Talk:Emmett Till

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleEmmett Till has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 20, 2010Good article nomineeListed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 28, 2009, August 28, 2010, August 28, 2012, August 28, 2015, and August 28, 2018.

Photo of Emmett Till in his Casket[edit]

I think it appropriate that there should be a photo of the battered body of Emmett Till in his casket on this wikipedia page, especially in view of the fact that Carolyn Bryant died this year without retracting her belief that she was a victim. https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/woman-center-emmett-till-lynching-admits-she-fabricated-testimony-1603602#slideshow/396896 Timtak (talk) 07:20, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there is a photo already in this article with Till's body, although someone changed it to one including his mother and her future husband at center, instead of one focused on the body, perhaps that was not a great call, but it is there. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 11:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tidying up this talk section?[edit]

Apologies- I don't know the protocol about deleting messy talk sections but this one is a hot mess. There are two opinion-based discussions about the topic rather than the article. This isn't the place for them. Are we able to just delete them? It's not a good look for the website to be honest. Mr Blumenthal (talk) 20:41, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Blumenthal, talk pages on 'hot' topics are not infrequently toxic, so this one is relatively mild. Unless content is unequivocally offensive or wholly off-topic or obvious trolling, deleting is frowned on. The content automatically, periodically, self-archives (see top of page), but can be manually archived by copy-pasting to the most recent (highest number) archive if clearly redundant. Pincrete (talk) 06:15, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for letting me know; I still feel like I have a lot of Wikipedia etiquette to learn! Hope you had a nice Christmas :) Mr Blumenthal (talk) 18:01, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why was the recent discussion deleted from the Talk section about the questionable "recantation" by Ms Bryant that likely never happened yet WK treated almost as a fact, by including it in the main section of the encounter between Till and Bryant rather than just relegating it to Later Developments? 137.43.212.106 (talk) 15:50, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why you replied to my thread as I did not archive (not delete) that discussion, but, based on what Pincrete said, I assume that the discussion was automatically archived due to elapsed time. It could also be because the conversation became a general discussion about the subject of the article, which is not the purpose of a talk page. If you have a problem with the article, please explain these issues (including which secondary sources you take issue with) and back up your recommendations using sources of your own. Mr Blumenthal (talk) 16:50, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone interested in copy editing?[edit]

Hello, friends. I wrote this article back in 2010. This was before Carolyn Bryant Donham came out with her statements, so a lot has happened since I wrote it and retired from Wikipedia.

As a result, the article has lost cohesion which happens when a lot of editors add info. It needs a good copy edit. I'm asking if anyone is interested in getting it back into shape with me. If so, I'll start a sandbox and we can start there.

If not, I can try it myself but don't @ me with ya nasty comments when it's posted. I don't intend to watch it after I'm done so it will need to be watched by someone who has a regular presence here. That's easier to do when you know the source material.

I'll wait a few days for replies. Moni3 (talk) 16:09, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Info Box Accused?[edit]

Carolyn Bryant is listed in the info box as "Accused," while I'm sure she could be accused of several things, or unless there is some other definition of accused I am unaware of, this isn't accurate. At the moment I can't think of the correct term, but thought I'd drop a note of anyone wants to fix it. Dmwilliams1979 (talk) 18:49, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]