Talk:Assata's Daughters

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nick M-PS489. Peer reviewers: Micalh, Mfisch29.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

FBI most wanted list

Explanation for Revert: Information is accurate, noteworthy and from a reliable source. Establishing a background listing involvement with political extremist groups would make the fact that they are wanted by the F.B.I noteworthy and relevant. It is part and parcel to their overall noteworthiness as a person. Not listing it would be obfuscating a fact that could be construed as negative for no apparent reason. See: WP:NPOVHOW and WP:PRESERVE and WP:POVNAMING. Also wanted to mention that I'm still learning the editing process... Appologies in advance for any mistakes. :) Fusion2186 (talk) 20:27, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

The information that Assata Shakur was named "FBI's Most Wanted Terrorist" may be accurate and from a reliable source, but it has nothing to do with Assata's Daughters, the subject of this article. Adding it to this article, but especially to the lead section (which already describes Shakur as a "wanted terrorist"), is off-topic, unnecessary, and nothing but an attempt to poison the well (in other words, a violation of WP:NPOV). Does it belong in Assata Shakur? Absolutely. Does it belong in this article? I've explained why it doesn't, and you have yet to explain why it does. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:10, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

It is most certainly worthy of note that the group is named after someone who is on the FBI's most wanted list. The name was specifically chosen to establish a background connotation. The most notable parts of the background were that she was a civil rights activist(listed) affiliated with 2 different activist entities (listed) and wanted by the FBI (listed but not cited). Im happy with the current structure of "wanted terrorist". The citation should remain for the FBI information, a fact is being stated and if a citation is available it should be included. I think that sentence could be rewritten. I feel like it's grammatically incorrect but only because the word "and" is used instead of commas. I tried it with commas and it didn't look right either. Thoughts? (Posted from mobile)2600:100A:B01C:7A7A:94C0:89DA:FD70:5507 (talk) 08:20, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

If listing the FBI information is poisoning the well, then noting the affiliation with The Black Liberation Army would be the same. Affiliation with an extremist group would generally be viewed as negative except to readers of similar political affiliation which would be in violation of WP:NPOV. 2 different times I have illustrated my arguments to have the information included, your only discernible argument so far is to accuse me of trying to create his and that it makes them look bad. Whether the facts are negative or positive they should be presented if relevant If it's relevant to establish that she was a political activist then how could it not be relevant that she is a on the most wanted list for domestic terrorism which is directly relat d to her political activism which is why she was chosen as the groups namesake? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100A:B01C:7A7A:94C0:89DA:FD70:5507 (talk) 09:11, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

You seem to be confusing this article with Assata Shakur. We don't need a biography of Shakur here. This article says she is an activist and wanted terrorist, and it links to her biography. That's all that's needed here. Assata's Daughters isn't the Assata Shakur Fan Club. This article doesn't mention Shakur's date of birth, or the crime of which she was convicted, or her defense, or her escape from prison, or her living in Cuba, or the repeated calls for her extradition. And that's appropriate, because none of those things have anything to do with Assata's Daughters. Neither does the specific designation of FBI's Most Wanted. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 12:08, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Point conceded. What are your thoughts specifically on: 1. Adding the citation in for the "wanted" info? 2. The sentence structure as previously mentioned?

(Posted from mobile) Fusion21862600:100A:B01C:7A7A:94C0:89DA:FD70:5507 (talk) 19:26, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

In general, I'm not a fan of government announcements and websites as sources, and Wikipedia policy generally favors secondary sources. Surely we can find a reliable source that describes Shakur as both an activist and a wanted terrorist. We might even be lucky enough to find a source that also says this organization was established by Page May in March 2015 and named after Shakur. All the FBI "wanted poster" does is establish that the U.S. government considers her an armed and dangerous terrorist; it really doesn't establish any other facts.

As far as the sentence structure, I must have missed your suggestion. What was it? — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:59, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

I did some looking for a secondary source for the FBI info and found this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/12/20/cuba-still-harbors-one-of-americas-most-wanted-fugitives-what-happens-to-assata-shakur-now/?utm_term=.f9f65c109012

Reading this article, I just saw that she is on the Top 10 Most Wanted and the first and only female on the list. I would again like to address my original point: In the lead section, it reads "Assata's Daughters is named after Black Panther and Black Liberation Army activist" You stated that we didnt need a biography of Assata Shakur but her affiliation with those two groups are listed which is part of her biography. I cant see how it is not equally of note that she is in the top 10. If a group of obstetricians named themselves after Samuel Green It would be a failure on our part not to(throw a brick at them) point out that the group was named after a white supremacist/terrorist/criminal even though he was also an obstetrician. In my oppinion the article as it reads now is partly biased. The two most noteworthy things about the name Assata Shakur is are political activism and being the only woman in the world to make it to the top 10. We arent responsible if the facts as they are appear negative. But we must present them anyway. We are presenting two other facts that in the context may appear positive to specific readers, but witholding another that would appear negative to the majority.

