This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Judging from TV footage and press photos-
whilst all the rest was multi-ethnic chaos and anarchy. Wipsenade ( talk) 09:42, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Malayasians? 81.100.118.140 ( talk) 08:22, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
"Commander of Iran's Basij Force says it is ready to deploy peacekeeper forces in London as the unrest in the British capital drags on despite tightened security measures. .. “Unfortunately the crimes and violence of the autocratic British kingdom continues against the country's deprived [population] and not only the advice of well-wishers has no effect on the conduct of the regime's repressive police force but we witness the deprived people of this country are being called a bunch of thieves and looters,” he regretted... “If the UN General Assembly approves, the Basij Organization is ready to send a number of Ashura and al-Zahra brigades to Liverpool and Birmingham as peacekeepers to monitor observation of human rights laws and deter use of force,” he added. "
Unsure of whether this is notable enough, but it certainly seems to be Iran rubbing it in the UK's face. -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 06:47, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh, but there's more!
I guess right now would be the perfect time for Libya and Iran to make their PR strikes. -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 09:36, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
And THIS from someone who acknowledges Operation Ajax and hates that it happened. Wzrd1 ( talk) 06:39, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
We should probably trim down the arrests sections and talk about charges. A good article here detailing the greater than normal sentences being handed out for minor crimes including six months in jail for a first offence of stealing £3.50 of water.-- Pontificalibus ( talk) 07:42, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
The intro says 1100+ people have been arrested in total. The infobox says 1500+ arrested in total. Both statements quote the same source http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/10/london-riots-spark-copycat-birmingham a Guardian article which mentions 1100 but not 1500. I know the number may increase with time but both figures suggest it's the total so far and use the same source, this is incorrect. Surely it should state it was 1100 at a given date, and the 1500 if true should have a correct source and also be in the intro. Or the 1500 should be changed if not true. Carlwev ( talk) 13:19, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Does 1968 Grosvenor Square count? BBC Article on Grosvenor Square-- Kitchen Knife ( talk) 14:16, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
In "Causes", criminal behaviour is is cited as the primary reason for criminal behaviour. This is circular and contributes nothing to the section. I would expect the underlying causes to largely be the barriers to social advancement or personal betterment that these young people are faced with. They're acting like people with nothing to lose and that should be explored. 68.145.117.39 ( talk) 16:19, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
I highly recommend people stop edit warring on the lede. That already has caused the article to be protected once already. Please discuss the different versions and develop consensus for your changes. This edit war is silly, and is almost amounts to vandalism if no discussion happens. Lets focus on quality, please. -- Cerejota ( talk) 18:50, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
What looks like a useful summary by The Independent may be of interest if anyone has time. Unfortunately links to the pieces aren't given. -- Trevj ( talk) 22:15, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
AndyTheGrump, you've just deleted the See Also section on the grounds that it is being used to push POV articles. Examining it, I found the articles listed in it immediately before your reversion/deletion edit combo were
Obviously people will take different views. There's only one of those I'd consider to be POV (Race riots) and even that one is much less problematic placed in the "See also" section than it would have been if the text had asserted that the 2011 England riots were race riots. Also for an article of this size I think a "See also" section is helpful in guiding people to other major related articles - not all of which were listed, but they could have been added later. What exactly was your problem with this section, or more particularly, with each of these links? Rubywine . talk 02:02, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Andy, you are serious in your edit summary? It seems like you need to recharge your AGF battery, because launching into accusations of POV pushing without evidence is surely a failure to AGF. That said, I disagree strongly with your assessment of the situation - there was no attempt on my part to push any POV. I just found it weird that unlike the bulk of the articles in wikipedia, this lacks a see also and dropped some stuff into it, including a List article I recently created.
