Talk:Unite the Right 2/Archive 1

Archive 1

Requested name change to "2018 Unite the Right rally"

Why is this titled White Civil Rights rally? A majority of the sources, and Kessler himself, are mainly referring it as the "2018 Unite the Right rally" or "Unite the Right 2." The title "White Civil Rights rally" has only been used infrequently as a description of the event itself. I suggest we title it the 2018 Unite the Right rally. IcierJacks (talk) 20:41, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Kessler called it "White Civil Rights Rally" in his application for a permit from the parks department. I'm not certain which is the best title. I recommend starting a move request if you think the title should be changed.- MrX 🖋 21:02, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

He put that under the "purpose" section, no indication that is what he intended to name it. Beach drifter (talk) 20:48, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I will. IcierJacks (talk) 21:15, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 8 August 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. Closing this a little on the early side based on near-unanimous consent here and the fact that the new name is markedly more common per WP:SNOW. Neutrality^talk 18:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

---

White Civil Rights Rally → 2018 Unite the Right rally – I recommend that this article should be renamed. A good majority of sources—including Kessler himself—are referring it as "Unite the Right 2" or the "2018 Unite the Right rally" outside of referring to the approved permit. The current title seems pretty obscure, and risks becoming unintentional wn propaganda. IcierJacks (talk) 21:22, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

@IcierJacks: Can you, or someone else, summarize what reliable sources refer to it as to help those of us were following the page but aren't completely abreast of the topic. EvergreenFir (talk) 22:58, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir: The second above appears to cover that. PackMecEng (talk) 23:03, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

• Wait. The rally will be held in a few days and there is bound to be a flurry of media activity surrounding it during and immediately after the event. We should wait until then to get a better sense of what this event will be commonly referred to. Rreagan007 (talk) 01:07, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support – all the media are calling it a "Unite the Right" rally. Dicklyon (talk) 06:52, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support but with small r – most of the media are calling it a "Unite the Right" rally. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:15, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support – Unite the Right 2 is a more common name and the one used on the official website. 108.245.173.217 (talk) 18:13, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support per nom. (Unite the Right 2 is also acceptable.) Station1 (talk) 20:06, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support – Call it Unite the Right 2 LuvataciousSkull (talk) 22:10, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support — "white civil rights rally" does not appear on the official website, and appears only in lower case in the NPS permit application. WP:COMMONNAME leans towards United the Rights 2(/2018). And "white civil rights" is at least slightly POV. It's appropriate to WP:SNOW close this before Sunday.--Carwil (talk) 02:48, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Is this useful anywhere

Guardian article on the aftermath of the first rally, "The far right hails ‘Unite the Right’ a success. Its legacy says otherwise" maybe I should have posted it there.[1] Doug Weller talk 18:40, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Big Tent

Per these edits: I'm not sure where "big tent" came from, but it seems like it might be WP:OR. If the intention is to convey that there will be a wide range of protesters, wikilinks to jargon like big tent and political spectrum seems more confusing than helpful. I don't have access to the WSJ article, but it seems like the point is that, per the Washington Post article, Styczynski said she expects participants with a range of political backgrounds from far-left to moderates to conservatives “who agree that white supremacy is abhorrent.”[2] It's tempting to preemptively head-off the false narrative that only far-leftists are opposing these rallies, but we should figure out a way to do this which more closely matches sources. And of course, there will be more sources very soon. Grayfell (talk) 04:19, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Activities in Charlottesville?

Should this article cover any of the weekend activities in Charlottesville?

• https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-protests/hundreds-take-to-charlottesville-streets-a-year-after-far-right-rally-idUSKBN1KX023

---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:28, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Recent edit (Ivanka Trump tweet)

Preserving here by provind this link; my rationale was: "Undue opinion by the admin staffer". Please let me know if there are any concerns. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:17, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

title

it seems to me that the UTR2 rally was much less notable than the counter-protest called "Shut It Down" and that this article should be titled Shut It Down Rally? just my humble opinion. :] 173.85.200.56 (talk) 21:45, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Disagree. Shut It Down would not exist without UTR2. MartinezMD (talk) 21:54, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

I disagree also. Titling the article after the counter-protest is a bad idea. Rreagan007 (talk) 05:25, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Lasting notability

The Unite the Right rally article is too long according to Wikipedia:Article size. I bring this up here because if that article weren't too long, this would seem like a very obvious candidate for merging there. The quantity of coverage is fairly high, but it's largely also routine or speculative. Or it's about Kessler's numerous legal problems. The event itself, per sources, would otherwise certainly not meet Wikipedia:Notability (events) if it weren't for the previous rally. WP:LASTING remains to be seen, but do we really expect a lot of additional coverage?

