Talk:2020–21 United States election protests/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

help on some content issue?

hi i would like some help from the community on some changes to this article. I recently took out some information which had sources that made no reference to the protest but I was then reverted because it was said that this was my personal preference. But i do not understand this criticism because the sources do not actually reference the protests and this can be verified when you consult the articles. Some of the sources were written before the protests even happened. Although I recently registered my account, I made sure to read all of Wikipedia's editing policies and if this information is allowed then it would appear that this is original research. (here is the changes i made [1]) BCEVERYWHERE (talk) 06:11, 6 November 2020 (UTC) :I agree with you that material which relies on sources which do not mention the subject matter of this article should be removed as that would be (among other things) improper synthesis and an indiscriminate collection of information. That said, I suspect that the real reason why there's been frequent reverts of your edits is that it is somehow being misconstrued for suppressing (or endorsing) the main cause (or one of the main causes) of the protests, which is Donald Trump's false claims of electoral fraud, and that it they will stop if that claim is placed (in a proper position) in the article. I'll see what I can do. Flickotown (talk) 10:31, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

The source in question is this one and the sentence is Observers had been suggesting for months about the possibility of a premature Trump victory claim and then a contested election based on the likelihood that the initial votes counted by Election Night would skew heavily Republican. This was because mail-in ballots were expected to lean heavily Democratic, leading to a blue shift that becomes more favorable to Biden as more votes are counted. To me, this sounds like needed background on why there are protests. --Super Goku V (talk) 09:45, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Stop the Steal Facebook group

I find it a good thing that the FB group Stop the Steal is mentioned here, in fact I went to this article to see if it's mentioned. However, the source used to source it is a thesis dated 2017 on Trump's use of social media in his 2016 campaign, so it's highly unlikely to contain anything about this FB group started in 2020.

I think better sources on the group and its ban would be The New York Times, The Verge, and The Guardian. Those sources also hold more notable informations about the group, being that it was originally started by Republican operatives and tea-party organizers and that it was one of the fastest-growing groups in the entire history of FB, having grown from 0 to 350,000 members within the course of only 22 hours before its ban. --2003:EF:1703:A528:D960:9B1:48A9:97E5 (talk) 21:09, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

I removed the 2017 source, but can't copy-paste, so leaving its choice of replacement to better people. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:32, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Portland

• https://abcnews.go.com/US/protesters-portland-target-city-commissioners-home-set-fire/story?id=74054924&cid

---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:37, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

It's in the article. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:15, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

::I've removed the item in the main article that is sourced to this ABC one as it makes no mention of the election and to suggest otherwise would be improper synthesis, crystal balling and an indiscriminate collection of information. For all we know th3y could have been protesting (or their protests could have stemmed from) the death of George Floyd. Flickotown (talk) 00:07, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Infobox

I like the idea of an infobox in theory, but I appreciate the revert by Flickotown. We need to be very careful about WP:OR, WP:SYNTH, and WP:CRYSTAL, especially as things change. Bkissin (talk) 01:28, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 8 November 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Oppose. Will relist the requested title as Domestic reactions to the 2020 United States presidential election Flickotown (talk) 07:58, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

---

2020 United States election protests → Domestic Reactions to the 2020 US Presidential Election – 1) The renamed article would allow it to better capture the burgeoning material that celebrates the outcome of the election (and others) 2) The renamed title is a more accurate representation of the fact that the reactions are over the presidential election and not, for example, the concurrent house or senate elections. 3) The formulation/naming convention is consistent with this article. Flickotown (talk) 01:29, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Moved from technical requests for discussion. (permalink). – Ammarpad (talk) 04:58, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

• @Flickotown: This would almost certainly not be uncontroversial. Station1 (talk) 03:43, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per over-capitalization. A neutral descriptive title in alignment with MOS:CAPS and WP:NCCAPS might be OK. Dicklyon (talk) 05:25, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per Dicklyon. Maybe I suggests to rename this article to Domestic reactions to the 2020 United States Presidential election or Reactions to the 2020 United States Presidential election and expand it to includes reactions from other countries. 36.76.239.33 (talk) 09:33, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose - the new title looks messy and the current one is fine. Icantthinkofausernames (talk) 10:47, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Clunky and limiting in scope. Odd capitalizations and “US” instead of U.S. Wait for a decision on the merge discussion before a rename. If the page is not merged, I suggest something short and general like Aftermath of the United States presidential election. KidAd talk 10:52, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per above, probably WP:SNOW. Quahog (talk • contribs) 11:22, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose The article currently covers specific protests. This is in no way reflected in the suggested title. Dimadick (talk) 16:03, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose, too unwieldy. Free1Soul (talk) 17:54, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per Free1Soul. — Czello 17:55, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
• Comment: I do somewhat agree with the nominator (as do I think at least some !voters above) that the scope of this page, if it survives, should include celebrations in support of the election result, not just protests against it. Anything else would violate NPOV by giving weight to conservative reactions but not liberal reactions of the same or bigger scale. The specific proposed title clearly has some issues and won't gain consensus, but if we return to this if the merge nom is unsuccessful, we should be thinking about what potential title might capture the scope we want this article to have. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:22, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
• Comment As Sdkb said, there are mentions of celebrations as well. In that case the title would become misleading, unless we decide to keep this page solely about the protests. If they page is to cover both types of reactions to the elections (not just the presidential election, but also Senate and House elections) then the appropriate title would be Domestic reactions to the 2020 United States elections, which would make it consistent with the main article’s title. If it’s only about the presidential election, then Domestic reactions to the 2020 United States presidential election would be the best title. Keivan.f^Talk 08:30, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose The term 'domestic relations' isn't used anywhere, it's barely even english for that matter. At best its WP:EUPHEMISM. blindlynx (talk) 18:17, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Odd capitalization and punctuation, combined with a vaguer title than we have now. sam1370 (talk · contribs) 06:45, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

On top of that I'd say that eight protesters being arrested is hardly notable. — Czello 16:13, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

The article title says "8 arrested seattle election night protests." Albertaont (talk) 21:21, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Sock edits

Struck through some sock edits, and removed most of those where there was no response. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Waskerton/Archive. Doug Weller talk 14:36, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 November 2020

Minor fixes: add a hyphen to the "Pro Trump" and "Anti Trump" sections, and fix the dates with cardinal numbers or with ordinal numbers (it's one or the other, there's a date with an ordinal number in the Anti Trump section). 93.42.68.194 (talk) 09:14, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done Captain Calm (talk) 06:11, 12 November 2020 (UTC)