I think that if we still disagree on it, we should get a Third oppinion WP:DRR/3.

Sentence structure question: "Founded in March 2015 by Page May, Assata's Daughters is named after Black Panther and Black Liberation Army activist and wanted terrorist Assata Shakur."

It feels to me like the word "and" is used too often. I tried writing it with commas but it didnt feel right either. I'm not the best with grammar but it seems like a run-on sentence or just feels off somehow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fusion2186 (talk • contribs) 05:41, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

You might as well ask for that third opinion now, because I don't agree. In the Washington Post article, the "important" trivia that Shakur was -- at the time the article was published -- the only woman on the FBI's list is buried at the bottom of the article. There's no way it can be considered defining in terms of who she is.

For what it's worth, your analogy is off-base. The fact that Shakur is a wanted terrorist is already in the article. We're not ignoring that. The fact that she is "most wanted" has more to do with Senator Robert Menendez and the New Jersey police union than Assata's Daughters.

Finally, as far as Shakur's activism goes, that is much more relevant to this article because that is (presumably) the reason the organization was named after Shakur. I'm fairly certain it had nothing to do with the FBI designating her "most wanted". — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 11:57, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Community programs

This whole section looks alot like a recruitment advertisement. I think it should either be rewritten or deleted entirely. Its only verifiable via the Assatas daughters website and the citation takes you straight to a donation page.Fusion2186 (talk) 23:13, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

I think it looks too much like what it probably is: an organization's own description of its activities. It should be sourced to reliable secondary sources.

If the URL takes you "straight to a donation page" instead of a page that describes what Assata's Daughters does, your browser may be hijacked. You might want to run a malware scan. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:28, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

I was taken to the same page you were. The citation is titled "interested in joining?". The page has "donate now" buttons on it. The section describes the activities in the group verbatim to the recruitment page and the citations are the recruitment page. I deleted the section. Its in violation of WP:PROMOTION See below:

1.Advocacy, propaganda, or recruitment of any kind: commercial, political, scientific, religious, national, sports-related, or otherwise. An article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to describe the topic from a neutral point of view. You might wish to start a blog or visit a forum if you want to convince people of the merits of your opinions.[2]

5.Advertising, marketing or public relations. Information about companies and products must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery. All article topics must be verifiable with independent, third-party sources, so articles about very small "garage" or local companies are typically unacceptable. Wikipedia articles about a company or organization are not an extension of their website or other social media marketing efforts. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they identify notable organizations which are the topic of the article. Wikipedia neither endorses organizations nor runs affiliate programs. See also Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for guidelines on corporate notability. Those promoting causes or events, or issuing public service announcements, even if noncommercial, should use a forum other than Wikipedia to do so. Contributors must disclose any payments they receive for editing Wikipedia. See also Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.Fusion2186 (talk) 16:09, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Deleted Community Programs section. WP:V Fusion2186 (talk) 14:48, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

@Malik Shabazz, I've looked all over to try to find another source for the information on community programs and havent been able to find one. I dont think the information meets the criteria for WP:V and I still think it violates WP:PROMOTION. I deleted it once, but it was reverted citing WP:CPUSH in the comments with nothing on the talk page. I would like to have a little more discussion than just the edit commments, otherwise I will continue to try to find a source or eventually delete the section again. Fusion2186 (talk) 23:23, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Still have not been able to find a source for this section. Deleting until source can be found.Fusion2186 (talk) 18:34, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Several edits

Reasons for Edit:

--Lead-- Removed: "Assata's Daughters is part of a cluster of black activist organizations known as the Movement for Black Lives.[3]" Reason: Referenced source does not mention affiliation with MBL. See WP:V WP:SYN Removed: "protesting against police violence." Reason: Only cites one reason. WP:CHERRYPICK WP:SYN WP:SOAPBOX

--Founding-- Changed: "Assata's Daughters is one of many new organizations" Reason: New or old is subject to perspective. See WP:POV WP:WEASEL