I understand it's not a fair comparison, but 1960s Berkeley protests is about half the length of this article about a single rally in which only one person was arrested and nothing significant happened. This article seems far too detailed compared to its encyclopedic significance, and just because we can provide sources doesn't mean we should. Grayfell (talk) 05:08, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

This event got a significant amount of national media coverage. It should have its own article. Rreagan007 (talk) 05:24, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Okay, so is the current level of detail appropriate? Grayfell (talk) 06:04, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

@Grayfell: - Thanks for bringing up the topic. I think this situation is sorta interesting. I think if we're being honest, this article is sorta an example of WP:CRYSTALBALL. We set it up thinking this event would be notable. In fact, the thing sorta turned out to be a bust.

Half the content on this page appears to be about the first rally. I'm just going to throw out an idea here and slowly walk. Perhaps we merge with Unite the Right rally and just dedicate a small paragraph/subsection to the sequel which never really came.... NickCT (talk) 18:19, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I would support that yet, but I doubt it would gain consensus regardless. As I said, I think the UtR article is already too long, so I'm reluctant to expand it even more, especially with information on something that turned out to be only minimally significant. In this case, it's the sources which were guilty of CRYSTALBALL, because the scrutiny and expectation was intense. There's something to be said about media cycles and yadda yadda yadda, but for Wikipedia, we sort of have to go where the sources go, even when it turns out to be overblown.

That said, one of the editors who expanded this article the most (IcierJacks) has been blocked as a sock puppet, and their idiosyncratic application of due weight has caused many problems elsewhere, also. Trimming this to be strongly focused on the event itself would be a good first step in cleaning this up. The Unite the Right rally and the Charlottesville car attack articles are both quite long and detailed. A small amount of redundancy is very useful, but I think there's too much right now, and it's become distracting. Grayfell (talk) 20:58, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

@Grayfell: - Yes. You're right. There wouldn't be support for a merge. And the article is too long.

As I said earlier, a lot of the content seems focused on the first rally. I'd suggest we just go through and aggressively strip any material related to the first rally. Want me to do that? NickCT (talk) 11:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. Strip and merge. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I also agree, a lot of the content can just be stripped and merged, I feel like the notability of the rally is just how UN-NOTABLE it ended up being.QueerFilmNerd^talk 20:14, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

@QueerFilmNerd: - Indeed. It was notability un-notable. This raises the interesting philosophical WP question; can something that was once notable become un-notable!? Wrap your mind around that one.... NickCT (talk) 22:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Agree with strip and merge, especially considering what a damp squib the event actually was. If anything, were it not for the counter-protests I'd aver the march had little to no notability. Phantomsnake (talk) 01:20, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

• There might have been very few protesters, but there was a bunch of counter-protesters. wumbolo ^^^ 04:24, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Sockpuppet edits Suggestion

A lot of editing was done on this page by IcierJacks (talk · contribs) (up to 03:10, 13 August 2018‎ ) who has now been banned as a sock of also blocked PerfectlyIrrational (talk · contribs).

Perhaps someone familiar with the event should check their edits? 220 of ^Borg 02:26, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

I can do a check of the edits shortly. Edit: From what I can tell, their edits were mostly genuine. Anything suspicious doesn't seem to be on the page anymore (such as the mention of Russian interference), and a lot of their edits were edited over and also are not on the page anymore. QueerFilmNerd^talk 17:20, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for that. Appreciated! 220 of ^Borg 07:19, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Change name

If I'm correct, the rally hosted by Jason Kessler was actually called "White Civil Rights Rally". Therefore, I believe the name should be changed back to White Civil Rights Rally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.76.163.6 (talk) 17:49, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

We usually use a topic's common name on Wikipedia. There was a discussion about this in August in a section above. You could start a new discussion but it would be unlikely to be successful unless something has changed significantly since then. Station1 (talk) 18:59, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Daniel Hertz listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Daniel Hertz. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:24, 8 May 2019 (UTC)