This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Upon reviewing the article, I'm not sure where there's excessive detail. @ Innisfree987, could you please clarify why you added the tag? voorts ( talk/ contributions) 03:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
I think that this page should not use the term addict unless quoting someone who uses said term in the page. The subject of Mass and Cass is covered widely in the media every other month. It is irresponsible to use stigmatizing language towards a group of people that are already so disenfranchised. It is also inaccurate language because many of them are trying to recover from drug use and many of them will. Making their diagnosis their identity is not less of a euphemism, it does real harm in the perception of traumatized and stigmatized disabled people. Elttaruuu ( talk) 21:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Xcia0069: Graywalls ( talk) 21:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Also @ Innisfree987: as you've done a good deal of pruning on this article to see if you've got any input. The disputed change in question is here where an editor changed it not because of concerns about information being transferred accurately, but because they didn't like the wording for what appears to be of personal values and appealing to practices in other sources. It was edited back to origional, then they changed it back to their version, and it was reverted back again. Graywalls ( talk) 00:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
I've been notified that @Elttaruuu brought this to 3PO. First of all, the discussion is not quite done, and the discussion already involve three people, so this would be for RfC, not 3PO; if discussion doesn't resolve the disagreement; however I do not feel that Elttaruu has been allowing reasonable time for others to respond. Graywalls ( talk) 20:22, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Inserting the preferred word choice from studies that make no mention of this article’s topic is not something we currently have consensus for on WPsounds to me of disagreement to your justification. Restoring the status-quo before you or I touched the disputed section, then giving a little more time seems like the sound approach. Graywalls ( talk) 20:39, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
The dispute in question is
Following the migration of homeless and substance addicts to Mass and Cass, businesses in the year reported vandalism and difficulty hiring and retaining employees as they fear for their safety. [1] [2]
Graywalls ( talk) 20:42, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
References
This isn't a third opinion as such, but I happened to notice that there (I removed the request, as there are more than two editors involved in the discussion), so I guess this is just, well, a regular old opinion. I think the edit that changed it to ...homeless people and people with substance use disorders to Mass and Cass...
is overly wordy and unwieldy, less clear, and using "people" twice in a row like that is quite awkward. "Addicts" is accurate, and I don't think it's pejorative; it's a descriptive term. I do agree that "substance addicts" is an odd phrasing of it, so just "addicts" is probably better. That makes the issue clear, without any talking around it or euphemisms.
Seraphimblade
Talk to me
21:40, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
I have removed traffic incident log, which detailed details such as name, housing status, race, age, date and time of pedestrian incidents. While we have a policy that everything must be verifiable, verifiability is not a guarantee of inclusion. Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:DUE, I question the encyclopedic value of such minute details. This section looked like the police incident section of local community newspapers that publishes things like so and so, age, of so and so block was cited for DWI. Of course, those papers are intended to cover the happenings of the city, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It should remain off unless consensus says otherwise. If a 10 year old Kia sedan with 150,000 miles backed into a public works vehicle and caused damage in an area that happens to fall within the neighborhood and this fact is published in a credible local paper, Wikipedia's sourcing standard wouldn't cast doubt that this incident occurred, but this occurrence is not suitable for inclusion just about anywhere on Wikipedia. Graywalls ( talk) 20:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
In fact, it appears that things that do not directly relate to Mass and Cass started to appear shortly around this revision with the addition of things about long island and information about organizations in the homelessness services industry. Perhaps that's a good foundation to rewind back to and add things back in piece by piece. Graywalls ( talk) 03:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Graywalls could you help me with something? Would you say that the haunting of hill house reference in popular culture is original research? I added it when I was very new to wiki and added a lot of the other stuff you’ve since taken out of the article. I feel like at this point I understand OR enough not to add it to any other articles but not really enough to accurately remove it? Thank you for your help. Elttaruuu ( talk) 12:36, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Since it’s been removed and added a few times I thought I’d start a conversation about this quote. @ Slugger O'Toole @ Graywalls what are your thoughts? I’m still forming an opinion I think Elttaruuu ( talk) 13:04, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
“It’s complete misery,” says one man who is addicted to opioids. “Misery after misery.”
