Talk:George Floyd protests/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Neutrality tag

Why is there a neutrality tag? What exactly is non neutral about the article? X-Editor (talk) 18:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

I was tempted to remove it. According to the template it's to do with Ongoing status and controversy. I don't know what the latter refers to, and I don't believe the former justifies the tag. FDW777 (talk) 18:51, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@FDW777: Did the person who put the template in the article give any specific examples? X-Editor (talk) 04:25, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

They were referring to this conversation and the follow-up informal RFC, both now archived. The informal RfC wasn't closed but I think it's fair to say there was no consensus to change this article to past tense and state that the protests are all over. I support removing the tag. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 04:43, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Seems reasonable. I've done just that. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 07:51, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

The article appears sufficiently WP:Neutral enough. Dilbaggg (talk) 20:16, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Related discussions re: monuments

Please contribute to ongoing related discussions at Talk:List of monuments and memorials removed during the George Floyd protests. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:48, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

25 Deaths Source

Please provide the source of the stat of "25 deaths". This is ambiguous and misleading. 98.150.232.98 (talk) 06:21, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

I've removed the edit request template as this is a general question on the talk page and not a request to perform a specific edit. I've also renamed this section from "Semi-protected edit request on 7 October 2021" to "25 Deaths Source?" for easier visibility of other editors. Cheers! —Sirdog (talk) 20:37, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2021

Change "murder of George Floyd" to "death of George Floyd". There were many factors that lead to his death: fentanyl, possible overdose, old age etc. Kneegears154 (talk) 14:18, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

See FAQ.Slatersteven (talk) 14:20, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:24, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

2020 Gettysburg hoax

Talk:George Floyd protests in Pennsylvania#Proposed merge of 2020 Gettysburg hoax into George Floyd protests in Pennsylvania may be of interest, as this article is a possible alternative merge target. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 12:16, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Not as neutral as it could be

The article says there were 25 deaths in the protests and subsequent riots, but there are no sources for this number and no description of who died when. There is also plenty of language that isn't completely neutral; there is a heavy emphasis on the majority of the protests being peaceful, despite straight days of well-documented riots across the US. I think this article is still politically charged and should present straight facts instead of actively trying to change a narrative. 2601:282:8200:5d60:84bd:8ec4:8a52:1ec0 (talk) 21:24, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

If the majority were peacefull, then that is what we must say.Slatersteven (talk) 16:24, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

The majority of the protests were peaceful and the article goes into much detail about the looting and rioting involved Bedrockbob (talk) 02:43, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Update

Hasn't the main phrase of the unrest been long done by now, it's going to be 2022 and this article implies mass unrest is still going on which obviously isn't the case

Hgh1985 (talk) 03:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

The article implies that protests are ongoing, not necessarily that widespread unrest is. However, officials are preparing for the possibility of unrest related to the upcoming federal trial in January 2022 and state criminal trial in March 2022 of the other three police officer at the scene of Floyd’s murder. Minnemeeples (talk) 19:06, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

I made this edit about how the Chauvin trial did not result in the same degree of unrest as the initial reaction to Floyd's murder. Here is an excerpt from the Star Tribune article on December 29, 2021:

But the trial didn't bring the kind of unrest that followed Floyd's death, and it is unclear whether any of potential threats mentioned in the briefings materialized. Still, authorities cautioned that the "diverse threat of domestic terrorism could persist through upcoming trials," according to one briefing.

Minnemeeples (talk) 16:50, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

But that does not mean there was none. By the way, a news story is not a briefing.Slatersteven (talk) 16:54, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Slatersteven, I am not sure I understand your point, my friend. The edit was stating the events during the Chauvin trial were not the same kind of unrest as the period immediately after Floyd's murder. I was not saying there was nothing going on. Perhaps we are not understanding each other. What do you suggest be done? Care to elaborate? I don't understand. :) Minnemeeples (talk) 17:16, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

The point raised here was the main phase is over, maybe it is. But that does not mean the protests are. So I am unsure what this has to do with the (implied) question, that the protests are not ongoing.Slatersteven (talk) 17:21, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

I agree that the protests are not over. However, the intensity of the George Floyd-related protests, and degree of widespread civil unrest, was not the same during Chauvin's trial as it was in late May and early June of 2020. Minnemeeples (talk) 17:25, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