I think that see also's, and WP:SEEALSO backs me completely, are very good ways to separate this article from a news article, in that it provides encyclopedic depth and contextualizes events in the wider world, and goes into our wealth of encyclopedic knowledge to enrich the knowledge of our readers. They should be present whenever possible and needed, which I have found to be nearly always. Your argument "ad absurdum" that we would have to include every British riot in the last 50 years is put to rest by the existence of a conveniently placed navbox that highlights the most notable events regarding riots in the United Kingdom - I think you might have missed it, but its right there in the bottom of the article. So there is no possibility of the see also becoming a problem in this sense. The other arguments seem more like a philosophical opposition to See Also's in general, rather than an specific criticism of any particular one -even when you mention particular ones. I am sure that if you have a philosophical opposition to See Alsos in general, the place to vent it is not here - but in the talk page of the appropriate MOS.
What would a "see also" include in this article? For starters, to reflect notable and reliably sourced views that compare this event to others, Such as this piece by Dominique Moïsi in the Financial Times, without giving these views undue weight in the article - precisely address issues of neutrality in a way that is encyclopedic, rather than journalistic, which is what your proposal of complete deletion of the section feels like. That said, I see the point on the inclusion of the list, but the cause of the Tottenham riot is directly related to the police killing a man - that is an issue of *this* event to, as the Tottenham riot was the riot that sparked all the other. That is information that provides historic context that has no other space to go in this article than a See Also. And any other addition we can discuss, as well as removals.
I see many problems with the article, in particular the lack conscientiousness of not discussing edits, the incredible amount of redundant sources, the lede and its utter lack of any making of sense and looking more like a tabloid lede rather than an encyclopedia lede, and of course, the NPOV battle, etc. The See also has neither been a source of problems, nor the "problems" it might create cannot be solved by discussion and consensus.
That said, I am restoring the section, and restoring the links, and will revert to my limit as per 3RR, unless substantial, non-philosophical opposition to each item is given. --
Cerejota (
talk)
05:37, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
This is the navbox:
I hope it illustrates why we do not have to include all the riots pretty well.-- Cerejota ( talk) 05:40, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
This contribution from historian David Starkey has received significant media coverage, eg:
-- Mais oui! ( talk) 04:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Would someone please archive some of this talk page. Thank you. Deterence Talk 09:40, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Police were not responsible for the shooting of a man in Croydon on 8 August, as stated in the 2nd para. of the Introduction.
Two men have now been arrested in connection with this death.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14513340 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinvs ( talk • contribs) 11:09, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
The recent edit here includes information not relevant to the article and I believe it should be removed. Add Hominy ( talk) 22:17, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
We need to form a consensus on whether we include the word "peaceful" when describing the initial protest/demonstration that followed the death of Mark Duggan. It is repeatedly being inserted, and then removed, from the description in the (currently) second sentence of the lead, and we need to have authority to revert-on-sight, one way or the other.
My current opinion, based on the fact that the word is used when referring to it in several reliable sources, is that it should be in the lead of this article. Reliable sources using it include: The Guardian 7th Aug, BBC News 7th Aug, BBC News 8th Aug, BBC News 9th Aug, The Independent 13th Aug, The Telegraph 7th Aug, The Scotsman 9th Aug, Irish Times 9th Aug, USA Today 9th Aug, AlJazeera 10th Aug, The Wall Street Journal 10th Aug, Sydney Morning Herald 13th Aug. Are there any sources which say it wasn't peaceful?
FactController ( talk) 22:33, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
A small number of editors persist in adding "cleanup" tags to the head of this article. This is currently a high traffic page, read by more than 50,000 people each day. They did not come here to read about editors prodding each other. You don't see editor's notes to each other in a reputable encyclopaedia. This article is very much a work in progress, and so it will not yet be perfect. We know it needs ongoing cleanup. Adding a gaudy distracting tag in no way helps that process. WWGB ( talk) 01:21, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
These are the tags in question. You can put them back if removed to show you support a consensus to keep them. You can also discuss why not or why to include them. You can also edit the article to eliminate the basis for the tagging. But by g-d! Do not harm the template's feelings by calling them ugly...
