Talk:List of ethnic slurs/Archive 2

message: The UK Census office on their site descibes the problem:
How do you define ethnicity?
Definitions of what constitutes an 'ethnic group' or an 'ethnic minority' are subject to much discussion. In fact, there is no consensus on what constitutes an 'ethnic group' and the terminology used to describe these groups has changed significantly over time. 
This is because membership of any ethnic group is something that is subjectively meaningful to the person concerned, and can be based upon a combination of categories such as:
*country of birth 
*nationality 
*language spoken at home 
*parents' country of birth in conjunction with country of birth 
*skin colour 
*national/geographical origin 
*racial group 
*religion ''
[|How to define Ethnicity| UK Government office of Statistics/Census]
Many of the Slurs in this article concern Class or Political Affiliation. They are not Ethnic slurs.  I suggest a BIG re-write of the opening paragraph. Directing Ethnicity to Ethnic groups (a socio-anthropological term) just whacks out every single category you place after it. 
I nominated the list for Afd on the grounds that the article is a mis-match for any kind of nonsense people (ok, lets say editors) can think of based on this Broad view of ethnicity.  Please formulate a new criteria, and then begin to purge subjects and definitions that do not meet them. For example, Gazpacho made a few deletions under T (why pic on T to start the ball rolling?) after the Afd contributors said it needs a good clean.  However, with an opening paragraph that redefines the complete nature of ethnicity or sloppy editing, how can you purge knowing you have done the right thing?
Another example - before Purging the T listings Gazpacho deleted a quite common derogatory name for jews in the UK (Three by Two, its Cockney rymning slang for Jew]] on the grounds that he had never heard of it before.  Not hearing of something before is, certainly being BOLD when editing, but sometimes a citation flag will do.
Oh course, I want this List to exist. I nominated in in an attempt for editors to get into action and think properly about what the list is about.  Not make it some made zone where you can descibe people 3 streets away as being an ethnicity.
Please do clean up, I am only happy to help and source. but please define ethnicity, in a manner that is used in the real world, not just in this list.  Mike33 01:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Defing Ethnicity

message: Perry used to be used as a ethnic slur towards Native American skateboarders around the 1970's in Western New York because of being from the Perry Projects
: Native American skateboarders from Western New York? This sounds like it might be far too obscure for inclusion. Unless it was used outside of the community of Western New York skateboarders, it's probably not notable or verifiable enough to warrant an entry. My Alt Account 11:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Perry

message: theres a lot of slurs here about gays and lesbians, but its not ethnic. just my two centsJigsaw Jimmy 02:05, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate list of information and there are untold thousands of "slurs" of varying importance and obscurity. How about just sticking with a list of ETHNIC slurs. A list of derogatory terms for homosexuals could possibly find its home on another page somewhere. Or not... My Alt Account 11:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gay does not equal ethnicity

message: In reference to Jeff's comments below - the question isn't whether or not this article is politically correct or incorrect (I think if Wiki was about that, it would have deemed it 'un-p.c.' and deleted it, rather than having this bizarre conversation about the article's relative merits), the question is why is an article like this necessary? The intention is not to delete it "because it contains..offensive words". 
Granted, deleting this entry as a means of censorship is ignoring the problem of ethnic slurring and other examples of intolerance, but noone is trying to censor anything; it is a matter of understanding the purpose of this article and determining whether or not its actually a) in keeping with the Wikipedia spirit, and b) of any practical use to anyone.
To me the whole debate seems absurd, and childish. If it is really necessary to define the meanings of these words, then that should be done either on the Wiktionary, or else within relevant articles that refer to them. In my opinion, there is no purpose whatsoever of compiling a list of offensive words, and its in directly contravenes everything that Wikipedia is about - the words cannot be sourced, their definitions are frequently dubious, and there is no practical (or positive) use for the information contained in the article. 
This is not an advocation of ignorance, but rather, common sense: there is no need to assemble an unverifiable list of words of hatred under some pigheaded banner of righteous liberalism! Ignorance may not be for the best, and I again suggest that the words that have need to be explained by Wikipedia can be so within relevant articles, but this list is a perfect example of what SHOULDN'T be in the encyclopedia - it is a list, with a complete lack of useful information. I defy anyone to reasonably argue for its inclusion on these grounds.
Surely that's enough said.
bish 19:39, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Thom

message: I agree with the comment below, that this page should not be deleted because it contains (past and present) offensive words.  That sort of "politically correct" censorship is misguided and even more repulsive than using these words.  Ignorance is never for the best.  Nuff said.
Ignorance is bliss? Not really. "Jeff" is a pejorative for a French or German as well is "Jacque" from a common French first name, and "Jerry" is a German soldier from world war I. I wonder how the European versions of wikipedia handle ethnic/national slurs, the same way as Americans? + 207.200.116.71 06:23, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jeff

message: Just noticed my correction has mysteriously reverted to the old error. I have restored it. Glad to discuss it here if someone actually has a problem with it, but perhaps the reversion was unintended. 66.241.86.57 00:15, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Shylock

message: "Chan" is one of the worst pejoratives against Asian Americans, and Chongas meant a temporary Asian worker in the US (China? Japan? or Korea?). The term Chino is said to mean Chinese in Spanish, an Asiatic-looking mestizo from Mexico (Chinatepec), or an American Indian in California (the 1800's). The new pejorative for Hispanics, Asians or those of Asian-Hispanic descent are "chinxicans". Filipinos are called "yellow spicks" by the fact many Filipinos have Spanish names and cultural features from the Spanish colonial era (1521-1898), when the U.S. acquired the islands, independence in 1946. + 207.200.116.71 06:31, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chan, chino or chonga 

message: A Chinese person basically.
: Any evidence that you didn't just make this up? I propose NOT including this term until there is evidence that it's in widespread use. My Alt Account 11:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Chung-Li

message: An ethnic slur short for "Mexican" has been in long usage since the early 1900's. "Chicano" isn't a bad vernacular term, but "greaser" for a Mexican originated from the occupation of Mexicans oiled or 'greased' wagon wheels, and "brown brother" is a skin color term for Mexicans of various shades "of brown". The racism against Mexicans was strong in the last century, that any Mexican-American was easily a "Mexican" while an Anglo was a "real American". Old pejoratives like "zoot suiter" named for a gang attire of urban Hispanics in the 1940's and "chuk" from the term 'pachuco' as in gang isn't used as much. New pejoratives for persons of mixed Anglo-Hispanic (Mexican) descent "half Jose", "yellow pepper", and "light chocolate", then could be light-skinned African-Americans or bi-racials of white and black parentage. +207.200.116.71 03:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Mex' 