As said above this is not about "major unrest" it is about protests related to Gorge Floyd's murder. As we have trails still coming up it may not be over yet. So lets wait at least until 2022 before declaring it has ended, or better test find an RS that says they have (in fac t) ended.Slatersteven (talk) 19:44, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps there's a way to indicate that the "major unrest" is over, because we're not in the summer of 2020 anymore. It'd depend on what sources say. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

MAybe, but as you say we need soruces.Slatersteven (talk) 19:51, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

And I haven't found any. We may need more distance from the 2020 protests for historical perspective. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:24, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Covid section

In the Covid-19 section, the article doesn't make clear that we didn't know then that the virus (for the most part) doesn't spread outside. We only knew that way after the protests. Thus, there are some ethical issues here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:844:4302:40A0:0:0:0:E853 (talk) 18:47, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

We need RS drawing this conclusion, we cannot judge the morality of an act.Slatersteven (talk) 18:51, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

New lead photo from first protest suggested for infobox

I suggest replacing the main photo of the article with this photo, which is of the very first George Floyd protest on May 26, 2020. This photo is of the protest crowd that had spontaneously gathered throughout the day at the 38th and Chicago Avenue street intersection were Floyd was murdered, that then decided to march to the Minneapolis 3rd precinct police station (at Minnehaha Avenue and East Lake Street) where the police officers were assigned to. The photo is taken looking westward from about 16th Avenue South and East 38th Street in Minneapolis. It captures a diverse crowd of people participating in a protest march with hand-made signs. The march to the police station on May 26 in Minneapolis literally put the protest movement into motion, from the initial reaction of people that had gathered outside the Cup Foods store to when people marched to a police station to demand justice and accountability for Floyd's death. The current photo is of a much less notable protest event on May 28 in downtown Minneapolis, several days after the protest movement began. The lead photo could instead convey how it began. Minnemeeples (talk) 17:22, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. See below for what the images look like alone and in the infobox multiple image template. Firefangledfeathers 17:52, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Visual examples
old image new image Old version New version

I understand the motivation behind this request. However, the current top photo has a sign with "I can't breathe" which the proposed new one doesn't. Since this sentence has been a notable slogan since then (with its own article) and was widely used in these protests, any image in the infobox should imho include this phrase. After all, per MOS:LEADIMAGE the lead image should be one most representative of the topic and said topic is "George Floyd protests", not "the first George Floyd protest". That is for example also the reason why Monday demonstrations in East Germany shows a photo of one where 40000 people participated and not one of the first demonstrations with only a few dozen people. Regards SoWhy 19:13, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

SoWhy, If you want an "I can't breathe sign", here is another photo from May 26 with exactly that in it. The sign reads, "Justice for GEORGE FLOYD #ICANTBREATHE". It is from the same march that departed George Floyd Square and followed 38th street each toward the police station. Is that a better compromise? It is better than the current photo as it has the name George Floyd in it. Thoughts? Minnemeeples (talk) 19:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

I would be okay with that photo for the reasons you mentioned. Regards SoWhy 08:21, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 August 2020 and 7 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Cgagyemang.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

First sentence and lead paragraph

The current version of the first sentence does not adhere to the Manual of Style guidance about the first sentence. There have been several good faith edits made to it recently, which are well-intended but do not solve some of its underlying problems:

• It uses the word "protests" redundantly.
• It is overloaded with information.
• The title, which is not a proper name, may not naturally lend itself to the first sentence.

Perhaps it could be simplified with the first paragraph explaining more context.

Here here is a suggested lead paragraph:

Protests over the murder of George Floyd began in Minneapolis on May 26, 2020. Floyd, an African American man, died on May 25 after Derek Chauvin, a white police officer, knelt on his neck for over nine minutes while Floyd was handcuffed and laying face-down in a street. Floyd's murder was captured by a bystander's video that circulated widely in the media, provoking public outrage. Protesters demanded that Chauvin and three other police officers at the scene of Floyd's death be held legally accountable. Within a few days, local protests broadened into a global social movement against police brutality and racial injustice. The United States experienced widespread civil unrest in mid 2020.

The rest of the lead could use some revision, too. Thoughts?

