Talk:Free people of color: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:24, 27 December 2009

African diaspora C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology C‑class Mid‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Was the term "Free person of colour" ever used? I would expect that 'person of colour' is a recently enough coined term that the adjective "free" was superfluous. This article seems to cover exactly the same subject matter as Free Negro. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is Free Negro is only about the US; this article covers other societies in the Americas. "Free people of color" was a term definitely used in French-speaking societies, as the article notes. It was used in Louisiana before the purchase by the US; it was also used on some US Census forms (I think around the turn of the 18th-19th century, and maybe a little later.) There is a Free People of Color forum for people exploring their family histories on www.afrigeneas.com.--Parkwells (talk) 22:28, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the term "free person of color" was actually used in documents, at least in North Carolina. I do research documenting free persons of color in antebellum North Carolina and work with original records and I often see the term "free person of color" after a name, sometimes "free negroe", they seem to be used interchangeably. One document on a person may say "free negroe" and another on the same person may say "free person of color". --Eabradfo (talk) 14:25, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Freedman - NO

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

the apparent consensus is no. --emerson7 21:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a proposal to merge this article with "Freedman". That is inappropriate, as Freedman generally refers to the 4.5 million former slaves emancipated by Pres. Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation and the Civil War (and then the constitutional amendments.) The chief thing about "free people of color" and Free Negroes was that their freedom preceded the Civil War, sometimes by centuries. In the Upper South, the percentage of free Negroes went from less than 1 to 10% in the early decades of the 19th c. after the American Revolution, chiefly through manumission of slaves in Maryland and Delaware, but also in Virginia.

Free people of color in Louisiana were chiefly Creoles of color, another distinct group who were free long before the Civil War and had an established class in New Orleans before the Louisiana Purchase. The number of free people of color in LA increased with refugees from the Haitian Revolution, esp. about 1809. As this article makes clear (and the sections on other societies could be expanded), free people of color were important in South America and the Caribbean, too. Both kinds of distinctions are important to understanding history in the US as well as in the Americas. --Parkwells (talk) 14:33, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actualy, 'freedman' refers to any freed slave. From times farther than the roman times to the current dates... I find your (2nd person plural) narrow view offensive. Other than that, I don't agree with the merger either. If anything, it should be merged with Free Negro, not Freedman.--portugal (talk) 08:55, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree 'freedman' refers to any freed slave; this was not about my personal view. I was referring to the article on Freedman in wikipedia, which seemed mostly about the US (and was written mostly by other editors).--Parkwells (talk) 13:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

merge:Free Negro → Free people of color

most of the content in the source article is pretty much already covered here. --emerson7 21:34, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Free Negro article seems to be mostly about the United States. They could be merged but I would like to be sure that the material on the rest of the Americas doesn't get deleted in the process. Most Americans do not realize that the majority of African-Americans lived (still live) outside the United States in Central and South America and the Caribbean. ##

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 {{Mergefrom|Free Negro|date=November 2008}}
 most of the content in the source article is pretty much already covered here. --[[User talk:emerson7|emerson7]] 21:34, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
+The Free Negro article seems to be mostly about the United States. They could be merged but I would like to be sure that the material on the rest of the Americas doesn't get deleted in the process. Most Americans do not realize that the majority of African-Americans lived (still live) outside the United States in Central and South America and the Caribbean. ##