This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sunrise Movement 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 |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Sunrise Movement. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Sunrise Movement at the Reference desk. |
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 article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | 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. |
When there is a reference to an article at the end of a sentence, our readers expect that article is a reliable source for the information in that sentence. But, for example, today I looked at the reference for a statement in our article that Sunrise "endorses nonviolent, community-based political action." The RS cited did not mention nonviolence, community-based action, etc. etc., let alone describe Sunrise Movement as endorsing them.
Our article also misstated a different reference, saying, "After taking control of the House of Representatives in the 2018 midterm elections, the Democrats failed to put climate change on their list of priorities." The source cited, published weeks before the 2018 elections, could hardly be RS for what Dems failed to do after winning control of the House. Instead, the article quoted careful statements by Democrats who were busy with the campaigning that won them control of the House. Furthermore, despite its pessimistic title, the article described a wide range of opinions among Democrats about legislative approaches to climate change.
This is an encyclopedia article which should be written in an NPOV way to give factual information about the Sunrise Movement. It should not be presenting Sunrise Movement talking points in the voice of Wikipedia, and it should certainly not be misrepresenting what reliable sources say. HouseOfChange ( talk) 22:40, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
The lead paragraph summarizes important items that already are in the body of the article. Nothing close to this sentence appears elsewhere in the article, nor is any RS cited to support it. I am going to rewrite the lead paragraph to make it clearer, but this sentence needs to be explained and cited in the article body. Also, the word "allied" is unclear about what relationship is being claimed. HouseOfChange ( talk) 17:32, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you HouseOFChange for your help. My point in adding all of that was so that there would at least be something on the page, which was fairly blank before. However, you're right that I needed to be more careful with my use of tone and how I presented the Sunrise Movement's talking points. The page looks great now! EthanMagnuson ( talk) 14:58, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Is Sunrise a movement or is Sunrise simply a 501(c)(4)?
Currently, the article misrepresents the relative roles of Sunrise Movement, Justice Dems, and AOC in the sit-in. Per the source cited, Sunrise Movement planned the sit-in and asked AOC to help publicize it. Instead, she offered to show up. (A New Yorker article says the same.) SM then worked with JD and AOC and "hashed out a proposal for a Select Committee on a Green New Deal, outlining their vision for the kind of plan such a committee would produce." Later, over a weekend in December, the SM and JD worked with AOC and her staff and a group called New Consensus to create an 11-page Google doc for the New Deal. HouseOfChange ( talk) 03:23, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
In this recent interview with Vox's David Roberts, Senator Ed Markey, who introduced the Green New Deal resolution in the senate, clarifies that the resolution was written explicitly to be technology-agnostic about meeting the resolution's decarbonization goals. [1] Many outlets appear to have mischaracterized the GND resolution's language. I think the article should be updated to reflect that the senator who introduced the resolution says it doesn't exclude nuclear or CCS as potential avenues for decarbonization.
(Preceding comment added by User:Eyesmo)
I'm trying to document a nuanced interaction between the Sunrise Movement and their allies and the DNC. It is complicated and in my view requires going into wonky detail to capture what is happening. There's a tension between getting all the facts down vs. being clear and concise to fall within to Wikipedia guidelines of good editing. My original text on this section was pared down by JesseRafe (I've commented on their talk page, no response yet), and while I can see that the result is more readable, I also fear important details are lost.
One particular sticking point is this line, which I rewrote after similar content was deleted from the original post by Jesse: "On June 29th, a DNC executive committee voted unanimously to refer two proposals--one calling for a debate on climate change, and one less formal--to the resolutions committee." [2]
This line came after a line explaining that the Sunrise Movement had held a three day protest outside DNC headquarters. I think it's important primarily because of the timing of the decision with regards to the protest. Of course we can't know if the decision was made because of the protest but in my view that possibility makes it an important detail. I am aware that political content should be treated with extra care to remain neutral. I am a newer editor and am still figuring out how everything works.