message: The result of the recent Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of ethnic slurs was "No consensus". Among those voting to "keep" a large percentage noted that the list needed to be sourced. I think we need to set an overal deadline to finish this job and when that is met to remove, and keep out, all unsourced terms. I think that one month is a reasonable time, specially since the complaints about lack of sources go back to the previous VfD. I will send a note to those who voted to keep asking them to help with the effort, perhaps by picking a letter to work on. -Will Beback 00:13, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Correction: 5 of the 26 people who voted to keep the list mentioned removing unsourced material. This is less than 20% of the total. As for deleting the 92% of the terms that are unsourced--that would be an underhanded way of deleting the list, and consensus is to keep it. I also don't think that one month is enough time to source 1,300 terms.--Primetime 02:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Our vote counts differ because some votes were ineligible. That's why the result was "no consensus". Anyway, some people suggested moving the unsourced material to a sub page where we can work on it. The material wouldn't be deleted, but the only material in the article itself would be sourced. Of course one month isn't enough time to source 1300 entries. But a year hasn't been enough either. Let's say three months, or four. It can be an article improvement drive. (that worked at List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people and List of groups referred to as cults, articles where every entry must be sourced). We can solicit help from AfD voters, projects, and other pools of editing labor. But we need to have the goal in the definite future of an article that is at least mostly compliant with WP:V and WP:NOR. This list is not exempt from Wikipedia's policies. The payoff is that a fully-sourced article is easier to maintain in the long run. It puts the direct burden of proof on the editor adding the new material. With the provided reference other editors can verify it easily. Like those other lists, this article will be made better by being fully-sourced. Cheers, -Will Beback 10:42, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm a hundred percent for moving the unsourced stuff to a holding pen. Do that, you don't even have to set a hard date for deletion; we have a legitimate page the very next day, and can take whatever time is needed to rescue whatever else can be sourced. Your work won't be wasted, Primetime; quite the contrary, it's what we'll keep seeing as you validate and restore entries from the holding pen. This is clearly the best solution. 66.241.86.57 19:19, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hiding the terms from general view would be wrong because most of them are correct. I actually took it upon myself to source all entries beginning with the letter a in February. 75% turned out to be correct and 11% of the unsourced entries were in foreign languages I don't know how to reference (e.g., Chinese). Much of the remainder I'm sure were just too rare or new. I might support removing the suspicious slurs to a holding pen, but removing them simply because they're unsourced would be wrong.Also, I don't have enough time to source every entry in this article myself. I just copied the list into MS Word, and it took up 104 pages. Anyone advocating sourcing entries should help out, preferably by visiting a library and referencing some of the slang and foreign-language dictionaries there. Many libraries allow patrons to check out such dictionaries, and if they're requested through interlibrary loan (ILL), they can always be brought home. The vote we just endured showed that a majority of voters did not want the list removed, and I consider gutting 93% of the terms the same thing as deleting the list. Us inclusionists shouldn't be burdened with all of the research because we don't care as much about the fact that they're unsourced. It's almost not an issue for me. Think about it: Is there such a thing as an "incorrect" ethnic slur? They're not used because they're accurate. They're slurs regardless of whether they're used by one person or a thousand. An argument might be made for proof of worth of inclusion (notability), but that does not seem worth throwing the baby out with the bathwater over. That's why so many voters (me included) assumed that the list was under assault because of the slurs--not because of policy. Indeed, the "Glossary of anatomical terminology, definitions and abbreviations" page has never been nominated for deletion because of the "Wikipedia is not a dictionary" or "Wikipedia: Citing sources" policies.--Primetime 20:57, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Not sourced" is not an option. WP:V is our core policy. No, the burden of sourcing should not be on "inclusionists" or "deletionists", the burden should be on the editors who add the material in the first place. That's what we're trying to get to. As we're sitting here talking new unsourced entries are being added, two in the last 24 hours. Who is going to source them? I think we should expect the editor putting it in to do so. But unless we've got a fully-sourced list then we can't refuse unsourced items. You seem to think that the lump in th bathwater is a baby. I think it's excrement and should be thrown out. -Will Beback 21:19, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should be able to get consensus here on the talk page to allow no NEW unsourced slurs while we work on the backlog of EXISTING unsourced slurs. How about it? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 01:15, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Back to sourcing 

message: AdriaDracis added some categories to this page and the instructions. They also archived many discussions. I fiddled with them a little bit. Does everyone like it? I'm not sure if everyone will follow the format, and the archiving could cut off comment on some discussions. I can still change it back, but the sooner we decide, the easier it will be.--Primetime 04:43, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never seen a page organized quite like this. I'm not sure where I'd put a new section. Do what you think best. -Will Beback 10:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I object... it's massively more convenient to see "what's new" on the talk page by just checking from where you last left off and going "down". --Dante Alighieri | Talk 01:17, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. I'll go ahead and restore the old layout. What about the archiving thing? I was thinking about at least keeping some old postings from a certain date on (e.g., October 2005), but it would be OK with me if we restored everything, also, as I've seen some discussions drag on for a very long time.--Primetime 01:35, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I just undid the layout and moved the old discussions previously archived (i.e., before March 23, 2006) back into the archive.--Primetime 02:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New talk-page look

message: Rather than delete entries not specifically ethnic (for example relating to beliefs, religion, and activism), why don't we just change the overall category and title from List of ethnic slurs to List of slurs. That would simplify and consolidate alot of data and not require excessive deletion of knowledge and information.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Exander (talk • contribs) 
It seems that the title should be revised, if only for reasons of accuracy. I noticed "Greasemonkey" included as a slang term for an automotive mechanic, and I'm pretty sure automotive mechanic is not an ethnicity. Nor is homosexuality. I think dropping the word "ethnic" would be a possibility. Or we could split it into two articles... cull-out the non-ethnic slurs and move them to an article called "List of slurs" or "List of non-ethnic slurs." --redjac 16:10, 21 Apr 06 (EST)
The list was meant to discourage, not promote or celebrate hate speech. It's a learning guide on why these words are wrong and bigoted to groups of people,
some aren't bad but others like the "N word" are very inflammatory. The rest are impolite and improper to use, then a person from that group may use it in a not so bad/negative manner. Sometimes, words we may find not controversial enough like "gay"/"homo"(sexual), "Jewish" and "retarded" are used in name calling, discrimination and harassment of individuals assumed to belong to that social group. Public schools in the US, esp. in California brought the issue on school children are verbally attacking or using those words in an offensive manner. Socio-economic terms like "redneck", "white trash" and "welfare queen" are sometimes disparaging and divisive to hurt people for their misfortunes related to money or class. And to end the sentence, the word "ghetto" originally meant a closed enclave for European Jews before WWII and then used by the media to indicate a low-income urban area populated by Black Americans. Today this term is applied to any isolated, downtrodden or vacated neighborhood, esp. populated by minority groups and the poor (low-income class). Often "ghetto" is used in negative and prejudicial ways, so alternatives like "inner city" and "disadvantaged groups" may be used when allowed, but those terms can be disparaging when it don't need to be said. + 207.200.116.71 07:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revise Title? 

message: I feel I need to raise this issue again. While the Apache entry is seemingly well-sourced, it is also selectively sourced. A glance at the Apache article proper and a brief amount of research indicates that the origin purported in this list is by no means definitive. Given that the origin is speculative, I am suggesting (again) that Apache be removed from this list. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 01:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about we just remove the etymology? The "ruffian" sense used in France seems like a slur, and the "savage as an apache sense does, also.--Primetime 01:35, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apache redux 

message: Is this for real? 71.236.33.191 02:50, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know the "Nigga stole my bike" your-the-man-now-dog fad is correct.<However, I don't know whether anyone calls other people "bike stealers".--Primetime 03:15, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bike Stealer

message: Its not really an ethnic slur because it means the same thing as foreigner, should it be removed or should foreigner be added ?
:I'm not sure how useful foreigner would be. Ajnabii, on the other hand, would be useful for non-Arabic speakers who visit an Arab country and hear people saying "Ajnabii" near them. It can be a slur when used with adjectives like stupid, etc. So, I wouldn't stop you if you added foreigner to the list, although it might not be very useful.--Primetime 07:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ajnabi 

message: In east Asia, an increasingly used pejorative for American and European is Ank, also "Yank" short for Yankee and in Vietnam, "Frank" derives from the French colonial era. Anti-Americanism is on the rise in Japan, Korea and Taiwan by those who feel the U.S. army occupied their lands too much and president Bush's foreign policy. It breeds hate and contempt for Americans, esp. the fear of civil war in Korea between the North and South gets ugly with protestors cry "(Y)ank go home". Colonialism in Asia was brief like the Dutch in Indonesia, British in Malaysia, Spanish/the U.S. in Philippines and the Russian East (and soviet occupation of North korea). Japan continues a dispute with the Kuril Islands with Russia and problems with China-Russia relations. Words and terms are part of the hostility against the West in much of Asia.+ 207.200.116.71 08:05, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ank" in Asia 

