![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am not sure the highly ideological term "class conflict" should be used to describe the events. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LienEmpire ( talk • contribs) 05:25, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Extensive revision for point of view and poor writing style is now pretty much completed. This note is likewised revised. Richard Myers 09:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Seriously, the article is still orphaned. Jobjörn ( Talk ° contribs) 10:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
The lead section needs to be revamped too. Currently it kind of gives a background, while it should summarize the rest of the article.-- Carabinieri 20:08, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
A couple of us who edit organized labor articles believe that the anarchist template in this article — included in addition to links providing information on anarchism — gives undue weight to anarchism in an article that is more immediately associated with organized labor.
We discussed it briefly here:
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Organized_Labour#New_type_of_template_--_do_we_need_one_too.3F
I am willing to listen to discussion from other points of view, or to other possible solutions, before removing the template. Richard Myers ( talk) 07:22, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
"These disturbing incidents"
What is so disturbing about being tough with anarchists? Anymore distrubing about anarchists coming to try and destroy san diego?
YankeeRoman( 68.195.102.206 ( talk) 21:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC))
Just wondering where to fit this in; note the connection to San Diego. Skookum1 ( talk) 10:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Pullman Strike which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 06:00, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Moved as proposed. Note that pinging participants in previous discussions only applies to previous discussions about the specified action (e.g., the title of this article. Editors are not required to ping everyone who has participated in other discussions about capitalization of events. bd2412 T 19:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
San Diego Free Speech Fight → San Diego free speech fight – This term is almost always lowercase in better sources (books), as it is not a proper name. Dicklyon ( talk) 05:23, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Only lowercase is common enough to appear in book n-grams.
Books show uppercase hits are pretty much only in citing sources in title case, such as "History of the San Diego Free Speech Fight" and "A Crisis of Confidence: The San Diego Free Speech Fight of 1912". Otherwise mostly lowercase in text, implying not treated as a proper name. Dicklyon ( talk) 06:00, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Book occurrences: On the n-gram link that Randy Kryn posts below, or on mine, one can click through and look at actual books, e.g. as here. The listings are as described above: lowercase use in text usually, and uppercase use in citing titles of other works in title case. One has to get into the second page before finding a single book that uses uppercase in the text; these are relatively rare, not at or near half as Randy would suggest. There are not many books newer than 2008 that mention it, but those that do are still lowercase (e.g. [1] and [2]). Dicklyon ( talk) 04:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Google scholar finds many articles mentioning the "San Diego free speech fight"; some snippets show uppercase, but examination of them shows that in every case (up through the first several pages that I've studied at least), every such uppercase occurrence is somebody else's title, in title case. Every use in running text is lower case. Probably there are exceptions, but I haven't come to one yet. Certainly treatment as proper name is rare. Dicklyon ( talk) 05:12, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
This doesn't strike me as a neutral article at at...it's about how the poor IWW people were persecuted by the wicked Bosses. What court actually declared that their rights to free speech had been infringed? Without that, it's simply a matter of opinion...they considered their rights to have been infringed. It shouldn't be stated as a fact. For all we know, the people who signed the petition against them were doing it for what they considered perfectly good reasons' they were sick of the violence at the meetings, they were sick of traffic being held up, they felt it was a public safety hazard. We don't know, because the article makes no attempt to explain their point of view. "The police played fire hoses on the crowd, indiscriminate of women and children"....what were they doing in a dangerous protest area anyway? Have you ever tried to play a firehose on a crown discriminately? It sound to me like they put their women and children at the front of the line in the hopes that the police would be scared to do anything, or that they could use their reaction as propaganda. If they were just mixed in with the crowd, it's still stupid to expect them to be treated differently. The vigilantism says to me that a good many people of the town were not happy with being invaded by radicals looking to cause trouble. And many other things; I don't care which side is right, but the article needs to not be about the heroic IWW members and their fight against The Wicked Capitalists. AnnaGoFast ( talk) 14:51, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am not sure the highly ideological term "class conflict" should be used to describe the events. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LienEmpire ( talk • contribs) 05:25, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Extensive revision for point of view and poor writing style is now pretty much completed. This note is likewised revised. Richard Myers 09:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Seriously, the article is still orphaned. Jobjörn ( Talk ° contribs) 10:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
The lead section needs to be revamped too. Currently it kind of gives a background, while it should summarize the rest of the article.-- Carabinieri 20:08, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
A couple of us who edit organized labor articles believe that the anarchist template in this article — included in addition to links providing information on anarchism — gives undue weight to anarchism in an article that is more immediately associated with organized labor.
