Talk:Interminority racism in the United States

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Headerless section [April 2013][edit]

/* Asian Americans as model minorities */ Entire section was written in a strongly editorialized style inappropriate for wikipedia - removed some of the more egregious examples of personal POV and editorializing, but problems remain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hominidx (talk • contribs) 13:09, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moar.[edit]

This article seems to be entirely written by 160.94.56.160. This frightens me.  Esper  rant  03:58, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure this entry is up to Wikipedia's standards. Nantucketnoon (talk) 07:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


This article seems to have issues both with being more like an essay than an encyclopaedia article, and with failing to maintain a neutral point of view. It simply states its case without making it clear that it is not a universally held position: statements like This kind of color-blind racism ignores how racial differences have occurred through dominance.[13] It causes minorities to enter into conflict with each other since the U.S. policy is to let things be. are certainly not neutral! This article needs serious attention, and may need to be rewritten entirely. Robofish (talk) 21:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Are there any scholarly sources from peer reviewed journals on the matter? To remotely corroborate what's being said? Dillonke (talk) 05:35, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV[edit]

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
  1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
  2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
  3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:51, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This entire article is a disaster[edit]

Almost all of the content is POV, the citations mostly do not match the wording used in the corresponding text, the entire thing is written in the format of a homework essay by a teenager. Since repairing the article would require the entire thing to be completely redone from scratch and there are numerous articles which overlap with this otpic, nominate for deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.242.62.125 (talk) 21:38, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to report an article as in dire need? 149.31.194.129 (talk) 12:54, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ha, would love to see how the article might have looked back then Becausewhynothuh? (talk) 12:55, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Interminority racism in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:56, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Interminority racism" is only used in a handful of sources[edit]

The term "interminority racism" is used is less than 10 academic sources of dubious quality, and is not used in any mainstream media. A google search of "inter-minority racism" and "interminority racism" finds less than 700 pages on the web. This page is essentially about a made-up term.

Merudo (talk) 16:54, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

what would you suggest to be a better term? Becausewhynothuh? (talk) 12:55, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Merudo I dont even see how thats a problem. Its not like we are talking about nuclear physics here where we as community members might not be equipped to know whether a certain highly niche or rare terminology even makes sense. The terms "inter" "minority" and "racism" are perfectly well known and communicate clearly (in my opinion) what this article is about. Why create a problem where there is none? 77.20.155.35 (talk) 20:23, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anti black bias and fake statistics.[edit]

“ Various ethnic groups in the United States have perpetrated racist violence against Asian Americans, which were commonly caused by both White Americans and African Americans respectively. White Supremacist and Anti-Black Asian have cited the 2019 Bureau of Justice Statistics figures that indicated that 27.5 percent of those committing violence were Black; 24.1 percent were white; 21.4 percent were Hispanic or "other" and well under 25 percent were Asian.” The 2019 Bureau of Justice Statistics never posted figures that indicated that black people attacked asians the most. And using 1 single year as a reference to paint a specific narrative against african american people is not correct and offensive and very misleading. Madara84 (talk) 00:10, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

right....so it's only everybody else at fault here🫤 Becausewhynothuh? (talk) 12:56, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article is a mess[edit]

This whole article seems to focus entirely on African Americans and seems to usually go against them. Especially the sections on African-Jewish and African-Asian relations, both of which have some very racially questionable views on Africans. The African-Asian section has a list of "Prominent Murders of Asian Americans by African Americans" which feels extremely questionable at best. BigSneeze444 (talk) 20:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hmm, while i feel removing that section would just obscure important information, I too, had a massive eyebrow raise moment when i saw it phrased that way. how about you collaborate with me and some other users to improve the state of the article? Becausewhynothuh? (talk) 12:54, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Expanded lead issues[edit]

Becausewhynothuh?, I reverted your lead changes. Issues included:

  • WP:OR, by using examples to illustrate your point, instead of reliable sources that draw the conclusions themselves. For example, using the source title "Riot Breaks Out At Calif. High School, Melee Involving 500 People Erupts At Southern California School" to show that racial tensions had increased constitutes WP:OR, as that article doesn't explicitly state that conclusion.
  • WP:EASTEREGG issues, such as the sentence minorities secured full political rights.
  • Unreliable sources, including a blog.

Cerebral726 (talk) 12:49, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for using a blog, that was rather careless of me.
Otherwise, I feel like that page's lede definitely needs an improvement.
How about we use its talk page to consider aspects of my version, workshop it together and create an excellent lede in collaboration? (of course with the help of others as well) Becausewhynothuh? (talk) 12:53, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds great! Happy to go about it that way. I 100% agree the lead is in need of improvement. Cerebral726 (talk) 12:57, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
excellent, I'll repost that version's lede here in the talk page and we can stark the discussion Becausewhynothuh? (talk) 12:59, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

POV fork?[edit]

@Becausewhynothuh? and Cerebral726: tbh, I suspect that this article (or at least the current version of it) may be a WP:POVFORK, what do y’all think? 2601:204:C901:B740:A895:5509:CA3A:3CF9 (talk) 13:04, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, it's not exactly an archetype of WP:POVFORK but I do feel it was written by somebody with a sort of grudge or somebody who wanted to prove a point. defo NPOV violation. how about we clean it up to be neutral, have legitimate sources, and not be so aggressive towards some minorities in favour of others? we would be doing everybody a great service Becausewhynothuh? (talk) 13:09, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree , gonna tag the article since you, me, and several others above have expressed NPOV concerns. 2601:204:C901:B740:A895:5509:CA3A:3CF9 (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We should ideally be seeking out neutral reliable sources that discuss this topic from an overview perspective. Blogs are unreliable, and news reports tend to be WP:UNDUE or miss the bigger picture. 2601:204:C901:B740:A895:5509:CA3A:3CF9 (talk) 13:06, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Interminority_racism_in_the_United_States&oldid=1202971506"