{{multiple issues|lead rewrite=August 2011|original research=August 2011|synthesis=August 2011|update=August 2011|weasel=August 2011}}
{{Too few opinions|date=August 2011}}
--
Cerejota (
talk)
14:45, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
The second paragraph of the article lists 6 deaths, but the "Deaths and Injuries" section and the info box still say 5. Raevn ( talk) 01:54, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
An editor has reinstated this story sourced only by The Sun, here with the edit summary "(disprove it if you have a problem)". This misses the point; The Sun is not a reliable source and we shouldn't add contentious material that is not reliable sourced. I don't edit war so perhaps another editor would remove this, if it is considered my view is correct? Bridgeplayer ( talk) 02:41, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Someone could improve the article? Here is the English Wikipedia. The best wikipedia. What a shame! Many articles featured here and many with problems. What a paradox! Eduardo P ( talk) 15:42, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
As I see it, there are several problems with this article.
I have tried to fix some of the problems that I've come across, however, in many cases my edits have been reverted soon afterwards. See: reverted to untrue state for example. For those reasons I believe the article seriously needs cleaning-up to compy with Wiki policies andd guidelines, so the cleanup template is appropriate. FactController ( talk) 19:27, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
I notice that The Sun is being cited. Hitherto this red top has not been considered a reliable source; it has no reputation for fact checking. Bridgeplayer ( talk) 01:38, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
The sun is crap. 82.18.204.132 ( talk) 16:32, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Definitely. All the tabloid citations must go, if possible. The Mail is even worse in some respects. Rubywine . talk 05:34, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Can we get some clarification of the riots? Are the riots limited to black areas, or are they multi-racial? Can we get some level-headed discussion that does not stoop to David Starkey's level? There needs to be some analysis of social class' relationship also. And please let us use internationally decipherable language, not regionalisms, such as "chavs." Dogru144 ( talk) 10:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Someone, could put one reference in the section? Eduardo P ( talk) 16:26, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Comments about the lead section from Cerejota (copied) :
Ouch. To begin with, I corrected some grammar and removed a paragraph. This is the result:
This is the paragraph which I removed. I thought it wasn't worth saving; you may disagree. I think it says very little, and I find it generally problematic. I think it needs to be replaced with something far more substantial about the response of politicians, the police, the media and others.
So the next step is to locate and think about Wikipedia's guidelines for lead sections. Suggestions and comments would be great. Rubywine . talk
According to WP:LEAD, the lead should give an NPOV introduction to the article and a concise summary of the most importand aspects of the topic, including controversies, with the amount of emphasis reflecting the significance. Perhaps the best place to start to to attempt to agree what are the most important aspects of the topic.
I'll stick my neck out here and offer the following as an Aunt Sally list of the most important events:
FactController ( talk) 09:22, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Here is my draft proposal for the Lede in the main article. I have tried to incorporate elements of the existing Lede, and the concerns expressed above (especially those of User:Cerejota), as much as possible. This is only a tentative suggestion. I encourage and welcome criticism and suggestions. No kittehs were harmed in the production of this Lede:
Obviously, many of the numbers will change as new information comes to light. Remember, this is just a draft suggestion from which an alternative Lede may evolve. I have not put too much time and effort into references because, 1) I'm not sure how much referencing is required for the Lede (especially when the references will occur in the main content anyway), and 2) experience has taught me that my proposed draft will be ignored anyway. Enjoy. Deterence Talk 11:10, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
“ | Widespread rioting occurred, initially in several districts of London, then later across England, from 6 to 10 August 2011. Following a peaceful march protesting the fatal shooting of Mark Duggan by Metropolitan Police Service firearms officers on 4 August 2011, a riot began on Tottenham, North London. Rioting then spread in the next few days across London and to other areas of England, with the worst disturbances centred on several major cities. Small and localised events connected to the major riots also took place in many smaller towns and cities in England, giving national scope to the events.
These riots were characterised by rampant looting and arson attacks of unprecedented levels. As a result, British Prime Minister David Cameron returned early from his holiday in Italy and other Government and Opposition leaders also cut their holidays short to attend to the matter. All police leave was cancelled [when?] and Parliament was recalled on 11 August to debate the situation. As of 13 August, 2,275 people have been arrested, of whom more than 1,000 have been charged and X convicted. Arrests, charges and trials are continuing, with courts working extended hours. 5 people have died and X have been wounded as a direct result of related violent acts, and there has been an estimate XXX pounds of property damage. There was significant economic impact as local economic activity halted as a result of the riots. Police action has been blamed for the initial riot and the subsequent Police reaction has been criticised as not being appropriate or sufficiently effective. The riots have generated significant ongoing debate among political, social, and academic figures about the causes and context in which they happened. |
” |
“ | For three days in August 2011 London suffered a series of riots and serious unrest, these were followed by looting and disturbances in some other major cities, mainly in the Midlands and North-West of England.
