Talk:Black Irish (folklore)

Historic term

@CeltBrowne, do you have any reliable sources that directly say Black Irish is a historical term, i.e., that it is not actually being used today (even though it obviously is being used today)? WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

We have multiple sources showing it was used 19th and 20th centuries. Do we have any reliable, secondary sources of people self-identifying as "Black Irish" in the 21st century? CeltBrowne (talk) 20:58, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

If you want to call it "the historic term" in the article, then we need a source that WP:Directly supports that claim. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

If the term is still "obviously being used today", you should be able to provide reliable, secondary sources that WP:Directly supports that claim. We have sources directly supporting its use in the 19th and 20th centuries. CeltBrowne (talk) 21:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

We don't have to have a source to say nothing in an article, but we do need a source to assert a claim. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

So are you denying that the term was used in the 19th and 20th centuries? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 17:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

No. I am WP:CHALLENGING the claim that a word "used in the 19th and 20th centuries" is actually a "historical term". I have not seen, e.g., any source that says the word isn't used (with this meaning) in the 21st century. Do you have such a source? WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:11, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I've seen several sources saying nobody in Ireland uses it to describe, e.g., the guy who wrote Conan, but they'd not count as reliable. And you can't prove a negative. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 19:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm not asking you to prove a negative. I'm saying that if the article is going to make a positive assertion that it's a historical term, then we need a source that supports that positive assertion.

(Also, mind the gap between "nobody in Ireland" and "nobody".) WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:49, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

I think, possibly, the best solution is for you to just go and create a Black Irish (American term) article, where you can write about the Americans, Richard Nixon and Robert E. Howard, being called 'Black Irish', by other Americans. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

I believe that the RFC above indicates that this is the article for that subject. @S Marshall, have I correctly interpreted the closing summary above? WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:45, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

I believe Bastun is being facetious and you've missed the meaning of what they wrote. CeltBrowne (talk) 17:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm not being facetious, but hey, maybe someone could stick a picture of British beer into this talk page section, too? The closure by S Marshall says 'people first, myth second', but presumably that means Nixon and Howard and other Americans should be left out of this article in favour of Black Irish (American term), and we should include more about actual, real, Irish people who are Black in this article. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 20:33, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

The consensus at the RFC was to change the focus of this article to the people rather than the myth. And that's all I can say with my closer hat on. We as a community didn't decide anything else.

Taking my closer hat off, I did personally feel that, after we've changed the focus, this article will very arguably be mistitled. We didn't decide to fork the article; but we also didn't decide not to fork the article, and if forking it lets us get an encyclopaedia written with the least amount of hassle, then I can see a clear argument why we should.

But I also wonder if there's really enough to say about ethnically Caucasian people with dark hair who identify as Irish to justify two separate articles about them. Maybe there isn't.—S Marshall T/C 00:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

For the record, I am opposed to splitting the article.

Bastun, I think now I understand what you're getting at, but I would say that because this article has the "(folklore)" suffix to it, this article is the one dissecting the "American term" aspect, while Black people in Ireland should feature the term "Black Irish" much more. So in the sense you're talking about, the "split" already exists. CeltBrowne (talk) 01:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you that this is not the article about Black Irish (African). Information about Irish citizens of African descent (e.g., the thousands of people who self-identify as Black Irish in the census) really doesn't belong in this article, beyond the hatnote and perhaps a sentence or a ==See also== entry to Wikipedia:Build the web.

We might be able to rename this article to something like Black Irish (Americanism), but it'd probably be easier to pick a name after everyone has figured out that this article is the one about white people, and the other, bigger article is the one about Black people. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Or - and think about this for a minute - maybe, just maybe - go write a Black Irish (Americanism) article or a Black Irish (American term) article from scratch, and leave this one to talk about the folkloric myth of the Spanish Armada, meaning we don't end up with a mis-named article. It's a fairly f'n obvious solution! S Marshall, for the record, unless I'm missing something, your closure does not distinguish whether the "rough consensus" you claim refers to the article being about Black people in Ireland, or the American people who think they have a distinct Irish ethnic origin distinct from other people of Irish descent and actual Irish people. But changing the article to no longer be about the folkore/myth, and instead to be about an American term, then renaming the article to reflect that change, just seems perverse! Should we clear with you in advance what the article that will be created about the myth should be called, to avoid future RfCs? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I said the consensus was to change the focus of this article. It can still include the folklore/myth. I understand the community's decision as meaning that we should deal with the Americanism first, and to give greater prominence to the Americanism than the myth. As for clearing stuff with me in advance... I've closed one RFC, but that doesn't make me Article Manager.—S Marshall T/C 16:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree:

