Talk:African Americans in sports#Separate history article

@Omnis Scientia, the content of this article does not overlap much with a separate history article, as was written in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_African_Americans_in_sports&oldid=1288730909]. The history article can cover everything until the late 20th century, such as aspects of racial discrimination, separate sporting competitions, and "firsts" in African-American sporting participation. GreekApple123 (talk) 16:21, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:You have made three different articles with same sections and same wordings. While your heart was in the right place, its unnecessary to have two similar articles which talk about essentially the same thing. Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:24, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

::There was not the same content or detail of coverage across this article and the history article though. The way I had written this article, at [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=African_Americans_in_sports&oldid=1288583040], allowed for a very brief discussion of the past, while focusing on the 21st century and some of the late 20th century.

::I agree however that there was more content overlap between Race and sports in the United States and History of African Americans in sports, but that was inevitable because any discussion of American trends on race and sport would include a primarily African-American history. I don't think that justifies merging the African-American history article, but rather, removing some of the African-American history content from the Race and sports in the United States article. GreekApple123 (talk) 16:29, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:::You can say so but I read both and found both to be quite similar with same sections and just differing levels of information split across both articles. They weren't unique, as you say they are. And this way, anyone who wants to read it can find all the information in one article.

:::"Race and sports" is far larger and should be seperate as it isn't just about Black Americans. These two, talking about the same topic but in slightly differing ways, should be one - its also in the same style as the article similar to it Asian Americans in sports. Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:44, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

::::I don't know how you found mostly the same content in both articles. Referring to the articles as they were before your edits (this general article at [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=African_Americans_in_sports&oldid=1288583040] and the history article at [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_African_Americans_in_sports&oldid=1288730909]), it is clear that this general article had very little content on the pre-21st century. If we take 1995 as the cutoff point for recent history, then the only historical content in this article was 1 sentence in the lede, a 3-sentence history section (as a summary), 4 lines in the golf section, 1 line in the discrimination section, and over half a paragraph in the "Promoting racial harmony and breaking stereotypes" section. Meanwhile, the history article had almost no content on the 21st century. A pretty good split, in my opinion, and that's what I would like to restore.

::::And even if you think my above analysis doesn't demonstrate a good enough split, don't you think that there is too much content from before the 21st century to justify having one article to house all of it?

::::Also, I think your comparison of this article to Asian Americans in sports makes some sense, but that article does not have as much content. If it did, I would suggest advocate for a dedicated history article for that topic as well. GreekApple123 (talk) 17:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::My view has always been "quality over quantity" - I think both together work much better, on the whole, than seperately and is also more likely to be read. It makes it easier to find. And I do think both articles were similar in their talking points and that the sections split up between both articles. If they were indeed two seperate topics, I would have left them as such.

:::::I'm glad you took the initiative. But I think there should be one article about African American in sports like there is for music, dance, and other cultural aspects of the group, talking about both the contemporary and the historical viewpoints. If anything, I think there should be splits between sports. As in "African Americans in baseball" and "African Americans in hockey" and so on. Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:34, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::This way there is focus on how it differed between sports - and still does - and highlights the important players in those sports. Omnis Scientia (talk) 17:37, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:And its also a fork of a fork of a fork. Omnis Scientia (talk) 16:27, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

::That's not an issue at all, as long as there is enough content and enough uniqueness to each article to justify forking. GreekApple123 (talk) 16:29, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Omnis Scientia, I still disagree with you, but I can respect the civil way in which you have argued. Let me know if you have any ideas on expanding this article, as I think there is a lot to write about both the early and recent history. And I don't mind contributing if you want to go with your "separate articles for each sport" idea or any other scheme of splitting up and specializing in the coverage of the content. GreekApple123 (talk) 18:04, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:I really appreciate that you were civil as well. Its quite rare. I know sometimes these disagreements can spiral and become full-blown fights. At the end, we're all trying to make something worthwhile here for people to be able to read. :) And I would definitely love the help! Will let you know whenever I start up an article! Omnis Scientia (talk) 07:01, 8 May 2025 (UTC)