Jump to content

Talk:Ferguson unrest

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

Media for shooting of VonDerrit D. Myers

If someone wants to make a new article I have pictures from last night's protests. Might also put videos up soon as well. https://commons.wikimedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/Loavesofbread&ilshowall=1 Loavesofbread (talk) 07:37, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like Myers is not worth a standalone article, but should be listed as one of the related incidents. We should also include the most up to date info about that incident regarding the gunpowder residue etc. Gaijin42 (talk) 21:02, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I do hope you'll rephrase the sentence above, G42. Michael-Ridgway (talk) 20:09, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the note from the article; it doesn't seem like it is independently notable at this point and there seems to be little interest in creating an article about it. We can always revisit it at a later date should it prove more noteworthy. Titanium Dragon (talk) 11:51, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I still believe it is worth an article, based on the independent autopsy, but can wait for it.--Japarthur (talk) 11:15, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I believe Mr. Myers case is deserving of a Wikipedia article. http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/private-autopsy-suggests-vonderrit-myers-was-shot-while-fleeing-st/article_ab007919-9bf9-50e2-8dd2-8f5b45088440.html As a first step, I suggest we learn to spell his first name, which I have taken the liberty of correcting in the section head. Michael-Ridgway (talk) 20:09, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox image caption date

Is the date of Aug 14 in the infobox image caption correct? From a timeline in our article, it looks like Aug 14 was peaceful.[1] Also, we may not want to put any date in the caption because it would be OR for the image that was taken by a Wikipedia editor. --Bob K31416 (talk) 13:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I made an edit in the article per the above.[2] --Bob K31416 (talk) 01:21, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

arrests

is there any source for the final legal outcome of anyone arrested?.Did any proceed to the trial phase?.this seems like an important piece of info, if any of the controversial arrests were legaly upheld99.235.56.10 (talk) 03:57, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See also

Is there some reason the Ukraine protests are linked? They seem like very different situations. Feel free to restore, but removing for now as dubious. 98.203.144.15 (talk) 04:16, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(white) protester beat by other protesters

Gaijin42 (talk) 03:19, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Does the race play a role here ? If so, please specify.--Japarthur (talk) 09:04, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Brown family altercation

@Cwobeel:: I only just noticed that you removed this section here when someone added something about it to the main Shooting of Michael Brown article; I was going to point out that it was here, and belonged here rather than on that article, but you had removed it!

This is, I think, wholly relevant to this article - the Ferguson unrest was in response to the shooting of Michael Brown. It has included peaceful protests, rioting, looting, attacks on people, ect. and we have included numerous related incidents in this article. This was a case where someone selling Michael Brown merchandise was assaulted for doing so, then robbed of the merchandise and the money they made off of it. It is entirely pertinent. Titanium Dragon (talk) 09:16, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For reference:
  • On October 18th, 2014, an altercation between Michael Brown's relatives over the sale of merchandise bearing Brown's likeness resulted in Michael Brown's cousin being beaten with a metal pipe or pole and taken to the hospital for treatment. A witness reported that merchandise and about $1,400 in cash were taken in the course of the incident.[1]

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference FoxNews2.FamilyFight was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Titanium Dragon (talk) 09:23, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. - Cwobeel (talk) 16:10, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Cwobeel: Why not? It is directly related to the shooting; someone actually attacked someone over selling Brown-related merchandise. Titanium Dragon (talk) 06:41, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Timeline of protests" section

The section contains irrelevant details that should be removed per WP:NPOV. I just re-arranged the section into just the "<Month> <Year>" format. --George Ho (talk) 06:43, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please either (1) specify the irrelevant details here for discussion, or (2) boldly make the changes and see if anyone reverts or otherwise objects. We can't do much with such a vague statement. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 07:55, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, perhaps it needs copy editing then. The writing looks sloppy at best, especially when I converted subheadings to prose. --George Ho (talk) 09:13, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Overall racial context" section

We should keep in mind that this event follows on the heels of George Zimmerman being found not guilty of murder in the Trayvon Martin shooting as well as the outcome of the first "Loud Music Trial", where the jury was hung on whether or not killing the kid was a crime. Public discourse very much included a discussion about whether or not killing an unarmed black teen should be considered a crime. Those trial outcomes were still fresh in the minds of people in the black community and not charging the cop was a contributing factor in the Ferguson unrest. 69.249.175.119 (talk) 13:03, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to suggest specific content, with supporting reliable published sources (Wikipedia does not editorialize independent of the sources). People will then evaluate the suggestions and possibly make content changes based on them, subject to other Wikipedia policy and guideline. Absent specific suggestions, it's largely "thanks for the input" but it's unlikely your comments will have much effect on the article. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 13:29, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Officer Go Fuck Yourself Edit War