message: In Mexico and Latin America, gringo is used in contempt and ridicule against Americans. Gringo may mean "grinning" as Americans are assumed to smile alot, or "green" as in U.S. dollars. Another harsh term is "yanqui" or Yankee, and they say "pendejo" means jerk or sell out. In Chile where a rising influx of tourists from the U.S. occurred, they began to call Americans "vastidos" or annoying. There are fresh memories of U.S. involvement in the installment of dictators in South America. Rising anti-American politics like from pres. Hugo Chavez of Venezuela adapt common pejoratives on Americans in his fiery speeches. Fidel Castro uses "yanqui" or "pendejo" every time he described the U.S. and recently, the Mexican national mood began to turn anti-American over the immigration problem. "It's those gringos again don't like us". + 207.200.116.71 08:12, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to note, as I speak Spanish pretty good and have spent some time in Mex, where I got into discussions over the origin of this word: it specifically only means Americans and in its proper sense does NOT include Canadians, Australians or Europeans; it does not simply mean "a white guy" (gringa would be a gal, y'see, 'though that's not heard as much for some reason; possibly because  a more complimentary guera or guapa would be used instead).  And the origin of the word, according to Mexican tradition, is that it was the Mexican battle cry during the American invasion of Mexico City; American troops wore green in that war, and the battle cry when "Green - GO!!"; a differeing account was that this was the American battle-charge rather than the Mexican one; the story I heard was associated with the Battle of Coyoacan (? - battle was just north of Coyoacan; that doesn't redlink so I'm not sure what it's called now) but it may have originated in battles farther north, before the US entry into the Valle de Mexico.  It may be that other Latin Americans use it in a general sense, including Canadians; but to my Mexican friends it doesn't.Skookum1 17:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Darn. You guys don't know what research is.  First, gringo most likely comes from the word griego meaning Greek, as in the English term, "That's all Greek to me" i.e. that's unintellible. Someone who is a gringo would have likely been originally someone who didn't speak Spanish, or someone who didn't speak Spanish the way a local spoke.  Second, Latin America is not a homogenous region (as many GRINGOS think it is hee, hee).  Thus what gringo means in one state in Mexico can be different than what it means in another state in Mexico or in a Province in Argentina or a town in the Hispanic Caribbean or wherever! Just because you were in Mexico doesn't mean that a) you have  any crediblity; you can learn that anywhere just go to a library b) that what you did "learn" was factual in anyway, look up folk etymology, (by the way, that "Green-Go" theory is told throughout Latin America, I heard it in the Dominican Republic and in several places in Central America, each nation claiming the word was theirs) and finally c) that you "learned" the universal definition.  Typically a gringo can mean ANY of the following: American, American tourists, non-Hispanic whites, English-speakers, Anglophones trying to speak Spanish, amongst others.  I've heard gringo used for Canadians and Brits.  Then again, that's personal experience, not RESEARCH.  Oh and the grinning definition is utter bullshit. Grin is not a word in Spanish. Arthurian Legend 14:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gringo in Latin America 

message: is this page necessary? i think not. if it MUST be kept then move it to wiktionary rather than it remaining here. i for one am in favour of deleting it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by petemwah (talk • contribs) 
:It has already been nominated for deletion three times, and the last debate closed three weeks ago. It was kept by a comfortable margin.--Primetime 00:00, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite a few of the keep votes were keep/transwikify, indicating substantial support for moving it. Many other votes were keep/clean up, indicating a dissatisfaction with the sourcing. I think the only objection I've heard from Primetime about moving it to Wiktionary is the effort involved, and the fact that editors there are "more prudish".   -Will Beback 00:11, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I made quite a few more arguments than that. For a four-paragraph summary of my objections to moving it to Wiktionary, see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_ethnic_slurs. As for the sourcing, I'm working on that. I added nine sources just tonight. In case anyone is about to read my summary on the debate page, one thing I forgot to mention there is that the editors on Wiktionary would probably just delete the list. That's why I mentioned that they're "prudish". I was just being polite. They're jerks.--Primetime 00:17, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you don't want it moved then why did you ask me to change my vote to "move", which I did in good faith. -Will Beback 00:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I meant that if I had the choice between moving it and deleting it, I would rather it be moved. I was willing to take a chance if I had to. I tried adding a few terms from this list a couple weeks ago with three citations each and they deleted them! They do whatever they want over there.--Primetime 00:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, since I last raised the issues of sources on March 27, by my count 51 new entries have been added, 7 entries have been removed, and 27 new footnotes have been added. So we're losing ground as far as sourcing goes. Again, the answer is to move the unsourced entry to a working page, and to require all new additons to be sourced. It's the only way we'll be able to get a list which adheres to Wikipedia policies. -Will Beback 00:40, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had to return most of my slang dictionaries to the library a few weeks ago. That's why it's been slow lately. However, I requested an interlibrary loan for another slang dictionary (a very large one). If it doesn't come (I'm sure it will, though), I'll buy one through eBay.--Primetime 00:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's generous of you. I think that we need to set a deadline to move the unsourced material out. How about the end of May? -Will Beback 00:49, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I still think the "best" thing we could do would be put a moratorium on NEW unsourced material. I propose we just set a date in the very near future (I don't know, like April 19th at 00:01 UTC) and after that we agree to revert/delete any FURTHER unsourced material as we concentrate on sourcing the EXISTING material. Does that sound like the sort of thing that we could reach consensus on? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:47, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That'd work for me. -Will Beback 23:58, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Mmmm. so rather than needing thought police, we just give ourselves lobotomies and be damned with it?Skookum1 17:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  really necessary? 

message: Putting the article within context, it is socially acceptable. As a generalization, most slurs mentioned within the article are ethnic slurs and thus the topic should not be merged, nor edited in any form. We should forget our political and ethnocentristic thoughts behind and publish information which is generally correct! None of this scholarlary interference.
:I think you meant SOME of this scholarly interference. Both sides agree that vandalism like http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_ethnic_slurs&diff=48780617&oldid=48770873 "british bagler" must be removed (assuming the Irish don't really say that), and one way to determine if such alleged slurs are really used is to require some kind of reference. Art LaPella 17:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral 

message: 1. Mulatto, Semiroon, Quadroon and Maroon. People of mixed race (mainly black African and white), Quad means 1/4 black, semi as more than half, and Maroon for mostly black with little white. Since the 1960's, widely rejected as a disparaging term meant to degrade persons, now called "bi-racials".
 
2. Mischling. In the European Jewish community, a religious not racial group. The German (Yiddish?) word for "mixed" as in half-Jewish or a gentile with identified Jewish ancestry. Became a fighting word from Nazi persecution of religious Jews and those of Jewish parents in the 1930's.
3. Half-breed. In the New world and other colonies in Africa and Asia, the label meant persons of white and indigenous tribal parents. In America, it's of half American Indian. In India, Africa and Australia, was a white with local non-white blood. and In the pacific islands, it's hardly used. 
:Well, funny part is I hear First Nations persons (the Canadian equivalent of Native Americans) use it all the time, also in its short form 'breed, and usually derisively.  Yeah, it's derisive from both directions, that is; but also many non-status natives (native blood, but not sufficient lineage/pedigree to have band-member and card-carrying official status) use it for themselves, and not in an ironic sense.  The official/legal term in Canada now is supposed to be "Metis" but historically that refers to a specific mixed-blood culture/group originally from the Prairies, who themselves don't use it to mean other mixed-bloods (see Metis).  You'll note that I use "mixed blood" here, which appears to be (for now) a "safe" variation on half-breed, which "we" are not supposed to use; but still do; with or without a pejorative sense.Skookum1 17:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: other terms no longer acceptable

message: Assuming this is a literal translation, why can't it also be a slur? It's at least politically incorrect, and so is most any kind of wordplay with somebody's heritage these days. I would certainly expect to get in trouble if I called a female Native American a "squaw". Art LaPella 19:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't in the main list anymore, if it ever was (it should be...).  From what I know from soc.culture.native a native languages/linguistics listserve or two, it's definitely a slur, or has become so despite one-time usage even in Native American/First Nations slang (as with, for example, "brave", which if used by a white man is a slur, if used by a native is not).  And the biggest reason it's a slur is its etymology, which is from an eastern Algonkian language I think: it means female genitalia in an explicit sense, although most who used it (native and otherwise) had no idea of that origin.Skookum1 17:23, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Squaw