Following a peaceful march on 6 August 2011 protesting over the fatal shooting of Mark Duggan by police officers on 4 August 2011, a riot began on Tottenham, North London. Rioting then spread in the next few days into several London boroughs and eventually into some other areas of England, with the worst disturbances outside of London being centred on cities in the Midlands and the North-West of Englaand. Bristol and Nottingham were also seriously affected and localised events connected to the major riots also took place in many smaller towns and cities in England, giving national scope to the events. These riots were characterised by rampant looting and arson attacks of unprecedented levels. As a result, British Prime Minister David Cameron returned early from his holiday in Italy and other Government and Opposition leaders also cut their holidays short to attend to the matter. All police leave was cancelled [when?] and Parliament was recalled on 11 August to debate the situation. As of 13 August, 2,275 people have been arrested, of whom more than 1,000 have been charged and X convicted. Arrests, charges and court proceedings are continuing, with courts working extended hours. 5 people have died and X have been wounded as a direct result of related violent acts, and there has been an estimate XXX pounds of property damage. There was significant economic impact as local economic activity halted as a result of the riots. Police action has been blamed for the initial riot and the subsequent Police reaction has been criticised as not being appropriate or sufficiently effective. The riots have generated significant ongoing debate among political, social, and academic figures about the causes and context in which they happened. |
” |
I can live with this version with a small modification to the first sentence: rather than "For three days in August 2011 London", something to the effect "Between the 6 and 10 August 2011 in England". I further elaborate "why" below.
We need to source it and fill in the blanks and give it a day to see if there is further comments. You make a good point on the geographical spread, some comments on that:
I feel good about this being able to fix the issues so we can move to the article proper.-- Cerejota ( talk) 14:49, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
The image in the infobox is meaningless, a map of the spots, where the riot happened would be better! 78.35.196.9 ( talk) 14:43, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
I was browsing this article and noticed that the pie chart given to illustrate the YouGov / The Sun Survey Results in the Causes section is unfortunately very much in error. The percentages correctly reflect the survey results, but the pie itself is very disproportionate to them and thus useless as an illustration. I'd happily do it myself but don't have enough edits to upload an image, and I'd hate to just delete it without replacing it. Anyone? Thanks -- FreshLikeADaisy ( talk) 04:31, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
BUT WHAT IS THE GREY!?-- Sabri Al-Safi ( talk) 15:40, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Non't know mate. 82.11.105.195 ( talk) 16:28, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Gang culture has been cited as a cause of the riots. Paul Routledge writing in the Daily Mirror singled out the role of rap music. However, rap artist Professor Green (not actually a professor) challenged this assertion on Twitter.[56]
140 characters must have been a really insightful rebuttal. LOL. Is twitter really a WP:RS now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.132.92.8 ( talk) 13:26, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
LOL Professor Green explains it all! He is just another one pathetic product of bloodocracy dope-dealing regimes of UK and USA which shall certainly fall... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.86.156.63 ( talk) 17:52, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Today FactController deleted the following section under Effects with the dismissive comment "one of many":
Quoting the Guardian headline: "Independent record labels fear ruinous stock loss". The destruction of most of PIAS' inventory including the entire British stock of LPs and CDs for Domino Records, XL Records and over 100 other European independent record labels is notable and definitely deserves to be mentioned. That is why I am reverting this edit. FactController, as ever, I am completely dismayed by your pattern of editing. Rubywine . talk 15:23, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
guardian-06-duggan
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).enf1
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).DailyMail-2023556-martyr
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).cnn_figures
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).death_one
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).death_two
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).death_three
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).jackson
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check |url=
value (
help); Missing pipe in: |url=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check |url=
value (
help); Missing pipe in: |url=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check |url=
value (
help); Missing pipe in: |url=
(
help)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Judging from TV footage and press photos-
whilst all the rest was multi-ethnic chaos and anarchy. Wipsenade ( talk) 09:42, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Malayasians? 81.100.118.140 ( talk) 08:22, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
"Commander of Iran's Basij Force says it is ready to deploy peacekeeper forces in London as the unrest in the British capital drags on despite tightened security measures. .. “Unfortunately the crimes and violence of the autocratic British kingdom continues against the country's deprived [population] and not only the advice of well-wishers has no effect on the conduct of the regime's repressive police force but we witness the deprived people of this country are being called a bunch of thieves and looters,” he regretted... “If the UN General Assembly approves, the Basij Organization is ready to send a number of Ashura and al-Zahra brigades to Liverpool and Birmingham as peacekeepers to monitor observation of human rights laws and deter use of force,” he added. "
Unsure of whether this is notable enough, but it certainly seems to be Iran rubbing it in the UK's face. -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 06:47, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh, but there's more!
