Talk:List of black Nobel laureates

AfD

Prior AfD keep: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Nobel Prize laureates (November 2009)

Should be deleted

There is no valid reason for there to even be a page like this. Why segregate blacks from the rest of humanity? A black skinned person is a human. Segregation of colours is just a continuation of the 1950's mentality against coloured people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.59.241.2 (talk) 02:08, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Very confusing

How exactly is Barack Obama considered black? His mother was white, and his father was black. It's racist to consider that someone is instantly black if he had a parent who is black. Stop encouraging the racist one drop rule.

Some of the other gentlemen on that list are the same, like Derek Wilcott. Was this whole article done by Jim Crow? Someone should fix it up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.236.94 (talk) 14:26, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

• Do you really have to ask whether people consider Barrack Obama to be black? The background information is readily available on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a soapbox.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 14:43, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

What do I care what people think? If we go by what racists think, then all black men and women are subhuman. Is that your intention? Should we re-name the list "List of Subhuman Nobel Laureates?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.236.94 (talk) 14:49, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

If you don't care what people think, you wouldn't be here.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 15:57, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

He's considered to be black because that's how HE seems himself. That's one important criterion. I have no idea how it works in the USA but in most countries you are black if you have black skin whether because you are 100% of an African background or not.--Xania ^talk 18:43, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion

Do you propose to delete the "Female Nobel Prize laureates" page as well?

Why is there no "Male Nobel Prize laureates"? or "Asian Nobel Prize laureates"? or a whole slew of similar categories? It shouldn't matter. Sex and colour should not be a defining characteristic. Maybe I'm being overly idealistic, but if we could all see things that way, the world might be a better and more peaceful place in which to live. Truthanado (talk) 21:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

-Correct. There is no reason to perpetuate the separation of people based on skin color. I suggest that the article be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.160.208.161 (talk) 23:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree as well, this artical just promotes distance between groups. I am also in favour of deletion--Scottykira (talk) 22:23, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

But don't you understand that this list proves blacks are as humans!--Skashifakram (talk) 06:20, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

An additional argument for deletion is that this list comes across as very USA-centric. "Being black" is a Northern American cultural concept and this list throws together a number of people that have very little in common other that the color of their skin. An African American list would make more sense in that regard. I also have to put into question placing Anwar Sadat on the list who was by no definition "black" unless you're using a color scale system as a criteria.. Blanksteg (talk) 07:02, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Original research?

According to Wikipolicy (see WP:OR), verifiable sources are required. Where are they to substantiate the information in this article and, in particular, the table? Truthanado (talk) 21:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

The similar Female Nobel Prize laureates is being similarly tagged. Truthanado (talk) 21:44, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

This article has been reformatted to match the similar List of female Nobel laureates. Both of these article no longer contain the table in question, hence the original research tag no longer applies and has been removed. Truthanado (talk) 15:37, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

The list itself still is an original research and a racist POV. Derek Walcott is not black but mixed, the same for Obama who is 50% white.--17:03, 4 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.226.117.72 (talk)

Image copyright problem with File:Arthur Lewis (Nobel photo).jpg

The image File:Arthur Lewis (Nobel photo).jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:05, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I cannot understand why the W. Arthur Lewis article can use that image but this article cannot. Grillofrances (talk) 19:25, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

File:Derek Walcott.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Derek Walcott.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. 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. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Derek Walcott.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:41, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Racist

So it's okay to have a page for black people who have recieved the Nobel prize but it's racist to have a list of whites or asians who have recieved the Nobel prize? Hypocritical much?--Collingwood26 (talk) 10:29, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Walcott?

What the heck is black about Derek Walcott? I mean, you barely find a whiter person ...--31.17.153.15 (talk) 00:34, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Why is this page still here?

Why is this page still here in 2017, for there is no special page for other ethnicities, a List of white Nobel laureates, for example? Also, the way the article is written is bordering neutrality; the sentence "Nobel Prizes have been awarded to 881 individuals, of whom 15 - 1.7% - were black recipients, although blacks comprise around 15% of the world's population" could be perceived as condescending by many, deliberately pointing out that compared to other ethnicities, black people haven't won as many Nobel Prizes? Is this what the point of this page is? To awe at the horrible fact that compared to other ethnicites, black people haven't won as many Nobel Prizes? Numerous people on this talk page have been questioning the page's neutrality since 2013, perceiving it as racist. Why absolutely NOTHING has been done to even address the issue further by individuals, who have the authority to change the situation? Also, the list includes people who are as much white as they are black, Barack Obama for example. Including him in the list would only be logical if the list was named "List of African American Nobel laureates". Is according to Wikipedia every person with some African ancestry considered automatically "black"? Is this what "The Free Encyclopedia" means? Just label every single person under some category and hope it's the right one? This is supposed to be a neutral and a politically correct dictionary, yet to my great disappointment it seldom is that. –Regards, Sullay (Let's talk about it) 05:48, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

This Page Mislabels the Nobel Prize Laureates

The concept of "black" as a race is a construct unique to the United States.

A more appropriate title for this page would be one that mentions that all of the winners are part of the African diaspora (which is how you would include all of the individuals that this article refers to).

To address the points that were made by users in the other comments:

1. Black is relegated to the racial classification of those named as "African Americans". A perceptibly "black" individual from Britain, would be identified as British, not "African-British". One from France would be "French", Nigeria - "Nigerian". And so forth.

2. Barack Obama is considered black, both historically and culturally. Remember, the United States established a strict, codified policy called the "one-drop rule", which made it clear that if someone is an American "citizen" with any trace of African ancestry, then they must be considered black. This has been further reinforced via record-keeping in America through the census, death records, etc.

To answer the question of, "Why do we need to 'separate' the black winners"? The answer is simple. This page exposes the Nobel Committee's failure to properly assess the contributions of black people to the STEM field (notice there are no winners in the STEM category despite the revolutionary discoveries in the fields of science and medicine that have been made by members of the African diaspora).

I have referenced this page elsewhere for the sake of enumerating Wikipedia's failure to value "black people" enough to properly identify them. The page is also flagrantly disrespectful in labeling individuals from foreign nations as "black", when that word and concept has no meaning where they are from (with the exception of South Africa, perhaps, due to apartheid). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Librehash (talk • contribs) 08:37, 3 March 2021 (UTC)