20:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment:Thats just the racist comments i mean. Do you actually think all africans eats with sticks? haha All this articles do is to cause arguments like this stupid arguments due to that people get hurt because of the feeling of being stuck into a certain category by a page written by all people.the vanuatu man making fire with a stick is the worst i have ever seen. pointing out people who is black as fools. my god.-- Matrix17 20:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment what I am trying to illustrate is cultural relativity. What may offend one person may not be offensive to others. If you only have a western view, then there is a vast array of things that will be offensive. There are many people who still live a pre modern existence. to some any mention of them is racist. to others its just a way of life. but we digress. my point is if society sees black and white, why should we pretend not to. for example most social economic indicators still show differences between black and white. Muntuwandi 20:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Comment Its still wrong, anyway you put it.and just makes unnecssary arguments on the discussion page,Delete page.-- Matrix17 20:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
Keep. An encyclopedia should not delete information and historical accounts on what has been and what is. This and other similar article are not putting a value to a certain skin color or "race" but only describing the cultural heritage and history of mankind - with all the bad sides to it. If this article is deleted then we're on a slipping slope and it could lead to historical revisionism. Closing the eyes won't make any suggested problems disappear - only enlightenment can take care of that. Strangnet 21:53, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply
comment the asian people article has been nominated for speedy keep. Muntuwandi 22:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC) reply