Talk:Black History Month

UK

Black History Month is celebrated. Perhaps someone can add to the article to qualify this statement. It may be celebrated, but by whom ? Not many black British that I know have heard of it. The article at the moment has the distinct and misleading inference that celebration is widespread in the UK, whether amongst the British people at large, or considering black British people as a separate group. On either account, there is little widespread knowledge currently of this celebration.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.77.133.103 (talk • contribs) 21:03, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

The following comment was inserted into the above comment without indicating that it was inserted. Thus I am pasting it below to clear up authorship. --User:Ibn Battuta

Black History Month is about celebrating our heritage for what our African Americans did for us and changed the laws to make it better and worthwhile staying in this country without having to be segregated or having to be punished because the color of our skin but by the contenent of our character.So keep that thought in your mind so you won't be judged by your skin color.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.160.43.1 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 23 January 2008 / reformatted by Ibn Battuta (talk) 01:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi all, quick question - is this wiki intended as "Black History Month" of "Black History Month US." This is not a sarcastic question, but a genuine one. I suspect that while there are clear similarities and links between the celebration of Black History Month across the world, there are also significant differences. Do different national Black History Month celebrations qualify for different wikis, or should this one be extended to give a better view of Black History Month world-wide? Best Darigan (talk) 08:38, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

February shortest month of the year

Unless it can be proven that Woodson was not aware that February is the shortest month, I think this statement should be removed. —Fleminra 04:01, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

"February was chosen as Black History Month because the birthdays of the esteemed black abolitionist Frederick Douglass and the celebrated black poet Langston Hughes fall during that month. It's also the month the NAACP was founded. It just so happens that February is the shortest and one of the coldest months of the year." <http://www.freemaninstitute.com/woodson.htm> a google search turns up many references to it being an odd coincidence that February (shortest and coldest month), even going so far as to debunk conspiracy theories. —User:66.82.9.57 (aka User:66.82.9.33?)

If you find a quote from Woodson that says "I did not realize that February was the shortest month," then I think the statement could stay. Otherwise, it would probably be more fair to say "Woodson either failed to realize that February is the shortest month of the year, or did realize it but decided that the month's length was less important than the fact that three important black-history anniversaries fall in February."

Can you elaborate on your argument above? I'm pretty sure I don't understand, but is it:

1. Three important events in black history occurred in February.
2. This outcome is an "odd" (i.e. improbable) coincidence.
3. An improbable outcome suggests the existance of unknown ("secret") factor(s), i.e. a conspiracy.

If this is where you're leading, what is the theoretical conspiracy and who are the conspirators? What evidence supports (not debunks) the theory? Your last statement seems to contradict my #3 above, which is what I'm confused about. Thanks.. —Fleminra 19:57, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

You must note that I am not the same one who added it the article, I was just looking around and saw that and decided to see if I could verify it. I do not believe that he literally failed to realize it, as whoever added that put, but I do think that it may be noteworthy to mention in that it is quite the coincidence, being how ironic it seems. With a quick search of the internet it is quickly evident that many do wonder why this month was chosen and it is often discussed whether the shortest month thing is a conspiracy or not (which, most likely, is not the case). So, I suppose what I am saying is that, he didn't necessarily fail to realize it as the author says, but, instead, the case is that it is just an unlucky coincidence. 204.38.166.4 19:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Actually, this is silly to argue about. Black History Month didn't occur until the 1960s. According to http://www.infoplease.com/spot/bhmintro1.html, Woodson chose the second week in February to be Black History Week back in 1926. This was apparently due to the birthdates of Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln. The site above lists a number of events that make it all the more appropriate to pack it all into 28 1/4 days (on average). So it's probably time to give up the conspiracy stuff. Woodson apparently thought a week was sufficient to draw attention to the richness of Black history. February is simply more appropriate than any other month for a lot better reasons than length. User: nora1262

Abraham Lincoln

Am I the only person here who believe abraham lincoln was not black. Lincoln has very little to do with black history. I don't want to here he emancipateted the slaves because by the time Lincoln won the war the south had pretty much already abolished it or was pretty close to it. Also black history month is in Canada, I know that first hand http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=340&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0 How has Lincoln affected black history in Canada. Unless someone has some evidence to support these claims I think it should be disembowled from the article.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.31.232.8 (talk • contribs) 13:08, February 2, 2006 (UTC)

which claims? i'm pretty sure that this is about AMERICAN black history, and i'm pretty sure he did play an important role. and whether or not you believe this to be true, it doesn't matter, february was chosen, partly because of his birthday, so i'm pretty sure he is worth mentioning... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by R66y (talk • contribs) 15:50, February 10, 2006 (UTC)

hi :P

Preachy paragraph

The last paragraph in the first section sounds a little preachy to me. Maybe it would be better to say: "In the opinion of Foo, who is an expert, Black History Month exposes the harms…". In other words, {{citation needed}}. —Fleminra 22:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Relevance of rationale for choosing February

