Talk:Civil rights movement
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Civil rights movement article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14Auto-archiving period: 183 days ![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of civil rights movement was copied or moved into Birmingham campaign with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
![]() | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | This article was reviewed by The Chronicle of Higher Education on 27 October 2006. Comments: Grade: C For more information about external reviews of Wikipedia articles and about this review in particular, see this page. |
August 1, 1968
So, how is this date chosen as the end point? For the start point there's a Supreme Court decision, which seems to me perhaps kind of late, since someone had to be making the court case happen, but at least it's a definite datable event. However some quick Google searches have failed to show me anything special about August 1, 1968. So, how come? Jim.henderson (talk) 02:31, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
The last paragraph on the first section is weird. Wrong facts.
Hi! I just want to give some attention to the last paragraph on the first section on this page. It's talking about the black power movement, and it says:
"The emergence of the Black Power movement, which lasted from 1965 to 1975, challenged Black leaders of the movement for its cooperative attitude and its adherence to legalism and nonviolence. Its leaders demanded not only legal equality, but also economic self-sufficiency for the community. Support for the Black Power movement came from African Americans who had seen little material improvement since the civil rights movement's peak in the mid-1960s, and still faced discrimination in jobs, housing, education and politics. Martin Luther King Jr. was the most visible leader of the movement. However, some scholars note that the movement was too diverse to be credited to any particular person, organization, or strategy."
This entire paragraph is talking about the black power movement, which makes it weird why Martin Luther King is mentioned there and makes it look like he was the most visible leader for the black power movement instead of the civil rights movement, which is of course wrong. And right after mentioning him as a leader it says "However, some scholars note that the movement was too diverse to be credited to any particular person, organization, or strategy.", and the link is a article about the black power movement, so I think it's just a honest mistake about the person writing it thinking he really was a leader for that movement, and that it's not just weirdly written. Can someone please change this? At least to organize it in a way so it doesn't seem like he was leader for the wrong movement, so there's no misunderstandings when reading it. But you can keep the rest of the text there. Thanks!
(Also if this is now changed it just means that someone changed it already) <3 Thank you! MeManBlaze (talk) 21:12, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yup. As you mention, it appears it was part of a good faith and much needed attempt to trim the lead down to a more manageable size. This particular edit added far, far too much confusion, so I have restored the prior wording and moved it to its own paragraph. Grayfell (talk) 21:51, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
- Cheers! MeManBlaze (talk) 02:48, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
- It's much easier to read now, thanks! I just got to ask (just to be sure) is the source cited with "However, some scholars note that the movement was too diverse to be credited to any particular person, organization, or strategy." really talking about the civil rights movement? I believe it's talking about the black power movement. Look at the source. Maybew we could move up that sentence to the other paragraph as well?
- I'm not really sure though since I didn't read too much of the article linked with the source. But the title makes it seem like it (but it could be there, I don't know), and I've only skim-read it a little bit, and that's why I'm asking :p I just want to be sure. I'm not really experienced with editing at wikipedia, so I'd rather ask than make a wrong edit when it's about an important subject like this. And once again, thanks for the help with the edit! I appreciate it. MeManBlaze (talk) 03:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Is the article too domestic focused?
Hi! I can't currently edit the page, as my account is new and I haven't made any edits elsewhere, but I have some suggestions on some improvements. When reading the page, I got the impression that it presents Civil Rights almost entirely as a domestic issue, when a lot of modern scholarship doesn't see it that way (eg Dudziak, Gaines). There are a few ways I think this should be addressed. Firstly, I think the lead section should at least mention how the Cold War/foreign relations impacted the movement, seeing as international opposition to segregation was an important reason why the movement succeeded (figures eg Eisenhower only acted as they did due to external pressure). Similarly, the 'Background' section is completely domestic focused. It doesn't mention appeals to the United Nations (eg An Appeal to the World), or how American Civil rights campaigners were influenced by campaigns against racial discrimination elsewhere. Another part missing its international context is the section on Little Rock, which doesn't mention any reasons why Eisenhower made the decision (partly to enforce the law, partly to demonstrate progress to international observers). I definitely think the 'Avoiding the Communist label' section needs changing, as this only reflects part of the movement and not figures eg Mayfield, Robeson, Du Bois etc. Finally, I think the 'Truman administration' section leaves out the more complicated reality of his relationship with Civil Rights, including but not exclusively his administration voting against UN declaration against racial discrimination. So while obviously this page is about the movement for legal change in the United States, I think it is currently missing a lot of the context and limiting it purely to events within the US is not helpful. Alexmolinario (talk) 22:01, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Jewish support for the movement
@Drmies As requested I'll post the rationale here, the rationale is the same however I was largely responding to the previous edit with clarifications. I actually think there are several reasons for the removal of this section:
- The information is almost entirely duplicated on this page already, the section "American Jews" already contains all the relevant information, if anything the additional link and a small sentence should have been added to that part of the page
- Information is provided in much more detail on the linked page "Jews in the civil rights movement" as well making this addition redundant on an already very detailed page
- The inclusion of the 2% figure referenced by @Luxofluxo is not supported by the article linked, is a case of "WP:OR" and also doesn't provide much in the way of additional information. EG: Providing the % of practicing lawyers who are Jewish would be a more specific and relevant detail if this is the type of sentence we're looking for.
- Incorrect section: Characteristics is a section for the core characteristics of the movement itself and not of the groups who supported it, note that Native American groups which were also directly involved in the movement and supportive of it are also referenced in the "Popular Reactions" section.
This is a recent edition to the page and doesn't seem to provide any additional detail aside from a case of Original research which isn't supported. Galdrack (talk) 15:45, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- Well, now you can see if this gains any traction. Drmies (talk) 15:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- Remove. Tend to agree with Galdrack, also because this article is very long, and there were many supporting, and not just many Jews or Native Americans but others: auto workers union, Protestant churches, Catholic conference, Orthodox churches, communists, and more. Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- C-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in History
- C-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in History
- C-Class vital articles in History
- C-Class Civil Rights Movement articles
- Top-importance Civil Rights Movement articles
- WikiProject Civil Rights Movement articles
- C-Class United States articles
- High-importance United States articles
- C-Class United States articles of High-importance
- C-Class United States History articles
- High-importance United States History articles
- WikiProject United States History articles
- WikiProject United States articles
- C-Class Georgia (U.S. state) articles
- High-importance Georgia (U.S. state) articles
- C-Class Atlanta articles
- High-importance Atlanta articles
- Atlanta task force articles
- WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) articles
- C-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- C-Class American politics articles
- Mid-importance American politics articles
- American politics task force articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- C-Class Human rights articles
- Mid-importance Human rights articles
- WikiProject Human rights articles
- C-Class Discrimination articles
- Top-importance Discrimination articles
- WikiProject Discrimination articles
- C-Class African diaspora articles
- Top-importance African diaspora articles
- WikiProject African diaspora articles
- C-Class sociology articles
- Low-importance sociology articles
- C-Class social movements task force articles
- Social movements task force articles
- C-Class Philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Philosophy articles
- C-Class social and political philosophy articles
- Mid-importance social and political philosophy articles
- Social and political philosophy task force articles
- Externally peer reviewed articles
- Externally peer reviewed articles by The Chronicle of Higher Education