![]() | 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. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 28 January 2015, it was proposed that this article be moved from March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom to March on Washington. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
I reverted the title of the march to "March On Washington" from someone who changed it to "March In Washington." The official title of the march used "On" as you can see from the Lincoln Memorial Program. There is a valid argument that the political tone of the march was watered down from "on" to "in" at the insistence of the Kennedy administration and the more conservative organizations such as the NAACP, and that argument should be reflected in the article, but the title of the march remained "On," not "In." For a discussion of internal political issues among march organizers and the White House, see March on Washington for Jobs & Freedom (Civil Rights Movement Veterans).
Brucehartford ( talk) 16:20, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
"About 250,000 people were in attendance, of which 60,000 were white people."
"eighty two out of five marchers were African American. "
This doesn't add up.
this is bullshit, if only because Martin Luther King, Jr., cited as one of primary organizers of the March on Washington, actually contributed very little to the real organization of the March on Washington. As a matter of fact, the idea, which is often attributed to him, was initially conceived by female SNCC activists. Also, while this is arguably one of the most important moments in the American Civil Right's Movement and indeed America history, the article on this monumental event is criminally brief.
2005 Protesters from around the country joined a march in Washington D.C. organized by ANSWER Coalition and United for Peace and Justice to promote peace and an end to the occupation of Iraq. Organizers claim that around 250,000 people attended the demonstration. Police said that 150,000 was "as good a guess as any". C-SPAN, which broadcast the pre-march speeches, is said to have estimated 500,000.
Why was the march condemned by the Nation of Islam and Malcolm X? Jimp 22:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
From my understanding, SNCC and SCLC were both nonviolent organizations at the time of the march. The Nation of Islam and Malcom X were both more radical groups. A 1964 quote from Malcom X taken from the Wikipedia article on the topic:
"The time for you and me to allow ourselves to be brutalized nonviolently has passed. Be nonviolent only with those who are nonviolent to you. And when you can bring me a nonviolent racist, bring me a nonviolent segregationist, then I'll get nonviolent. But don't teach me to be nonviolent until you teach some of those crackers to be nonviolent."
As I recall, the Nation of Islam did not have an interest in desegregation, they seemed more prone to establishing non-overlapping black and white societies within the walls of America. Again, I'm not 100% sure on this but hopefully my thoughts can be a starting point for your journey into learning about this.
This page is unorganized and wacked. I will do all I can to fix it up. - BlackBrotherX7
The article talks about the logistics but doesn't talk about the goals or results. Needs more work 68.117.64.25 03:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
The main organizer of the march should be more prominent not an after thought. Its tough to fix given the layout of the article though. MATThematical ( talk) 19:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I just noticed the same thing. The article Bayard Rustin acknowledges Rustin as the main organizer of the March, but you wouldn't know it from the March on Washington article. The book "Leaders from the 1960s: a biographical sourcebook of American activism" by David De Leon describes Rustin as the "central organizer of the March" and says the event was "primarily Rustin's idea." That book says that Adam Clayton Powell opposed Rustin being regarded as the principal organizer due to Rustin's homosexuality. A compromise was brokered, and A. Philip Randolph agreed to be known as principal organizer, with Rustin as his deputy. I hope a scholar of this era can expand the article to clarify this. Benccc ( talk) 04:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Why is there such a great big section called "Controversy over John Lewis' speech"? The march involved many speeches, and none were more effective than King's "I Have a Dream". Certainly, the John Lewis controversy must be aired, but its treatment here gives it WP:UNDUE emphasis. If one speech is to be extensively quoted, would it not be better to have several of them quoted? Binksternet ( talk) 14:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
The article currently states: "... largest political rally for human rights in United States history." No one questions that the March on Washington was the largest up to that point in U.S. history (1963). The "largest" claim is sourced to a National Archives Article, Official Program for the March on Washington (1963). But there were subsequent marches around similar issues that were larger. For example, the Million Man March of 1995. So it seems to me that the language in this article should be either "... a large political rally" or "... largest political rally for human rights up to that point in United States history."