message: Check this one--I have heard this one BY JEWS used to describe foreigners (basically someone with a foreign accent)
:Merriam-Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged says it's "usually used disparagingly". Here's some quotes from the Oxford English Dictionary, also:
:1943 I. Wolfert Tucker’s People xxix. 481 Love thy neighbor if he’s not..a mockie or a slicked-up greaseball from the Argentine.
:1931 D. Runyon in Collier’s 10 Jan. 10/3, I consider this..disrespectful, like calling Jewish people mockies, or Heebs, or geese.
--Primetime 06:02, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mocky

message: In recent years, two socio-economic classes of white people in California are head to head. The "OCies" are upper class suburbanites from Orange County and other metropolitian areas, while the dust-bowl era families "Okies" are lower income or blue collar residents of Central valley. There's a growing rivalry between the two groups over how much opportunities and privileges they get.
 It reminds me of the WASP/English yankee vs. WOP/ethnic American rivalries
 in the Northeast U.S. in the mid 20th century, as descendants of immigrants
 feel left out or a step under the economic ladder. It took another
 generation for the "ethnics" to be in line with the "Anglo-Saxons"
 in the U.S. by the 1970s and 1980s as the two distinctions blurred and became obsolete. + 207.200.116.71 02:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: OCie vs. Okie in California 

message: In France where my father came from, there are slurs designated for the nation's array of ethnic groups: Corsicans "loves dogs",  Alsatians "skinheads", Flemings "tulip dancers", Basques "bomb throwers", Bretons "frigid minds" and regional jokes/comments on his native province: Nord Pas-de-Calais, seen as backward, lack good incomes, very conservative and religiously devoted. These characteristics except this "backward" thing is true to a point, but to exagerate something leads to stereotyping. In Northernmost France are comments about Parisians as "snubs", "self centered", "materialist" and "get the good jobs". My Dad's family are proud to be Frenchmen/women/people, and don't hold grudges on other races or people. My grandpa and great-grandpa fought against Nazis for their cruelty done to France and oppose their ideology as socialists. There are depictions, negative or positive, or not always true, on France's political neighbors. They made jokes why the English have hands on their laps under the table (a breach of French etiquette for reasons I won't discuss), and Americans are always smiling (I noticed the French have emotions, but not much smiling) and demand treatment/service on the spot. Some locals said things on Belgians, Germans, Swiss and Italians. The worst comments goes to the British as "hooligans can't handle their gin". Not as bad goes to Spaniards as "flamboyant" or Austrians as "robotic". Nationality slurs aren't kind and are inflammatory, and France has strict laws regarding hate speech not just to protect Jews, Christians, women, homosexuals, immigrants and visitors from biased comments. The French has a historic custom and policy to promote strong inclusion of minorities to assimilate, integrate and acculture to France. They do this not to abandon minority status, but accepting one foreign person as an equal and as a French citizen.+ 207.200.116.71 09:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnic slurs in France 

message: Blackfella is not an ethnic slur in Australia. It is used by black people to describe themselves, and good naturedly by whitefellas. mgekelly 05:26, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blackfella 

message: I've added some more about it,and how it clashes with People of Judas.However,it is politically correct.Musevi is used more by pro-jewish,and/or higher class people.--CAN T 20:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yahudi 

message: The word "sharp" is in here designated to describe a skinhead. Unfortuntly, it's not a racial slur, and is in fact the exact opposite. SHARP stands for "Skin Head Against Racial Prejudice" and is a way of describing street punks who are against neo-nazis and biggots in general and hate when people associate skinhead with their lifestyle. I believe that the word should either be removed or should be fully explained. Before I edit the article, I would like to know what other users think.
:Just include a citation - this page is unusually strict about that. Art LaPella 15:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SHARP 

message: An ethnic slur of Italians, because many Italian men's first names are Giuseppe. Was used in the U.S. to describe Italian Americans, but also in Canada, Australia and across Europe. Guappo may be another form of the term, though the offensive term "WOP" originated from Guappo or "Gwape", also said to mean grape wine, as Italian immigrants were stereotyped as heavy drinkers.+ 207.200.116.71 09:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Giuseppe 

message: The entry about the word "dipper" erroneously indicates that the Punjab is in the East of India whereas it is actually in the West. I understand that "East Indians" is a phrase used extensively in this article to distinguish American Indians, West Indians and actual Indians, but a less misleading term should replace it if possible.
:I'm unfamiliar with that sense of the term "dipper", but I changed it to "Asian Indians". Art LaPella 19:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, "Indian" is the proper term for someone from India (from the U.S. perspective).  "American Indian" is probably more accepted among most American Indians, but "Native American" caught on too quickly, and many American Indians find that term to be more disparaging, given the primitive connotation.  "South Asia" covers a lot more than India.  Peyna 02:48, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Punjab is not in East India 

message: According to the word found in the Webster-Merriam collegiate English Dictionary, the definition of Jewish or "anything having to do with Jews ... -as Jewish" is refered to offensive, deragatory and of biased contempt, when used to defame and attack a group of people. To say Jewish religion, culture, heritage, holidays, foods and music, is not offensive and are actual parts of the Jewish people. But to negatively say Jewish things, behavior, cheapness, fraudulence, conspiracy and race, are totally offensive and of anti-Semitic nature. The definition of Jew (ish) gets sketchy with the definition of Jewess is not only a "Jewish woman, lady or girl", but is offensive and disparaging slang based on religious, sexist and cultural hatred, and the stereotypes of Jewish women as tight, gaudy, more dominant, demanding and emotional get a label "Jewess" in most anti-Semitic canards. The animated television series, South Park, has jokes, slurs and depictions of Jewish people held as shocking and mean-spirited, and critics said it's as much the 1930's Nazi publication der sturmerwas filled with pejoratives, assumptions and unscientific "facts" are another example. In ethnology, Jews don't constitute a "race" but only a religion one can convert to or leave from. However, the Jewish talmud said of a customary matrilineal lineage pattern: Anyone born to a Jewish mother is a Jew in the eyes of talmudic law with exceptions like she converted to another religion. But some parents of mixed faith families try to combined opposite faiths as a family or cultural inheritance, then it's best not to suggest are "Jewish".+ 207.200.116.71 02:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your input. But the definition is how a person identifies his or herself, whether in a religious practice or to describe their family heritage. I never understood why Jewish women, not men, recieved a heavy load of insults. It reminds me of similar attacks on black American men, are viewed as aggressive or follows white women. The stereotypes on black American women aren't severe enough than their male counterparts. Some have a sexist basis or there are cultural differences on how some societies brought up women on their status. In the Middle East, East/South Asia and Latin America, women are considered in most cases, subordinate and live under strict gender roles. But the popular assumptions of African women are strong, unregulated, to hold power, self-sufficient and 'have the last word' lacks a reliable source. It's all over the media and pop culture in the U.S. to show black women this way, or sometimes, to show Jewish women share some of those 'powerful persona' traits. + 207.200.116.71 09:28, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On the word "Jewish" 

message: In Mexican spanish, it means full-blooded person of Spanish ancestry, or an urban professional/upper class Mexican. The term is short for "guerreros" or "warriors", Spanish conquistadors when they invaded and took Mexico from the Aztec empire (1520). It's widely known the elites in business, colleges, the media and government in Mexico are of mostly Castillian descent. +207.200.116.71 06:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  guero 

message: I'd like to know how this is an ethnic slur?
Cereal Killer 19:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illegal(s) 

