Jump to content

Talk:Robert D. Cherry

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AndrewRichmo (talk | contribs) at 03:10, 25 January 2019 (Suggestion for changes to "Controversies" section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

There are a few problems in the "Controversies" section. The most glaring was this sentence, which I removed: "Throughout his review, he repeatedly denied that whites ever sought to control black bodies -- as if slavery never existed in America." That isn't supported by the cited source (https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/race-and-opportunity). In fact, Cherry doesn't make that claim once, let alone repeatedly, in the article. Another issue is that the rest of the section includes no actual sources suggesting that there was controversy over anything; it's just a list of things Cherry has said. The section should either be updated to include sources supporting the claim that there was a controversy over the claims it mentions, or else the claim that those articles were controversial should be deleted (which would mean deleting the "Controversies" section). This goes for the National Affairs article as well; I removed the false claim but there are still no citations to suggest the article was controversial, as the heading of that section suggests. (I should add that I haven't reviewed one of the sources, the National Economic Association one, because the link takes me to a login page that I can't log into. Maybe that source, when the link is updated, will include evidence that there was some controversy over the relevant issues, but it looks unlikely, since from the title it appears to be just another article written by him, not a report on a controversy surrounding his views, or an actual example of controversy arising about his views, or etc.) If the sources can't be updated the section should be deleted, but I won't delete it myself right away, since if it was properly sourced -- and if it was revised to only make claims that are supported by its sources -- the section would be informative and relevant.