Black history month is world wide, so technically the reason for choosing February as the month for black history month worldwide is irrelevant, Abraham Lincoln had nothing much to do with the initiation of Black history month in Britain. Does France Germany, Italy have a black history month, I don’t think they do and u notice that the social divides are more pronounced there than in our, I hate to use the word, multicultural Britain. Personally I have the opinion that is a bit divided, black history should be appreciated in all the cities and countries were it made an impact and it should be just as important as the roles of Asiatic, and other cultures. This would be more free thinking and radical than simply placating the masses with a month of GOOOOO black people. Essentially I think black history week/month was started with good intention but as in many cases the saying "the road to hell is paved with good intentions"

Legenda91 20:40, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Insulting/immature redirect

Someone please fix the redirect. Its insulting and immature. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 168.122.208.102 (talk • contribs) 22:27, November 29, 2006 (UTC)

Morgan Freeman

Is this man a historian, A culture icon, i dont think a actor (performer) should be used here. I mean how silly is the statment there is no white history month? It is a White country you dont need history for the dominant culture, history for them is 24/7. Yes there is issues with Black history month, like having a month to sum it up. But the childish statement about color and racism is "childish" human beings will always see difference pretending it isnt there as opposed to confronting it is just madness.--HalaTruth(ሐላቃህ) 12:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any African nations celebrating White History Month. Any date that "celebrates" the culture of a presumed race only serves to segregate and force a grudging tolerance rather than engender acceptance between two aesthetically dissimilar types of human being. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Heptapod (talk • contribs) 19:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

I think something better would be a universal "heritage month",celebrating wherever you have come from, from Africa to England, Scotland to Australia.--70.158.160.6 17:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)(User:Viridis, but logged out)

I wonder why an African culture colonized by Whites would need to celebrate a culture they celebrate every single day, todayalmost every African nation has a European language as the official language. Today Every African nations leaders where the dress of europe. In African schools the history of Europe is taught everyday. thus they celebrate European history every day. Black history month is for a disempowered people living among a colonial/oppressive system--HalaTruth(ሐላቃህ) 20:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I know Africa is just one big colony right now owned by the Brits, Spaniards, French, Dutch, Germans, Italians, and Portuguese. Not one African, besides the Arabs, are free. (Note the saracasm). Casey14 22:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

No body is free, and some ask why you need a month (only a month) for Black history when you had 500 Years destroying the history. Some people are something else. Everyone got it bad, but Arabs didnt lose their ha ha ha ha ha ha--only their lands and government.--HalaTruth(ሐላቃህ) 23:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Lost their history? Tribal skirmishes for thousands of years don't exactly constitute a history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.163.0.46 (talk) 16:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I think that is VERY IGNORANT I DONT EVEN WANT EXPLAIN —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.107.195 (talk) 07:03, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

The reason there's no white history month is because Caucasians have never had to face discrimination, enslavement, fighting for basic civil rights, etc. Black History month serves as a purpose to remind us how far we've come and to honor those who have paved the way for African-Americans. With all due respect, I think the logic of no white history month in African countries is possibly the worst logic to use. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 21:48, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

"Caucasians have never had to face discrimination, enslavement" Ever heard of Romans enslaving captured whites from Britannia and other nations? I suppose I, a person of English and Irish ancestry, have a right to demand reparations from modern-day Italians for what their Roman ancestors did to mine. LOL Where do I sign up?Kerry (talk) 21:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Semi-protected

...what a relief! My fingers were getting tired from doing the walking :-D  uriel8  (talk) 23:50, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Just removed a line of self promotion from the top User:justinmcl Justinmcl 03:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

related groups info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left here. Ling.Nut 22:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Introduction: African American?

Black History Month is a remembrance of important people and events in African American history. It is celebrated annually in the United States and Canada in the month of February, while in the UK it is held in the month of October.

Is it true that Canada and especially the UK remember African American history? Sounds a bit US-centric to me... but maybe I'm wrong? --Ibn Battuta (talk) 09:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Week/month

I'm English, and not 100% about the details, but I assume this is an error:

"Woodson, creator of Negro History >>Month<<, hoped that the >>week<< would eventually be eliminated, when African-American history would be fully integrated with American history."

Was it started as a week, or should that read "hoped that the MONTH would.." 138.38.217.149 (talk) 13:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Italic textthey for the african american

The section on the 'History of Black History Month' should indeed be updated. The scholarship on this precise question is limited, though. I *think* that Black History Month becomes 'nationally-recognized' [by US Congress] in 1973, and 'presidentially-sanctioned' [by Ford, Feb. 10] in 1976. But this is certainly an area that needs verification and expansion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.114.59 (talk) 20:50, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Planned special interest editing

http://www.scriptlance.com/projects/1221003408.shtml "I will, however, only be doing the Explanation and the purpose and not the Controversy because there is none. I will also provide 2 links."

