This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
George Floyd protests article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Frequently asked questions Q1: Does it have to say "white" police officer?
A1: Yes, because almost all reliable sources emphasize the significance of this fact. Q2: I read some information on the web that isn't in this article!
A2: When proposing anything to be added to the article you need to cite a
reliable source;
secondary sources are generally preferred over
primary. Q3: This article is biased (for/against), or (whitewashes/blames), (Floyd/police)!
A3: See our
neutral point of view policy. Complaints of bias must be accompanied by specific concerns or suggestions for change. Vague, general statements don't help. Q4: Why is this article calling it a murder instead of a death/killing?
A4: As a person was formally convicted for murder in a court of law, the article uses the term "murder", in line with the community guidance at
WP:MURDERS. Q5: Wasn't Floyd killed near a store called Cub Foods, not Cup Foods?
A5: The store is Cup Foods, and is not affiliated with the
Cub Foods store chain. Q6: Why does the article use such a graphic photo? Isn't it in poor taste?
A6: The lead image was determined by the community in a
formal Request for Comment process. The RfC reached an "overwhelming consensus" that "...the image, despite it being traumatizing, should be kept per WP:NOTCENSORED, as it is an appropriate representation of the topic." Q7: Why was my request or comment removed?
A7: Because of the frequency of meritless and disruptive requests, any further requests to describe Floyd's murder using other terms (e.g. "death", "overdose") or to change the name of the article accordingly will be removed without consideration, unless the request complies with all relevant Wikipedia guidelines and essays, including
WP:Requested moves,
WP:Common name,
WP:Article titles,
WP:Naming conventions (violence and deaths), and
WP:Reliable sources. Anyone removing such requests should include a link to this FAQ in their edit summary. Q8: Why do we not call the protests riots?
A8: Because multiple reliable sources call them protests, not riots. |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
A news item involving George Floyd protests was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 29 May 2020. |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the
Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
On 25 August 2020, it was proposed that this article be moved from George Floyd protests to 2020 Black Lives Matter protests. The result of the discussion was consensus against move. |
Archives ( Index) |
This page is archived by
ClueBot III.
|
the definition of a riot is as follows: A violent public disorder; 2600:1016:B002:5ACE:E19D:ED4F:6DFB:D915 ( talk) 16:46, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
I agree. Should be changed to George Floyd Riots (Mostly peaceful) to give homage to our "reliable" sources.. Wikipedia is such a joke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.117.214.231 ( talk) 16:31, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Do we need a FAQ on this? 16:34, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, it seems we need a FAQ.
Slatersteven (
talk) 17:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
The article is controversial to say the least. Most of these alleged "protests" were violent and resulted in widespread vandalism. These were not protests. Moreover, they took place during the Covid lockdown, in violation of the law. The motivations for continuing the protests shifted from George Lloyd's death to wider political demands, leading to the weaponisation of Floyd's for political gain. Little or none of this is acknowledged in this article, which often uses false or biased sources, mostly from only one side of the political spectrum. Discussion is silenced. In short, the article is very unbalanced and needs to be substantially rewritten. NPOV must not be removed until all these issues have been addressed. 86.6.148.125 ( talk) 11:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Title incorrectly uses the word "protests" should be changed to "riots". Sections that mentions cost of damages use the word "insured" it is irrelevant and should be removed from each section mentioning it. NH51907646 ( talk) 15:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
{{
Edit semi-protected}}
template. –
Muboshgu (
talk) 16:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Yes the George Floyd Demonstrations where largely peaceful, however they also included the largest amount of damage for any riot and over 30 dead, so I feel like a more nuteral term like demonstrations would be appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:5CC:102:2FC0:E042:8310:1E31:4E6E ( talk) 22:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello all, I'm still relatively new here so I'm hoping I formatted this correctly and it isn't too long. Constructive criticism is always appreciated.
