Talk:15 February 2003 anti-war protests: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:21, 19 June 2016

15 February 2003 anti-war protests was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 17, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
May 26, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
March 5, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
January 4, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Anti-war B‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anti-war, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the anti-war movement 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.Anti-warWikipedia:WikiProject Anti-warTemplate:WikiProject Anti-warAnti-war articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Iraq B‑class

	Iraq portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq 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.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 15, 2006, February 15, 2007, February 15, 2008, February 15, 2009, February 15, 2011, February 15, 2013, and February 15, 2016.

Evidence of Laugh Not War and War is a Drag participation in CT

If you need evidence, I have the pictures. Will upload as soon as I'm near a scanner. Also some amazing picks of Peace Barbie Ethnopunk 11:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be great to have some pictures of the South Africa demonstration, one thing that this article is missing is more photos. Unfortunatly I don't think that photos are appropreate to show that the demonstration was organised by Laugh Not War and War is a Drag (as was the assersion in the previous version). They may be okay to back up the statment that those groups were involved but idealy we need referances to writtern sources (they don't have to be internet baced). The reason for evidence isn't that i don't belive you, it is just so the article is verifyable, see Cite your sources.--JK the unwise 14:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peacebarb.jpg

I have some Cape Town photos at indybay, and will dual license under the GFDL and upload to commons if they are useful. I think the in-the-crowd photos are better than the fuzzy mass photos, if only because the Stop the war poster became a Stop W poster :). -- Jeandré, 2006-05-03t20:38z

Check Peace Barbie —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ethnopunk (talk • contribs) .

Photo's look good and would certianly add some thing to the article.--JK the unwise 13:32, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming

Should the article name refer to which war was protested, or that it was an international event? At present, the name seems to be lacking something as it is extremely vague. Harr o5 08:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There has been some eariler discusion of the name when Violetriga suggested that wemove the page to Global day of protests against the invasion of Iraq however I pointed out that there were at least two other such days (though none as big)(Talk:February 15, 2003 anti-war protest/Archive1#Article name). Prehaps we could change the name to February 15, 2003 protests against the Iraq war but thats rather long.--JK the unwise 08:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or just "February 15, 2003 anti-Iraq war protests". I think it needs that plural for protest as it was a series of protests interconnected but nor directly related. Thoughts? Harr o5 09:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I personally see nothing wrong with the present name. It's quick and simple, and matches other similar protest days in its format. SchuminWeb (Talk) 13:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beirut

Beirut information seems to have been anonymously removed without comment. I suggest that someone re-check sources and either restore it or indicate here why it was removed. - Jmabel | Talk 04:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced the Beirut info' as it is sourced in the Green left review article; to quote; "In the Middle East, 10,000 protested in Damascus, Syria, on February 15, as did 10,000 in Beirut, Lebanon, and 5000 in Amman, Jordan."[1].--JK the unwise 22:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Hollywood Bl.

event also included Sunset Bl., & Highland Av. That would be more accurate. Do you want more accuracy? @ the time, I'd been a Koreatown | Westlake District resident {Southeastern Hollywood}.

Thank You.

{Koreatown,_Los_Angeles,_California.}

{Green Left Weekly (GLW), World Socialist Web Site (WSWS).}

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 00:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

London, Hyde Park

This London Telegraph article supports the view that considerably more than 750,000 protesters turned out on that cold day. [2] SMB

If you look at allItalic text the listings where a police estimate is given, it invariably is below other estimates given for the same event. The supposed reason for this phenomena is that demonstrations by their very nature are anti-government policy and the police are defenders of that policy. Therefore, lowering the numbers creates an impression that is favourable to the gov.46.7.85.68 (talk) 14:21, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Delisting

