Talk:Ghetto

POV

This is badly written and POV. For instance saying a supermarket is denying access to blacks sounds like there is a supermarket there but not letting black people in while letting whites in. This is not what the reference says. The reference says supermarkets are choosing not to build in black neighborhoods. This is different, sure it's discriminitory but it's not the same as saying they aren't letting blacks through the door. Which is the tone this article is written in 63.26.116.200 (talk) 06:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)Petra

'hiBold text'I am not really sure about when the ghetto gates were closed from the inside or the outside. -- Davidme

This help?

Gates were to be erected in two places, and locked at sunset (not midnight as sometimes erroneously asserted) and only opened again at sunrise, with a substantial fine levied against any Jew caught outside after hours. The Christian inhabitants of the ghetto were required to vacate their premises, and as an incentive for landlords to comply, the Jews were required to pay them a rent one-third higher than that previously paid, with that increase exempt from taxation. [| University of Maryland]. DavidP 12:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

---

I don't see the relationship from iron foundry to ghetto. I thought that the etimology was from (bor)ghetto (small city-quarter). -- Davidme

who ever said Iron? foundries are needed for bronze, brass and almost all metals - Ghetto as a word meaning 'cast' or extruded still survives in the word Spaghetti a form of pasta that is made in a way similar to the extrusion of metal. DavidP 12:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

---

Etymology of "Ghetto"

The claim that the word "ghetto" comes from the Italian "getto, gettare" is erroneous. The term does originate in Venice, and is related to the operations of a foundry on the island, but derives instead from a noun and adjective "ghetta", meaning slags, itself from the Latin adjective glittus (sticky, soft). The term refers to the part of the island (campo ghetto < CAMPU[M] GL&012C;TTU[M]) where the slags were cooled. Had the term been related to the Italian "gettare" (VL *JECTARE = CL JACTARE, cfr. E-JECTARE), then we would expect the Venetian to be "zeto" (IPA: [zeto]). The term was later interpreted as being related to the Hebrew word for the bill of divorce, "get" (גט), but this is a later bilingual paronomasia on the Venetian word. In Venetian, "gheto" (IPA: [geto]); Italian "ghetto (IPA: [getːo]); Latinized form (in Papal documents regarding the "serraglio delli hebrei" in Rome, first in 1555 in an edict of Pius IV, and again in 1562 when the name of the "serraglio" was officially changed) "ghectus".

See:

Ariel Toaff, "Getto - Ghetto," The American Sephardi 6:1/2 (1973): 71-77.

Sandra Debenedetti-Stow, The etymology of “ghetto”: new evidence from Rome, Jewish History, Volume 6, Issue 1 - 2, Mar 1992, Pages 79 - 85, DOI 10.1007/BF01695211, URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01695211.

--Jerchower 17:42, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Someone inserted the following into my talk. The comment is NOT mine, and the information in it is utterly spurious. Jerchower 12:21, 27 February 2007 (UTC):

My Ghetoo GOSPEL! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.181.31.61 (talk) 01:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

"as i understand the ghetto is acording to jewish law where jew should live and want to live, they live in ghettos as the did since the begining of talmudic law and perhaps before. jews are following talmudic law when they live in ghettos. in bablon they lived in ghettos out of personal choice and safty and not due to being forced by non-jewish peoples. anyone knowlable in talmudic law can prove this and cite sources. "

This etymology is the original work of one linguist 'Sandra Debenedetti-Stow'. it is based on a fragment found in rome that purports to represent the inhabitants ideas of how the name arose, long after it did. Debenedetti-Snow's journal has been called 'creative' and her assertions are not at all mainstream. It is far more likely that the etymology represented on this page is erroneous.

'The word ghetto is of Venetian rather than of Jewish origin, as has sometimes been conjectured. It is encountered in Venetian sources from the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and today it is generally presumed that the word derives from the Italian verb gettare (to pour or to cast), because of the previous presence of foundries in the area.' [| from Benjamin C.I. Ravid, "From Geographical Realia to Historiographical Symbol: The Odyssey of the Word Ghetto"].