This is regarding the George Floyd Protests#Murder of George Floyd subsection; last sentence of paragraph three and first two sentences of paragraph five. For reference, I've included the sentences as they currently appear:
A May 26 autopsy conducted by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's Office found that there were "no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation"; the preliminary findings stated that underlying health conditions, the police restraint, and potential intoxicants likely contributed to Floyd's death.[83][84]
On June 1, a private autopsy commissioned by the family of Floyd found the death to be a homicide and that Floyd had died due to asphyxiation from sustained pressure, which conflicted with the original autopsy report done earlier that week.[88] Shortly after, the official post-mortem declared Floyd's death a homicide.[89]
The paragraphs above compare the findings from the two autopsies. They cover cause of death (CoD), physical signs of asphyxiation and contributing factors. To maintain balance and a NPOV both autopsies' POVs on these topics should be included since they are of equal weight. However, there a several instances where only one POV is mentioned.
The private autopsy's POV on the CoD is included, but the medical examiner's (ME's) POV isn't. According to [84], the ME's full report concluded the CoD to be “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression”.
The ME's POV is that there were no physical signs of asphyxiation, but the private autopsy's POV on the topic isn't included. According to [A] and [B] (both linked at bottom of this post), the private autopsy found hemorrhaging over the vertebral bodies, in the cervical region and on the outside of the carotid artery as physical evidence of asphyxiation.
The ME’s POV on whether underlying medical conditions and drugs contributed to death is mentioned, but the private autopsy's POV isn't. According to [A] and [88], the private autopsy said that neither drugs nor underlying medical problems contributed to death.
Consider adding the ME's homicide ruling in the second sentence of paragraph five into paragraph three. The sentences from paragraph three discuss the ME’s findings, while the sentences from paragraph five deal with findings from the private autopsy. Keeping all the ME’s findings together makes more sense and improves readability. The information that the death was a homicide is included in [84] so [89] can remain in paragraph five.
The first sentence of paragraph five references an "original autopsy report done earlier that week". There was no autopsy report from earlier in the week. According to [88], some preliminary findings from the May 26 autopsy were independently released by the county attorney's office in charging documents on May 29, but the only actual autopsy reports were from the ME’s office and the privately commissioned doctors, both released on June 1. I'm going to assume the reference was to the preliminary findings and propose it be edited accordingly for accuracy.
Add some wikilinks for the medical terms so readers know what they are.
Copy-edit for clarity, add wikilinks, [A],[B] and missing POVs (additions and copy-edits underlined):
A May 26 autopsy conducted by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's Office found that there were "no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation"; the preliminary findings stated that underlying health conditions, the police restraint, and potential intoxicants likely contributed to Floyd's death.[83] On June 1, the medical examiner’s full report declared Floyd’s death a homicide, finding that “law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression” caused “ cardiopulmonary arrest.”[84]
On June 1, the report from a private autopsy commissioned by Floyd’s family was released shortly before the medical examiner's report. It found the death to be a homicide but found hemorrhaging over the vertebral bodies, in the cervical region and on the carotid artery as physical evidence that Floyd had died due to asphyxiation from sustained pressure.[89][B] It also stated that neither drugs nor underlying medical problems contributed to his death.[A] These findings conflicted with the medical examiner's preliminary findings from earlier that week.[88]
Pierce Havoc ( talk) 19:35, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
There is a biased emphasis in this article made several times on how 93% of all protests over the career criminal floyd were peaceful. The number 7,750 is given as the total number. If 93% were “mostly peaceful,” that means 543 were violent. 543 violent riots across the US is not insignificant and gives context as to why these riots were unpopular with most Americans. Bourbonberserkerbear ( talk) 13:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
career criminalis just plain wrong. Happy Good Friday. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 15:37, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Garrett Foster was not actually a part of the Bugaloo Boys, and never had any official or unofficial affiliation with the group. He was legally carrying a long gun in the State of Texas, that was pointed towards the ground at all times. Moments before his death, he engaged in deescalation tactics and was then murdered by Daniel Perry. Garrett Foster was never a part of extremist groups whatsoever. 2603:8080:1001:E372:75D1:17AB:4BEA:85DF ( talk) 11:15, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
George Floyd protests article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Frequently asked questions Q1: Does it have to say "white" police officer?
