Talk:Students for a Democratic Society
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 Old discussions
- 2 Attribution
- 3 WikiProject class rating
- 4 Title
- 5 Fair use rationale for Image:Join sds.jpg
- 6 Attribution section
- 7 POV Problem
- 8 Any connection to German SDS (Sozialistischer Deutscher Studentenbund)?
- 9 See also/members
- 10 Sources?
- 11 Requested move
- 12 Clarification Needed
- The original version of this article incorporated text from the Wikipedia article Students for a Democratic Society. -- But|seriously|folks 02:29, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 14:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, the present title choice was deliberate on my part. It was chosen to indicate the year the organization was founded. According to this article, the 1960s SDS first appeared in 1960, thus the "1960 organization" bit. Yes, it went on for some time longer than that, but it's sufficiently descriptive, just like how there's now another SDS, that was formed in 2006, and is marked as such. It also has lasted past its founding year. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:19, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Join sds.jpg
Image:Join sds.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.
Is this really necessary? Saying that the article includes text from an earlier version of the same article with a different title? The justification given is that it is necessary for GFDL compliance, but that seems a little absurd to me. I'll read through the GFDL when I have time later today, or, alternatively, if anybody wants to do something about this/explain this justification to me now... --superioridad (discusión) 00:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- The proper attributions are already placed in more appropriate locations, as that "attribution" section is highly non-standard. Who on earth put that in there? SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Any connection to German SDS (Sozialistischer Deutscher Studentenbund)?
There was an organization in Germany at the same time and with pretty similar views and goals, also abbreviating to SDS, the Sozialistischer Deutscher Studentenbund, which was the backbone of the German student movement. Was there any connection or is this just a coincidence? -- 220.127.116.11 (talk) 13:16, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
An editor recently added a long list of names to "See also". Presumably, those were members. A list of notable (blue linked) members would be appropriate, if we have adequate sources for it. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
The majority of these names appear identified as members in Helen Garvy's "Rebels with a Cause," a documentary film (and associated book) on the subject. The rest are identified as SDS members within their individual biographical entries on Wikipedia.--Historytrain (talk) 18:03, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
- Then we can use the sources in those biographies as cites for a list, along with the film/book. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 19:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Will Beback: I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, and am not sure of either the process or the protocol for reinstating the members list I created (and SchuminWeb deleted). As a compromise measure, I'd like to create a child entry to the SDS entry that might serve as a members list. Is that something you think would be appropriate, and if so, might you be in a position to help me do it? I would then work to annotate the names appearing on the list. Thanks for considering this request. --Historytrain (talk) 23:49, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
- One thing that's very important nowadays is making sure that assertions about living people are properly sourced. I suggest working on the sources first, and adding names as sources can be found, rather than restoring the whole list and then trying to find the sources. Second, lists on Wikipedia are traditionally limited to "notable" people, notability determined by the presence of a Wikipedia article. In other words, "red-linked" names should be left off, unless there is strong evidence that an article is well-deserved and overdue. Here's what I suggest. Work on the list on a draft page, Talk:Students for a Democratic Society (1960 organization)/draft, and once enough names have been added with sources copy it into the article under the heading, "Notable members". Then we can add more names as we find the sources for them. Does that sound reasonable? ·:· Will Beback ·:· 23:58, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, that seems entirely reasonable. Thanks for the advice. I don't want to clutter the main entry, but I would like to help readers/researchers get a better sense of the membership of SDS beyond Tom Hayden. Your suggestion should help accomplish that very effectively. Many, many thanks!--Historytrain (talk) 01:27, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
The statement "By 1968 and 1969 they would profoundly affect SDS, particularly at national gatherings of the membership, forming a well-groomed, disciplined faction which followed the Progressive Labor Party line." seems to beg for some support. Elfride.swancourt (talk) 05:45, 1 December 2009 (UTC)