Brucehartford ( talk) 19:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
The two Bob Dylan links to YouTube do not work anymore. -- Finn Bjørklid ( talk) 13:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Is there a source for
as stated in the main paragraph? FieryEquinox ( talk) 03:23, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
I've started uploading photos at Category:50th Anniversary of the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. (More photos to come). Djembayz ( talk) 12:14, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
I always thought that the common name for this event was the "March on Washington," not "March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom." I never heard of the last part of the title, although I do believe that it is the official event. Should the title of the article be changed in order to reflect what people usually call the event per WP:COMMONNAME? PointsofNoReturn ( talk) 02:49, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. No agreement on whether this is the primary topic. Number 5 7 13:44, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom →
March on Washington – March on Washington is the common name and should therefore be the title of the article.
PointsofNoReturn (
talk)
00:16, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
I think this discussion needs to be kept open longer. I had the same thought... the article should be moved to "March on Washington". SUPPORT! --
Potguru (
talk)
03:45, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.guampdn.com/article/20130815/OPINION02/308150017/Rustin-finally-getting-due-recognitionWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:18, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
The article should mention that it is the 100y anniversary. — Charles Stewart (talk) 17:04, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
The caption about Lena Horne being “excluded from speaking” and why she and some others were escorted off the stage opens a question that is not answered here or on her page. What was going on? Marty Mangold ( talk) 01:42, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
I am unsure how the nomination of Donald Trump as the 2020 Republican presidential nominee is relevant to the section "2020 Virtual March on Washington".
"An online tie-in event was also planned, called the 2020 Virtual March on Washington. It was held August 27 and 28, the latter being the anniversary of the iconic "I Have a Dream" speech, and the day after President Trump was scheduled to accept his party's nomination for President at the Republican National Convention."
It's inclusion is seemingly random and distracts from the purpose of the section.
![]() | 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. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 28 January 2015, it was proposed that this article be moved from March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom to March on Washington. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
I reverted the title of the march to "March On Washington" from someone who changed it to "March In Washington." The official title of the march used "On" as you can see from the Lincoln Memorial Program. There is a valid argument that the political tone of the march was watered down from "on" to "in" at the insistence of the Kennedy administration and the more conservative organizations such as the NAACP, and that argument should be reflected in the article, but the title of the march remained "On," not "In." For a discussion of internal political issues among march organizers and the White House, see March on Washington for Jobs & Freedom (Civil Rights Movement Veterans).
Brucehartford ( talk) 16:20, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
"About 250,000 people were in attendance, of which 60,000 were white people."
"eighty two out of five marchers were African American. "
This doesn't add up.
this is bullshit, if only because Martin Luther King, Jr., cited as one of primary organizers of the March on Washington, actually contributed very little to the real organization of the March on Washington. As a matter of fact, the idea, which is often attributed to him, was initially conceived by female SNCC activists. Also, while this is arguably one of the most important moments in the American Civil Right's Movement and indeed America history, the article on this monumental event is criminally brief.
2005 Protesters from around the country joined a march in Washington D.C. organized by ANSWER Coalition and United for Peace and Justice to promote peace and an end to the occupation of Iraq. Organizers claim that around 250,000 people attended the demonstration. Police said that 150,000 was "as good a guess as any". C-SPAN, which broadcast the pre-march speeches, is said to have estimated 500,000.
Why was the march condemned by the Nation of Islam and Malcolm X? Jimp 22:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
From my understanding, SNCC and SCLC were both nonviolent organizations at the time of the march. The Nation of Islam and Malcom X were both more radical groups. A 1964 quote from Malcom X taken from the Wikipedia article on the topic:
"The time for you and me to allow ourselves to be brutalized nonviolently has passed. Be nonviolent only with those who are nonviolent to you. And when you can bring me a nonviolent racist, bring me a nonviolent segregationist, then I'll get nonviolent. But don't teach me to be nonviolent until you teach some of those crackers to be nonviolent."