I guess right now would be the perfect time for Libya and Iran to make their PR strikes. -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 09:36, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
And THIS from someone who acknowledges Operation Ajax and hates that it happened. Wzrd1 ( talk) 06:39, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
We should probably trim down the arrests sections and talk about charges. A good article here detailing the greater than normal sentences being handed out for minor crimes including six months in jail for a first offence of stealing £3.50 of water.-- Pontificalibus ( talk) 07:42, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
The intro says 1100+ people have been arrested in total. The infobox says 1500+ arrested in total. Both statements quote the same source http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/10/london-riots-spark-copycat-birmingham a Guardian article which mentions 1100 but not 1500. I know the number may increase with time but both figures suggest it's the total so far and use the same source, this is incorrect. Surely it should state it was 1100 at a given date, and the 1500 if true should have a correct source and also be in the intro. Or the 1500 should be changed if not true. Carlwev ( talk) 13:19, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Does 1968 Grosvenor Square count? BBC Article on Grosvenor Square-- Kitchen Knife ( talk) 14:16, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
In "Causes", criminal behaviour is is cited as the primary reason for criminal behaviour. This is circular and contributes nothing to the section. I would expect the underlying causes to largely be the barriers to social advancement or personal betterment that these young people are faced with. They're acting like people with nothing to lose and that should be explored. 68.145.117.39 ( talk) 16:19, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
I highly recommend people stop edit warring on the lede. That already has caused the article to be protected once already. Please discuss the different versions and develop consensus for your changes. This edit war is silly, and is almost amounts to vandalism if no discussion happens. Lets focus on quality, please. -- Cerejota ( talk) 18:50, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
What looks like a useful summary by The Independent may be of interest if anyone has time. Unfortunately links to the pieces aren't given. -- Trevj ( talk) 22:15, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
AndyTheGrump, you've just deleted the See Also section on the grounds that it is being used to push POV articles. Examining it, I found the articles listed in it immediately before your reversion/deletion edit combo were
Obviously people will take different views. There's only one of those I'd consider to be POV (Race riots) and even that one is much less problematic placed in the "See also" section than it would have been if the text had asserted that the 2011 England riots were race riots. Also for an article of this size I think a "See also" section is helpful in guiding people to other major related articles - not all of which were listed, but they could have been added later. What exactly was your problem with this section, or more particularly, with each of these links? Rubywine . talk 02:02, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Andy, you are serious in your edit summary? It seems like you need to recharge your AGF battery, because launching into accusations of POV pushing without evidence is surely a failure to AGF. That said, I disagree strongly with your assessment of the situation - there was no attempt on my part to push any POV. I just found it weird that unlike the bulk of the articles in wikipedia, this lacks a see also and dropped some stuff into it, including a List article I recently created.