Be on guard, wiki-brothers. Looks like she has some vested interest in the topic. Bananabananabanana (talk) 06:51, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Removed Vandalism

I removed a scrap of text about Obama someone put in there. "AND WE THE PEOPLE CONGRATS PRESIDENT OBAMA" in all caps.--RyuKisargi (talk) 04:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Terrible article

This article, to be frank, sucks. It has almost no information on Black history Month itself, rather it is a very poorly presented list of accomplishments by African Americans. Such a list belongs elsewhere, perhaps in a article identified as a list (we have plenty). The article doesn't even tell us when the observance gained national recognition. I'm going to revert this back to a marginally presentable version from last year. -R. fiend (talk) 18:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Sub standard article

• onesource - Monifa, Akilah a detractor of BHM is cited how many times in a article which only has a critique section. So we get BHM 2 lines intro and then a massive Critique section tearing it down.

• Wikipedia does not favor a critique section [[1]]. It should be inline with the topic.

• The tone reads like pure See It can be argued that Canadians celebrating African-American History Month makes as much sense as Canadians celebrating the American Revolution or American Civil War and

• Orphan statements : Rosa Parks, MLK, Malcolm X etc were all Americans living in America dealing with American problems.

• Original research and opinions of an editor: African American history is an extremely important part of American history, and it is almost impossible to find an American History textbook that does not include passages about black history.

Just because I have no account doesnt mean anything.--41.177.100.252 (talk) 09:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

There are now seven sources cited in that section.

The page you linked to does not indicate that Wikipedia does not favor critique sections. It is merely a template to denote when NPOV is violated by the manner in which a particular article's Criticism section is written, specifically when all negative information is segregated (no pun intended) into one section. The fact that criticism and controversy sections are not prohibited by policy is somewhat evident in the part of that page that says:

Note that criticism and controversy sections are not prohibited by policy.

I've removed the unsourced material, added material from the two op-eds that are merely mentioned, and emphasized the attributive nature of the other material in that section, and removed the NPOV tag. If anyone wants to add advocacy of BLH from appropriate sources, it is encouraged. Nightscream (talk) 22:08, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Too much criticism....

I find it a bit disturbing that about two-thirds of this entire page consists of debate about why Black History Month shouldn't exist.

Anyone else concerned? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.235.151.5 (talk) 20:40, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

If anyone wants to add advocacy of BLH from appropriate sources, it is encouraged. Nightscream (talk) 22:08, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Association for the Study of African American Life and History

The Association for the Study of African American Life and History (ASALH)is the founder of Black History Week, now known as Black History Month. ASALH was established on September 9, 1915 by Dr. Carter G. Woodson, the Father of Black History. Continuing Dr. Woodson's legacy, ASALH's mission is to promote, research, preserve, interpret and disseminate information about Black life, history and culture to the global community.

The Association for the Study of African American Life and History is headquartered in Washington, D.C., temporarily on the campus of Howard University. The Association operates as local, state, and international branches promoting greater knowledge of African American history through a program of education, research, and publishing.

ASALH hosts an annual Black History Luncheon to honor prominent African Americans that are carrying out the ASALH mission and Dr. Carter G. Woodson's legacy. ASALH also hosts their Annual ASALH Convention that provides a venue for historians, educators, students, and those interested in African-American life and history to participate in discussion forums and events in regards to preserving, promoting, researching, interpreting, and teaching African American life, history and culture.

To learn more about the Association of African American Life and History please visit www.asalh.org. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enchanta Jackson (talk • contribs) 00:24, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

File:CGWoodson statue.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:CGWoodson statue.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:31, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

youtube as reference

One of the references (number 6) is to youtube. Is that an acceptable reference? What is the wikipedia policy on using youtube and the like? Socialresearch (talk) 03:16, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Hacking this site and/or eploiting it

We need to put the silver lock on here, it is not acceptable to remove it along with the reason of why it is protected.75.171.11.221 (talk) 06:51, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

•  Done Jeancey (talk) 23:52, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

This is a joke

Why is the article locked from editing? It hasn't been touched and its locks have been removed for purposely producing a one sided edit over the entire article. This is unacceptable.75.171.4.63 (talk) 20:31, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

We need to have this open

Are they afraid that this will get changed? Its a very small article on here for years, why is it still locked? I will bring this up with an admin since only certain people feel like they have to only put their own view on the subject, and this is coming from an African-American.184.98.143.25 (talk) 07:56, 30 July 2012 (UTC)