message: I removed the entry for "Maracucho":
:Maracucho : (Venezuela) A native from the western city of Maracaibo, but nowadays the term has been generalized to apply to anyone from Zulia State. The people from this region are usually stereotyped as being excessively extrovert, loud, unrespectful and kitsch.
"Maracucho" is not an ethnic slur - it is a commonly accepted term for someone from Maracaibo.
JPMcGrath 04:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is incorrect that the name "Maracaibo" means "black" or has a racial meaning.  It is derived from the Cacique (indian chief) "Mara", who dominated the Zulia region around the year 1500 when the Spanish arrived. What you say about the ethnic mix is reasonably accurate, but not relevant to whether "Maracucho" is an ethnic slur. -- JPMcGrath 11:04, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maracucho 

message: FIB ("Fucking Illinois Bastard") isn't a racial slur, but rather a regional one. Should it be removed? Wangoed 14:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion, terms like this are clearly not related to ethnicity and therefore are not ethnic slurs. Such terms should be deleted from this article. My Alt Account 11:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FIB 

message: Gook actually has been in use much longer than the korean war.  It was around at least as early as the Filipino insurrection in 1890, and was used in some cases during the second world war.  Obviously this means that the etymology given in the article is suspect.
128.187.184.75 19:02, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The term gook came from the Korean War not the Philippines. It came from the word hanguk and miguk. Hanguk means the Korean country and miguk means Americans. Some Kyopos I know (Korean Americans) told me it came from these terms. Vietnamese also have a similar word called “Han Quốc” which means Vietnam country. I know some tagalog and some Korean/hangul. I know it doesn’t come from Tagolog or any of the other Filipino languages. It came from a Han based language. Not an Austronesian based language. There’s no word called “gugus” in tagalog or any of the Filipino languages . I never heard of the word “gugus” in tagalog meaning "tutelary spirit" or whatever the heck that is from the original meaning in wikipedia. The only religion Filipinos worship is Catholicism for the past 400 years, some protestantism from the American evangelical missionaries, and some islam in the southern Philippines. There’s a word in tagalog dictionary spelled “gugo” which is a kind of vine or shampoo used in washing hair or “guguan” which is a verb to clean hair. There’s also two other words in tagalog called “gugol” which means expenses and “gugulan” which is a verb meaning “to finance” or “invest money”. None of the veterans I know (which includes my former high school math teacher) that served during the Korean War and/or Vietnam War never heard the term used for Filipinos before the enlisted. Filipinos (who weren’t called Filipinos before the Spanish American War where they gain independence on their own from Spain without American help) were called “Little Brown Brothers” by the white American soldiers in the Philippine American War. I’ve seen all the racist posters for the Philippines (which was called Filipinas by the Spanish), Cuba, and Puerto Rico that the U.S. cartoonists made of these countries. And none of it has the word “gook” on it the way the American Propaganda Artists used the word “Hun” for World War 1 Germans and “Japs” and “Krauts” for Japanese and World War 2 Germans.--James 04:06, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The world Charlie came from the Vietnam War not the Korean War. It’s from the U.S. Military phonetic alphabet “Victor Charlie” which means VC or Viet Cong. --James 04:06, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gook 

message: This is a very awful word to describe either black (American) or low income renters. To compare them as "roaches" and label them like pests is one of the worst things one can do to perpetrate racism. Also to attack persons of a low income class, to call them that is like they're dirty when it's untrue. + 207.200.116.71 02:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roaches 

message: On California freeways, the term means Unidentified F-----g Orientals" and based on stereotypes of Asian Americans are terrible, wreckless drivers or drive in a frenized hurry like "they live in Asia". Sometimes used against Hispanics as slower drivers crowding roads and made more traffic, but are called "caminos" ('to walk' in Spanish, as Hispanics are assumed not able to afford automobiles). There is a code 'DWH' or "Driving while Hispanic" to mean Hispanics are poor drivers. Both the immigrants and ethnic groups are blamed for creating auto accidents and grindlock, as some drivers shout "This isn't some back alley in Mexico city or Tijuana" to perpetuate those views.+ 207.200.116.71 03:25, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "UFOs" 

message: The definition means a person of black (African) and white (European) races
in the Americas. No longer considered acceptable to many in North America, but this Spanish term for "mule" or "mixed" remains tolerable to most in Latin America, esp. the Caribbean where majorities of people are "mulatto". Because of it's controversial nature and used as a racial epithet, the use of "mulatto" to racial identify people is in decline in the U.S., Canada and British crown colonies. In Puerto Rico, alternatives of the term came upon in the 20th century, but not much change in Cuba and Dominican republic. The use of this term in Britain, Europe, and rarely in South Africa or Australia is not polite in most social circles. Racial identity of people, including actors, music stars and celebrities of mixed race, from Halle Berry to Lenny Kravitz, Mariah Carey to U.S. Gen. Colin Powell, consider themselves "black" or "Bi-racial" to mean two or more than one race. Other terms like "semiroon" and "quadroon" once commonly used in the Southern U.S., as well informally in other U.S. regions, are avoided like the plague. It's widely said the U.S.' upper-classes, institutions and policy makers in the late 20th century reject racism to a point they banned virtually every racial or ethnic slur, since it's downscale or declasse or "taboo". There's a continual use of "mulatto", as well "Negro" and "colored "in jest among few older African Americans, who noticed the younger generations preferably use "black", "mixed" and "Afro-American" to mean terms of positive pride. "Mulatto" like "mestizo", "guero" and "zambo" remain in casual usage in Mexico, Brazil and Latin America.+ 207.200.116.71 01:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: mulatto

message: Remarkably, the Ku Klux Klan's initials are something not said out loud or written as much. In the presence of black people (or some places, other races or ethnic minorities), the triple-K word is threatening to create a social problem like a disturbance. In the Southern U.S., whites and blacks together find this a curse word, but not totally dangerous in some social situations. In Cal. the triple-K word will create bigger danger, since racism targets Asians, Latinos, Jews and Muslims as much it harms Black Americans. My Mom's family includes Cherokee Indians, while my dad is from France, both brought me up to stay away from racism, Nazism, political extremism and prejudice. They belong to the generations (Baby boomers in America, post-war in Europe) both ashamed of discrimination and anti-Semitism ran amok in their memories. The KKK is one of these things they never want their children or descendants to repeat the same mistakes, while neo-Nazis are treated a social disgrace in France. The two share common traits and characteristics of promoting hate and violence, while their prime enemies are different (but neo-Nazis hate Black people, the Klan equally hates Jews, and both groups dislike liberals and homosexuals). +207.200.116.71 10:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 'K K K'

message: An underclass caste in Japan, considered dirty and polluting had pejoratives for thousands of years. Like the untouchables caste in India, the Bukrakumin of Japan are often impoverished and kept away from general society by ancient social codes. Bukarumin are in professions like cemeteries, tanning, butchers and anything exposed to body parts/ fluids. Japanese religion and authority  felt these individuals will forever be polluted and must not come in contact with others above them. The Bukrakumin minority are culturally, ethnically and nationally Japanese, but are viewed as sub-human or like a pest in the eyes of their society. Japanese myths spoke of their "lower" or inferior origins, like Bukarumin's ancestors came out of the underworld or their forefathers' souls are from gutters or cesspolls. Or some historical detail  they were a captured enemy tribe when feudal Japan conquered all kingdoms of the four main islands (500 AD). Only 2 million people in Japan came from traditional Bukrakumin classes, families stuck in poverty and still avoided by people with age-old prejudice. The Bukrakumin are alleged to commit petty crime and associated with "Yazuku" gangs built on organized crime, drug sales and "our turf" rivalries. The term "Bukrakumin" originated from "village dwellers" lived in walking distance of their places of work. In the 20th century, they were confined in decaying urban enclaves in Tokyo, Osaka and other cities. In the 1990's Bukrakumin activists entered the national conscious by protests and calls for full civil rights. The news media began to drop the term, along with government officals and now the general public, no longer comfortable in usage of the term "Bukrakumin". + 207.200.116.71 06:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: bukrakumin

