Thread:LoveWaffle/@comment-821254-20130729211341/@comment-1895174-20130729214255

For one, the Wiki does not support race-based categories. And if there should be one, it shouldn't be made by someone with such a small edit count. Maybe an admin or something, but definitely not someone with less than 200 edits.

Secondly, the usefulness of the category is determined by how descriptive it is. "Black/ African American" is not descriptive, especially not how you were using it. "Black" is not alone a very descriptive term. "Vampire" means someone is a vampire; "black hair" means someone has black hair; "Black" could mean any number of things, especially when you consider that "Black" has very different meanings depending on who you are. "Black" to an American, "Black" to a Brazilian, "Black" to a South African, and "Black" to an Australian are four entirely different things. Especially the latter, who would use "Black" to describe Aboriginies (like Gateway), people not of African heritage.

Furthermore, since the category was tied to "African-American", it was used much more widely than it should have. People from Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America, or anywhere other than the United States are not African-American. And then you have consider whose definition of "African-American" you go buy, since there are some anthropologists that argue it's all people in the United States of African descent, while others would say that it's only those descended from the former enslaved people and whose family have been in the United States for several generations.

Never mind the numerous grammatical errors in the title of the category.

There's nothing shameful or negative about being Black. The problem is the term "Black" is far too vague and has far too many different meanings depending on where one is, and that it was tied to "African-American." As a biracial person, I have a problem with you assuming all Black people are African-American.