Although this is probably a good topic to explore one way or another, this particular entry hasn't had any substantial improvement in two months, and only has three examples. If someone wants to turn it into a Useful Notes page, great, but it's clearly not cutting it as a trope. Calling a 24-hour warning on deleting it.
Trope Workshop talk:Black Egyptians
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Reply to "Nominating for Nuke"
Reply to "Is this a trope?"
Nominating for Nuke
Okay, we're getting some action (Thanks, Umbire) so I'm removing the threat of immediate deletion.
And I went ahead and expanded the main text a bit. As a result I'm thinking this is leaning more toward a useful note than a trope. Thoughts, anyone?
And I've just done a major expansion of the main text.
Definitely Useful Note material. On that note (ha) we'll also want to closely scrutinize additions to this - as I've noted in the edit summaries, the person who started the article has been noted as using dubious sources for claims they make, on top of this subject attracting the usual invoked threat of "political correctness gone mad" as a means of enforcing "counter-revisionism" (basically still historical revisionism but with a contrary bias).
Also, a thought just occurred - perhaps we could subsection the hypothesis as a real-life example of sorts and give a more generalized summary of the trope in the main section prior to launching into examples? As it reads now, it may be inadvertently conflating said hypothesis with any and all examples of Egyptians being portrayed as black in fiction, even (and especially) those that had little to no influence from the hypothesis in question. I definitely want to see about fixing it, but I'm settling for raising the question now because I'd rather tackle it at a time where I'm fully awake enough to not make several mistakes doing so.
Do we incorporate the WE WUZ KANGZ meme into this?
If we do, it's probably best as a footnote with regards to examples of specifically reactionary pushback, as I noted in the main paragraphs.
Full disclosure - I'm a black guy who's witnessed a lot of dealing with black Egyptophiles and the like, and as much as I side-eye them, something about that meme never fails to rub me the wrong way.
I don't blame you -- it rubs me the wrong way, too, just from looking at the KYM page. I second the suggestion that at best it gets a footnote, with at least one crosslink to Troll and anything else we find appropriate.
That sounds about right.
I have no issue with that. My noting of the meme was not an endorsement, but the meme is pervasive enough Web Original wise that IMO it does warrant mentioning, not doing so would be counter to the ATT objective.
Wait, what do I have to do with this?
"@ing almost everybody just to avoid being tone deaf to the racial issue"
I tagged you so if you desire, you can contribute your own neutral perspective, you are not forced to.
The Useful Note consensus strike me as wise, and yeah, the meme reference does deserve mention, but we should take care to be as objective as possible in describing it's relationship to the topic of Black Egyptians.
Oh, I understand you're not endorsing it LK, just being as cautious about tone-deafness as you are. I've been inclined to think it's one of those "using sorta-dumb things that black people do as an excuse to be horrendously racist" deals, but then I haven't seen the meme used at all in some time, so I can't really say with any kind of certainty if it did or didn't take on any other connotation (as much as I might personally doubt it).
To put it as succinctly as I can, the line between irony and intentional is often blurry and thin at that, and what was once fully intended to mock subjects can become a sign of pure support. /pol/ is what you and I both know as the main example of this.
I've also been in disreputable online communities, as @GethN7 can attest to, and sometimes I've had to make those character judgements as to how to use humour and on who genuinely meant what they wrote.
As long as we feel comfortable with being able to defend whatever we have on the page (and from what I'm seeing in this thread we might have to defend it when somebody complains), I'm okay with this article taking whatever approach everyone else wants it to take. Trope, Useful Note, Meme, whatever. Excessive snark in the article would probably be a bad idea, though.
Yea verily to the last line.
Is this a trope?
Or is it an embryonic Useful Note?
This one is right on the border, I think. While it is an erroneous belief with some politics behind it, it does become an element contributing to the creation of some works...
There are no older topics