Jesse subsequently deleted the line I had reworked without much explanation. In the interest of avoiding an edit war I'm writing out my thoughts here and would be particularly interested to hear from JesseRafe, and other experienced editors, especially HouseOfChange who has made significant contributions to the page. Mistipolis ( talk) 06:25, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
Thank you for taking the time to write a thoughtful response. I see your point about indirectly implying a causal relationship with regards to the DC protest. I will leave the edits for now but I do dispute the descriptor "mundane." This is clearly my opinion but the younger generation of the world takes climate change extremely seriously, and anything that moves the needle in terms of addressing the climate crisis (such as forcing a future president to enumerate and defend their climate policy) is likely to become an important part of that history. Mistipolis ( talk) 04:53, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
I hear that you take the climate crisis seriously; it wasn't my intention to imply otherwise. I also take Wikipedia's NPOV policy seriously. Yes, I have biases and my passion for the subject is part of what motivated me to create the page and continue to edit it. However, I also try very hard to write from a neutral perspective, which is why I included the statement directly from the DNC chair on why it's against DNC policy to hold single issue debates. It wasn't a cherry-picked statement designed to make him look bad. It was a statement addressing the heart of the issue from the other side. As far as the DNC meeting goes it's the timing that was the key point, as the meeting and decision to hold a vote happened right after a large, nationally covered protest. I did have to combine two credible sources to draw that conclusion, which I now understand to be more the role of a journalist and not a wikipedia editor. My essential point is this, though, Jesse: that I am trying to do this right. I am newer, I have more to learn. Chew up my edits, turn them upside-down or whatever makes sense to you, just tell me why you did it. The "wiki adventure" is not enough, I need solid points to improve upon. I think you can fairly assume that most people are just trying to get it right. Mistipolis ( talk) 07:03, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
I think calling the Sunrise Movement "neo-marxist" is not neutral. What does everyone else think? – Gladamas ( talk · contribs) 16:22, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
I think neo-Marxist is a term typically used to negatively characterize a position, policy, organization or person as somehow connected to the ideology of Marx or Communism. It is not meaningful in this context unless you want to cast Sunrise as acting against the US public interest, which it certainly is not. Bluewater02 ( talk) 17:35, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
I cited sources from major publications. User:JesseRafe removed my edit claiming I violated the NPOV policy by not citing sources.
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2022 and 30 May 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Seaguilar (
article contribs).
This article does a great job at remaining neutral, however I think there could be significant expansion on defining the purpose(s) behind the movement. More specifically, there is mention of demonstrations, however a lack of information as to their intentions and direct plan of action, as has been stated or recorded. In addition, there is a lack of emphasis placed on the fact that the Sunrise Movement is a majority YOUTH led movement, in the summary. Seaguilar ( talk) 06:45, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Claims made into the intro section should be attributed to reliable sources. Peter L Griffin ( talk) 23:38, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sunrise Movement 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 |
![]() | This page is not a forum for general discussion about Sunrise Movement. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Sunrise Movement at the Reference desk. |
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 article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | 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. |
When there is a reference to an article at the end of a sentence, our readers expect that article is a reliable source for the information in that sentence. But, for example, today I looked at the reference for a statement in our article that Sunrise "endorses nonviolent, community-based political action." The RS cited did not mention nonviolence, community-based action, etc. etc., let alone describe Sunrise Movement as endorsing them.
Our article also misstated a different reference, saying, "After taking control of the House of Representatives in the 2018 midterm elections, the Democrats failed to put climate change on their list of priorities." The source cited, published weeks before the 2018 elections, could hardly be RS for what Dems failed to do after winning control of the House. Instead, the article quoted careful statements by Democrats who were busy with the campaigning that won them control of the House. Furthermore, despite its pessimistic title, the article described a wide range of opinions among Democrats about legislative approaches to climate change.
This is an encyclopedia article which should be written in an NPOV way to give factual information about the Sunrise Movement. It should not be presenting Sunrise Movement talking points in the voice of Wikipedia, and it should certainly not be misrepresenting what reliable sources say. HouseOfChange ( talk) 22:40, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
The lead paragraph summarizes important items that already are in the body of the article. Nothing close to this sentence appears elsewhere in the article, nor is any RS cited to support it. I am going to rewrite the lead paragraph to make it clearer, but this sentence needs to be explained and cited in the article body. Also, the word "allied" is unclear about what relationship is being claimed. HouseOfChange ( talk) 17:32, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Thank you HouseOFChange for your help. My point in adding all of that was so that there would at least be something on the page, which was fairly blank before. However, you're right that I needed to be more careful with my use of tone and how I presented the Sunrise Movement's talking points. The page looks great now! EthanMagnuson ( talk) 14:58, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Is Sunrise a movement or is Sunrise simply a 501(c)(4)?