Personally I think that 'slag' is an unlikely source of the word, mainly because prior to the industrialisation of smelting the quantities of slag, produced as a by-product of smelting, would be too small to require two whole blocks of land specifically for cooling it (there were two ghettos; the ghetto nuovo and the ghetto vecchio), especially when you are surrounded by water (why not just pour it into the water) in a reclaimed island in lagoon where all land is precious. Further more it is highly unlikely that Venice would be smelting ore at all, it would make no sense using the city to produce raw materials when you have an empire to do that for you. the foundries or ghettos in Venice would be for casting, probably bronze, a process that produces very little slag indeed.

For a more informative view that would be worth reading for many aspects of this article (and one you can read without buying the journal) take a look at [| The University of Maryland article based primarily on B. Ravid, "The Religious, Economic and Social Background and Context of the Establishment of the Ghetti of Venice," in Gli Ebrei e Venezia, ed. G. Cozzi (Venice, 1987), 211-59] DavidP 12:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

---

The Jewish community and the Word "Ghetto"

A ghetto is an area where people from a specific racial or ethnic background live as a group in seclusion, voluntarily or involuntarily... "Ghetto" is also used figuratively to indicate geographic areas with a concentration of any type of person (e.g. gay ghetto, student ghetto) or for non-geographic categories

You don't mention that the word "ghetto" has an extremely negative connotation in the Jewish community today, and although the word ghetto can be used to describe almost any grouping of people, referring to a predominantly Jewish neighborhood where the residents live by choice as a "ghetto" is a racial slur. I'd add a sentence after the last one I quoted saying that for historical reasons referring to Jewish neighborhoods as "ghettos" is highly offensive.

Some take offense at the current causal use of the word "ghetto" because they feel it is downplays how ghetto's were used as an instrument of genocide during the holocaust. For that reason using the word causally and/or in highly formal context is politically incorrect and potentially offensive.

Some Links: [1]http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005059 [2]http://fcit.usf.edu/holocaust/timeline/ghettos.htm Why the hell does holocaustresearchproject.org/ghettos/ trigger you spam filter?

as i understand the ghetto is acording to jewish law where jew should live and want to live, they live in ghettos as the did since the begining of talmudic law and perhaps before. jews are following talmudic law when they live in ghettos. in bablon they lived in ghettos out of personal choice and safty and not due to being forced by non-jewish peoples.

Using the word ghetto in this context is antisemitic. Saying that the Jews like to live near each other and near Synagogues is one thing, but saying "Jews should want to live in the ghettos" is something else all together. This statement is making excuses for the Holocaust. This quote is a perfect example of how referring to Jewish neighborhoods as "ghettos" is a racial slur.

--Absolute Relativity 08:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

---

In somewhat more recent times, ghettos appeared primarily in the Western part of Tsarist Russia, in the so called Pale of Jewish settlement. Since Jews couldn't acquire land outside the ghetto, during periods of population growth, ghettos had narrow streets and tall, crowded houses. Residents had their own justice system. Around the ghetto stood walls that during pogroms were closed from the inside during Easter Week and from the outside during Christmas or Pesach. Often ghetto residents had to have a pass to go outside of the bounds of the ghetto.

For me it is complete nonsense. Closed from outside Ghettos never existed in Eastern Europe before Nazis.

---

Figurative use

Ghetto is also used figuratively, and for areas that are anything but poverty struck (cf usage in Speculative fiction, Gay ghetto). Any reason not to indicate this in the first paragraph?

E.g. The term ghetto is also used in a more figurative way to indicate areas and ideas that are excluded from the mainstream, such as Gay ghetto, or Sci-fi ghetto (see speculative fiction). If this seems to be denigrating the real ghettos, could add: Such usage may actually make some people more comfortable with the word, by distancing it from real, current, deprivation. Notinasnaid 09:12, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

  The ghetto is most commonly knon as a lower class area of a rural city

---

I live in da ghetto and it ain't dat bad.just a few gangs and slang.but look,if you got to my userpage and read it you see i'm still smart.I'm just say in...--Cute 1 4 u 20:45, 17 July 2006 (UTC) hello

---

Ghetto is also used figuratively, and for areas that are anything but poverty struck

No, it can't be used that way. "Student ghetto" is one thing, because students are often poor, and sometimes live in concentrated area's with substandard living conditions. The word "ghetto" as it is used in American culture was originally derived from the ghettos of the holocaust, and given the oppression of Blacks in the US at the time, I don't object to that use of the word. Given the bloody origin of this word, it is not, and cannot be, used to describe any ethnic neighborhood. A better definition of "ghetto" would allow the residents of a community to define their community as such, if they were unhappy there and unable to leave for whatever reason (be it legal, economic, social, etc.)

