This  level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Sociology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. African diaspora High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Discrimination Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Human rights Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. International relations: United Nations / Law High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations. This article is supported by WikiProject International law (assessed as Mid-importance).

Change slave to enslaved person. More neutral language. Slave is not an inherit identity, enslavement was involuntary. 2600:1702:508B:B210:4452:2AB0:EFE8:8922 (talk) 00:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 01:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just a non editor passing through. I didn't ask for this, but, can someone with more wiki skills follow the procedure to establish a consensus for this alteration? I think the original poster had a point and a consensus is worth pursuing. 173.222.1.130 (talk) 23:40, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's been a few discussions about this—I forget where, but I think there was one at the Village pump—in short, there's no consensus to mandate the use of one term over the other. Both terms are well attested in the reliable sources we base usage off of, and both can be argued to reflect different shades of meaning that may be worth emphasizing in different contexts. Remsense ‥ 论 23:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aciram, Gheghji has removed this content by falsely claiming it was added by a sockpuppet. Can you please revert it if it is worth reverting. It has removed the picture of a slave of an Arab.-Sockbuster1 (talk) 00:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC) Blocked sock. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:05, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me? You can see from the edit history it was added by a sock puppet of rajputbhatti

I removed no image I think your mistaken I only corrected the text. Gheghji (talk) 00:18, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why isnt there a section on the Arab slave trade? Its larger than the Euro version and lasted until the 70s and 80s.

Wiki is being destroyed by people exceptionalizing this issue as a European problem.

Why are you guys hiding this but putting a headlined European section?

Its dishonest. 2602:FE43:1:EE47:FC61:6F8:8697:8B11 (talk) 15:44, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion over terminology was never resolved. There was a long back and forth which eventually went quiet and then it was deleted by the bot (17 May 2023 if you want to find it). The alteration in terminology was asked about again earlier this year, but not discussed. I will not resurrect the long discussion, but repaste an edited version of the position I put forward at the end of that original discussion, which is where things ended:

This change of terminology effectively amounts not only to removing the word 'slave' from the lexicon, but to have no word for that thing that 'slave' refers to. This, it must surely be admitted, is extremely novel and unusual. No we mustn't have a word for that thing is an argument I've heard nowhere before from anybody, ever. Even Voldermort was called 'He-Who-Shall-Not-Be-Named'. Also note that the term 'enslaved person' and 'slave' are not synonyms, for example just try substituting the term in this article. All these substitutions are transparently motivated by the desire to condemn various things associated with slavery by using new words that have other associations because they refer to something different. The only reason say, 'enslaver' is preferred to 'slave owner' is because it sounds worse, but it only sounds worse because it refers to a different thing (enslaving a free person). The same goes for the other terms. The second the replacement of the term becomes universally used and accepted, the replacment becomes pointless, creating an imperative for a constant roll-over of terms (the 'Euphemism Treadmill'), which is frankly intolerable to the general population and undermines the very purpose of language (communication). LastDodo (talk) 17:05, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please add prison labor to the "see also" section. 173.222.1.130 (talk) 23:37, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: the See also section is not for links that already exist in the article body, and Penal labour is already linked in this article. Remsense ‥ 论 23:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

why isnt there a section on the trade of slaves in Mideast and Africa that birthed the European model and continued until 1981 in tbe Islamic world? This, again, betrays and further discredits this site as a source as you are representing an incomplete view that exceptionalizes one form but not others of equal or worse horror and magnitude. Locking editing is even more suspect. Shame on biased activist moderators for destroying wiki. 2602:FE43:1:EE47:FC61:6F8:8697:8B11 (talk) 15:33, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and Im sure you will ban my IP for asking. Ill screenshot this and make sure everyone knows if you do. 2602:FE43:1:EE47:FC61:6F8:8697:8B11 (talk) 15:34, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than silly threats, why don't you tell us what's actually missing from the article? Seems to me the History section (which also points to the full History of slavery article) starts with where humans started -- Africa -- and almost immediately presents that 5 million African slaves were bought by Muslim slave traders and taken from Africa across the Red Sea, Indian Ocean, and Sahara Desert between 1500 and 1900 among much more detail. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:57, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article contains what each individual author have been interested to put in it. There appear to be sections about more than Europe and America; each part of the world seem to have its own section as far as I can tell? Wikipedia have plenty of articles about slavery in other parts of the world. Perhaps you would enjoy Slavery in Africa, History of slavery in the Muslim world, and the slavery-articles of individual countries. --Aciram (talk) 16:22, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]