Minnemeeples (talk) 17:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Here is another attempt at improving the lead paragraph:

The George Floyd protests are a global social movement against police brutality and racial injustice. The movement began on May 26, 2020, as local protests over the murder of George Floyd in the U.S. city of Minneapolis. Floyd, an African American man, died on May 25 after Derek Chauvin, a white police officer, knelt on his neck for over nine minutes while Floyd was handcuffed and laying face-down in a street. Floyd's murder was captured by a bystander's video that circulated widely in the media, provoking public outrage. Protesters demanded that Chauvin and three other police officers at the scene of Floyd's death be held legally accountable. Within a few days, protests over Floyd's murder occurred across the globe and broadened to issues and symbols of historic racism. Many protests were part of the Black Lives Matter movement. In the United States in mid 2020, the reaction to Floyd's death resulted in widespread civil unrest and the largest racial justice protests since the civil rights movement of the 1960s.

Minnemeeples (talk) 16:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

I prefer the first one. There appears to be some disagreement as to whether or not the protests are "ongoing". The first example leaves that ambiguous. --Spekkios (talk) 03:36, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the talk page section. I like the first example more. Gets rid of "ongoing" as Spekkios said which has been the subject of contention between us over the past few months. Only thing I would add in the last sentence is "The United States experienced widespread civil unrest in mid 2020 which sparked protests and riots across the country." Describes specifically what the "civil unrest" is referring to since that is a broad term. Good job otherwise Anon0098 (talk) 06:00, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Attorneys Admit Making Explosives Thrown at NYPD Vehicle in NYC Floyd Protests

These three links are from October 2021. I propose that this content be included. What do others here think?

Also, it says their sentencing date was set for February 8, 2022. That was more than two weeks ago, but I haven't been able to find any news of their actual sentencing.

Still, I think their guilty plea from October 2021 is relevant, and should be included.

What do others here think?

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/attorneys-admit-making-explosives-thrown-at-nypd-vehicle-in-nyc-floyd-protests/3337536/

https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/new-york-lawyers-plead-guilty-molotov-cocktail-case-2021-10-20/

https://web.archive.org/web/20211020150005/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/20/nyregion/george-floyd-protests-lawyers-plea-deal.html

Baxter329 (talk) 21:02, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

This is my proposed addition to the article. What do others think?

On October 20, 2021, two attorneys - Colinford Mattis, a Princeton and NYU Law graduate who had worked at Pryor Cashman, and public interest attorney Urooj Rahman, who had attended Fordham Law - each pled guilty in Brooklyn federal court to a single count of making an incendiary device, for their roles in manufacturng a Molotov cocktail and throwing it into a police car, which was unoccupied at the time.

Baxter329 (talk) 23:36, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

No, per WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. FDW777 (talk) 07:52, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your response and the link to that Wikipedia policy.

I disagree that this incident is indiscriminate. Setting off an explosive device inside a police car is a big deal. I think it's notable. At the same time, I don't want to violate the policy that you linked to. I am interested in reading what other editors here think of this incident being included in the article.

Baxter329 (talk) 03:50, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

There were a large number of people arrested in connection with the protests, and I'm sure there will be plenty of convictions. This article is not the place for laundry lists of convictions, especially ones relating to low-profile living people. FDW777 (talk) 16:04, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

The issue I think is this was just one incident, what makes this one significant?Slatersteven (talk) 16:08, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

It already exists on George Floyd protests in New York City here. Kire1975 (talk) 16:30, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

References

It's 2022 - this protest is over

The inability for editors to find "acceptable" sources is a criticism of Wikipedia. The protests are OBVIOUSLY over 2601:5C4:200:5C40:110E:EB7F:2BB0:95D0 (talk) 09:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

So find an unacceptable one that says they ae over, and show that at least someone think they are.Slatersteven (talk)

Slatersteven pleae remember the difference between protests and wars. Wars (e.g American Civil War )ends after formal declarations, protests ends when street incidents stop, there have been no street incidents since the 1st anniversary on Many 26, 2021, sho that date should be set as ending, learn the difference between actual protest phase and aftermatches, people will talk about this for decades to come just like they talk about Rodney King, but that won't change that the 1992 LA riots ended in 1992, this was a part of the Black Lives Matter protests, much like the Long Hot Summer of 1967 was one out of many parts of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. Here is NYT giving an accurate timeline of the protests, according to them the protests ended in june 2020 [1], at this this article more innacurate than any protest related article I have ever seen, FIND A SOURCE THAT SAYS THE PROTESTS ARE ONGOING. Cheers. Dilbaggg (talk) 12:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Well it appears there have been (see the comment below).Slatersteven (talk) 12:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

That is about a court case, and from a potentailly unreliable source. You do understand the difference between court cases and protests? After the end of protests protesters are arrested, thsoe who were protested against are arrested, that is not a part of protest. Since when did court cases start being counted as protests?Dilbaggg (talk)

