Jump to content

Talk:2020 United States racial reckoning/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

article

intro sounds biased and incorrect— Preceding unsigned comment added by Baratiiman (talk • contribs)

Baratiiman, offering a suggested fix is more helpful. What do you find biased and incorrect? —valereee (talk) 15:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

The entire premise for the article is original research and synth

I get where you're coming from, but I think this article tries to tie too many subjects together and the result is pure synthesis and original research. No source provided refers to this "racial injustice reckoning". We have an article covering the content contained within: George Floyd protests, Black Lives Matter and Removal of Confederate monuments and memorials. Does this article have a clearly defined and tangible subject? Respectfully, I don't think it does. Bacondrum (talk) 00:26, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

@Czar: I also have questions about scope. My understanding from how the topic is currently framed is that this is covering everything that transpired due to George Floyd's death and the protests, but does not include the protests themselves. Is that right? That would means this captures everything we have in the lists of changes, name changes, police reforms and removed monuments. If so, I think we could use a prose-ified explanation of the phenomena, as they are all related and were catalyzed by the one event. This would solve the difficulty we've been having with the lists in that there are stories to be told about how the changes came about, and how they are linked to each other that can't really be addressed by a list. One concern is that making this only about the United States doesn't acknowledge the global nature of the repercussions. gobonobo + c 00:53, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
@Gobonobo, agreed, just haven't had a chance to expand here yet czar 07:41, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Bacondrum, I understand your query, but I think it's maybe similar to Arab spring. Is it going to be long-term notable? I dunno. —valereee (talk) 00:54, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
I reckon it's way WP:TOOSOON to make that call. And I tend to think that broader movement will be remembered as the Black Lives Matter movement, for which we already have an article. The real question is: Is there widespread reportage about something called the 2020 United States racial injustice reckoning? Bacondrum (talk) 01:09, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Bacondrum, I see what you did there. :D
I do understand your concern, but I'm not sure it's too soon, or synth, or OR. It's certainly near those things. The articles are all using the term reckoning, most are using the term in the title. I'm not sure that's proof it's a thing, but it's getting really close to proving it's a thing, and to me the articles do read different from simply Black Lives Matter movement. I kind of feel like this is getting bigger than BLM? I certainly wouldn't !vote to delete. I wondered about maybe using to create a subsection of BLM or George Floyd protests, then spin off later once things developed/became became clearer, but I'm not sure this really fits well into either of those, either. —valereee (talk) 10:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
@Valereee: It's definitely long-term notable. The question is whether or not this unnecessarily duplicates other topics. Also the article's title really needs to change. gobonobo + c 01:17, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes, there is a reckoning with racial injustice taking place in the USA, at least I hope there is. We cover that in a number of articles. This article is drawing subjects together in a manner that is original research and synthisis. I've started an AFD discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2020_United_States_racial_injustice_reckoning Bacondrum (talk) 21:50, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

This article is drawing subjects together in a manner that is original research and synthisis.

How? It states no conclusion that isn't already made by the most reliable of sources. It doesn't invent or create claims for which sources don't already exist. If the issue solely comes down to the name, I've already addressed that above—it doesn't need a formal name in order to be covered by press as a distinct idea. czar 07:41, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Czar, I think the problem is that coverage hasn't settled on a single name for the phenomenon, and that's confusing people into thinking this is OR or synth. —valereee (talk) 17:21, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Quotes

I think the parts that successively quote from the sources re: "reckoning" might be distracting from the rest of the content and giving the appearance of synthesis. Would it make sense to move some of it to the talk page (with quotes at greater length)? I just expanded a fair amount so hopefully the article needs less reinforcement that the topic is independently notable but can still move the text to the talk page so it's available for those who need it.

I'm going to dump a few of the quotes I've found while editing in the past few hours but there are plenty more that I just didn't extract my first time through. Feel free to add/modify and mind that many of the articles with quotes that I've seen refer to a cultural reckoning/outcry/backlash/whathaveyou in their ledes. czar 07:23, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Extended content

Across the US, states are grappling with pushback regarding a trove of monuments and place names that many argue are ahistorical, degrading, and inappropriate amid a nationwide reckoning with racial injustice and benevolent forms of white supremacy.
— Bowker, Brittany (June 30, 2020). "A running list of controversial statues, symbols, and names under scrutiny amid nationwide reckoning with racial history". Boston Globe. Retrieved July 6, 2020.