ALL EDITORS: Especially User:Gaijin42 and some IP user User:38.75.48.81. Please stop censoring the article and reach consensus if you want to remove his nickname from the infobox. Please read up on WP:CENSOR and explain why his nickname should not be included. Myopia123 (talk) 18:15, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mediaite is not an RS for the nickname. Its a BLP violation. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:18, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ray Albers infobox

Myopia123, please explain how it is that Ray Albers is the only person in this article who warrants his own personal infobox. Absent such an explanation, the POV pushing is yours. Regardless, you misinterpret Wikipedia policy and guidelines if you think the headline in one news article warrants "Officer Go Fuck Yourself" in an infobox. I'm removing the infobox per NPOV. I'm more than willing to discuss this here with you and others, and I hope we can avoid edit warring on this. Please don't use edit summaries to try to intimidate other editors. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 18:17, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how the infobox itself is POV pushing. I had time to make one for Ray Albers and so I did. Your edits are blatant censorhip of a well known fact. I am currently in the process of finding a more reliable source, as per your request, and if you remove that edit when it is with an RS, then you will be in clear violation of WP:CENSOR -Myopia123 (talk) 18:20, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
RS alone does not justify inclusion. There are other tests that must be passed, too. It is not "censorship" to insist that those other tests be applied as per Wikipedia policy. I'd suggest and request that you calm down a little. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 18:25, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I'm not convinced. What other tests must be applied? Even WP:BLP does not prevent this from being added if it comes from a more reliable source, as per your request. This is censorship, pure and simple. Precedent: Alfredo Lim is noted as being known as "Dirty Larry" in the lead paragraph of his article. -Myopia123 (talk) 18:30, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That nickname is not defamatory. (It is however, unsourced, so should also be removed) Gaijin42 (talk) 18:34, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is sourced in the paragraphs below. The lead paragraph does not always require sources. You calm down. -Myopia123 (talk) 18:35, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And it is defamatory as it came about as a result of his extra judicial killings of criminal suspects. Please educate yourself as to the facts before making comments. -Myopia123 (talk) 18:36, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:DUE, for starters. Although that's far from all of it, it's more than enough to eliminate the infobox. An infobox draws an undue amount of attention to that individual, who was but one player of many in this story. As I said, there is no justification for singling him out for extra weight. For the record, not that it matters, I don't like Ray Albers either. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 18:39, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The person infobox should stay out. This is not Albers' biography. There's also no encyclopedic justification for adding the "nickname".- MrX 19:17, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There is no justification for not adding the nickname. If you google officer go fuck yourself, all I can see is information pertaining to Ray Albers. I would not be surprised if he is known to more people with the nickname as opposed to his real name. The infobox itself may be debatable but adding one line about his nickname from a reliable source is airtight and any removals would be censorship. -Myopia123 (talk) 19:21, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Allright, here is the only compromise I am willing to make. Currently, the information about Ray Albers appears to come from his police department. Therefore, I found this article [3] which talks about the exact words he used, mentions that he has his own hashtag on twitter and that the ACLU complained about him and those actions of his specifically. In that context, it is very appropriate to have information from a third part and not just from his own police department. -Myopia123 (talk) 19:32, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about, every source in the section on albers is from a secondary source. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:36, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The info was from a statement released by his police department."According to st louis PD etc. etc." It is perfectly justifiable to talk about his actions as recorded on video, the ACLU inquiry and the nom-de-guerre he acquired while his identification was pending. Myopia123 (talk) 19:44, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have to go all the way to Australia for a source, you have this from the Washington Post. Considering that source, and considering that the incident was criticized by Amnesty International as reported in that source, I wouldn't personally have a problem with language like the following.
A video taken during the protests on the night of August 19 shows Ferguson police officer Ray Albers pointing his semiautomatic rifle at a protester. Albers tells the protester that he is about to die and says "I will f— kill you!'. Asked for his name, Albers says, "Go f— yourself!" Albers was suspended and resigned soon after the incident, which was. It was among the things criticized by Amnesty International in their report released on October 23. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 19:52, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
While his identification was pending, he was referred to as officer go fuck yourself. This is something that has been recognised by multiple news organisations and is very evident on social media. Leaving it out is censorship. -Myopia123 (talk) 19:55, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, all the american sources still self-censored themselves to some extent or another. The australian one, imo, is one of the few that has been completely open and reported the facts without toning the language down or any other kind of censorship. -Myopia123 (talk) 19:57, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, as you indicated that's your opinion. So far, you're the only one in this discussion who holds that opinion. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 20:11, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My point was that there is no compulsion to rely on american sources only. Wikipedia is very clear that as long as a source is in english, there is no importance given to american news outlets over other news outlets. Even non-english sources can be used, if and when appropriate. So saying, "Why do we have to go outside america" is a pointless statement. -Myopia123 (talk) 20:20, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(Edited my suggested language for clarity; it wasn't his resignation that AI criticized) ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 20:14, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are clearly in a one-person minority as to the weight to give this issue. Editing contrary to the prevailing opinion here is the definition of Wikipedia:Disruptive editing. I'm advising you to stop doing that. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 20:24, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And you are the only other person insisting on censoring this (aside from the IP user). -Myopia123 (talk) 20:26, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Even if you count the IP user, you don't have much of a majority as other editors are yet to weigh in. -Myopia123 (talk) 20:26, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is bullshit, you clearly said