@ Seraphimblade:, pinging for input as you've commented here not too long ago. Graywalls ( talk) 16:24, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Slugger O'Toole:, This incident is probably still under investigation and it is a contentious one. It is likely the press said "reportedly" as they had their own doubt about the story. It is based on she said, he said, she said, he said... You've been editing here for a long time. We are not supposed to take an allegation from a source, put our twist and present it as a fact. Graywalls ( talk) 23:15, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
City Councilor Tania Fernandes Anderson reportedly had her phone briefly stolen and returned with police assistance during a walkthrough of the Mass and Cass area Saturday evening. (Matt Stone/Boston Herald)(highlighting mine). Our task as Wikipedia editors is to convey what's reported in reliable sources as accurately as possible without editorial distortion of our own. Unless the sources say it happened specifically because the person who made a victim's report is a councilor, it's an editorial bias to emphasize importance here because of who the reported victim is. Graywalls ( talk) 06:26, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
If this is going to stay, and I don't see a consensus to remove it. I am not seeing a consensus to include it which the user wishing to include it need to establish. We're not going to go for a nicer reading flow at the expense of accurate reproduction of information presented in the source and the latter takes priority. Graywalls ( talk) 20:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
-- Slugger O'Toole ( talk) 00:10, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
According to the latest coverage from Aug 31, the phone was returned, Anderson said. The man apologized to her, Anderson said and she was familiar with the perpetrator, Anderson said. And Anderson did not want to file a report. If the consensus is to include it, I think the more appropriate place is on page on her unless additional news coverage come up in context of Mass & Cass. Graywalls ( talk) 05:44, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
References
When Boston city councillor Tania Fernandes Anderson was visiting Mass and Cass, Anderson reported her phone was snatched out of her hand. https://www.bostonherald.com/2023/08/31/bodycam-footage-shows-boston-police-quickly-helped-city-councilor-robbed-on-the-mile-video/
What do you all suggest we do?
Graywalls ( talk) 19:34, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
@ Elttaruuu:, I am not sure you realize this but the disproportionate coverage and lopsided presentation makes it look like social justice movement or activism type meant to push certain agenda than to neutral descriptive encyclopedic view. For example, referencing the letter "Committee for Public Counsel Services Letter to Sheriff Tompkins" (PDF), or selectively emphasizing certain things. Why are the names of opinion holders mentioned, but not of the absconders? I am wondering if it is unconscious bias or you are aware of the non-neutral presentation. Graywalls ( talk) 21:07, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Upon reviewing the article, I'm not sure where there's excessive detail. @ Innisfree987, could you please clarify why you added the tag? voorts ( talk/ contributions) 03:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
I think that this page should not use the term addict unless quoting someone who uses said term in the page. The subject of Mass and Cass is covered widely in the media every other month. It is irresponsible to use stigmatizing language towards a group of people that are already so disenfranchised. It is also inaccurate language because many of them are trying to recover from drug use and many of them will. Making their diagnosis their identity is not less of a euphemism, it does real harm in the perception of traumatized and stigmatized disabled people. Elttaruuu ( talk) 21:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Xcia0069: Graywalls ( talk) 21:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Also @ Innisfree987: as you've done a good deal of pruning on this article to see if you've got any input. The disputed change in question is here where an editor changed it not because of concerns about information being transferred accurately, but because they didn't like the wording for what appears to be of personal values and appealing to practices in other sources. It was edited back to origional, then they changed it back to their version, and it was reverted back again. Graywalls ( talk) 00:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
I've been notified that @Elttaruuu brought this to 3PO. First of all, the discussion is not quite done, and the discussion already involve three people, so this would be for RfC, not 3PO; if discussion doesn't resolve the disagreement; however I do not feel that Elttaruu has been allowing reasonable time for others to respond. Graywalls ( talk) 20:22, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Inserting the preferred word choice from studies that make no mention of this article’s topic is not something we currently have consensus for on WPsounds to me of disagreement to your justification. Restoring the status-quo before you or I touched the disputed section, then giving a little more time seems like the sound approach. Graywalls ( talk) 20:39, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
The dispute in question is
Following the migration of homeless and substance addicts to Mass and Cass, businesses in the year reported vandalism and difficulty hiring and retaining employees as they fear for their safety. [1] [2]
Graywalls ( talk) 20:42, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
References
This isn't a third opinion as such, but I happened to notice that there (I removed the request, as there are more than two editors involved in the discussion), so I guess this is just, well, a regular old opinion. I think the edit that changed it to ...homeless people and people with substance use disorders to Mass and Cass...
is overly wordy and unwieldy, less clear, and using "people" twice in a row like that is quite awkward. "Addicts" is accurate, and I don't think it's pejorative; it's a descriptive term. I do agree that "substance addicts" is an odd phrasing of it, so just "addicts" is probably better. That makes the issue clear, without any talking around it or euphemisms.