Referring to affluent minority communities as "ghettos" implies the deprivation is inherent in the minority group who lives there, making such use of term highly offensive. This is especially true in the case of a predominantly Jewish neighborhood, where the word "ghetto" has a very powerful negative connotation, and such a statement could be interrupted as wishing harm on the area in question (because the residents of Jewish ghettos were systematically murdered).

--Absolute Relativity 00:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

---

Faulty reasoning, needs clarification

Because African-Americans of all economic levels had to live in these neighborhoods, such as Bronzeville in Chicago and Harlem in New York City, they often became known as vibrant cultural centers

the article needs clarification to indicate that black ghettos, became vibrant cultural centers because great artists lived there ( Nina Simone <3, John Lee Hooker -- boom, boom, boom --, Proffesor Longhair -- gumbo anyone? -- three artists that come most easily in mind) and not because a bunch of black people where stuck living there... Come on, it's like saying "Ghettos produce artists". Not NPOV. The article needs to reflect on the dates that this cultural flurishment happened.

[TODO] 'pedia "Harlem", "Detroit", "New Orleans", check out the dates where their ghettos flurished and then set this article straight. (did/does the 'awleans have a ghetto? - i'm putting it on the list cuz some of my most favorite jazz artists come from there.) Project2501a 11:17, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It's often said that great art is born out of suffering. So it isn't necessarily a coincidence that great artists live in the ghetto. Perhaps "ghettos produce artists" in the same way that other crowded, poverty stricken, areas have done (e.g. late 19th century Paris). (No I haven't read the original statements). Low property prices and tolerant neighbours can also influence whether people are able to gather in "cultural centres". Notinasnaid 12:01, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

point taken, but still, that doesn't negate the "minstrel" implication or the "go to the nigger hood, cuz they's gonna entaintain you" feeling of the wording. So, I changed the wording. let me know if you agree. thanks :) Project2501a 15:04, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I added a whole section noting that african-american ghettos were often vibrant cultural centers Project2501a 15:28, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Faulty reasoning (2): out-of-bedlock

Its opponents point out that in the 1970s, when the real amounts of welfare checks decreased, out-of-wedlock births increased. Murray also missed the fact that although the percentage of blacks born out of wedlock increased in the 60s and 70s, the percentage of black women having babies out of wedlock decreased.

On the contrary, these facts actually support the theory.

• since the welfare checks decreased, more babies were to be born to get the same money.
• percentage: Again the same. This shows that while less new women were encouraged to be indecent, those who already abused the system were encouraged (or forced) to abuse it even more (I vouch for "forced", since already having children decreased odds to find a job). Mikkalai 00:08, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This is a very interesting perspective. The line of argument I used to criticize Murray came from the books "The Truly Disadvantaged" and "The Promised Land." I will move the reasoning that you consider faulty to the section on William Julius Wilson, as well as add the fact that the illegitimacy rate increased in low benefit states like Mississippi just as much as it did in high benefit states like Ill and NY.

Personally, I think that Waldinger's theory deserves to be better known. In "The Promised Land" Nicholas Lemann points out that both Murray and Wilson have one thing in common in that neither "blames the victim." user:dinopup

"something blacks have not been able to do"

(concerning [this reversion http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Ghetto&diff=19466622&oldid=19462838]): Waldinger argues that immigrant groups benefit by establishing nepotistic niches for themselves, and use niches for mutual help, something blacks have not been able to do.

Whether or not each of us believes that blacks are "able" or "unable" or "willing" or "unwilling" to create and use niches, the point here is that Waldinger asserts they are unable to do so. The article isn't saying one way or another, it's just reporting what Waldinger said. FreplySpang (talk) 21:43, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Is that a quote by Waldinger? If so, it should be in quotations, if not, the editor is simply projecting their beliefs onto a descriription of Waldinger's work. Show where Waldinger specifically said "not been able." "Not been able" is a racist statement. Furthermore, the following line in the paragraph: " In contrast, unskilled northern-born blacks, who hope to do something better than their parents, disdain these jobs, in hope of something better, and may often wind up working outside the legitimate economy altogether." further point out my opinion that this is a willing choice, not something which they are "unable" to do. I believe that the quote above shows that Waldinger means unwilling.