I think that see also's, and WP:SEEALSO backs me completely, are very good ways to separate this article from a news article, in that it provides encyclopedic depth and contextualizes events in the wider world, and goes into our wealth of encyclopedic knowledge to enrich the knowledge of our readers. They should be present whenever possible and needed, which I have found to be nearly always. Your argument "ad absurdum" that we would have to include every British riot in the last 50 years is put to rest by the existence of a conveniently placed navbox that highlights the most notable events regarding riots in the United Kingdom - I think you might have missed it, but its right there in the bottom of the article. So there is no possibility of the see also becoming a problem in this sense. The other arguments seem more like a philosophical opposition to See Also's in general, rather than an specific criticism of any particular one -even when you mention particular ones. I am sure that if you have a philosophical opposition to See Alsos in general, the place to vent it is not here - but in the talk page of the appropriate MOS.
What would a "see also" include in this article? For starters, to reflect notable and reliably sourced views that compare this event to others, Such as this piece by Dominique Moïsi in the Financial Times, without giving these views undue weight in the article - precisely address issues of neutrality in a way that is encyclopedic, rather than journalistic, which is what your proposal of complete deletion of the section feels like. That said, I see the point on the inclusion of the list, but the cause of the Tottenham riot is directly related to the police killing a man - that is an issue of *this* event to, as the Tottenham riot was the riot that sparked all the other. That is information that provides historic context that has no other space to go in this article than a See Also. And any other addition we can discuss, as well as removals.
I see many problems with the article, in particular the lack conscientiousness of not discussing edits, the incredible amount of redundant sources, the lede and its utter lack of any making of sense and looking more like a tabloid lede rather than an encyclopedia lede, and of course, the NPOV battle, etc. The See also has neither been a source of problems, nor the "problems" it might create cannot be solved by discussion and consensus.
That said, I am restoring the section, and restoring the links, and will revert to my limit as per 3RR, unless substantial, non-philosophical opposition to each item is given. --
Cerejota (
talk)
05:37, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
This is the navbox:
I hope it illustrates why we do not have to include all the riots pretty well.-- Cerejota ( talk) 05:40, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
This contribution from historian David Starkey has received significant media coverage, eg:
-- Mais oui! ( talk) 04:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Would someone please archive some of this talk page. Thank you. Deterence Talk 09:40, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
Police were not responsible for the shooting of a man in Croydon on 8 August, as stated in the 2nd para. of the Introduction.
Two men have now been arrested in connection with this death.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14513340 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinvs ( talk • contribs) 11:09, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
The recent edit here includes information not relevant to the article and I believe it should be removed. Add Hominy ( talk) 22:17, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
We need to form a consensus on whether we include the word "peaceful" when describing the initial protest/demonstration that followed the death of Mark Duggan. It is repeatedly being inserted, and then removed, from the description in the (currently) second sentence of the lead, and we need to have authority to revert-on-sight, one way or the other.
My current opinion, based on the fact that the word is used when referring to it in several reliable sources, is that it should be in the lead of this article. Reliable sources using it include: The Guardian 7th Aug, BBC News 7th Aug, BBC News 8th Aug, BBC News 9th Aug, The Independent 13th Aug, The Telegraph 7th Aug, The Scotsman 9th Aug, Irish Times 9th Aug, USA Today 9th Aug, AlJazeera 10th Aug, The Wall Street Journal 10th Aug, Sydney Morning Herald 13th Aug. Are there any sources which say it wasn't peaceful?
FactController ( talk) 22:33, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
A small number of editors persist in adding "cleanup" tags to the head of this article. This is currently a high traffic page, read by more than 50,000 people each day. They did not come here to read about editors prodding each other. You don't see editor's notes to each other in a reputable encyclopaedia. This article is very much a work in progress, and so it will not yet be perfect. We know it needs ongoing cleanup. Adding a gaudy distracting tag in no way helps that process. WWGB ( talk) 01:21, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
These are the tags in question. You can put them back if removed to show you support a consensus to keep them. You can also discuss why not or why to include them. You can also edit the article to eliminate the basis for the tagging. But by g-d! Do not harm the template's feelings by calling them ugly...
