Talk:Clarence 13X

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Clarence 13X is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 22, 2015.


Clarence 13X was under FBI investigation, and has been detained for attacking police officers. He was placed under psychic evaluation after not seeming to understanding what he did wrong. The FBI file on Clarence 13X states that he believes the white man to be the devil by nature, and so cannot be anything else than a devil. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:40, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

cleanup request[edit]

can someone who cares more about this article please rewrite it so that the subject isn't referred to by his first name throughout? as it is, it reads quite unencyclopedically. -- (talk) 04:34, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Clarence 13X/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 12:20, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well written:
1a. the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct.
1b. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Good
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. Good
2b. all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines. Good
2c. it contains no original research. Good
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. Good
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Good
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Good
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Nothing but constructive edits (and snarky edit summaries)
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
6a. images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content. See below
6b. images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Good, I think
7. Overall assessment. Pending



  • "numerology teachings" - numerology teachings or numerological teachings?
    • Numerological wasn't in my spell checker, but that does sound better, changed.
  • "only five percent of the population know and promote the truth." - Present or past tense? Truth about what?
    • Shifted to past tense for consistency, hope that works. (and explained)
  • "The mayor of New York City and several other prominent leaders attended his ceremonies." - Funeral?
    • Changed.
Early life and Nation of Islam
  • "pudding" - Capital?
    • Yep, good catch.
Founding of the Five Percenters
  • Why is John referred to as Shahid afterwards, but Clarence referred to as Clarence?
  • Because I forgot :)
  • Who is Simmons and why is he pertinent?
  • I guess not everyone knows who he is, good point.
  • "After a United States Supreme Court decision (Pate v. Robinson) in 1966, limits were place on the confinement of mentally ill criminals, causing many to be released. Clarence 13X was consequently released in March 1967." - Could be merged with above paragraph.
  • Ok, moved it up. I was going to create a stub on that but got distracted. Maybe I still will.
Cooperation and conflict
  • "he admitted that his previous teachings about racial hatred were wrong around this time. " - Who?
  • Noted.
  • Last three paragraphs are sort of here and there.
  • Yeah, they really were. Tried to reorganize a bit, let me know what you think.
  • That politicians attended is not here.
    • Yeah, I'll recheck, but I think that was an error on my part in the lead.
  • Double check your capitalisation with god - God. Hell will be raised at FAC if you make a mistake.
  • Yeah, that is tricky, now I have all occurrences of "God" capital, and "gods" lower case.
  • Also, capitalisation of "Earth(s)" or earth, both the planet and the people.
  • Ok, think I fixed it.


  • Did you use those "in the name of Allah books" you have in further reading? They'll ask about it at FAC. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:06, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
    • No, I didn't use them, I have my doubts over whether they'd qualify as "high-quality reliable sources". I think they were published by the Five Percenters in-house publishing label to give their account of their history, so I don't see them as being independent/third party. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:21, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
      • It may qualify under SPS. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:47, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
        • I doubt it, but I'll check around and see what I can find about the author/book. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:27, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


The FUR for File:Clarence 13X.jpg needs to be beefed up. I think the one I use at File:Oerip Soemohardjo.jpg is nice and strong. Also, source link is not working for me. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:06, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

    • Ugh, I hate when this happens. I did some searching, and I can't find anything about that picture, or any good alternatives. The official Five Percenter website is no good either, it's something out of 1992 web design. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:21, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
      • Any of your books? A scan could work. (Tim scans some of his pictures from old newspapers, for example) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:49, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
        • Also, this was used in a book cover. You may be able to crop it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:57, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
          • Ahh, good find. I uploaded it as fair use, did I fill out the criteria correctly? Mark Arsten (talk) 02:27, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
            • Have to show that it has previously been published. The immediate source may not be the best for showing that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:07, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
              • Alright, I fixed that myself. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:10, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Further discussion[edit]

  • On hold for seven days. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
    • Ok, I think I've taken a stab at all your comments, thanks for the review. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:21, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


A fantastic article, but I do have one question: why is there no mention of his parentage or family background? Neither of his parents are named, for instance. Many thanks, —Noswall59 (talk) 11:59, 22 February 2015 (UTC).