message: This Kount Sto - (U.S.) An alleged 'ebonics' version of the term 'discount store', based on stereotypes of African Americans shop in low-price discount stores.
Brown brother- (U.S.) a disparaging term on non-whites (Africans, Latinos, Asians, east Indians, etc.) and said widely used by liberals, the new left and the civil rights movement, when they refer to minority groups.
Nappy- (U.S.) A term about the width and style of hair of African Americans.
Olive Oily skin - (U.S.) An Italian American of 'olive' brown complexion.
ShitStein- (U.S.) Conflicting, whether an insult to African Americans or to crudely mimic last names of Jews, like 'goldStein' or 'Steinberg'.
McNegros/ Nigger King- A fast food restaurant frequented by black/African American patrons, also a stereotype of poor blacks' dietary habits. 
Jewess- an offensive remark/slur of an (usually shroud) Jewish woman.
Bomber- Any Arab/middle-eastern young male, caught on recently in U.S. 
Pagan- In Britain, a pejorative on Irish Catholics, deemed as "pagan" and "heathen" due to heavy Celtic influences in folk christian religion. 
Mail Order Bride- In the U.S., an Asian woman who migrates to the U.S. , but held as "mail order" brides to white/non-Asian American men. 
Half Jose- a person of mixed Anglo/Hispanic (Mexican) descent.
Dune Bunny- a Middle-Eastern person, increasingly held as offensive. 
Island Monkey- A West Indies black person, typically called "monkeys" the classic racial pejorative. But implied to pacific islanders, held as similar to primates in size and appearance, like body hair and large body weight, somewhat offensive.  
Jungle Music- (U.S.) Originated in the 1920's, it became a racial term and used widely in the 1950's & 60's, deragatory term of disdain for African American music (i.e. Jazz, soul, R&B, motown, rock n' roll). Since the 1970s, the term fell into general disuse and no longer acceptable, but revived by hate groups against rap, hip-hop and urban music in the 1990's. Also used against Latino music like latin jazz, salsa, cumbia, reggaeton and tropical varieties, esp. Cubans, Mexicans and Puerto Ricans find it equally offensive.
+207.200.116.71 01:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We can't add any of those unless we have sources for them. -Will Beback 06:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: The top of that page says it was ripped from some guy's personal home page. How do we know it's any better than urbandictionary? My Alt Account 23:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well it is on the "external links" of this page. If it is an unreliable source, it shouldn't be in the "external links" section of this page.--Googleplex5 04:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: please add these ethnic slurs

message: Expect an archive very soon, so any issues that are old list below and I'll brutally refactor and put a summary here after page move.brenneman http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Aaron+Brenneman{L}  08:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This talk is too long 

message: I'd suggest that a single reference (once confirmed) isn't enough to merit an item being included.  (Of course unsourced items can't stay at all.)  Two suggestions for dtermining what's appropiate are below. - brenneman http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Aaron+Brenneman{L}  08:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, please don't give any thought to the "own article" criterion. It would encourage people to write hundreds of single-sentence, unsourced, crap quality entries, and WP:NOT a dictionary. My Alt Account 11:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion guidelines 

message: I'm converting to the "cite" method at the footnotes page.  I'm concerned about the sources provided at that method makes it easier to get an over-all view. - brenneman http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Aaron+Brenneman{L}  15:11, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be doing this in stages and then reverting back to the last version before I started. Save points, this is a pretty big job.brenneman http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Aaron+Brenneman{L}  15:21, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Or not.  The two styles aren't that bad when smashed together, so I am not going to revert. - brenneman http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Aaron+Brenneman{L}  16:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation style 

message: Most of the terms on this page refer to the three Rs--race (too many to mention), religion (terms against Catholics, Jews, etc.), or region (Okies, etc.) I'm happy to agree to this expanded definition of "ethnicity" but I'm not sure how "mullet head" fits in here, as it seems to be based on an unfortunate choice of hairstyle.
: Good point. A term that refers solely to hairstyle doesn't sound like an ethnic slur, and should probably be deleted. My Alt Account 11:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mullet Head 

message: Is “Illinois Driver” really a derogatory slur? Where’s the source on this?  I’m from Chicago and have often visited the beautiful state of Wisconsin when I was a kid to go fishing. I use to know a lot of Wisconsinites and I never heard of the term “Illinois Drivers” from them. I also visited Indiana Beach Water Amusement Park every summerbreak when I was in gradeschool and I never heard of “Illinois Driver” over there.  I know about “FIB” for Illinoisans and something else for those from Minnesota visiting Wisconsin. But I never heard of "Illinois Driver"!
: Hmm, it's difficult to see how bad drivers from Illinois could possibly constitute an "ethnic group". Sounds like a good candidate for removal, no? My Alt Account 11:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illinois Driver? 

message: If the U.S. social mores insist we must never be prejudiced or never fear others from different backgrounds, then why many Americans I noticed like to call others names and discriminate? In Europe, where international borders overlap and redrawn many times for centuries, the question of ones' ethnic or national identity is interchangeable. In Northernmost France and Belgium, for example, people on both sides of this border share a common history and many people had family on the other side. There is generally little hate and both peoples seem to get along, because it's very possible their families could be the very same ethnic origin, but have different national citizenship or use a different language. A part of Northern France is mostly Flemish Dutch and few older persons still speak the language in addition to French, while one half of Belgium, the Walloons are French speaking or share common origins with their counterparts in France. The bilingual and dual-ethnic identity in any country can lead to some friction and animousity, Belgium remains a stable country and the French-Belgian border never did away with the original past of peoples, because their neighbors were once French or/and Flemish. The thing is why human beings want to become "us" against "them" when in fact we're truly one human race? Every cross-border people or region will share commonality with a neighbor, which is natural and a mixed/merged culture can also result in international contact if there's no war or conflict. + 207.200.116.71 17:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What makes one "us" and "them"?

message: Ginzo is in the atricle, and if I recall, Ginny was also at one time. I think it was quite stupid to delete it, as the two are entirely diffrent terms att his point.
:You might have noted that the edit page states now (though not on May 8), "Please provide citations for all new additions, or they will be reverted." Conforming to that much-debated policy is at least better than "quite stupid". Ginzo survived because Primetime added a citation http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_ethnic_slurs&diff=51805888&oldid=51800777 here, but Ginny had no citation when it was deleted http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_ethnic_slurs&diff=52148743&oldid=52148226 here. Art LaPella 02:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ginny 

message: The shocking nature of 'Nigger' became what it is now considered a very bad word, came from the O.J. Simpson trial in the 1990's when the court asked Los Angeles police detective Mark Fuhrman, if he ever used the "N word" in his career. This generated a media frenzy, along with the political correctness at the time caused quite an emotional reaction against the "N word". Despite most of society, esp. white people will avoid the term, but certain white celebrities in politics, comedy, and hip-hop culture (Colin Quinn, Kid rock, Eminem, Jennifer Lopez, Cruz Bustamente and Ralph Nader) are known to used the "N word", but had no huge protests and escaped media scrutiny. It seems only conservative white people get in serious trouble for saying this racist, profane, obscene, inflammatory, hateful and 'taboo' word. Not only the civil rights movement, and rejection of the word by several black comedians in the 1980s got more attention, but the "N word" never received this amount of controversy, until the O.J. Simpson trial. + 207.200.116.71 09:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah.  It was perfectly okay to go around spouting "nigger" left and right, until that darned OJ Simpson trial ruined it for all of us.  Right.  Wavy G 20:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: why 'Nigger' is worse sounding than ever