Currently, the article misrepresents the relative roles of Sunrise Movement, Justice Dems, and AOC in the sit-in. Per the source cited, Sunrise Movement planned the sit-in and asked AOC to help publicize it. Instead, she offered to show up. (A New Yorker article says the same.) SM then worked with JD and AOC and "hashed out a proposal for a Select Committee on a Green New Deal, outlining their vision for the kind of plan such a committee would produce." Later, over a weekend in December, the SM and JD worked with AOC and her staff and a group called New Consensus to create an 11-page Google doc for the New Deal. HouseOfChange ( talk) 03:23, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
In this recent interview with Vox's David Roberts, Senator Ed Markey, who introduced the Green New Deal resolution in the senate, clarifies that the resolution was written explicitly to be technology-agnostic about meeting the resolution's decarbonization goals. [1] Many outlets appear to have mischaracterized the GND resolution's language. I think the article should be updated to reflect that the senator who introduced the resolution says it doesn't exclude nuclear or CCS as potential avenues for decarbonization.
(Preceding comment added by User:Eyesmo)
I'm trying to document a nuanced interaction between the Sunrise Movement and their allies and the DNC. It is complicated and in my view requires going into wonky detail to capture what is happening. There's a tension between getting all the facts down vs. being clear and concise to fall within to Wikipedia guidelines of good editing. My original text on this section was pared down by JesseRafe (I've commented on their talk page, no response yet), and while I can see that the result is more readable, I also fear important details are lost.
One particular sticking point is this line, which I rewrote after similar content was deleted from the original post by Jesse: "On June 29th, a DNC executive committee voted unanimously to refer two proposals--one calling for a debate on climate change, and one less formal--to the resolutions committee." [2]
This line came after a line explaining that the Sunrise Movement had held a three day protest outside DNC headquarters. I think it's important primarily because of the timing of the decision with regards to the protest. Of course we can't know if the decision was made because of the protest but in my view that possibility makes it an important detail. I am aware that political content should be treated with extra care to remain neutral. I am a newer editor and am still figuring out how everything works.
Jesse subsequently deleted the line I had reworked without much explanation. In the interest of avoiding an edit war I'm writing out my thoughts here and would be particularly interested to hear from JesseRafe, and other experienced editors, especially HouseOfChange who has made significant contributions to the page. Mistipolis ( talk) 06:25, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
Thank you for taking the time to write a thoughtful response. I see your point about indirectly implying a causal relationship with regards to the DC protest. I will leave the edits for now but I do dispute the descriptor "mundane." This is clearly my opinion but the younger generation of the world takes climate change extremely seriously, and anything that moves the needle in terms of addressing the climate crisis (such as forcing a future president to enumerate and defend their climate policy) is likely to become an important part of that history. Mistipolis ( talk) 04:53, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
I hear that you take the climate crisis seriously; it wasn't my intention to imply otherwise. I also take Wikipedia's NPOV policy seriously. Yes, I have biases and my passion for the subject is part of what motivated me to create the page and continue to edit it. However, I also try very hard to write from a neutral perspective, which is why I included the statement directly from the DNC chair on why it's against DNC policy to hold single issue debates. It wasn't a cherry-picked statement designed to make him look bad. It was a statement addressing the heart of the issue from the other side. As far as the DNC meeting goes it's the timing that was the key point, as the meeting and decision to hold a vote happened right after a large, nationally covered protest. I did have to combine two credible sources to draw that conclusion, which I now understand to be more the role of a journalist and not a wikipedia editor. My essential point is this, though, Jesse: that I am trying to do this right. I am newer, I have more to learn. Chew up my edits, turn them upside-down or whatever makes sense to you, just tell me why you did it. The "wiki adventure" is not enough, I need solid points to improve upon. I think you can fairly assume that most people are just trying to get it right. Mistipolis ( talk) 07:03, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
I think calling the Sunrise Movement "neo-marxist" is not neutral. What does everyone else think? – Gladamas ( talk · contribs) 16:22, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
I think neo-Marxist is a term typically used to negatively characterize a position, policy, organization or person as somehow connected to the ideology of Marx or Communism. It is not meaningful in this context unless you want to cast Sunrise as acting against the US public interest, which it certainly is not. Bluewater02 ( talk) 17:35, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
I cited sources from major publications. User:JesseRafe removed my edit claiming I violated the NPOV policy by not citing sources.
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2022 and 30 May 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Seaguilar (
article contribs).
This article does a great job at remaining neutral, however I think there could be significant expansion on defining the purpose(s) behind the movement. More specifically, there is mention of demonstrations, however a lack of information as to their intentions and direct plan of action, as has been stated or recorded. In addition, there is a lack of emphasis placed on the fact that the Sunrise Movement is a majority YOUTH led movement, in the summary. Seaguilar ( talk) 06:45, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Claims made into the intro section should be attributed to reliable sources. Peter L Griffin ( talk) 23:38, 12 December 2023 (UTC)