• This article is about white people (mostly in the US), including the stories they told about themselves (particularly the Spanish Armada myth).
• This article is not about Black people. For example, this article is not about how many current residents of the Republic of Ireland self-identified as "Black Irish" in the most recent census. The article about those people is at Black people in Ireland, aka Black Irish (African).

WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

A fork would be the easy way out, but that would make it a POV fork, which is explicitly not allowed. The only correct solution is to improve this article. There are only two editors who are opposed to this. The reasoning has been copiously explained to them, but they are refusing to engage with it and are simply repeating the same lines over and over. If we made a fork, those two editors would be perfectly justified in nominating it for deletion, and we'd be back here again. Or else the two versions would exist and this article would continue to fail to meet Wikipedia's standards for quality and accuracy, and we cannot guarantee that those two editors would not sabotage the new article as well. Dantai Amakiir (talk) 10:45, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Suggesting that I am "sabotaging" articles (deliberately hurting or damaging the credibility of Wikipedia out of malice) will result in me referring those comments to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. CeltBrowne (talk) 14:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

I suppose it can be counted as a victory for common sense that the article about the folkloric term "Black Irish" can still include the folklore/myth! Dantai, you might want to drop the personal attacks, there? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:12, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Irish American media

I am new to this discussion, but I want to point out that this page excludes any history of the term being used within Irish American media. This would qualify the earlier question about Black Irish being used in the 21st century, which among Irish Americans, it still very much is. No study (that I can find) has been done to determine the modern usage of the term and its frequency, but from media alone such as The Black Donnellys (2007), Black Irish by Stephan Talty (2013), and by extension Black Mass (2015) it is clear the term is still used amongst Irish Americans.

There seems to be an edge to this article that seeks to bury the terms modern usage within Irish America, or makes claims about "performance" to suggest that it is not a legitimate ethnonym. Anxieties about the use of the term for nefarious purposes are understandable, as in the example of Rosanne Barr's classic tweets about the subject. That does not, however, disqualify the term out of existence. 162.83.150.150 (talk) 23:43, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@162.83.150.150 Black Irish is not a legitimate ethnonym, as the article states, due to a complete lack of evidence to support the most often cited Spanish Armada myth. Given its continued usage in American media, it may be more accurate to say it dates to the 19th/20th century rather than it's a 19/20th century term. Shana3980 (talk) 22:27, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the article is a mess. The original creator of this article has claimed ownership and sits like a troll under the bridge, editing out anything that gives the term any legitimacy. We are lucky the article is the way it is. That editor is convinced the term is illegitimate and is very dedicated to ensuring the article gives that impression. Dantai Amakiir (talk) 09:14, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Despite a warning for personal attacks, you're persisting? Knock it off. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Facts aren't attacks. All of my citations have magically disappeared. That's not responsible editing, that's sabotage. Dantai Amakiir (talk) 10:14, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@Dantai Amakiir The term is illegitimate when it refers to a connection with the Spanish Armada, as genetics studies have proven. It's been debunked thoroughly. Shana3980 (talk) 19:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Um, genetics can't prove that words are illegitimate. There's nothing in the "rules" for ethnonyms that says that the names can't be associated with a false folk etymology, especially for endonyms. The indigenous people of the Americas can still legitimately call themselves "Indians" or "American Indians" if they want to, even though they're not from India, and there are any number of indigenous groups whose names mean something like "people from the north" or "people eternally of this place" when genetics shows the opposite. Names are chosen by people, not by genetics tests. If some Irish Americans want to call themselves "Black Irish", then they're allowed to do so, and that's true even if you think they have the wrong motivation for it and you thoroughly disapprove of their choice. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:26, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, we know that. The rest of us have been trying to stop this article focusing on the Spanish Armada myth and instead focus on black Irish identity. You can't blame me that a couple of persistent editors keep changing the article to focus on the Spanish Armada myth despite consensus being against this. The article is needlessly confusing and uninformative for this very reason. Dantai Amakiir (talk) 10:13, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