We discussed it briefly here:
Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Organized_Labour#New_type_of_template_--_do_we_need_one_too.3F
I am willing to listen to discussion from other points of view, or to other possible solutions, before removing the template. Richard Myers ( talk) 07:22, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
"These disturbing incidents"
What is so disturbing about being tough with anarchists? Anymore distrubing about anarchists coming to try and destroy san diego?
YankeeRoman( 68.195.102.206 ( talk) 21:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC))
Just wondering where to fit this in; note the connection to San Diego. Skookum1 ( talk) 10:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Pullman Strike which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 06:00, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Moved as proposed. Note that pinging participants in previous discussions only applies to previous discussions about the specified action (e.g., the title of this article. Editors are not required to ping everyone who has participated in other discussions about capitalization of events. bd2412 T 19:52, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
San Diego Free Speech Fight → San Diego free speech fight – This term is almost always lowercase in better sources (books), as it is not a proper name. Dicklyon ( talk) 05:23, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Only lowercase is common enough to appear in book n-grams.
Books show uppercase hits are pretty much only in citing sources in title case, such as "History of the San Diego Free Speech Fight" and "A Crisis of Confidence: The San Diego Free Speech Fight of 1912". Otherwise mostly lowercase in text, implying not treated as a proper name. Dicklyon ( talk) 06:00, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Book occurrences: On the n-gram link that Randy Kryn posts below, or on mine, one can click through and look at actual books, e.g. as here. The listings are as described above: lowercase use in text usually, and uppercase use in citing titles of other works in title case. One has to get into the second page before finding a single book that uses uppercase in the text; these are relatively rare, not at or near half as Randy would suggest. There are not many books newer than 2008 that mention it, but those that do are still lowercase (e.g. [1] and [2]). Dicklyon ( talk) 04:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Google scholar finds many articles mentioning the "San Diego free speech fight"; some snippets show uppercase, but examination of them shows that in every case (up through the first several pages that I've studied at least), every such uppercase occurrence is somebody else's title, in title case. Every use in running text is lower case. Probably there are exceptions, but I haven't come to one yet. Certainly treatment as proper name is rare. Dicklyon ( talk) 05:12, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
This doesn't strike me as a neutral article at at...it's about how the poor IWW people were persecuted by the wicked Bosses. What court actually declared that their rights to free speech had been infringed? Without that, it's simply a matter of opinion...they considered their rights to have been infringed. It shouldn't be stated as a fact. For all we know, the people who signed the petition against them were doing it for what they considered perfectly good reasons' they were sick of the violence at the meetings, they were sick of traffic being held up, they felt it was a public safety hazard. We don't know, because the article makes no attempt to explain their point of view. "The police played fire hoses on the crowd, indiscriminate of women and children"....what were they doing in a dangerous protest area anyway? Have you ever tried to play a firehose on a crown discriminately? It sound to me like they put their women and children at the front of the line in the hopes that the police would be scared to do anything, or that they could use their reaction as propaganda. If they were just mixed in with the crowd, it's still stupid to expect them to be treated differently. The vigilantism says to me that a good many people of the town were not happy with being invaded by radicals looking to cause trouble. And many other things; I don't care which side is right, but the article needs to not be about the heroic IWW members and their fight against The Wicked Capitalists. AnnaGoFast ( talk) 14:51, 12 April 2016 (UTC)