I read Waldinger before I knew of wikipedia, or else I would have used a direct quotation from him. I do recall that Waldinger writes more than one chapter about economic niching of Koreans, Indians, Jews, etc. as a contrast to African-Americans. Waldinger writes about how blacks used to be prominent in the catering business, so I think that the wikipedia article correctly summarizes Waldinger's theory. Dinopup 01:37, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure how it could be interpreted as some sort of racialist "fundamentally unable" statement. In context, the phrase "have not be able to do" means something like "have not managed to do", as in "I would like to visit China someday, but so far I have been unable to do so" (which does not imply that I am fundamentally incapable of visiting China). --Delirium 12:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Unsubstantiated claim?

The below paragraph has five claims that should be backed up by statistics:

"Losing Ground has met with a broad chorus of liberal criticism. Losing Ground's opponents point out that [1] in the 1970s, when the real amounts of welfare checks decreased, out-of-wedlock births increased. Critics also point out that [2] illegitimacy rose just as much in low benefit states like Mississippi, where [3] work undoubtedly paid better than welfare, as [4] it did in high benefit states like Illinois and New York. Critics also say that Murry missed the fact that although the [5] percentage of blacks born out of wedlock increased in the 60s and 70s, the percentage of black women having babies out of wedlock decreased.

The claims should be footnoted or this paragraph should be removed or altered to clarify it is merely a POV and not fact.--CrazyTalk 18:33, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

The information came from The Promised Land by N. Lemann. I'll get a citation up within a few hours. Dinopup 19:32, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Piotrkow was the first ghetto

It was organised in October 1939, according to deathcamps.org/occupation/piotrkow%20ghetto.html

Xx236 14:02, 10 February 2006 (UTC) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Above information on first ghetto incorrect.

First Ghetto

The first ghetto

The Hebrews first came to Egypt to escape a famine. According to the Torah, they were harbored by Joseph, who became Prime Minister to Pharaoh because of his interpretation of dreams.

They were granted their own state in the fat land of Goshen, north of Thebes.

Later, their fortunes fell with the overthrow of the Hyksos kings around the 14th century BCE. Goshen became a ghetto ... the world's first. The Hebrews slowly descended into slavery, as "there arose a Pharaoh who knew not Joseph."

Alot of Graffiti

Something about west London appears to be on this page alot, is there wa way to revert it back to a saved version without all the graffiti?

Slums for Jews

The article blithely exclaims that the Irish were the first so-called "ethnic group" to form ghettoes in the United States of America, but that statement is a falsehood. Jews preceded Irishmen by many decades. Jews moved into older parts of cities, replacing the earlier (English) settlers. Boston, Massachusetts, New York, New York, and other cities were places where Jews established the earliest ghettoes in North America. 71.240.82.223 04:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

---

It is not OK to refer to Jewish neighborhoods as ghettos in this context. Nor were these neighborhoods slums. Talking about Jewish "ghettos" in this manner is about as offensive and careless using the N word interchangeably with Black or African-American. It is condonation of violence and racism in one of the worst imaginable ways, and should not be tolerated by decent people. --Absolute Relativity 08:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

---

Ghettos aren't limited to where Black-Americans and European Jews live, because ghettos are segregated ethnic or racial communities. What about barrios where the main ethnic groups are Hispanic? These are ethnic enclaves often depicted as old, slummy, overcrowded, buildings close-together, aging bungalow homes and entire shopping districts sale Hispanic goods to Spanish-speaking clientele (the storefront signs in Spanish). Ghettos can be residential areas where only Hispanics or east Asians in the U.S. and Asian Indians or Gypsies in the U.K. live due to arriving in a new land, sought a similar cultural identity and lower-income status to only rent or live in lower-cost residential tracts: i.e. Lower East Side or Harlem in New York city. + 71.102.2.206 (talk) 12:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

"neutrality of this article is disputed" total BS

When a moderator places this stamp on an article, what purpose does it serve? The blacks in the US section should be removed completely and locked from the user(s) that added it. When newbies visit Wikipedia, they still read these biased articles and believe all its contents despite that dumb "neutrality of this article...". Find other methods to keep Wikipedia neither left or right. Panda

