Talk:Reparations for slavery in the United States

message: "Notably, 82% of Black Americans support reparations, while 75% of White Americans do not."
Is it really "notable" that the overwhelming majority of those who would have to pay do not support it, while those who would receive do support it?  Perhaps "understandably" makes more sense.  Better yet, leave it out altogether, unless participants in the survey were informed of the anticipated ramifications of reparations litigation on a large scale.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hmm1 (talk • contribs) 13:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You make an excellent point! Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 04:03, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  For and against reparations 

message: How do Latinos, Asians, other races in the US feel about paying reparations to black people? They weren't even here. And soon they will be the majority. I suspect they are not in favor. 2600:8801:280C:5900:EC9A:60AF:9F00:3C43 (talk) 03:51, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  what about other races 

message: I'm doing research on this topic and was attempting to read the original source for the article's claim that only nine states have formally apologized for their involvement of slavery. When following the link in the references section (number 48), it seems that the original site has since been taken down and the domain is now for sale. I don't have much experience editing things on Wikipedia, but I figured it was worth pointing out for those that do. ANamelessAimlessEditor (talk) 20:00, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have pointed it at an archive, although really, we could probably try and find a better source. --Aquillion (talk) 21:53, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference #48 Appears to be Dead 

message: I was just curious about this topic, but I noticed a problem in the section "Proposals for reparations > United States." These two sentences have problems probably caused by editing:
For the descendants of the 12.5 million Blacks who were shipped in chains from Western Africa, [how does this initial clause relate to what follows?] “America has a genetic birth defect when it comes to the question of race,” as stated recently by U.S. Representative Hakeem Jeffries.[this seems out of place in this section, and what he means "a birth defect" is not contextualized or explained.] If America is to atone for this defect, reparations for Black Americans is part of the healing and reconciliation process. [this isn't in quotation marks, but is it a summary of Jeffries further comments? At face value, it reads as an awkward non-factual statement of opinion]
Ultimately the Jeffries part doesn't seem relevant to this particular section—maybe it can go somewhere else, if properly cited (another problem here). But the problem is that the first part, about "12.5 Blacks" then would just be left hanging. Should we just eliminate these whole last two sentences? Then the paragraph would be properly focused on Brookings Institution material.  2600:1700:2870:AE0:A573:8F09:AF9B:FFD5 (talk) 11:33, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two jumbled sentences in “Proposals for reparations” section