Talk:Radical flank effect

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Sociology

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

BLM, antifa, neo nazis, and the like

I'd like to add a bit about how it related to BLM, antifa, neo nazis, and the like. Benjamin (talk) 02:16, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Effectiveness

The effectiveness of people like MLK have historically been highest when accompanied by more radical counterparts, such as Malcolm X to MLK and Bhagat Singh to Gandhi. You’re effectively using a good cop/bad cop angle to communicate your demands and goals while still attracting enough attention to make listening to you necessary.

Benjamin (talk) 00:25, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ref for "Violent radical flank"

On 2020-01-29 the section on "Violent radical flank" mentioned a study of 233 cases by Schock and Chenoweth, citing <ref name=SchockChenoweth>{{cite web|author1=Kurt Schock|author2=Erica Chenoweth|title=Radical Flank Effect (Webinar)|url=http://nonviolent-conflict.org/index.php/learning-and-resources/educational-initiatives/usip-course/icncusip-2010/1428-radical-flank-effect-webinar|website=International Center on Nonviolent Conflict|accessdate=25 February 2015}}</ref> This "Webinar" was no longer available at that URL but was available on the Internet Archive. An abstract there mentioned "323 primarily violent and nonviolent resistance campaigns from 1900 to 2006." A more recent paper in a refereed academic journal, Erica Chenoweth; Kurt Schock (December 2015). "Do Contemporaneous Armed Challenges Affect the Outcomes of Mass Nonviolent Campaigns?". Mobilization. 20 (4): 427–451. ISSN 1086-671X. Wikidata Q83970885., mentions "106 primarily nonviolent resistance campaigns from 1900 to 2006".

I think the "233" was supposed to be "323 violent and nonviolent campaigns". When their study was finally published in Mobilization, they had restricted their focus to the 106 of those 323 that were "primarily nonviolent". I'm changing the number 233 to 106 and the reference accordingly. DavidMCEddy (talk) 18:04, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chenoweth and Schock's dataset was NOT limited to "ideal types of campaigns"

On 2020-01-29, the text claimed that, 'Chenoweth and Schock's data set was limited to "ideal types of campaigns...that rely solely on nonviolent or violent tactics." She does not study "mixed campaigns" of both violence and nonviolence, although it is documented that most real-life campaigns are varied in this way.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=7on0obGSuVIC&pg=PA200&lpg=PA200&dq=gamson,+chenoweth,+social&source=bl&ots=Zl9Zg6tFmI&sig=4o9X_yRW_Jzr-FSaiqSirlvHbrI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hXYLVaWRHbaQsQSRmoKACg&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=mixed%20campaign&f=false Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan "Mobilization and Resistance: A Framework for Analysis" in ''Rethinking Violence: States and Non-state Actors in Conflict'', edited by Erica Chenoweth, Adria Lawrence, p. 251 (note 9)]</ref> William Gamson's data set included some groups that threatened and prepared for violence without fully engaging in it.'

The citation given to support that claim was NOT Chenoweth and Schock but rather a book chapter authored by Chenoweth and Stephan. Chenoweth and Schock considered primarily nonviolent campaigns, and categorized them by whether they had a "radical flank". I deleted that sentence accordingly. DavidMCEddy (talk) 18:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]