I wouldn't personally have a problem with language like the following. A video taken during the protests on the night of August 19 shows Ferguson police officer Ray Albers pointing his semiautomatic rifle at a protester. Albers tells the protester that he is about to die and says "I will f— kill you!'. Asked for his name, Albers says, "Go f— yourself!" Albers was suspended and resigned soon after the incident, which was. It was among the things criticized by Amnesty International in their report released on October 23. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 19:52, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

How is that language so far off from what I added? This is fucking censorship. -Myopia123 (talk) 20:29, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nvm, editor self reverted. -Myopia123 (talk) 20:30, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MrX, any opinion as to the photo? ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 19:26, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This edit [4] was clear censorship. It was very close to the language suggested by Mandruss. I am going to start an RfC or some other form of dispute resolution if this censorship continues. -Myopia123 (talk) 20:23, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's a great idea. ‑‑Mandruss ☎ 20:32, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Editor self reverted. I am satisfied with the Ray Albers section. I think it has all relevant info and does not require any changes, unless new information comes out. -Myopia123 (talk) 20:45, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think the photo is somewhat iconic and should be retained. The section on Albers seems also seems about right to me. In my opinion, accusations of censorship are very much out of place on this talk page and should not be repeated without evidence of intent.- MrX 02:16, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the reason for the first revert was specifically someone stating "removing offensive language", so this whole thing did start with a censorship issue. -Myopia123 (talk) 05:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The moment that the world has been waiting for (or at least we Ferguson-Wikipedia editors) is at hand

Bloomberg News: Ferguson grand jury reaches decision; officials expected to announce later Monday Michael-Ridgway (talk) 20:04, 24 November 2014 (UTC) KDSK TV is reporting that the news conference announcing the grand jury's determination will take place at 8:00 PM CST tonight (November 24, 2014). Michael-Ridgway (talk) 23:13, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Well, niggers destroyed over 2 dozen businesses, totally burnt down, setting about 50 cars on fire, this isn't showing signs of stopping either, it's spreading to Dellwood, Mo, so this crap isn't stopping even with the National Guard in St Louis, Mo.2602:304:CFD3:2EE0:747C:4CF:F28D:A672 (talk) 08:02, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

media live streams

(F) KTVI Fox 2 News: http://new.livestream.com/accounts/2075940/events/1701970 Fox 2 News: http://fox2now.com/on-air/live-streaming-2/ (some press room) (F) CBSNews: http://www.kmov.com/video/cbsnews (F) NBC news: http://player.theplatform.com/p/2E2eJC/nbcNewsOffsite?guid=nbcnewslive_nyc4 ABC news: http://abcnews.go.com/live (F)MSNBC News : http://www.livenewschat.eu/politics/ 

CNN News: http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2014/11/25/erin-intv-patricia-bynes-protester-chain-street-blockade.cnn&video_referrer=
    CNN Mirror? http://www.shadownet.biz/channels/usa/cnn.html       Another of CNN's Mirrors? http://www.livestation.com/en/cnni
    Occupy The Mob: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/occupythemob/      Color of Change: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJSzoqr-R-4
    Audio Feeds:      St. Louis County Police Scanner: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/st-louis-county-police-scanner      Missouri State Highway Patrol - Troop C Live Audio Feed: http://www.broadcastify.com/listen/feed/17925/web
    Text Feeds:      https://www.reddit.com/live/tdrph3y49ftn/      CNN Liveblog: http://cnnuslive.cnn.com/Event/Grand_jury_rules_in_Michael_Browns_death      ((Someone have a good live-tweeting person to stick here?))
    Collections: (many contain repeats of each other) http://www.mediaite.com/online/watch-all-the-best-live-streaming-coverage-from-ferguson-missouri/3/ (Several streams and police scanner)
    http://www.smokeegyrl.com/ (Live channels shown by red box)
    http://interoccupy.net/ferguson/livestreams/
    http://citizenstreams.com/

Contradictory statements

"Brown reportedly was walking in the middle of the street when Officer Wilson stopped because he matched the description of a man from robbery around the corner."

"Brown was a suspect in an alleged strong-arm robbery committed minutes before the shooting; however they also stated the initial contact between Wilson and Brown was unrelated to the robbery and Wilson was unaware of the robbery when he approached Brown."— Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.152.64.36 (talk) 05:25, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

It has since been confirmed that Wilson knew about the strong-arm robbery, as he had radio communications about it after the robbery. Titanium Dragon (talk) 06:40, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ferguson_unrest&oldid=635353431"