Activists across the country are targeting statues of former U.S. presidents and other well-known figures, escalating a campaign that previously focused on Confederate generals and prompting a national reckoning over the value and meaning of historical monuments.
— Restuccia, Andrew; Kiernan, Paul (June 23, 2020). "Toppling of Statues Triggers Reckoning Over Nation's History". Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660.

The racial reckoning sweeping across America has triggered a long-overdue shift in attitudes towards offensive cultural icons.[1]

This historic moment is another significant triumph for African Americans – who in Mississippi have fought unsuccessfully for generations to rid their state of what they have seen as a vestige of oppression and symbol of sedition – amid the national reckoning on race galvanized by George Floyd’s killing in police custody.[2]

In the aftermath of the George Floyd killing, which has unleashed a national conversation on questions of race and racism, many say the country is long overdue to standardize the use of the uppercase B in black, which has been commonly used at black media outlets for a long time. ... The debate over racial vocabulary is unfolding amid growing recognition across society of the need to tackle racism after several high-profile police killings of black people incited mass protests nationwide.[3]

Although amplifying racism and stoking culture wars have been mainstays of Trump’s public identity for decades, they have been particularly pronounced this summer as the president has reacted to the national reckoning over systemic discrimination by seeking to weaponize the anger and resentment of some white Americans for his own political gain.[4]

Joe Biden is entering the final month of his search for a running mate, a decision people close to the process say is now heavily influenced by a national reckoning on racism, as his search committee pores over records and conducts interviews before presenting a list of finalists to the former vice president.[5]

America's leaders are rethinking how they view Independence Day, as the country reckons with the historic, unequal treatment of people of color during a pandemic which has disproportionately affected nonwhite Americans.[6]

But America's reckoning with systemic racism is now forcing a more critical look at the language we use. And while the offensive nature of many of these words and phrases has long been documented, some institutions are only now beginning to drop them from the lexicon.[7]

George Floyd’s death in police custody sparked weeks of protests across the US and brought a reckoning for diversity-weak industries, insensitive moments in entertainment, offensive mascots in retail and remaining symbols of slavery across the US.[8]

Floyd’s death has touched off an extraordinary reckoning of race and race relations, and sports has been part of it, from European soccer to the NFL. It has also made ripples in NASCAR, which like the NHL has predominately white athletes and, by most accounts, a larger fan base among white people than people of color.[9]

This, we are told, is an age of reckoning. The demonstrations and civil unrest that followed the killing of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police have thrust America into a new period of introspection, compelling it to engage in a long-overdue effort to correct for persistent, even subconscious, but nevertheless subtly racist attitudes.[10]

Scott is a deeply conservative politician and his ideas may struggle to find support among Democrats seeking big changes amid the national reckoning sparked by George Floyd’s death in Minneapolis.[11]

Yet now a crisis is breaking over Wintour, Vogue and the Condé Nast publishing empire: the reckoning with racism in America, triggered by the killing of George Floyd by a white police officer in Minneapolis, that has now spread to all aspects of American life, from publishing to academia to sports.[12]

Easter Eggs

Hey, regardless of any issues around synth, this article is full of WP:EASTEREGG's. Piped links should be as direct as possible. Here's an explanation of how not to use piped links from the relevant guidelines:

Shortcuts

"WP:NOPIPE" redirects here. For the Manual of Style guideline, see MOS:NOPIPE.
Further information: WP:NOTBROKEN

First of all, keep links as simple as possible:

  • Avoid making links longer than necessary:

☒N [[George Washington|President George Washington]]

checkY President [[George Washington]]

  • It is generally not good practice to pipe links simply to avoid redirects:

☒N [[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart|Mozart]]

checkY [[Mozart]]

Unnecessary piping makes the wikitext harder to read. Furthermore, the number of links to a redirect page can be a useful gauge of when it would be helpful to spin off a subtopic of an article into its own page, and such links would also continue to work correctly after the spin-off. For example: [[Leningrad]] currently redirects to Saint Petersburg, but one day it could be decided to spin off a dedicated article about the old city of Leningrad; when that happens, all existing links [[Leningrad]] will automatically point to the correct article, while the unnecessarily piped ones [[Saint Petersburg|Leningrad]] will not.
  • Given the option to pipe a link or to "blend" an affix, preferred style is to use a blended affix:

☒N [[public transport|public transportation]]

checkY [[public transport]]ation

Links like this are not permitted [[George Floyd protests|subsequent protests]], [[white privilege|systemic advantages and disadvantages due to race]], [[List of changes made due to the George Floyd protests|other institutional symbols]]. Hope that helps. Bacondrum (talk) 08:42, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't think those examples are Easter eggs. In context, they link the concept in question to the article discussing the concept and none of the destinations are astonishing to those who follow them. Links do not need to be verbatim article titles, especially if that would introduce jargon or awkward phrasing. If it's better to delink white privilege, go for it, but I think the section is richer for using the longer definition instead of jargon. Also I'm frankly baffled at the point of templating two admins at length as if it would serve as any reasonable edification. czar 21:53, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Read the guidelines, you are wrong. Those are improperly linked. Bacondrum (talk) 02:22, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

i don't even know where to begin

This entire article head to toe absolutely screams WP:POV. "racial injustice reckoning", really? I was searching for 2020 United States racial unrest and was absolutely dumbfounded to see this pop up as well. Apparently I just hadn't seen it earlier because for some reason this page has been able to survive for months. My only suggestion is to scrap it. Each protest page describes its own situation in enough detail. I'm interested to see what people have to say as more people discover this page. Anon0098 (talk) 05:46, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

For what other people say, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 United States racial injustice reckoning. For "racial injustice reckoning", really? yes, see the sources as cited. It's quite clear this isn't an article about protests. czar 17:44, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Title

With the multiple lists spinning out of the cultural response following the protests, it doesn't look like the phenomenon has a name yet, but multiple sources have described a national reckoning with race independent from and growing out of the protests themselves. I went with "2020 United States racial injustice reckoning" to balance non-judgmental description and specificity. The majority of the sources I used in the first draft use the word "reckoning" similar to how it was used in describing the Weinstein effect. Feel free to suggest a better article title or point out sources that give a common name. czar 07:20, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Just seeing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Early 21st-century civil rights movement now. This article's scope is much narrower. I'll repost the sources I referenced in acknowledgement of a cultural reckoning beyond the protests:
czar 07:40, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Czar, not sure about title. I see that these sources are using that term, but it's still feeling NPOV to me. That said, it's clearly a thing, and I don't have a better suggestion, so I'll just stick a pin in it. Maybe it'll become clearer later on. :) —valereee (talk) 15:24, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
I'd argue the name for all this is the Black Lives Matter movement and protests. I get where you are going with this, but it's OR and synth. Bacondrum (talk) 00:28, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Which of the above sources describe this phenomenon as a Black Lives Matter protest? What about the title is feeling non-neutral? The "injustice" part? Every source I've found is in clear response to what is widely perceived and described as centuries of, in the most aggressively neutral terms, racial injustice. The "reckoning" part? That part is even more widely supported by sources (see above titles in major press). Again, this is the best balance I could strike between neutral and generic until the press gives this subject a distinct name. It's certainly more neutral than calling it a backlash or fallout. I've seen it called a cultural turn, uprising, wave of cancellations, accountability. Open to alternatives but need a little more detail to work with before I can propose something else. czar 07:31, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
You've simply combined a bunch of material that contains the words "reckoning" and "race" from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources. That is original research and synthesis. I do hope America is reckoning with its racism, but the subject here is a synthesis of articles more suited to building existing articles about actual things like BLM, George Floyd protests and statue removals etc. It's nothing personal, it's just an obvious case of original research. Bacondrum (talk) 01:30, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
This section is about the title, not claims of original research, which I've already challenged to provide more specific examples (i.e., what is the "conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources"?) in the below section. czar 22:26, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

More exemplary sources that overview the concept, to add to the list above:

czar 02:16, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

I'd like to propose renaming the title United States racial reckoning, in line with the literature. Johncdraper (talk) 19:32, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

