Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of entertainers who performed in blackface


 * 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 keep. Consensus is to keep such a list in principle, and that sourcing and context issues can and should be addressed through editing.  Sandstein  06:14, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

List of entertainers who performed in blackface

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Long-standing high-impact WP:BLP issues for c150 people with no WP:RS. I have temporarily canned all unsourced individuals to mitigate. Unlikely to be able to obtain sources, and high-traffic article given current global dialogue around racism. Further if such a list is needed, it feels like we would be better citing on individual articles and using a category. Darren-M  talk  20:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  Darren-M   talk  20:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Yeah, we certainly don't want Fatty Arbuckle suing us for libel. Your blanking was indiscriminate and not targeted to BLP issues as you removed numerous long dead entries. Many of the entries you removed also cited the work in which they performed in blackface, so I'd recommend just undoing that edit completely for more careful pruning. On the merits of the nomination, I see no basis for the claim that sources will be unlikely, given that only notable entertainers would be included. And (as noted in what you blanked) many of the performances are themselves in notable works. So keep. postdlf (talk) 21:33, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your thoughts. Everything that was stripped was unsourced, of which many are likely to have had BLP issues - there were several high-profile living individuals in the list. Other entries even if not BLP are still clearly long-standing RS issues - many of the entries on that page have sat there without a source for years (and indeed, an article-level CN tag had been on the page since November 2008). I don't agree the blanking was indiscriminate on that basis, as I don't think it helps us to have unverified content sat there - especially when long-dead figures (e.g. Robert Paden-Powell) are currently receiving significant public and media attention for their historic views towards race. Best, Darren-M   talk  21:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * That sounds like a post hoc rationale to me. You invoked BLP, which only justifies urgent removal of unsourced, contentious material about the living and recently dead. Otherwise, if it is fixable, we fix it; if we believe it is not, then we remove it. You made no such determination for the dozens of entries you removed within the 14 minutes between this edit and your previous one. postdlf (talk) 23:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment if there are RIS to support a statement that a performer used blackface, what is the BLP issue please? Mccapra (talk) 21:50, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The BLP issue is because blackface has long been considered insulting. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:57, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The BLP issue is that the overwhelming majority of names on the list (prior to my pruning) are unsourced, as illustrated in [| this diff]. I sought revdel to remove the BLP issues and was instead directed to AfD. Best, Darren-M   talk  21:58, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I’m fine with removal of entries lacking RIS but that’s not an argument for deletion of the whole article. Mccapra (talk) 22:01, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think the parallel argument is whether there's a reason for this to be a list at all. A category seems to be a cleaner way of maintaining it going forward. I don't disagree with your logic though - it's at AfD because I was suggested to do so. Darren-M   talk  22:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * We don't categorize performers by performance. And it's moot given that, but categories would be harder to maintain because there's no way to directly source the assertion a category tag makes, either with a ref tag or an annotation explaining or describing the performance (see WP:DOAC). postdlf (talk) 23:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)


 * keep, cleanup for verifiable. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:57, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete It's a sourcing nightmare, and in the case of living/recently deceased, it's a BLP nightmare too. There's unlikely to be any independent, third party, reliable sources to confirm a number of performers actually performed in blackface. The list (prior to being pruned substantially) relied mainly on original research undertaken on a primary source, that is to say, an editor saw someone in a television program or film and then decided to add them to the list. That's in breach of several of our core policies, such as original research and verifiability, and invites significant risk of the incorrect actors being identified. The next issue is related to BLP but also of relevance to a number of the deceased performers, and would probably be best considered as undue weight and neutrality. It's highly likely that we will be able to source allegations of blackface use for a number of entertainers, but the majority of the recent coverage will be criticism for blackface performance, which risks turning the list into a list of people who have been criticised for blackface usage, rather than a neutral article on entertainers who have performed in blackface. I'd also question the utility (and in many ways, the fairness) of only listing entertainers who we can reliably confirm have performed in blackface, it's an incomplete list we may never be able to complete in the absence of reliable third party source material. Nick (talk) 22:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * There's no need for lists to be complete, that's the whole reason we have Template:Dynamic list. It also isn't OR to give a straightforward description of a primary source, such as "Al Jolson performs in blackface in The Jazz Singer". That it is something that is now criticized is also not a reason for removing that information; that it was so common among mainstream performers at one time is also justification for documenting its breadth. postdlf (talk) 23:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I would say that {[tl|Dynamic list}} was introduced in early days when there was no clear understanding what wikipedia is. Today it is pretty much clear that the overwhelming majority of lists will never be complete. Staszek Lem (talk) 05:20, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep because deletion discussions usually turn on the question of notability, and this subject is clearly notable. The arguments for deletion are pretty easily satisfied by careful editing.
 * #1: There are unsourced entries on the list. Answer: Remove the unsourced entries, as the nominator has already done.
 * #2: Unlikely to be able to obtain sources. Answer: There are definitely sources about people who have performed in blackface. We will include the entries that we have reliable sources for.
 * #3: There are high-profile living entertainers on the list. Answer: If there are reliable sources that say that those high-profile living entertainers have performed in blackface, then they should be on the list. It's not our fault they performed in blackface.
 * It seems to me like the people urging deletion are overly concerned with protecting entertainers who have performed in blackface and would prefer it if people forgot about it now. If an entertainer performed in blackface and there are reliable secondary sources to confirm that, then they're added to the list. If they haven't, or if they have and there aren't any reliable secondary sources, then they're not added to the list. I agree that there is a potential for malicious vandalism on this page, but vandalism can be reverted quickly, as on any other page. — Toughpigs (talk) 02:31, 19 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree exactly with Toughpigs. Mccapra (talk) 04:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per Toughpigs. The unref'd entries have been removed. Here's the diff prior to that, if you wish to pick an unsourced name and try to find a cite for the individual.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 07:07, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Absolutely this page must be kept. If we try to pretend that blackface did not exist, then we have followed Orwell down the memory hole. Do we really want to risk sliding down the slippery slope that leads to Holocaust deniers and people who claim the Civil War was started by the North and was NOT about slavery? Cadavra8Cadavra8 (talk) 22:47, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per Toughpigs. -  DoubleCross  ( ‡ ) 00:48, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep regardless of sourcing problems, which can be addressed, especially if editors will actually view the works in question, no legitimate argument has been made for deletion. This is no case of TNT. --Bejnar (talk) 19:28, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a violation of the general performance by performer criteria and ideas. The reason for performing in black face are very divergent. They very a huge amount and end up being very culturally specific. This comes off as an attempt to attack people without considering a lot of very specific cultural issues, and even the nuances of a list will not work when the mere accusaiton is wrongly taken as default proof of evil intent.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:48, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think that the page makes that claim at all. In fact, the text at the top acknowledges that there are several reasons that someone might be on the page, including "satire or historical depiction of such roles". Right now, the text with each list item only describes where and when the performance took place. I think it could also be expanded with further context on each item. — Toughpigs (talk) 14:52, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
 * We don't categorize performers by performance. There's no such restriction or guideline for lists. postdlf (talk) 14:57, 23 June 2020 (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.