In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of January 4,

2008, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.
The biggest problem with this article is the prose; it simply does not flow. Once the initial summary is complete, there is little cohesion within and amongst sections, it quickly devolves into short groupings of facts passed off as paragraphs in most of the sections. Many of the Level 3 headings do not have enough information under them to sustain the headings and should be either expanded or merged into a more general heading. There are manual of style concerns; the biggest one is the lead, which does not satisfy the requirements laid out in WP:LEAD as it does not adequately summarize the article in its entirety. In an article of this size, the lead should be far large and should cover every major point/heading made in the body of the article. In its current state, it is far too small and general to accomplish this. Furthermore, while the article has many citations, it does not have enough and there are several "citation needed" tags throughout the article, and many smaller paragraphs and even direct quotations (most noticeable in the final "Effect" section) that will require more referencing and in-line citations. Finally, as a minor but very noticeable point, Image:Feb15 Poster Amsterdam.jpg is floating in the ether of the article without an accompanying caption to place it in context. As these are the largest (but not all-encompassing) problems with the article, and as they are significant enough to require a substantial effort to repair, I am boldly delisting the article at this time. Cheers, CP 06:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great article

Great article -- well done to all concerned! Rosa Lichtenstein (talk) 15:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm... Washington, DC?!?

Apparently nothing happened in DC that day... Samstein (talk) 20:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Find a good quotable source and sick some stuff in.--JK the unwise (talk) 19:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it appears that nothing happened in DC that particular time, as we've not found any reliable sources to substantiate a DC action. And it's not that surprising. Generally, DC will be the main demonstration, or DC will be completely out of it. SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will have to locate citations, but I know there were fairly large protests in D.C. that day because I was there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.233.34.199 (talk) 21:04, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Style of London section

There's various parts here that read more like a personal account of the day, or a blog: e.g.

"On the day of the protest, the weather was grey and cold, but people were in high spirits..."
"Those that had to get coaches back to their home locations had to abandon the march before it had finished "
"Protesters who managed to reach Hyde Park in time .....but many protesters missed out"

Paulbrock (talk) 19:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then go ahead in and fix it. See if you can remove some of the worst offenses. SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:22, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've edited it best I can, does it read more like an encyclopaedia now? can I remove the tag?--JK the unwise (talk) 11:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering about style here too. The london demo is the only one with an in-depth look at how it was organised (with a special section devoted to it). It's interesting but given the protests were as significant in Italy, Spain, the US and Australia (for example) but these were organised in different ways, should they have their own similar sections - or if that would make it too bulky should the UKbit be pared down? 87.114.69.171 (talk) 12:22, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Polar

Shouldn't the "polar" section be "Antarctica" to correspond with all the other section headers being continents? 121.92.103.243 (talk) 07:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Effects section

The last sentence is a quote by a Hizb-ut-Tahrir member. I think this adds no value to the section or the piece as Hizb-ut-Tahrir's ultra Islamic views neither represent worldwide Muslim opinion or that in the UK, furthermore it fails to offer any substantial addition for the section, I propose its removal. --90.215.98.245 (talk) 13:43, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added that sentence myself not because it is supposed to represent general views of any particular population but because it shows how a supposedly unsuccessful peace-protest can affect the mind of someone with extremist views. It was intended to back up (with a citation) the preceding two sentences. I leave the final decision in the hands of others with more experience though Weavehole (talk) 09:14, 26 September 2010 (UTC)weavehole[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on February 15, 2003, anti-war protests. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:58, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on February 15, 2003, anti-war protests. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:00, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on February 15, 2003, anti-war protests. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070928004830/http://www.ukwatch.net/article/1525 to http://www.ukwatch.net/article/1525

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:44, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 69: / Line 69: @@
 This London Telegraph article supports the view that considerably more than 750,000 protesters turned out on that cold day.  [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/02/17/nblur117.xml/] SMB
-If you look at '''all'''''Italic text'' the listings where a police estimate is given, it invariably is below other estimates given for the same event. The supposed reason for this phenomena is that demonstrations by their very nature are anti-government policy and the police are defenders of that policy. Therefore, lowering the numbers creates an impression that is favourable to the gov.
+If you look at '''all'''''Italic text'' the listings where a police estimate is given, it invariably is below other estimates given for the same event. The supposed reason for this phenomena is that demonstrations by their very nature are anti-government policy and the police are defenders of that policy. Therefore, lowering the numbers creates an impression that is favourable to the gov.[[Special:Contributions/46.7.85.68|46.7.85.68]] ([[User talk:46.7.85.68|talk]]) 14:21, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
 == GA Delisting ==