Talk:Stepin Fetchit

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Might want to cut out that part about his movies being "rarely screened", as Bend of the River is on basic cable on an almost bi-weekly basis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 06:16, 5 December 2004

Requested change in text[edit]

Fetchit → Perry – In some places in the text, the man is no longer "Fetchit". We now recognize that the term is overtly degrading to a man and to a entire people. Certainly, that the biography mentions his conversion to Islam indicates that it was a profound spiritual conversion. Obviously, he personally left that part of his life behind him after some point. Please allow the text to reflect that highly likely fact.

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
  • Support. Amorrow 02:26, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this attempt by Amorrow to rewrite the policies of Wikipedia to suit their own politics. This originated at Linda Lovelace where Amorrow decided without consultation to move the article to Linda Susan Boreman, and when no one except Amorrow supported keeping the article at that location, made references to the mothers of other editors performing fellatio[1] and made threats that these editors would find their own names on Wikipedia changed[2]. After not a single person supported Amorrow's move, they started another poll suggesting that in the text the stage name Linda Lovelace should be replaced by Linda "Lovelace", claiming in the preface of the poll that "If it were a matter of, for instance, race, rather than gender, there would be no question." This article, Stepin Fetchit was raised to demonstrate that the claim was false: when the image associated with the stage name was considered racially degrading in the POVs of many, not one person suggested that that POV would, with "no question", override the Wikipedia practice of locating the person's article under the name by which they are best known. Rather than concede that their claim was incorrect, Amorrow has now included this page in their campaign to see political POVs be considered more important than simple considerations of what name is most likely to be searched for and linked to. -- Antaeus Feldspar 04:55, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Oppose. There is no reason why this article should be moved to a name under which no one is likely to search. By all means place a redirect at Perry. Amorrow's attitude is revealed in the comment below. Unbelievable. Quill 23:19, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, I did not ask to rename the page. I just wanna change two places near the end of the text from Fetchit to Perry. You got this guy as a slave, and you are never gonna let go of him, are you. Amorrow 23:23, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, come off it.[edit]

Come on. I am just trying to show some sweet ol' dead n*gg*r just a shred of respect. Why will you not let me do that? He was a nice man when he was alive. Where does it say in the policy, that once you have the dirt on someone, that you have to use it to pulverize them or their legacy into tinier and tinier worthless pieces? Amorrow 08:13, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder whether you are cognizant of the fact that you are trying to treat dead people with "respect" by denying them equality. Your arguments constantly revolve around the assumption that the choice between Lincoln Perry and Stepin Fetchit is a "matter of race" and the choice between Linda Boreman and Linda Lovelace is a "matter of gender". Why are you convinced that you are some shining light to the nations, showing them the way to justice and equality -- through discrimination on the basis of race and gender?
The principle that Wikipedia uses is blind to race. It is blind to gender. It is blind to orientation. It is blind to whether the image associated with a name is considered the paragon of humanity, or the watchword of degradation. It is blind to whether that image will change with time as images so often do. It is blind to everything except "is this the name by which this person is best known?"
Do you really think your efforts to protect, quote, "some sweet ol' dead n*gg*r" are a sign of your enlightenment, when they are founded on the idea that, even after death, his very race makes him need your patriarchal protection? You seem to think that you were only being ironic when you referred to Mr. Perry as if he were some mascot for whom you felt a condescending affection. I'd suggest that this is closer to the reality of your attitude than you are capable of seeing or admitting; you are still treating people as second-class citizens based on race and gender, and the fact that it's 'second-class citizens who couldn't possibly be expected to live by the same rules as white males' is not a great step up from 'second-class citizens who couldn't possibly be expected to exercise the same rights as white males'. -- Antaeus Feldspar 23:50, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Look at that last line:
Stepin Fetchit converted to Islam in the 1960s.

I cannot think of any normal, thinking person who would be proud to have written that line. It is so out-of-touch with reality. It might show up in, maybe, the National Enquirer. Tell me: what it your problem with

Perry converted to Islam in the 1960s.

Is it like, you cannot keep track of all the different people on that page or something because it is just so confusing? OK, OK. It is wrong of me to be so sarcastic, but look at what we are talking about here. I realize that the guy dead and this does not mean squat to him or his descendents. Let us try this: Shirley Temple. Why does she get:

Mrs. Black received honorary doctorates...

Should that not be simply this?

Temple received honorary doctorates...

or maybe even

Shirley received honorary doctorates...

or maybe even

Shirley Temple received honorary doctorates...