It is enough for me to say they may not be over, and it does not matter if it is "over a court case" as the court case directly relates to Mr Floyd. So they may well spark off again, Slatersteven (talk) 12:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

If you are not literate about the difference between protests and court cases, I can't help you. This article is about one of the most prominent protests in history, but has become a joke article, the type of articles that gives Wikipedia its bad name of unreliability. I was done with this article a year ago, but I had hopes after seeing this section here, but apparantly those handaling it do not know the difference between court cases and protests. What is to be done? I quit again, good day Slatersteven, best wishes. Dilbaggg (talk) 12:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

The occupied protest at George Floyd Square is ongoing, according sources cited in the article. The street intersection reopened to vehicular traffic in June 2021, but the protester presence continued, as did the occupation of an abandoned gas station there. The Wall Street Journal on January 3, 2022, discussed the preparation for protests and possible unrest in Saint Paul ahead of the federal trial of the other three officers. Protesters since very early in the protest movement have demanded accountability for ALL FOUR police officers who were there when Floyd was murdered. After the federal trial in January, you still have the state criminal trial, which will be held in March 2022, at the earliest, according to recent developments in that case. Minnemeeples (talk) 14:27, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

So can end it there and they convicted the guys https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jury-reaches-verdict-federal-trial-3-officers-george-floyds-killing-rcna17237 Persesus (talk) 05:46, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Dates are Exagerated in Infobox

The bulk of the racial protests and those related to the George Floyd killing died down within 2020. The situation in June 2020 is no longer the same political atmosphere related to this topic in January 2022. 2607:B400:26:0:CC32:D6B9:3C9D:302 (talk) 13:21, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Do we say "major protests"?Slatersteven (talk) 13:35, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Just look at the previous comments, everyone except two editors, not naming incase it gets considered WP:NPA acknowledge the protests ended, and they are bringing the larger Black Lives Matter movemnt information into this, and they actually do not know the difference between court cases adn protests. I agree this was one of the biggest and msost important protest ever that alsted between 2020 to 2021, and George Floyd will nevert be forgotten, but there has not been any street protests, and the objectives have also been received, Derek Chauvin has even been sentenced and I fully support his punishment and respect the protest. But tese two editors keep saying the protests are ongoing, which they are not, George Floyd will always be remembered in future Black Lives Matter issues but individual protests over him are over, he will always be remembered alongside Eric Garner, Breonna Taylor and others and rigtfully so. But individual protests over Mr Floyd lasted from 2020-2021 and I had the biggest respect for it, but there is no WP:RS saying that protests are still going on in 2022, and that just the way it is. Dilbaggg (talk) 05:18, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Two reliable sources cited in the article noted protest activity in January 2022.

Ajasa, Amudalat (January 24, 2022). "Trial begins of three ex-police officers present at George Floyd murder". The Guardian. Retrieved January 24, 2022.

"The bitter arctic blast, which had Minnesota temperatures below 0F , didn’t stop protesters from hosting a rally as the three lesser-known police officers accused of involvement in the killing of George Floyd faced their turn in the courtroom.

A caravan of two dozen cars had occupied the length of the block outside the courthouse in the state capital, St Paul, last week, as jury selection began in the federal civil rights trial of Tou Thao, J Alexander Kueng and Thomas Lane."

Arango, Tim (24 January , 2022). "Trial Starts for 3 Officers in George Floyd's Death". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved January 25, 2022.

Photo caption: "A protestor outside the federal courthouse in St. Paul, Minn., on Monday morning"

Three other police officers at the scene of Floyd's murder have not faced full judicial consequences for their actions/inactions. A key demand of protests from the very beginning of the George Floyd protest movement was that all four officers at the scene of Floyd's death be criminally charged and held legally accountable. On that matter, there is an ongoing civil rights trial for J. Alexander Kueng, Tou Thao, and Thomas Lane in Saint Paul, Minnesota. Officials there have mobilized a counter-protest operation. Then, the criminal trial of J. Alexander Kueng, Tou Thao, and Thomas Lane is scheduled for March 7, 2022, at the earliest. Minnemeeples (talk) 14:57, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Minnemeeples I have nothing to do if you have no idea what aftermatch is and if you think court cases are a form of protests. Best wishes. Dilbaggg (talk) 07:34, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