The NPOV tag is placed to call attention to the presence of bias presenting itself as fact. To me, it's a heads-up that I should be skeptical. I can't speak for others, but it does work, at least for me. The specific tag in question was placed incorrectly (in the middle of an article, in the middle of a sentence even), but I've fixed that. There needs to be some explanation as to why it was placed there, however. I agree that a NPOV tag placed without an explanation on the talk page is practically useless.(missed explanation above) Regardless, the best method "to keep Wikipedia neither left or right" is to be bold and make the changes needed, making sure to explain why. -kotra 02:22, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm assuming, although it's not altogether clear to me, that you are angry about the use of the term 'black' when referring to "African Americans". If that is the case, I would like to point out several things. First, I have yet to meet a case of some "black" person being offended by being called "black". Also, that the use of the term 'African American' is highly deceiving because most of the people referred to as "African Americans" are as "African" in their idiology, society, history and even (in many cases) ethnicity as they are "Asian". The majority "African American" communities were imported to the southern states as slaves and have been in America and have been integrating into American culture since then (approximately a hundred-fifty years). They no longer have any traces of African religion, custom, culture, ideology or behavior, in fact, I have been told that many naturalized "African Americans" positively dislike freshly immigrated Africans. Besides this, the "African Americans" were imported from vastly different tribal and geographic backgrounds thus making them form an entirely new culture all their own. For all these reasons they nor many of 'us' think of them as being African at all. The fact is, their only major distinguishing characteristic is that they are 'black', this is what they call themselves and what they are called by those who realize that it not only does not offend them, but is etymologically more accurate. Therefore, I think it is permissable and would be more accurate to replace all occurences of "African American" with "black". (Sir Tristram 22:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC))

strange... their african heritage seems pretty evident to me. it comes through in their music/singing/dance/rhythm, their language ("ebonics"), in their relation to family (extended family in particular), and in their relation to religion. you are assuming that because they aren't practicing the yoruba religion there is no connection with africa outside of the obvious (race). that's wrong. it's still there.

some AA's resent africans because of their success.

besides why is the label 'african american' such a big problem for everyone?

A deficiency in the term "African American" is that the term does not apply to many who could truly be called African-Americans. AA is popularly used to refer to black-African Americans, and does not apply to Arabs and other races/cultures that have lived in Africa for thousands of years. for example, an Egyptian immigrant could not be considered "African American", even though he or she has much closer ties to the continent of Africa than most African Americans. I wouldn't say black is better, but it's a bit more honest. When we say "African American", we are not talking about a group of people from a particular continent, we are talking about skin color, and facial features. They are both labels and they are both flawed; I neither prefer nor abhor either term. 207.122.168.88 22:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC)MCHouse (not registered)

---

I'm assuming, although it's not altogether clear to me, that you are angry about the use of the term 'Black' when referring to "African Americans". If that is the case, I would like to point out several things. First, I have yet to meet a case of some "Black" person being offended by being called "Black". Also, that the use of the term 'African American' is highly deceiving because most of the people referred to as "African Americans" are as "African" in their idiology, society, history and even (in many cases) ethnicity as they are "Asian".

I second that. A lot of my Black friends take offense at the term "African-American" because it implies they are 1st generation immigrants, not descended from families who lived here for generations. I believe one of by Black friends told me (paraphrasing) "I'm not African-American; Teresa Heinz-Kerry is African-American, I'm just Black, I don't have anything more to do with Africa than any white American does. The only thing that makes me different from anybody else is the color of my skin, and that's exactly what it should be called." Since then I've taken his advice and tried to use the word Black over African-American when addressing racial issues.

---

Category:Ghettos

I am suprised such a category does not exist yet?-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  18:44, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