message: According to the ethnic slur list, Nazi means a German person. The term isn't limited to that, but a politically charged word to insult anyone with a different political viewpoint/opinion. To call someone a 'Nazi' who don't affiliate or believe in Nazism is name-calling. I want to warn everyone the term 'Nazi' evokes hurtful and disturbing images of WWII, the Holocaust and racial hatred to many people, esp. Jews, gypsies and blacks in Europe and North America. In countries where Nazis occupied in the war, the term 'Nazi' takes on a much painful description to those who lived it, now in their older years, want to make it clear 'Nazi' is a shock word. The term is so strong and controversial, the Comedy Central web page banned the word "Nazi" as it's not suitable, inappropriate, emotionally charged and of ill repute. + 207.200.116.71 09:56, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: why 'Nazi' is just as worse

message: --Chungkwok 09:14, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ethnic Slur (Independent Article)  Chinese Pig

message: This list should be reserved for slurs used in the English speaking world only.  There are billions of racial/ethinic/self-identifying/nationalistic slurs of every kind in every language against every group.  But this is the English wikipedia, and thus this list should be reserved for slurs used in the English speaking world by English speakers only (Hungary would NOT be the English speaking world, among others)  Any slur that has to be followed by a language will be deleted outright.--Esprit15d 22:24, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree fully. -Will Beback 22:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Repy: Chugkwok, you might take a moment to notice that the article has not been nominated for deletion.--Esprit15d 21:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Question: Esprit15d - It appears we are in the wrong section. We are discussing about the deletion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 June 28 The separate article "Chinese Pig" was wrongfully deleted by Xoloz. --Chungkwok 09:14, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Reply: I have not participated in this articles proposal for deletion, nor do I plan to.  Until that issue is resolved however, in the meantime, the article can still conform to Wikipedia policy, namely, to not be a clearing house for every foul word in the world.  Keeping it English is a basic requirement.--Esprit15d 12:22, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The problem is that foreign slang words are not verifiable. If they can be verifiably sourced then that'd be different. -Will Beback 18:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Comment. The author has provided sufficient verifications from reliable sources and that is all that is needed to prove that the slur is indeed in public use in different countries.--Chungkwok 09:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're talking about one entry, we're talking about all of the entries in foreign languages. "Chinese pig" is an English phrase, so it isn't covered by Esprit15d's proposal. -Will Beback 18:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

text: *Honestly, I feel the recent pruning has been excessive, and possibly misdirected. a) true, a lot of the words pruned are not in common use among English speakers, then again, I could point a lot that are still there that are not either (see many people referring to whites as "gwaai lou" in English?) b) a word not being in common use in the language does not preclude its being borrowed or quoted in English language texts (I know English books about China that use "gwailo"[a term still in the list], or books about West Africa where "toubab" [one that got cropped out] appears. c) some of those slurs are  "eye of the beholder" or PC language stuff : I know people who don't know that Gypsies call themselves "Roma" and who regard "gypsy" as a normal, non slurring term. d) I do agree that referencing every racial slur in every language is impractical, then again, if you can't find them in an encyclopedia, what's the specific use of an encyclopedic database? This is an encyclopedia, not an English language dictionary. people come here to find what they can't get in lesser works. And anyway, mr esprit, who are YOU to decide what's worthy of inclusion or not? --Svartalf 20:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ''English'' Wikipedia

message: The slur Zulu should be added. I was quite surprised it wasn't on the list. It's obviously used against black people, comparing them to the African Zulu tribes.
:Do you have a source for its usage? -Will Beback 17:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zulu 

message: "derived from the German word "piefig", meaning boring or dull."
This is wrong. See Johann Gottfried Piefke for the real origin. -- 62.46.220.219 21:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Piefke 

message: It’s absurd to include the Arabic word Ajnabi.
It has only one meaning and that is foreigner. When you go to any Arab airport from Morocco to Oman, you will have a line at passport control which says Ajanib (plural of Ajnabi).
It absolutely has no negative or offensive annotation attached to it. 
Why don't we add the word foreigner to the list?
: Thanks for your testimony here. People will hopefully take this into consideration, and start deleting such terms. My Alt Account 11:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ajnabi? 

message: (US and UK) Refers to a Black person that has largely adopted or assimilated into cultural traits typically associated with Anglo-Saxons to the exclusion of his own cultural traits. Depending upon the context of usage, the term may or may not have an expressly pejorative connotation.
--Cavalawman 02:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anglo-Blaxon 

message: This is the dumbest article I've read in a long time.  Any word/term in the list that is not defined in a proper dictionary should not be here.  I can understand if a term is regional, but it seems that some of them are terms that someone heard someone else say once, and calls it "common usage."  71.244.220.237 10:44, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What? 

message: I am using Special:Linksearch to identify excessive linking, to help reduce the use of Wikipedia as a SEO tool and for Googlebombing.  The text of the links remains, they can be accessed using copy & paste, and if they are reliable sources they will be in the article by now.  Almost all of them I am unlinking are not, but I'm using a generic replace script so one or twoi reliable sources might be unlinked.  As I say, the text remains, so you can still go and see the content. Most of them on this Talk are niggafoo.ytmnd.com - all very amusing and everything but nothign to do with an encyclopaedia article. Just zis Guy you know? 14:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unlinking weblinks 

message: I didn't put this in but just saw the deletion....and I've never thought of it as a slur, partly because I've never associated it with an African-American queer (using "queer" here in the p.c.-o.k. sense, rather than the derisive sense); the only contexts I've heard it are in African-American slang, with the guy saying to the girl "you're my African queen", or referring to a woman as an African queen; a high praise, also implying she's powerful as well as beautiful, the archetype of what an African-American woman is.  Never heard it before used to refer to a black gay....Skookum1 17:04, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  African queen 

message: This article really shouldn't be deleted. It gives much information on the deregatory terms used by stereotypists and racists, and because such people are out there, it is good to know that these articles are here giving us the information on what they are saying. By all means I am not telling you to stay up late at night pondering over the "mean words" people say, but to be aware that they are out there, therefore they have information on the words and subjects at hand. 
Don't delete this article just because some followers of the PC fad say it could be deemed offensive, because then you would make a point of what was offensive and what isn't. Soon, you'll have to delete the article on the Spanish Inquisition, the Holocaust, Slavery in the U.S. and other topics deemed as offensive. This is an encyclopedia, and as long as there's fact-finders willing to contribute to the information site that is Wikipedia, we shouldn't deny them their right to make articles that clearly state controversial topics in a truthful manner. As long as it isn't biased in anyway nor in any form, this article should still be running.
If you delete this article you will only be adding to this "Political Correctness" fad, which is wrong in itself, with a philosophy that anything sounding offensive is offensive. Yes, it's a controversial topic, but why should it uphold to the standards of someone who just can't handle what an ethnic slur is supposed to do. They should just ignore it or better yet ignore the article itself.
Okay, so I have read that it's being put up for deletion because new words - made-up words - are being added to everyday, probably made up by hack-jobs. The list is longer than needs to be, of course. But why not just scan it over and see what is verifiable as an ethnic slur that is well-known and in the dictionary and delete the slurs that can be defined as "slur made by 40 year old who lives in his mother's basement". As for the slurs toward homosexuals, I would say that they shouldn't be on the list, due to the fact that, as stated before, homosexuality, or gay, is not an ethnicity like Jewish, African-American, Irish, Latino, Slav, etc. 
--Tromboneplayer 20:07, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the best grounds for deletion of this article is that it just plain sucks. It might be easier to start over from scratch than to reform it into something passable. I think I'm about to try to reform it so it doesn't suck so much. My Alt Account 11:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion Means Denial 

message: This is educational for me.  To me, the most politically incorrect thing would be to hide from the truth, and as Trombone wrote, "Soon, you'll have to delete the article on the Spanish Inquisition, the Holocaust, Slavery in the U.S. and other topics deemed as offensive."  In the same token, we should not destroy the classics that use derrogatory words, because they are mirrors of history.  When we refuse to acknowledge the truth, as history and many concerned people have pointed out through the decades, we are bound repeat it.
However, I think they decided against deletion. Raina 06:20, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I agree with Trombone above 