Seraphimblade
Talk to me
21:40, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
I have removed traffic incident log, which detailed details such as name, housing status, race, age, date and time of pedestrian incidents. While we have a policy that everything must be verifiable, verifiability is not a guarantee of inclusion. Per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:DUE, I question the encyclopedic value of such minute details. This section looked like the police incident section of local community newspapers that publishes things like so and so, age, of so and so block was cited for DWI. Of course, those papers are intended to cover the happenings of the city, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It should remain off unless consensus says otherwise. If a 10 year old Kia sedan with 150,000 miles backed into a public works vehicle and caused damage in an area that happens to fall within the neighborhood and this fact is published in a credible local paper, Wikipedia's sourcing standard wouldn't cast doubt that this incident occurred, but this occurrence is not suitable for inclusion just about anywhere on Wikipedia. Graywalls ( talk) 20:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
In fact, it appears that things that do not directly relate to Mass and Cass started to appear shortly around this revision with the addition of things about long island and information about organizations in the homelessness services industry. Perhaps that's a good foundation to rewind back to and add things back in piece by piece. Graywalls ( talk) 03:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Graywalls could you help me with something? Would you say that the haunting of hill house reference in popular culture is original research? I added it when I was very new to wiki and added a lot of the other stuff you’ve since taken out of the article. I feel like at this point I understand OR enough not to add it to any other articles but not really enough to accurately remove it? Thank you for your help. Elttaruuu ( talk) 12:36, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Since it’s been removed and added a few times I thought I’d start a conversation about this quote. @ Slugger O'Toole @ Graywalls what are your thoughts? I’m still forming an opinion I think Elttaruuu ( talk) 13:04, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
“It’s complete misery,” says one man who is addicted to opioids. “Misery after misery.”
@ Seraphimblade:, pinging for input as you've commented here not too long ago. Graywalls ( talk) 16:24, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Slugger O'Toole:, This incident is probably still under investigation and it is a contentious one. It is likely the press said "reportedly" as they had their own doubt about the story. It is based on she said, he said, she said, he said... You've been editing here for a long time. We are not supposed to take an allegation from a source, put our twist and present it as a fact. Graywalls ( talk) 23:15, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
City Councilor Tania Fernandes Anderson reportedly had her phone briefly stolen and returned with police assistance during a walkthrough of the Mass and Cass area Saturday evening. (Matt Stone/Boston Herald)(highlighting mine). Our task as Wikipedia editors is to convey what's reported in reliable sources as accurately as possible without editorial distortion of our own. Unless the sources say it happened specifically because the person who made a victim's report is a councilor, it's an editorial bias to emphasize importance here because of who the reported victim is. Graywalls ( talk) 06:26, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
If this is going to stay, and I don't see a consensus to remove it. I am not seeing a consensus to include it which the user wishing to include it need to establish. We're not going to go for a nicer reading flow at the expense of accurate reproduction of information presented in the source and the latter takes priority. Graywalls ( talk) 20:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
-- Slugger O'Toole ( talk) 00:10, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
According to the latest coverage from Aug 31, the phone was returned, Anderson said. The man apologized to her, Anderson said and she was familiar with the perpetrator, Anderson said. And Anderson did not want to file a report. If the consensus is to include it, I think the more appropriate place is on page on her unless additional news coverage come up in context of Mass & Cass. Graywalls ( talk) 05:44, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
References
When Boston city councillor Tania Fernandes Anderson was visiting Mass and Cass, Anderson reported her phone was snatched out of her hand. https://www.bostonherald.com/2023/08/31/bodycam-footage-shows-boston-police-quickly-helped-city-councilor-robbed-on-the-mile-video/
What do you all suggest we do?
Graywalls ( talk) 19:34, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
@ Elttaruuu:, I am not sure you realize this but the disproportionate coverage and lopsided presentation makes it look like social justice movement or activism type meant to push certain agenda than to neutral descriptive encyclopedic view. For example, referencing the letter "Committee for Public Counsel Services Letter to Sheriff Tompkins" (PDF), or selectively emphasizing certain things. Why are the names of opinion holders mentioned, but not of the absconders? I am wondering if it is unconscious bias or you are aware of the non-neutral presentation. Graywalls ( talk) 21:07, 3 September 2023 (UTC)