ghettos survive by liberalism, not racism

im sure racism caused ghettos to form in america. today, racism we know it has declined when colleges have lowered entrance exam standards for black students and job hiring practices made it easy for blacks to get work. then most white peeple i observe dont like to say 'ghetto' or dont wanna talk bout issues like this, cuz the p-c agenda will call them racists or bigots. im one of the 'evil conservative' types, but i always not care much on what race or color a person is. ghettos survive today by race baitin politics, the rap hip hop culture glamorizes failure & poverty, when these rap singers in contracts made 'bling bling' leave the ghetto. what kind of world we have any one can sing poorly & write songs full of cursing, drug use & objectifies women? it promotes a negative sense of self & young black kids listen to it thinking they are low lifes? im offended, are you? ghettos are here not by legal restricted home tracts, its been illegal to segregate homes since the 1960s. ghettos are where welfare dependents are addicted to small cash pay ments, goes up when a single mother has another baby. im sure it teach them to go get pregnant & dont go to school/find a job that has more benefits for her & the children. im amazed teens from ghettos are poorly brought up. i own a business that i look for new hires & i wish to give them a chance in life. but they dress in gang attire & speak bad english. they cant conduct themselves properly in interviews. in most cases they arent interested in work. i worry the country's public schools are so bad (thanx to liberal mismanagement & 'new math', 'ebonics courses' or 'revised history') they dont graduate or their diplomas are cheapened after promoted to a new grade while they failed. we've as a country lowered standards to create a underclass, plus the hip-hop culture tells em 'blacks dont go to college' or what their peers tell em. it makes me mad, but im not black and not poor, but a working white man 45 years old, who knew blacks in my school i got along with and back then, poor blacks or whites or whoever wanted to graduated & get a great job. what happened? liberalism & moral decline, get welfare & you be treated/cared of alright. no more welfare states. no more race politics. and encourage young people in economic challenged homes to study, work hard, plan for goals, integrate well & not beg for others. dont use race or class to determine their lifes are bad over the distant past. but tell them the future is great & our country has a better economy than ever. i believe all races of americans (i call them american first) have the same dreams & abilities, no need to use race or color to label or divide for political purposes, any liberals know of this work well? cities fail from bad city politics, economic restrictions (costs), mismanagement of communities, & high tax rates to pay for social welfare states. i dont pay for failure to breed or grow ghettos, i pay for growth & wana teach the future not get stuck on this p-c lib hip-hop black power baloney. - signed, open-minded conservative.

whites live in ghettos too. and hiphop dosent glamorize poverty. where did u get that. they glamorize what happen after the got out of the poverty but never the poverty.

I am very much in agreement with the author above, I just want to add this thought: This nation has had a long history of the desperate poor entering.They've all met bigotry and got by.Unless we believe blacks and hispanics to be inferior to the earlier arrivals, the only differance I can see is the new Deal.Traditionaly, employers, when deciding on a location wrestle between the the advantages of the poor area, low wages and those of a beter assimulated area, lower crime and end up going with the poorer area. What we've done, by federal labor law, is abolish incentive to locate in the ghettos becouse operation costs will be the same everywhere, and by judicial activism, aplified the dicincentive, the high-crime area is always the worst hit by criminal rights. More directly, anti-discrimination laws hurt only those bussinesses who opperate in minority areas. One never hires someone who's harder to fire.

---

Yeah cus this isnt racist what so ever???

            Isn't the talk page for discussion about the article itself, and not about personal views on the topic of the article? 162.136.192.1 16:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

---

Agreed, what kind of racist moron posted "Ghettos survive liberalism not racism"?

That comment contains nothing but a list of baseless stereotypes.

No wonder the article is locked. --Absolute Relativity 08:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

---

Ghetto music

I removed this sentence, which had its own section created called "Trivia".

"- Ghetto-themed songs have been created by several singers, such as Busta Rhymes, and Alicia Keys."

Is there another place we could put this? Thor Rudebeck 07:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

---

Talking about the music that's been developed in lower income African American communities, it's origins (slave songs, to Jazz, etc.), and saying something about the underground music scene, as well as gospel and Soul music would be a good idea.

---

Which ghetto??

The sentence

From its creation in 1462, until its dissolution at the end of the 18th century, the city council limited expansion in the Judengasse, resulting in steadily increasing overcrowding.

at the beginning of the section 13th–19th centuries makes no sense to me. Which ghetto was created in 1462, and which city limited its expansion?? - Austrian 23:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Early Ghettos

We should talk about early "isolated" Jewish communities For instance, Philo writing in the 1st century mentions that Jews in Alexandria, Egypt were forced out of the majority of the city by mobs into a small portion of one quarter.

P.S. When a page is protected, isn't there supposed to be a text box that says so?

151.197.28.239 19:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Hooverville

Do you think Hooverville could be added to this article? Socialism20091011 (talk) 06:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Post-World War II France

There is erroneous usage of the term Muslim in this section as expemplified in the following excerpted sentence.

..."The poorer banlieues, or suburbs, of France, especially those of Paris, house an impoverished population largely of North African Muslim and Black African origin in large medium- and high-rise building developments known as "Cités"...