This just another example of how biased Wikipedia has become over the years. I myself can attest to the fact that they do indeed "exist". One particular family we grew up around referred to themselves as "Black-Irish". They were very active in the Roman-Catholic church (at a mostly Spanish-speaking parish I might add) which also served as a Boy Scout troop hall. Moreover, their features were indeed rather "Mediterranean" and their ways somewhat different from what I would call "traditional Irish". Of course these are all just anecdotal observations of my own, but surely the editors of this article would be aware of such things as to address them properly? Instead we get gas-lit by those who seem to be more committed to "woke" identity politics than reality. Earl of Arundel (talk) 03:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it's a "woke identity politics" thing. I think the main problem is that exactly the same words are used to identify a different group of people in Ireland. They might equally say "I myself can attest to the fact that people of African descent are Irish citizens. My own family calls themselves 'Black Irish', and my grandparents immigrated from West Africa more than half a century ago. I've never heard anyone in Ireland call a white person 'Black Irish', and surely the editors of this article would be aware of such things. Instead we get gas-lit by people who have never even visited Ireland and who seem to be more committed to a stereotypical Irish American personal identity than to reality..." WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

What are you even taking about? AFAICT black people in Ireland simply call themselves "Irish", whereas the term "Black Irish" has been used for many centuries now to refer to something completely different. Again, this entire project is rife with identity politics. That much is clear. (Redacted) But of course woke rags such as this one continue to offer up such nonsense because they obviously have an agenda to do so. Wikipedia's status as a go-to for accurate information has long since been lost. Is it any wonder? Earl of Arundel (talk) 20:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

In the official Irish census by the Central Statistics Office, one finds tables saying things like:

Ethnicity    Both sexes    Male    Female

White Irish    3,893,056    1,921,947    1,971,109

White Irish Traveller    32,949    16,172    16,777

White Roma    16,059    8,548    7,511

Any other White background    502,081    245,378    256,703

Black or Black Irish - African    67,546    32,811    34,735

Black or Black Irish - any other Black background    8,699    4,382    4,317

So if "black people in Ireland simply call themselves "Irish"", then who are the 76,245 Irish people who called themselves "Black Irish" in the last census? WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:51, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

I think you may need to go outside and touch some grass, Earl. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 11:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Good question. Maybe you should ask that of the next "White Irish Traveller" that you meet? Barring that, I assume that "Any other White background"-er would be able to clear that up for you. Earl of Arundel (talk) 05:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

We have an article on Irish Travellers that might interest you. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Dantai Amakiir, would you mind looking through the article history to find the most important (sourced) contribution you've made that's been removed, and post it in a new section so we can talk about it? I find that talking about one single bit in isolation is best. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Again I keep seeing articles about “race” which assume the term has any validity

The problem here and elsewhere on Wikipedia is that the article says a lot about race, but without mentioning the fact that race is a social construct and that it has no scientific validity:

To quote the article on race: “Modern science regards race as a social construct, an identity which is assigned based on rules made by society. While partly based on physical similarities within groups, race does not have an inherent physical or biological meaning. The concept of race is foundational to racism, the belief that humans can be divided based on the superiority of one race over another.

The quote includes the sources (from the article on race) so I haven’t included any further sources.

If you want to use terms such as “white” and “black” to refer to people you are talking about race. There is no scientific validity to the concept of race. There are plenty of examples of people who have completely different backgrounds and languages who look like they could be from the same family let alone the same ethnicity! Kanchan M Mahon (talk) 00:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

@Kanchan M Mahon, if you want to talk about Race (human categorization), please do so at Talk:Race (human categorization). If you want to mention it here, then just add a simple link. Don't copy/paste the whole thing here.

I think you need to read a bit more about this idea that "There is no scientific validity to the concept of race". It is true that there is no consistent genetic basis for declaring people to belong to different racial groups. However, there are multiple valid social science concepts of race. Social constructs and identity are real things. Race is just as real as other social constructs, like blondes, short people, gamers, stoners, and married people are. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)