{{multiple issues|lead rewrite=August 2011|original research=August 2011|synthesis=August 2011|update=August 2011|weasel=August 2011}}
{{Too few opinions|date=August 2011}}
--
Cerejota (
talk)
14:45, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
The second paragraph of the article lists 6 deaths, but the "Deaths and Injuries" section and the info box still say 5. Raevn ( talk) 01:54, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
An editor has reinstated this story sourced only by The Sun, here with the edit summary "(disprove it if you have a problem)". This misses the point; The Sun is not a reliable source and we shouldn't add contentious material that is not reliable sourced. I don't edit war so perhaps another editor would remove this, if it is considered my view is correct? Bridgeplayer ( talk) 02:41, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Someone could improve the article? Here is the English Wikipedia. The best wikipedia. What a shame! Many articles featured here and many with problems. What a paradox! Eduardo P ( talk) 15:42, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
As I see it, there are several problems with this article.
I have tried to fix some of the problems that I've come across, however, in many cases my edits have been reverted soon afterwards. See: reverted to untrue state for example. For those reasons I believe the article seriously needs cleaning-up to compy with Wiki policies andd guidelines, so the cleanup template is appropriate. FactController ( talk) 19:27, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
I notice that The Sun is being cited. Hitherto this red top has not been considered a reliable source; it has no reputation for fact checking. Bridgeplayer ( talk) 01:38, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
The sun is crap. 82.18.204.132 ( talk) 16:32, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Definitely. All the tabloid citations must go, if possible. The Mail is even worse in some respects. Rubywine . talk 05:34, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Can we get some clarification of the riots? Are the riots limited to black areas, or are they multi-racial? Can we get some level-headed discussion that does not stoop to David Starkey's level? There needs to be some analysis of social class' relationship also. And please let us use internationally decipherable language, not regionalisms, such as "chavs." Dogru144 ( talk) 10:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Someone, could put one reference in the section? Eduardo P ( talk) 16:26, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Comments about the lead section from Cerejota (copied) :
Ouch. To begin with, I corrected some grammar and removed a paragraph. This is the result:
This is the paragraph which I removed. I thought it wasn't worth saving; you may disagree. I think it says very little, and I find it generally problematic. I think it needs to be replaced with something far more substantial about the response of politicians, the police, the media and others.
So the next step is to locate and think about Wikipedia's guidelines for lead sections. Suggestions and comments would be great. Rubywine . talk
According to WP:LEAD, the lead should give an NPOV introduction to the article and a concise summary of the most importand aspects of the topic, including controversies, with the amount of emphasis reflecting the significance. Perhaps the best place to start to to attempt to agree what are the most important aspects of the topic.
I'll stick my neck out here and offer the following as an Aunt Sally list of the most important events:
FactController ( talk) 09:22, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Here is my draft proposal for the Lede in the main article. I have tried to incorporate elements of the existing Lede, and the concerns expressed above (especially those of User:Cerejota), as much as possible. This is only a tentative suggestion. I encourage and welcome criticism and suggestions. No kittehs were harmed in the production of this Lede:
Obviously, many of the numbers will change as new information comes to light. Remember, this is just a draft suggestion from which an alternative Lede may evolve. I have not put too much time and effort into references because, 1) I'm not sure how much referencing is required for the Lede (especially when the references will occur in the main content anyway), and 2) experience has taught me that my proposed draft will be ignored anyway. Enjoy. Deterence Talk 11:10, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
“ | Widespread rioting occurred, initially in several districts of London, then later across England, from 6 to 10 August 2011. Following a peaceful march protesting the fatal shooting of Mark Duggan by Metropolitan Police Service firearms officers on 4 August 2011, a riot began on Tottenham, North London. Rioting then spread in the next few days across London and to other areas of England, with the worst disturbances centred on several major cities. Small and localised events connected to the major riots also took place in many smaller towns and cities in England, giving national scope to the events.
These riots were characterised by rampant looting and arson attacks of unprecedented levels. As a result, British Prime Minister David Cameron returned early from his holiday in Italy and other Government and Opposition leaders also cut their holidays short to attend to the matter. All police leave was cancelled [when?] and Parliament was recalled on 11 August to debate the situation. As of 13 August, 2,275 people have been arrested, of whom more than 1,000 have been charged and X convicted. Arrests, charges and trials are continuing, with courts working extended hours. 5 people have died and X have been wounded as a direct result of related violent acts, and there has been an estimate XXX pounds of property damage. There was significant economic impact as local economic activity halted as a result of the riots. Police action has been blamed for the initial riot and the subsequent Police reaction has been criticised as not being appropriate or sufficiently effective. The riots have generated significant ongoing debate among political, social, and academic figures about the causes and context in which they happened. |
” |
“ | For three days in August 2011 London suffered a series of riots and serious unrest, these were followed by looting and disturbances in some other major cities, mainly in the Midlands and North-West of England.