A1: Yes, because almost all reliable sources emphasize the significance of this fact. Q2: I read some information on the web that isn't in this article!
A2: When proposing anything to be added to the article you need to cite a
reliable source;
secondary sources are generally preferred over
primary. Q3: This article is biased (for/against), or (whitewashes/blames), (Floyd/police)!
A3: See our
neutral point of view policy. Complaints of bias must be accompanied by specific concerns or suggestions for change. Vague, general statements don't help. Q4: Why is this article calling it a murder instead of a death/killing?
A4: As a person was formally convicted for murder in a court of law, the article uses the term "murder", in line with the community guidance at
WP:MURDERS. Q5: Wasn't Floyd killed near a store called Cub Foods, not Cup Foods?
A5: The store is Cup Foods, and is not affiliated with the
Cub Foods store chain. Q6: Why does the article use such a graphic photo? Isn't it in poor taste?
A6: The lead image was determined by the community in a
formal Request for Comment process. The RfC reached an "overwhelming consensus" that "...the image, despite it being traumatizing, should be kept per WP:NOTCENSORED, as it is an appropriate representation of the topic." Q7: Why was my request or comment removed?
A7: Because of the frequency of meritless and disruptive requests, any further requests to describe Floyd's murder using other terms (e.g. "death", "overdose") or to change the name of the article accordingly will be removed without consideration, unless the request complies with all relevant Wikipedia guidelines and essays, including
WP:Requested moves,
WP:Common name,
WP:Article titles,
WP:Naming conventions (violence and deaths), and
WP:Reliable sources. Anyone removing such requests should include a link to this FAQ in their edit summary. Q8: Why do we not call the protests riots?
A8: Because multiple reliable sources call them protests, not riots. |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
A news item involving George Floyd protests was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 29 May 2020. |
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the
Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
On 25 August 2020, it was proposed that this article be moved from George Floyd protests to 2020 Black Lives Matter protests. The result of the discussion was consensus against move. |
Archives ( Index) |
This page is archived by
ClueBot III.
|
the definition of a riot is as follows: A violent public disorder; 2600:1016:B002:5ACE:E19D:ED4F:6DFB:D915 ( talk) 16:46, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
I agree. Should be changed to George Floyd Riots (Mostly peaceful) to give homage to our "reliable" sources.. Wikipedia is such a joke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.117.214.231 ( talk) 16:31, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Do we need a FAQ on this? 16:34, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Yes, it seems we need a FAQ.
Slatersteven (
talk) 17:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
The article is controversial to say the least. Most of these alleged "protests" were violent and resulted in widespread vandalism. These were not protests. Moreover, they took place during the Covid lockdown, in violation of the law. The motivations for continuing the protests shifted from George Lloyd's death to wider political demands, leading to the weaponisation of Floyd's for political gain. Little or none of this is acknowledged in this article, which often uses false or biased sources, mostly from only one side of the political spectrum. Discussion is silenced. In short, the article is very unbalanced and needs to be substantially rewritten. NPOV must not be removed until all these issues have been addressed. 86.6.148.125 ( talk) 11:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Title incorrectly uses the word "protests" should be changed to "riots". Sections that mentions cost of damages use the word "insured" it is irrelevant and should be removed from each section mentioning it. NH51907646 ( talk) 15:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
{{
Edit semi-protected}}
template. –
Muboshgu (
talk) 16:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)Yes the George Floyd Demonstrations where largely peaceful, however they also included the largest amount of damage for any riot and over 30 dead, so I feel like a more nuteral term like demonstrations would be appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:5CC:102:2FC0:E042:8310:1E31:4E6E ( talk) 22:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Hello all, I'm still relatively new here so I'm hoping I formatted this correctly and it isn't too long. Constructive criticism is always appreciated.