As I recall, the Nation of Islam did not have an interest in desegregation, they seemed more prone to establishing non-overlapping black and white societies within the walls of America. Again, I'm not 100% sure on this but hopefully my thoughts can be a starting point for your journey into learning about this.
This page is unorganized and wacked. I will do all I can to fix it up. - BlackBrotherX7
The article talks about the logistics but doesn't talk about the goals or results. Needs more work 68.117.64.25 03:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
The main organizer of the march should be more prominent not an after thought. Its tough to fix given the layout of the article though. MATThematical ( talk) 19:52, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I just noticed the same thing. The article Bayard Rustin acknowledges Rustin as the main organizer of the March, but you wouldn't know it from the March on Washington article. The book "Leaders from the 1960s: a biographical sourcebook of American activism" by David De Leon describes Rustin as the "central organizer of the March" and says the event was "primarily Rustin's idea." That book says that Adam Clayton Powell opposed Rustin being regarded as the principal organizer due to Rustin's homosexuality. A compromise was brokered, and A. Philip Randolph agreed to be known as principal organizer, with Rustin as his deputy. I hope a scholar of this era can expand the article to clarify this. Benccc ( talk) 04:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Why is there such a great big section called "Controversy over John Lewis' speech"? The march involved many speeches, and none were more effective than King's "I Have a Dream". Certainly, the John Lewis controversy must be aired, but its treatment here gives it WP:UNDUE emphasis. If one speech is to be extensively quoted, would it not be better to have several of them quoted? Binksternet ( talk) 14:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
The article currently states: "... largest political rally for human rights in United States history." No one questions that the March on Washington was the largest up to that point in U.S. history (1963). The "largest" claim is sourced to a National Archives Article, Official Program for the March on Washington (1963). But there were subsequent marches around similar issues that were larger. For example, the Million Man March of 1995. So it seems to me that the language in this article should be either "... a large political rally" or "... largest political rally for human rights up to that point in United States history."
Brucehartford ( talk) 19:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
The two Bob Dylan links to YouTube do not work anymore. -- Finn Bjørklid ( talk) 13:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Is there a source for
as stated in the main paragraph? FieryEquinox ( talk) 03:23, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
I've started uploading photos at Category:50th Anniversary of the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. (More photos to come). Djembayz ( talk) 12:14, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
I always thought that the common name for this event was the "March on Washington," not "March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom." I never heard of the last part of the title, although I do believe that it is the official event. Should the title of the article be changed in order to reflect what people usually call the event per WP:COMMONNAME? PointsofNoReturn ( talk) 02:49, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. No agreement on whether this is the primary topic. Number 5 7 13:44, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom →
March on Washington – March on Washington is the common name and should therefore be the title of the article.
PointsofNoReturn (
talk)
00:16, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
I think this discussion needs to be kept open longer. I had the same thought... the article should be moved to "March on Washington". SUPPORT! --
Potguru (
talk)
03:45, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.guampdn.com/article/20130815/OPINION02/308150017/Rustin-finally-getting-due-recognitionWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:18, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
The article should mention that it is the 100y anniversary. — Charles Stewart (talk) 17:04, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
The caption about Lena Horne being “excluded from speaking” and why she and some others were escorted off the stage opens a question that is not answered here or on her page. What was going on? Marty Mangold ( talk) 01:42, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
I am unsure how the nomination of Donald Trump as the 2020 Republican presidential nominee is relevant to the section "2020 Virtual March on Washington".
"An online tie-in event was also planned, called the 2020 Virtual March on Washington. It was held August 27 and 28, the latter being the anniversary of the iconic "I Have a Dream" speech, and the day after President Trump was scheduled to accept his party's nomination for President at the Republican National Convention."
It's inclusion is seemingly random and distracts from the purpose of the section.