Talk:Wassail

The use of blackface images for Wassailing

There has been blackface used to reference wassailing. Without the proper context in the article and with no reference to blackface, the image or any image of blackface should be avoided. Even with reference, one should link to the wassailing page where a picture of blackface as it relates to wassailing would be more appropriate. Images of blackface should be avoided unless directly relevant and contextualized as they are racist imagery and offensive. Jwayne33 (talk) 18:43, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I believe it's important to remember the article is very lucid wassailing's ancient origins. When a practice or custom is literally medieval, there is a much higher chance of it not being seen in favorable light today as opposed to one manufactured in modern era (but even then, compare the controversy of Baby It's Cold Outside). It is important to note that the image in question still happens even in Britain to this day, despite efforts especially in recent years and highlighted by media to quash it. Mostly in more rural locales and more among the less educated, etc., of course. But even if it were 100% absent, the context of wassailing's checkered and long-winded history that this particular sub-practice occurs also going back centuries is inherent. As I explained in my edit, quoting Warner Bros' disclaimer on some of their cartoons which contained offensive racial depictions and the like (as opposed to deleting them in damnatio memoriae): "because to do otherwise would be the same as claiming these prejudices never existed". This is hardly the first Yuletide tradition which most would say did not age well; many would in fact claim that this article promotes unhealthy romanticism or rose-colored glasses without context like this.--~Sıgehelmus♗_(Tøk) 04:21, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't think an article about the beverage wassail is improved by having an out-of-context photograph of a celebrant in blackface.

We can add context to this article. That would be better than just leaving the image in here without context.

However, how relevant is this to an article about a beverage? The use of blackface isn't even mentioned, much less shown, in the article specific to wassailing. Furthermore, isn't the use of blackface more directly related to the topic of Morris dance, with a whole article devoted to the topic of blackface and Morris dance Davidwbaker (talk) 18:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

No one's provided additional feedback, so I'll be bold and remove the out-of-context photo. This seems superior than adding context about blackface and English folk rituals. This is an article about a beverage, after all. Davidwbaker (talk) 16:01, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. The image does show a bowl, but there are many other images that can be used to illustrate that without needlessly invoking potential sensitivities, especially undiscussed ones. This article is about the drink, not the act of wassailing (a different article). We should not be selecting low-resolution blurry images that some readers – maybe many – will find shocking unless there is a good encyclopedic reason to do so. Otherwise, it seems like a WP:POINT is being made. MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:22, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Is a good encyclopaedic reason not given by @Sigehelmus? The File:Shirehampton wassail music.jpg image used is if anything even less relevant and not much less blurry. Whatever the majority verdict is should stand but I do think that taking out a reference to a cultural practice because it is not well explained will just lead to it not being explained. Removing it could come under censorship as much as it WP:POINT. It'd be nice to have an uncontroversial, clearer picture but if it is a real practice then I feel it shouldn't be hidden. Ingwina (talk) 05:58, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I have provided my concerns with the reason Sigehelmus has given. He's asserted that this image is typical of wassailing, even to this day. Are there sources that support that assertion?

My rudamentary understanding is that this is typical of a different English folk tradition, and is already described in the articles on Morris dance and Blackface and Morris dancing.

If Sigehelmus is correct and that blackface is an integral part of wassailing, putting this image here, on an article about a beverage, doesn't seem like the best first step. I's propose first adding it to the article on wassailing and add all the missing context of the "checkered" practice (as Sigehelmus puts it) that apparently ought to be in that article, as has been done for Morris dance. Davidwbaker (talk) 06:44, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Sigehelmus's argument leans heavily on "ancient origins", "literally medieval", and so on, giving the impression that wearing black makeup while consuming the drink is also ancient. While some sort of drink called 'wassail' is indeed old, clear sourcing will be needed to establish any old tradition that would make that image relevant. Of course it happened, and maybe it still does in a few places (even though the photo is 16 years old), but where is the evidence that supports it being on this page? Per WP:BURDEN and WP:BALANCE, those who want to add the image bear the burden of finding evidence, and showing that this is something integral to the custom and not merely a minor aberration, for example simply copied in a few areas from the Morris Dancers and Mummers (many of whom in modern practice tend to be the same group of people). And anyway, to repeat myself, this article is not even about any custom; it's about the drink. MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:38, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I am still unsure of the best action (though it seems most think it best to be gone) but I do see the logic in the argument that we don't know if this is a one off without supporting information and therefore if it is of sufficient relevance :) Ingwina (talk) 06:44, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Wow, I thought this had already been put to rest last October when the original photo was removed. I think the best course of action has been taken. Racist imagery in general should be avoided, but especially when its relevance is minimal if not unrelated completely. Jwayne33 (talk) 00:11, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I propose merging "wassailingwassailing" with "wassail". There is significant overlap between the topics, from the wassail bowl section in "Wassailing" article being just as relevant to "Wassail", to similar lyrics appearing in both articles (e.g. here and here). NB that as in the Apple Wassail, "wassail" can refer to the activity as well as the drink. Both articles have a 20-year history; I have a slight preference for the merged article to be at "wassail". —  AjaxSmack  17:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, indeed, I've considered tackling this several times myself. There's absolutely no reason for two articles. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:17, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

  Y Merge completed Klbrain (talk) 17:39, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Needs restructuring for clarity?

Reading the article today I found it a bit confusing. It presents two separate types of wassailing: visiting houses at Christmas, and folkloric rituals around cider apples in the West Country, but seems to jump between the two. I would say it needs to be clear that the visiting houses type is the main kind of wassailing, while the cider tradition is a regional variation of the same practice.

It also doesn't seem to make it clear this is an English tradition, not practiced in Wales, Ireland or Scotland. English settlers brought this tradition to the colonies. Gymnophoria (talk) 10:50, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Possible Fakelore?

I said as much on the Apple-Tree Man's page, but it deserves mention here:

According to this, the Apple-Tree Man was an invention of Ruth Tongue. I would consider looking into it. Paphvul (talk) 23:36, 26 August 2026 (UTC)