message: One expression I have come across in Hong Kong. It stands for "Failed In London, Trying Hong kong", and means expats who just moved to south east asia because they couldn't hack it in the UK.
Should this be added?
--62.253.208.109 16:36, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FILTH 

message: Uh oh...guess who really doesn't give a rats @$$? Me!
:What are you yabbering about?
Leopard Gecko 20:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yo Momma 

message: I think this article should be renamed like List of offensive slurs instead of List of ethnic slurs. The reason why is because there are some terms here that are not ethnic slurs but regional slurs or political slurs like FIB (Fuckin’ Illinois Bastard), BIFFO ("Big Ignorant Fucker From Offaly"), Preacher, Minnesootan, and 51st stater. A person might be of the same ethnicity or race and  call a fellow countryman of the same ethnic background these slurs because they live in a different state/province, root for a rival baseball teams, or have different political views. --Pilot expert 03:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By definition, slurs are offensive. Perhaops this should be merged with List of sexual slurs in order to create "List of slurs". -Will Beback 22:41, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it should be merged.  Sexual slurs are nation wide, while ethnic slurs kinda divide the nation, you think?  Fllmtlchcb 06:47, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't a national encyclopedia, so I don't know what you mean. -Will Beback 18:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sexual slurs can be used against anyone.  Ethnic slurs don't apply to everyone. Fllmtlchcb 21:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Look, "ethnic slur" is a pre-existing phrase, not a neologism. The fact that it's usage is not strictly in-line with how it really "should" be used is a peculiarity of the English language and has nothing to do with Wikipedia. The article title is appropriate. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 16:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article should be renamed 

message: The water buffalo incident would lead me to believe that "water buffalo" is not a proper slur, since only a small group of individuals found it offensive, rather than a people. Should the listing in the article be removed, or should a note be added indicating it is a "false slur" or something? --Beefyt 04:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Water Buffalo? 

message: A term for Italian-Americans. The following is source to "prove" this:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ginny
--68.192.188.142 21:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely many urban dictionary entries are slanted towards things someone made up in school one day. Maybe this is, in fact, a real ethnic slur, but urbandictionary proves NOTHING most of the time.My Alt Account 11:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ginny be included 

message: bak (Thai) [] บัก in the Isan (also Isaan or Esarn) language of the Isan region of Thailand, mister; in Thai []  slang, a man's privy part, a cock; bakgrok บักโกรก (bak + washed out) bak grok bak aan บักโกรกบักอาน (bak + washed out and saddled) worked to exhaustion, exhausted, done for; bak naan บักหนาน In Isan, a man who has just left the priesthood, in Thai, a boor, hick, hayseed, country bumpkin.  Not slurs but standard Isan usage worthy of note: bakham บักหำ literally Mr. Balls, a grown boy or man, and bakhamnoi บักหำน้อย Mr. Little-balls, a little boy. C. ee อี, elah อิล่า
ee (Thai)[] อี a designation used in contempt or abuse before a proper or common name of a woman or a female animal of or in the Isan region of Thailand. Not a slur but standard Isan usage worthy of note: elah อิล่า e + verb to hunt, little girl
Farang (Thai)[] ฝรั่ง a white man (probably by way of Arab traders from the word Frank of the Levant5) (often used interchangeably with Yeramon เยอรมัน German). Western = farang mang kah ฝรั่งมังค่า (some + wealth, value, price, etc.); of plants, a guava, a native of a foreign country as mon-farang มัมฝรั่ง potato, mak-farang หมากฝรั่ง chicle, chewing gum; farang kangsy ฝรั่งกังไส china made in Europe, esp. willowware; willow pattern. C. ma'am แหม่ม
jay (Thai)[] เจ๊  Chinese businesswoman; by extension a newly prosperous Thai woman or businesswoman; not considered offensive C. jek เจ๊ก, ma'am แหม่ม
jek (Thai)[] เจ๊ก a Chink, considered an offensive term by some but considered a Chinese businessman by others; jek doon fy เจ๊กตื่นไฟ n. adv. literally, a Chinese alarmed by a fire; panic-stricken (but self-mocking, for Chinese merchants alarmed by a fire swiftly move their wares to safety while Thai merchants gape) C. jay
kaak (Thai)[] แขก  a visitor, a guest; also kaakrua แขกเหรื่อ (เห่เรือ rua meaning 'sing while paddling a boat'; when not used in the general sense of a guest or visitor: a stranger, a foreigner, except Chinese (jeen, jek, jay), Japanese (yipoon), Vietnamese (yuan), Cambodian (kameen), Lao, Burmese (pamah), or a white man (farang):
 an Indian; a Malay; a negro; a person from the Near East or Middle East; a person from North Africa; kaak poo rap griat แขกผู้รับเกียรติ honored guest, kaak muang แขกเมือง: guest of the government (enjoying extraterritoriality under Bowring treaty with Britain, consequently most kaak were originally from British India); kaak yahm แขกยาม an Indian watchman (generally considered more trustworthy than a Thai watchman who will watch but not interfere) C. Farang
ma'am (Thai)[] แหม่ม Madam, a white woman; also ma'am farang แหม่มฝรั่ง a white woman; ma'am kapi แหม่มกระปิ Thai woman putting on airs as a Western woman but still wanting her kapi, a pungent shrimp paste C. Thai madam หมาดำ, farang ฝรั่ง
Madam If Thai [] deliberately pronounce as mah? dum หมาดำ it means black(-hearted) bitch. C. ma'am
ngaw (Thai)[] เงาะ rambutan 6 from its resemblance to a bushy head; a member of the Sakai and allied tribes in the jungles of Malaya and southern Thailand; C. Sakai
Sakai (slave in Khmer, Cambodian); a member of the Orang Asli and allied Negrito tribes in the jungles of Malaya and southern Thailand; Sakai now considered an offensive term by some. C. Thai ngaw
tameen (Thai)[] ทมิฬ As a noun, a Tamil from Madras, Malaysia or Ceylon; as an adjective, cruel, savage; ruthless = tameen heen-chaat ทมิฬหีนชาติ like a baseborn Tamil (the adjective ทมิฬ appears frequently in newspaper accounts of particularly savage Thai killers). Antonym araya อารยะ adj. Aryan, civilized; arayatom อายรธรรม civilization; arayachon อารยชน civilized man; arayatet อารยประเทศ civilized countries. 
''
Modern Thai-English Dictionary, S. Sethaputra,.ed
Bowring Treaty. Encyclopædia Britannica. 2006. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 14 Aug. 2006 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9016040>.
THE ORANG ASLI (Sakai) OF PENINSULAR MALAYSIA, Colin Nicholas http://www.magickriver.net/oa.htm
Pawyilee 09:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Thai-language ethnic slurs proposed for inclusion

message: "(U.S., but also used by the extreme right-wing in the UK)"
cool, didn't know that only the extreme right wing used this term in the uk must be impossible for anyone else to use it right, im sure this is verifiable.  this page sucks lol Lenn0r 02:23, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nigger lover

message: I don't understand the point of removing all the references from the A's and replacing them with a Citation Needed template. Is it a bot bug? Art LaPella 21:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ref converter

message: Sometimes shortened to Call Centres the terms refers to South Asians and originates from Western companies outsourcing their telephone call centres to India.
:Who calls people this? What's our source? Likewise for the above terms. -Will Beback 01:16, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Call Centre Workers

message: This page is beautiful. It truly reinforces my lack of faith in humanity. I've always said that most people, no matter their race, color, creed, gender, sexual preference, age, education, etc, are jerks. The length of insults kind of proves that correct.
That aside, I agree with the various arguments that some of these are not ethnic slurs, but rather religious, regional, etc. What about, instead of merging this with sexual slurs, this page get divided up into ethnic slurs, regional slurs, religious slurs, and so forth? It would be a lot of work, but it would make this a much smaller page. --Raulpascal 19:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too large