'racial reckoning' is more common. I suggest the page be renamed according to the more common sociological term: 'United States racial reckoning'. Johncdraper (talk) 18:37, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Could work—sources definitely use that phrase but I don't know if I'd go so far as to call it the common name. It is clear that much of the reaction to this article is impulse based on "injustice" in its title, though sources clearly discuss "racism" (or, more mildly, "racial injustice") as the object of the reckoning. "Racial reckoning" is concise but the adjective is ambiguous—what does it imply about who is reckoning with what? Sources often phrase it as "reckoning with/over/about [issues of] race" but invariably with the full context that the majority's culture is doing the reckoning with racism/whiteness. A title to that effect would be even more charged and I'd wager that is why most sources have used less forthright language. For the naming criteria, a more precise title would be "racism reckoning" rather than simply "racial reckoning", but open to what others think. czar 20:17, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Add: "cultural reckoning with race" is another possibility czar 03:48, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
I understand the apocalyptic undertones of race war and culture war that this may imply. However, we root ourselves here in the moral high ground that is the academic literature. Provided we explicate this clearly in the article, its title and integrity cannot be challenged. Thus, we both accurately reflect and shape the conversation, in the manner and form of the 18th century encyclopedists. High fallutin' maybe, but, I think, true. Still, waiting on others to comment. Johncdraper (talk) 22:56, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
czar, this is the only serious academic journal source I can find using that term: Holman, A. C. (2007). The Canadian Hockey Player Problem: Cultural Reckoning and National Identities in American Collegiate Sport, 1947–80. Canadian Historical Review, 88(3), 439–468. doi:10.3138/chr.88.3.439. Johncdraper (talk) 08:13, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

The massacre received renewed attention in recent months after President Donald Trump selected Tulsa as the location for a rally amid the ongoing racial reckoning over police brutality and racial violence.
— The Associated Press (September 1, 2020). "Attorneys File Lawsuit Seeking Redress for Tulsa Massacre". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331.

For the issues digital cover, DuVernay, whose credits include Selma, 13th, and When They See Us, interviews the scholar and activist about this summer of protests and the countrys current racial reckoning, which Davis calls an intersection between the COVID-19 pandemic and increasing awareness about the structural nature of racism.
— Stuart, Shauna (August 27, 2020). "Angela Davis, Ava DuVernay discuss protests, monuments, more for Vanity Fair". AL.com. Retrieved September 4, 2020.

I think it's safe to say that there's an emerging consensus for "racial reckoning" as this topic's common name, notwithstanding the points made above. It's also more concise, per the naming criteria. Going to move it boldly but feel free to discuss if there is disagreement. czar 21:14, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Source dump

Dumping sources and quotes to be considered for either staging a rewrite or expanding the article at a later time (in lieu of a humongous Further reading section)

Extended content

Name changes

Reframing history

Inequalities in representation

White people

Deleting videos and issuing statements doesn't erase that these creators built a following and profited from the content they were making content that YouTube then shared and promoted. What is clear is that YouTube's creator community is undergoing a reckoning, and an entire industry is trying to figure out what happens next.
— Alexander, Julia (July 2, 2020). "White YouTube creators struggle to address past use of racist characters". The Verge. Archived from the original on July 4, 2020. Retrieved July 4, 2020.

Corporations/business

Now, amid a national reckoning over racial injustice, some are breaking their NDAs to speak out about incidents of racism and discrimination in the workplacerisking financial and legal repercussions.
— Mohan, Pavithra (August 11, 2020). "'How much is my silence worth?': Amid a racial reckoning, women are rejecting NDAs". Fast Company. Retrieved September 5, 2020.

Schools and universities

Culture and power misc

The reckoning we have witnessed this spring and summer at public demonstrations transforms into a reckoning in legislatures, C-suites, university-admissions offices.
— Kendi, Story by Ibram X. (September 2020). "Is This the Beginning of the End of American Racism?". The Atlantic. ISSN 1072-7825.

McCarthy also announced the Army would be rolling out an initiative called Project Inclusion to address "behaviors that tear at the fabric of our force." He said these included diversity, discrimination, sexual harassment, sexual assault and suicide. He cited a nationwide reckoning that has occurred amid protests over racial injustice following the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis.
— Coronado, Acacia (August 6, 2020). "Army secretary: Fort Hood has high rates of murder, assault". AP News. Retrieved September 5, 2020.

While developer Blizzard has not said anything publicly about the decision to remove the spray, it appears to be a part of a widespread reckoning with racist and racially-charged imagery in media.
— Wright, Steven T. (July 15, 2020). "Overwatch Replaces McCree's Noose Spray". GameSpot. Archived from the original on July 30, 2020. Retrieved August 22, 2020.