Following a peaceful march on 6 August 2011 protesting over the fatal shooting of Mark Duggan by police officers on 4 August 2011, a riot began on Tottenham, North London. Rioting then spread in the next few days into several London boroughs and eventually into some other areas of England, with the worst disturbances outside of London being centred on cities in the Midlands and the North-West of Englaand. Bristol and Nottingham were also seriously affected and localised events connected to the major riots also took place in many smaller towns and cities in England, giving national scope to the events. These riots were characterised by rampant looting and arson attacks of unprecedented levels. As a result, British Prime Minister David Cameron returned early from his holiday in Italy and other Government and Opposition leaders also cut their holidays short to attend to the matter. All police leave was cancelled [when?] and Parliament was recalled on 11 August to debate the situation. As of 13 August, 2,275 people have been arrested, of whom more than 1,000 have been charged and X convicted. Arrests, charges and court proceedings are continuing, with courts working extended hours. 5 people have died and X have been wounded as a direct result of related violent acts, and there has been an estimate XXX pounds of property damage. There was significant economic impact as local economic activity halted as a result of the riots. Police action has been blamed for the initial riot and the subsequent Police reaction has been criticised as not being appropriate or sufficiently effective. The riots have generated significant ongoing debate among political, social, and academic figures about the causes and context in which they happened. |
” |
I can live with this version with a small modification to the first sentence: rather than "For three days in August 2011 London", something to the effect "Between the 6 and 10 August 2011 in England". I further elaborate "why" below.
We need to source it and fill in the blanks and give it a day to see if there is further comments. You make a good point on the geographical spread, some comments on that:
I feel good about this being able to fix the issues so we can move to the article proper.-- Cerejota ( talk) 14:49, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
The image in the infobox is meaningless, a map of the spots, where the riot happened would be better! 78.35.196.9 ( talk) 14:43, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
I was browsing this article and noticed that the pie chart given to illustrate the YouGov / The Sun Survey Results in the Causes section is unfortunately very much in error. The percentages correctly reflect the survey results, but the pie itself is very disproportionate to them and thus useless as an illustration. I'd happily do it myself but don't have enough edits to upload an image, and I'd hate to just delete it without replacing it. Anyone? Thanks -- FreshLikeADaisy ( talk) 04:31, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
BUT WHAT IS THE GREY!?-- Sabri Al-Safi ( talk) 15:40, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Non't know mate. 82.11.105.195 ( talk) 16:28, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Gang culture has been cited as a cause of the riots. Paul Routledge writing in the Daily Mirror singled out the role of rap music. However, rap artist Professor Green (not actually a professor) challenged this assertion on Twitter.[56]
140 characters must have been a really insightful rebuttal. LOL. Is twitter really a WP:RS now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.132.92.8 ( talk) 13:26, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
LOL Professor Green explains it all! He is just another one pathetic product of bloodocracy dope-dealing regimes of UK and USA which shall certainly fall... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.86.156.63 ( talk) 17:52, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Today FactController deleted the following section under Effects with the dismissive comment "one of many":
Quoting the Guardian headline: "Independent record labels fear ruinous stock loss". The destruction of most of PIAS' inventory including the entire British stock of LPs and CDs for Domino Records, XL Records and over 100 other European independent record labels is notable and definitely deserves to be mentioned. That is why I am reverting this edit. FactController, as ever, I am completely dismayed by your pattern of editing. Rubywine . talk 15:23, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
guardian-06-duggan
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).enf1
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).DailyMail-2023556-martyr
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).cnn_figures
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).death_one
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).death_two
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).death_three
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).jackson
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check |url=
value (
help); Missing pipe in: |url=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check |url=
value (
help); Missing pipe in: |url=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Check |url=
value (
help); Missing pipe in: |url=
(
help)