Changed: " Assata's Daughters is one several organizations that have set out to protest against police violence, specifically in the city of Chicago. The death of Eric Garner and the subsequent protests are what led to the organization of Assata's Daughters in Chicago, and the group engaged in protest tactics similar to other members of the Black Youth Project 100.[3]" Reasons: Death of Eric Garner is already listed. Source does not mention protest tactics comparison to BYP100, only that BYP100 "lead the way". Editors making comparisons would be original research or POV. Being one of many groups is irrelevant. No source indicates that the group exclusively protests police violence. See: WP:OR WP:SYN WP:V WP:COATRACK WP:WEASEL

Changed: "The activist group was founded by Page May, an African-American woman.[8] May grew up in a nearly all-white town in Virginia, moved to Massachusetts to attend college, and arrived in Chicago for a fellowship.[8] May spent time in Chicago working with Black Youth Project 100, which she says cleared the way in legitimizing all-black, radical spaces, in turn paving the way for Assata's Daughters.[3][8]" Reason: Source material was paraphrased, cherry picked and did not accurately represent statements from May. Also corrected formatting issues WP:POV WP:CHERRYPICK WP:WEASEL WP:V

Removed: Assata's Daughters, along with many of the other newly founded black activist organizations in Chicago, is operating under the ideals of both Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X.[7] The group combines King's peaceful protesting and Malcolm X's "by any means necessary" philosophy to change how protesting occurs and to disrupt "business as usual".[7][9] Reason: Cited material is misinterpreted. Quote in reference is to Ja'Mal Green in speaking about being an activist in general. It is not directly attributed to the Group as being the groups Ideals. See: WP:CHERRYPICK WP:V Fusion2186 (talk) 23:34, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Malik

Well, lets address each part individually and see if we can come to an agreement. I'm interested to hear what you think.Fusion2186 (talk) 11:48, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Edited: ---Founding--- Deleted: "Assata's Daughters, along with many of the other newly founded black activist organizations in Chicago, is operating under the ideals of both Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X.[7] The group combines King's peaceful protesting and Malcolm X's "by any means necessary" philosophy to change how protesting occurs and to disrupt "business as usual".[7][9]" Information is not verifiable. See WP:V Fusion2186 (talk) 14:52, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

                              -

Malik Shabazz, per our conversation here I think we should start an RfC for the Verifiability of some of the sources in the article and the content that we disagree on. I'm hoping that we can work together to formulate the question to ask. My suggestion is as follows:

The content in question is the 3rd paragraph of the Founding section. It currently reads as follows:

 "Assata's Daughters, along with many of the other newly founded black activist organizations in Chicago, is operating under the ideals of both Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X. The group combines King's peaceful protesting and Malcolm X's "by any means necessary" philosophy to change how protesting occurs and to disrupt "business as usual".

Are the statements and comparison concerning the Philosophy and ideals of the group Assata's Daughters being the same as Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X meet the guidelines of WP:V and WP:SYN ? originally posted 16:50 24 October 2017. Fusion2186 (talk) 21:31, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

I've asked for collaboration from Malik Shabazz as seen above. I even posted to his talk page to request his input with no response. Without additional input on the matter i'm going to assume that it is no longer contested that the content referenced in the post about RfC(above) is no longer contested. I have rewritten that section hopefully in a way that all parties would find acceptable.Fusion2186 (talk) 20:24, 30 October 2017 (UTC) ==

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Assata's Daughters. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170307124347/https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20160430/downtown/protestors-disrupt-draft-town-shut-down-lake-shore-drive to https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20160430/downtown/protestors-disrupt-draft-town-shut-down-lake-shore-drive
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170312200314/https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20160316/river-north/bye-anita-activists-celebrate-anita-alvarez-ouster-with-song-hashtag to https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20160316/river-north/bye-anita-activists-celebrate-anita-alvarez-ouster-with-song-hashtag
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170621044854/http://chicagoist.com/2016/03/14/activists_hang_banners_hoping_to_ou.php to http://chicagoist.com/2016/03/14/activists_hang_banners_hoping_to_ou.php

When 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: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:31, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

WP policy on lead

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents. Please do not keep readding material to the lead that isn’t even mentioned in the body of the entry (because it is not relevant to describing this youth group.) If you are tempted to add it to the body, please be mindful of the policy barring WP:SYNTH, which are conclusions made by editors and not stated in reliable sources on this subject. This entry should be built on reliable sources about this group, not other materials editors decide on their own are relevant but RS have not. Innisfree987 (talk) 20:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Ping Htowntexas1994, Martinhealy. Innisfree987 (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2021 (UTC)