Go change that, why don't you? I dare you to. Amorrow 01:31, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"OK, OK. It is wrong of me to be so sarcastic ..." ... What, you only just started realizing there was anything inappropriate about your behavior? -- Antaeus Feldspar 03:48, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, what I did to some unexpecting grade school teachers might be consider "behavior". It was labeled as "Conduct" on my report card. You have only experienced me as I sit and type. You want to accuse me of a thought crime? Guilty as charged! I am sure there are those who, upon recognizing that we share the same air on this planet, find it offensive that I breathe at all. Too bad for them! They simply have not yet tried hard enough to find out what it is about me that they might find to be genuinely enjoyable. I noticed that you managed restrain yourself from applying the template of childhood stardom to Mrs. Black. Surely, everybody knows her for that more than anything else she has done. I am sure that she appreciates your restraint and good judgement on that matter.
Consider adding pov tag::

This is a nice article, but it clearly has a pro-Perry bias (e.g. 2nd sentence of intro, also "Perry was an actor in the truest sense of the word," etc.). It reads more like a retrospective on Perry's career than it does an encyclopedia article. Although it does present both sides of the argument, numerous times it asserts that one side (the pro-Perry side) is correct. Probably should get the pov tag or a re-write. -- 15:05, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Selected filmography[edit]

As per Wikipedia is not a collection of lists, I have again reverted the edits by anonymous vandal (talk · contribs) (who never adds a summary to their edits), reduced the Filmography section to just the films that have Wiki articles, and renamed it to "Selected filmography" ... people can click the IMDb External link at the end of the article to see his full filmography with links to information about each of the films.

I have also used [[19xx in film|19xx]] tags for the years of the films, something that does not appear to understand, since they seem to think that just linking [[19xx]] somehow has some encyclopedic value ... they have removed or reverted the "year in film" links in other articles as well.

Anonymous edits without comments may be revereted by anyone. -- (talk · contribs) 15:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Stepin fetchit.jpg[edit]

Image:Stepin fetchit.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Convert to Islam? Are we sure?[edit]

I'm not sure about the source that claims Stepin Fetchit converted to Islam. But I just read an interview with him dated 1971 in which Stepin proudly speaks of how he had been a communicant of the Roman Catholic Church his entire life.

Source: Joseph McBride and Stepin Fechit. "Stepin Fechit Talks Back." Film Quarterly. Vol. 24, No. 4 (Summer, 1971), pp. 20-26.Spacelord (talk) 06:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stage Name Contradiction[edit]

Maybe I'm just misreading the article, in which case possibly someone can add some clarity, but there appears to be a contradiction regarding his stage name. In the Early Life section, it says "He performed a vaudeville act with a partner, with the two of them being known as "Step" and "Fetchit." When Perry became a solo act he combined the two names, which later became his professional name." So he got the name Stepin Fetchit from his vaudeville act. Then just three sentences later it says, "According to his entry in Ephraim Katz's The Film Encyclopedia, he borrowed his screen name from a racehorse that won him some money in his pre-Hollywood days." So he got the name Stepin Fetchit from a horse he bet on. Both read as a statement of fact, but clearly they can't both be correct. Superman7515 (talk) 15:17, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unless he knew of a racehorse named “Stepin Fetchin,” and he and his partner decided to split the name into two for their vaudeville act, in which case he could have recombined the names for his stage name.  I’m not saying that this is true—I really have no idea—all I’m saying is that, if this is true, then your claim that the two statements “can’t both be correct” would not be correct.  (Again, I’ve no clue whether both claims are true, only one of the claims is true, or neither of the claims is true.)  allixpeeke (talk) 12:05, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]


He apparently stopped making movies during this period, which is quite lengthy, but the article doesn't provide any reason for this. Perhaps someone out there can add an explanation of this to the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:58, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stepin Fetchit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:42, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No edit here. Just an additional facet. I saw and met Stepin Fetchit doing a wonderful stand-up routine in Louisville Kentucky somewhere between 1963 and 1968 at the Office Lounge. It was a great performance and I will remember it till my passing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:40, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

thank have a good life — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Can someone please add a reference which backs up the claims that this person was of Jamaican heritage because the "other sources" which state that his father was from the Bahamas seems to be the ONLY source provided and therefore nullifies the un-referenced claim in the introduction that he was "of Jamaican heritage". Also seeing as the mother was from the Bahamas perhaps it would be appropriate to state that clearly in the Early Life section rather than putting the name of the city alone to further reinforce the illusion of Jamaican heritage for people who have no idea where Nassau is and might assume that it is in Jamaica given the statement that he is "of Jamaican heritage" in the introduction. Lastly if some evidence can be found that the father was Jamaican then the claim in the introduction is still incorrect as it fails to mention his Bahamian heritage so perhaps "of West Indian heritage" would be better if the claim can be verified. Iynx (talk) 06:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Really reviled by (a majority of) black Americans at the time?[edit]

The article makes this point.....NPR claims it (without a source)...but is there really solid evidence of this? As a parallel: this is also claimed frequently about Amos & Andy. But the evidence there is mixed. (See the article for more info.) I just find it difficult to believe (in the 1950's). To be sure there was activism by organizations and publications (like the NAACP) against this sort of thing.....but the NAACP didn't/doesn't speak for all African-Americans on all issues.Rja13ww33 (talk) 21:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]


"In 1930, Hal Roach signed him to a film contract to appear in nine Our Gang episodes in 1930 to 1931. He was in the 1929-30 film A Tough Winter; his contract was cancelled after its release. " Do these two sentences refer to the same contract? That is, was his agreement to appear in Our Gang terminated after he appeared in A Tough Winter? Was there something about the latter film that changed the studio's attitude towards him? --Khajidha (talk) 12:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. I modified it based on the A Tough Winter article. The previous version didn't even make it clear that ATW was an Our Gang film.--Khajidha (talk) 12:14, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]