As one can see, not only does the sentence need re-structuring as well as editing, but the term Muslim is used to describe North African populations in a way deemed to differentiate them from "sub-Saharan" populations. The term Muslim is not exclusive or synonymous with just Arabs, but includes a wide array of ethnic groups and racial demographies. As a matter of fact, the overwhelming majority of these "Black African" populations, concentrated in these Parisian ghettos are generally of Saharan/Sahelian origin, from countries like the Senegal, the Gambia, Mali, or Niger, in other words, they are from countries that are significantly (if not wholly) Muslim in backgroud (in regards to religion). Please remove the word Muslim from the sentence, it is seriously pissing me off. Thank You - Jalopenio.

Villeurbanne a ghetto ? this article may confond with Venissieux. Minato ku 19:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Revert

Reverted large deletion by User:Vitund as no edit summary and no explanation given on talk page --carelesshx _talk 21:16, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Chinatowns

Um... have these been called Ghettos in any sources? If so we need to cite them. Otherwise, I think we should move the info about Chinatowns. futurebird 22:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Just a Thought

I was just reading over this article and found that the term Blacks was used frequently. Should this be changed to something a little more PC? Just a thought... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.40.204.246 (talk) 00:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

An Answer

Black is as PC as you can get. Referring to people who have dark skin and whose families have lived in the US for generations as "African-American" implies they are first generation immigrants, or somehow less American than Caucasians. The word "Black" describes the only real difference between us, and that is the color of our skin. Caucasians are referred to as "White" although they aren't perfectly white, so it is silly to say using the term "Black" implies Black people's skin is perfectly black. Absolute Relativity (talk) 03:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

To call someone "black" is about they have a darker skin color near to the black hue and "African-American" is to denote they are of African ancestry, but the two terms can be inflammable and offensive when used in negative manner or to denigrate someone because of their race. "Black" became a self-title of choice in the 1960's an English translation for the Latin term "Negro" and an informal "colored" both are considered archaic or unpopular since the 1970's. Followed by "African-American" first proposed by US Supreme court justice Thurgood Marshall and then popularized by Civil rights Leader Rev. Jesse Jackson to identify themselves rather a minor ethnic group the same way we heard of "Irish-Americans", "Italian-Americans" and other hyphenated nationalities who are Americans first or born in the USA, and indeed was the term of choice in the 1990's when "black" was going back to unfavored status. In the year 2009, a "person of color" will decide whether or not he/she wants to be referred to or self-identify themselves as black, colored, Negro, African-American, etc. except the new trend is to be only "American" without any hyphenation or simply as "people" without discrimination of what skin color they are or what continent their ancestors came from. + 71.102.2.206 (talk) 12:09, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

the Moynihan Report

I'm having a hard time working this in to the flow of the section. If the report is so old and if it is:

" the most refuted document in American history "

Why do we even cite it? It adds no information except to say that Moynihan thought black neighborhoods were "messed up" ... or something... I have better and more recent sources. So, I'm going to remove it. futurebird 19:46, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

how is royston a ghetto ^o) check south central la fur a ghetto :-|:-@ —Preceding unsigned comment added by SexayyFash (talk • contribs) 13:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Why is this not included

Okay, everyone knows that in the 90's crips and bloods expanded into Canada. Now Canada doesnt have as much as the US but deffinitly more then the UK. So why isnt it included. I can find references and pictures every where of Ghetto's in Ontario, Manitoba, BC & Nova Scotia. Just look up Toronto Ghetto's, Vancouver Ghetto's. It's all on the net. Cities in Canada have low income neighbourhoods with drugs, gun violence, gangs. As far as crips and bloods, they are only in Southern Ontario and Northern Manitoba. But there are ghetto's across Canada. You can find Halifax ghetto's. If you go on youtube and type in real toronto. There are multiple videos showing the low income neighbourhoods in toronto and the videos show gangs dealing drugs, selling guns, carrying guns, shooting guns, scenes before they commit homocides. I think Canada deserves to be in this article! I can find tons of references to back this up!