This is regarding the George Floyd Protests#Murder of George Floyd subsection; last sentence of paragraph three and first two sentences of paragraph five. For reference, I've included the sentences as they currently appear:
A May 26 autopsy conducted by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's Office found that there were "no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation"; the preliminary findings stated that underlying health conditions, the police restraint, and potential intoxicants likely contributed to Floyd's death.[83][84]
On June 1, a private autopsy commissioned by the family of Floyd found the death to be a homicide and that Floyd had died due to asphyxiation from sustained pressure, which conflicted with the original autopsy report done earlier that week.[88] Shortly after, the official post-mortem declared Floyd's death a homicide.[89]
The paragraphs above compare the findings from the two autopsies. They cover cause of death (CoD), physical signs of asphyxiation and contributing factors. To maintain balance and a NPOV both autopsies' POVs on these topics should be included since they are of equal weight. However, there a several instances where only one POV is mentioned.
The private autopsy's POV on the CoD is included, but the medical examiner's (ME's) POV isn't. According to [84], the ME's full report concluded the CoD to be “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression”.
The ME's POV is that there were no physical signs of asphyxiation, but the private autopsy's POV on the topic isn't included. According to [A] and [B] (both linked at bottom of this post), the private autopsy found hemorrhaging over the vertebral bodies, in the cervical region and on the outside of the carotid artery as physical evidence of asphyxiation.
The ME’s POV on whether underlying medical conditions and drugs contributed to death is mentioned, but the private autopsy's POV isn't. According to [A] and [88], the private autopsy said that neither drugs nor underlying medical problems contributed to death.
Consider adding the ME's homicide ruling in the second sentence of paragraph five into paragraph three. The sentences from paragraph three discuss the ME’s findings, while the sentences from paragraph five deal with findings from the private autopsy. Keeping all the ME’s findings together makes more sense and improves readability. The information that the death was a homicide is included in [84] so [89] can remain in paragraph five.
The first sentence of paragraph five references an "original autopsy report done earlier that week". There was no autopsy report from earlier in the week. According to [88], some preliminary findings from the May 26 autopsy were independently released by the county attorney's office in charging documents on May 29, but the only actual autopsy reports were from the ME’s office and the privately commissioned doctors, both released on June 1. I'm going to assume the reference was to the preliminary findings and propose it be edited accordingly for accuracy.
Add some wikilinks for the medical terms so readers know what they are.
Copy-edit for clarity, add wikilinks, [A],[B] and missing POVs (additions and copy-edits underlined):
A May 26 autopsy conducted by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's Office found that there were "no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation"; the preliminary findings stated that underlying health conditions, the police restraint, and potential intoxicants likely contributed to Floyd's death.[83] On June 1, the medical examiner’s full report declared Floyd’s death a homicide, finding that “law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression” caused “ cardiopulmonary arrest.”[84]
On June 1, the report from a private autopsy commissioned by Floyd’s family was released shortly before the medical examiner's report. It found the death to be a homicide but found hemorrhaging over the vertebral bodies, in the cervical region and on the carotid artery as physical evidence that Floyd had died due to asphyxiation from sustained pressure.[89][B] It also stated that neither drugs nor underlying medical problems contributed to his death.[A] These findings conflicted with the medical examiner's preliminary findings from earlier that week.[88]
Pierce Havoc ( talk) 19:35, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
There is a biased emphasis in this article made several times on how 93% of all protests over the career criminal floyd were peaceful. The number 7,750 is given as the total number. If 93% were “mostly peaceful,” that means 543 were violent. 543 violent riots across the US is not insignificant and gives context as to why these riots were unpopular with most Americans. Bourbonberserkerbear ( talk) 13:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
career criminalis just plain wrong. Happy Good Friday. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 15:37, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Garrett Foster was not actually a part of the Bugaloo Boys, and never had any official or unofficial affiliation with the group. He was legally carrying a long gun in the State of Texas, that was pointed towards the ground at all times. Moments before his death, he engaged in deescalation tactics and was then murdered by Daniel Perry. Garrett Foster was never a part of extremist groups whatsoever. 2603:8080:1001:E372:75D1:17AB:4BEA:85DF ( talk) 11:15, 22 April 2024 (UTC)