Related

Trumps decision to eliminate the anti-racism training featuring critical race theory and discussions of white privilege, according to the directive comes amid a nationwide reckoning on racial injustice the president has firmly opposed.
— Beggin, Riley (September 5, 2020). "Trump eliminates federal anti-racism training, calling it 'a sickness'". Vox. Retrieved September 5, 2020.

czar 03:51, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Further reading

czar, would you please cut down the Further reading web sources and add in the academic sources? Johncdraper (talk) 08:44, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Johncdraper, these are two different requests, right? I'm not seeing academic sources in the Further reading section. I've had an edit in draft for a few days now but I'm not planning to reduce the Further reading by much. Here I am overloaded with tabs (in addition to a full Further reading) section while other editors claim there is no evidence of a distinct social phenomenon. So it's important to keep that litany of sources visible, though I'm slowly working them into the article. The academic sources are the ones you've cited, correct? czar 19:17, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
czar Yes, two different requests, but interrelated. You don't need to justify the term so much using the references once you add in the core academic sources. Johncdraper (talk) 20:54, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
academic sources

The killing of George Floyd, subsequent protests and the Black Lives Matter movement have been described in the academic literature as a racial 'reckoning',[1][2] a sociological concept.[3][4][5][6] In this context, a racial reckoning implies a movement to address systemic racial disparities, for example in education,[2] health,[1] and criminal justice[3] outcomes. 'Racial reckoning' as a term dates back in the academic literature to at least 1994, when it was used by Herman Belz, a Professor of History at the University of Maryland in the title of an article reviewing the Supreme Court's decisions regarding civil rights law, affirmative action, and equality.[6] Subsequently, the term formed the main part of the title of a book authored by Renee C. Romano, Professor of History and Professor of Africana Studies and Comparative American Studies at Oberlin College, on prosecuting America's civil rights murders. The book documents a set of over 100 southern civil rights cold cases from the 1950s and 1960s and new trials instituted by the FBI in the 1990s and 2000s that finally delivered justice in a small number of high-profile cases.[7][8][9]

References

  1. ^ a b Printz, Carrie (2020). "Racism and racial inequities in health care rise to the forefront". Cancer. 126 (18): 4081–4082. doi:10.1002/cncr.33157. ISSN 1097-0142.
  2. ^ a b Kraehe, Amelia M.; Herman, David (2020-08-04). "Racial Encounters, Ruptures, and Reckonings: Art Curriculum Futurity in the Wake of Black Lives Matter". Art Education. 73 (5): 4–7. doi:10.1080/00043125.2020.1789413. ISSN 0004-3125. S2CID 221058227.
  3. ^ a b Romano, Renee C. (2017). Racial reckoning. ISBN 978-0-674-97603-0. OCLC 988214620.
  4. ^ Romano, Renee Christine (2017). Racial reckoning : prosecuting America's civil rights murders. ISBN 978-0-674-97603-0. OCLC 993321927.
  5. ^ Robinson, Sue (2018-11-14). "A Racial Reckoning of a Progressive Ideology in Public Discourse". International Journal of Communication. 12: 19. ISSN 1932-8036. Archived from the original on July 19, 2020. Retrieved August 31, 2020.
  6. ^ a b Belz, Herman (1994). "The Supreme Court and Racial Reckoning". Perspectives on Political Science. 23 (3): 134–138. doi:10.1080/10457097.1994.9941850. ISSN 1045-7097.
  7. ^ "Racial Reckoning: Prosecuting America's Civil Rights Murders". Journal of American History. 102 (2): 631–632. 2015-09-01. doi:10.1093/jahist/jav461. ISSN 0021-8723. Archived from the original on September 5, 2020. Retrieved September 2, 2020.
  8. ^ Downs, Matthew L. (2015). "Racial Reckoning: Prosecuting America's Civil Rights Murders by Renee C. Romano". Alabama Review. 68 (4): 378–380. doi:10.1353/ala.2015.0032. ISSN 2166-9961.
  9. ^ Boyle, Kevin (2014-10-10). "Civil rights cold cases". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Archived from the original on March 7, 2020. Retrieved 2020-09-02.

Moving this paragraph here—it seems out of place in the article to go into the history of this term when I don't think it's warranted. The news sources address this topic as a sociocultural "racial reckoning" so not sure the defense of the history of the term is needed, especially from pre-2020 sources. I wouldn't expect sociology papers to be peer reviewed and published for a few months, though you might be able to find academic blog posts to cite as a self-published expert. Also this isn't strictly a sociological concept—sociologists use it the same way that the news sources are using it, i.e., its definition. There might be a sociological overview of reckonings/awakenings in history but I haven't looked for it since the scope is this 2020 moment and not the history of the concept. czar 05:22, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2020_United_States_racial_reckoning/Archive_1&oldid=1020981659"