Thank you whoever posted that info up! I didn;t think i would have been able to post the info myself, All i knew were rescources and experiences. Thanks dude, you did an excellent job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.96.85.49 (talk) 22:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow! Whoever deleted the Canadian section is freaggin selfless. People don't thank that Canadians suffer, that we dont have to put up with living in low income neighbourhoods with the gun violence, unemployment and welfare checks, the drug dealers. Well whover thinks that can back the hell off cuz we do have those kinds neighbourhoods and quite a bit of em. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.96.85.49 (talk) 06:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Oi canada idiot there's ghetto's all over the world that are a lot worser than Canada by a mile there's ghettoe's in the UK that are a lot worser than Canada in places like London and Birmingham in the UK but they don't boast about it because it's a nasty place but you seem to be bigging it up so someone ban this canadian waste guy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.188.152.18 (talk) 19:07, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "Keating" :
  • http://books.google.com/books?id=O0bnHQAACAAJ The Suburban Racial Dilemma: Housing and Neighborhoods] By William Dennis Keating. Temple University Press. 1994. ISBN 1566391474
  • ''[http://books.google.com/books?id=O0bnHQAACAAJ The Suburban Racial Dilemma: Housing and Neighborhoods]'' By William Dennis Keating. Temple University Press. 1994. ISBN 1566391474
• "Glaeser" :
  • ''[http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/nerr/rr1997/spring/glsr97_2.htm Ghettos: The Changing Consequences of Ethnic Isolation]
  • ...
  • ..

DumZiBoT (talk) 13:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Oi canada idiot there's ghetto's all over the world that are a lot worser than Canada by a mile there's ghettoe's in the UK that are a lot worser than Canada in places like London and Birmingham in the UK but they don't boast about it because it's a nasty place but you seem to be bigging it up so someone ban this canadian waste guy.

Jewish Ghettos during WWII

The article states that during the WWII Jewish ghettos were established. It is quite wrong. The ghettos were there, but not fenced or walled. During WWII the Germans simply built a wall that surrounded pre-war Jewish quaters in Warsaw as the Jews rarely mixed/assimiliated with the local population and preferred to live voluntarily in their own communities before the war. Some other Jews were collected from small villages and other places around Warsaw and were transported to this walled ghetto later during the war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.34.140.197 (talk) 01:31, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Ghetto - the modern use

This article need to expand on the modern use of the word "ghetto". --cooljuno411 07:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes. In modern slang it seems to kind of mean "low class" without so much about race. Borock (talk) 16:24, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

The fourth 'voluntary' way to form a ghetto

I recall hearing that a jewish area in north London had asked to become a 'restricted religious enclave' or something equivalent to this so that local rules by-laws etc could be superceded within the area in favour of ?Judaic ?Talmudic law for specific times eg Sabbaths. This sounds like asking for the formation of a ghetto. Salisbury9986.160.136.146 (talk) 17:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Rural ghettos

Smaller towns or communities in rural states like Kansas, Alabama, eastern Kentucky and Central California are reported to have "ghetto" characteristics. Indian reservations in the U.S. are another example for a certain racial group (Native Americans) to live apart from the white majority. Both urban and rural ghettos are economically isolated, but the rural kind are geographically isolated from main economic job centers and/or involved declining low-wage job bases like agriculture in the cases of the Black Belt of Mississippi; Yakima Valley, Washington and Standing Rock, South Dakota. These areas are notorious for having America's highest unemployment rates, welfare receipency/dependency for entire families on the rolls, and lower life spans due to poor medical care available there. + 71.102.2.206 (talk) 12:25, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

What does this mean?

There is a section titled "post-war" which says: "After World War II, many emigrated to the United States and Israel. With the cold war progressing, industry was spread across the major cities and work assignments were given out." Is it talking about the Soviet Union and other communist countries? Is it saying that since work assignments were given out Jews left the ghettoes? It needs to be more clear. Thanks. Borock (talk) 16:18, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

The Intro

I tried to do some work on the Intro. I feel that is sounds better now. Firstman692002 <

Hyperghetto

Wacquant's definition of the hyperghetto is a historical demarcation in quality (not simply intensity) from its prior form - the communal ghetto. this part of the article should distinguish the historical differences in terms of the changing class composition of the ghetto (ie the exit of middle and upper class blacks and the "Negro Aristocracy"(Dubois), the connected destruction of locally owned businesses and community organizations, the shift from a surplus labor pool for industry to a redundant labor force trapped in the ghetto, and the roll-out of the penal state, which all qualitatively changed the FUNCTION and FORM of the ghetto. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christoph.herring (talk • contribs) 18:10, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

intro

does not conform to standard american usage, circa 2011; ghetto has taken on themeaning of uncultured or boorish, possibly synonomous with white trash In any event, where are the citations (or whatever passes for a citation to printed material in teh electronic age ??)