I see the word protest.Slatersteven (talk) 11:31, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

I see protests used in "past tense" of English language while the articles detalis the ongoing trials, again trials are not any form of protets. Dilbaggg (talk) 11:51, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

No, as they were contemporaneous with the protests. But even if they are, that still means there were protests as late as 24 January , 2022.Slatersteven (talk) 12:01, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Support: These protests have long since ended and the claim that they are still going on is OR. Protests over the sentences of officers who participated in the killing of Floyd and the subsequent "protests" do not mean that they were part of the original protests that swept the United States in May 2020..--Sakiv (talk) 21:24, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

If that is truly the case, is there a particular date we could cite to specify when the protests ended similarly to the "1992 Los Angeles riots" article? Or is that too generic at this point in time? Either way, if we reach a general consensus that the protests are now over, we would definitely need to update the listed date of "May 26, 2020 – present" by indicating an endpoint. 888888jdog 15:34, 16 March 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 888888jdog (talk • contribs)

They convicted the guys https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jury-reaches-verdict-federal-trial-3-officers-george-floyds-killing-rcna17237 Persesus (talk) 05:48, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Ended?

Can we say the whole thing ended now? Persesus (talk) 05:24, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Also can an alternate name of this page be the George Floyd riots or unrest I am willing for that discussion Persesus (talk) 05:41, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Hey they convicted the cops so can we ended here or use an end date with the trial https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jury-reaches-verdict-federal-trial-3-officers-george-floyds-killing-rcna17237 Persesus (talk) 05:47, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Riots as an alternate title

POV pusher, Chewbacca isn’t from Endor, case closed Dronebogus (talk) 07:05, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Is ok if someone were to add in the riots since some of the events were riots Persesus (talk) 05:45, 21 March 2022 (UTC) No. It’s mentioned and we’ve been over this. Calling the protests as s whole “riots” is a WP:POV WP:FRINGE interpretation. Dronebogus (talk) 06:11, 21 March 2022 (UTC) Yeah about that there were just use it as alternative since you don’t want to seem bias Persesus (talk) 06:28, 21 March 2022 (UTC) And just use the end date for the event as I stated previously since you clearly want this nonsense to keep going it has to end at some point since they convicted the cops who killed the guy Persesus (talk) 06:29, 21 March 2022 (UTC) WP:OR, provide a source showing the actual protests ended. Dronebogus (talk) 06:31, 21 March 2022 (UTC) The trial of the cops https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jury-reaches-verdict-federal-trial-3-officers-george-floyds-killing-rcna17237 Persesus (talk) 06:33, 21 March 2022 (UTC) That’s where it is ended right there Persesus (talk) 06:33, 21 March 2022 (UTC) Provide a quote from the article stating that. Dronebogus (talk) 06:41, 21 March 2022 (UTC) It’s right in the title Persesus (talk) 06:52, 21 March 2022 (UTC) No, provide a quote saying the protests have ended. Dronebogus (talk) 06:53, 21 March 2022 (UTC) You want to keep this grift going it’s done Persesus (talk) 06:56, 21 March 2022 (UTC) So you’re saying you have no quote. Dronebogus (talk) 06:58, 21 March 2022 (UTC) I didn’t say that, you are the one who suggested it. I mean face it it’s all over. Persesus (talk) 07:00, 21 March 2022 (UTC) That is WP:OR. Provide a quote saying it’s over. Dronebogus (talk) 07:01, 21 March 2022 (UTC) It’s not WP:OR it’s a fact at this point and it’s a fact you can’t comprehend it is just laughable at best. It wouldn’t surprise me the most. Persesus (talk) 07:04, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

25 claimed deaths

The Guardian reference does not support the inclusion of 25 in this article, since it actually says 11 Americans have been killed while participating in political demonstrations this year and another 14 have died in other incidents linked to political unrest, and further states Nine of the people killed during protests were demonstrators taking part in Black Lives Matter protests. Two were conservatives killed after pro-Trump “patriot rallies”. Since this article is about the George Floyd protests, not all political violence, I have removed the claim completely. I have no objection to a properly referenced figure being restored, but that wasn't one. FDW777 (talk) 18:40, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2022

I will change the all times they used the word, "protest" to riots, because they were. BOBByjsdf ohsfj (talk) 20:16, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done I suggest reading the third paragraph of the lead. FDW777 (talk) 20:24, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Importance of including "insured" before damages in side bar

No other riot page includes the amount of "insured damages." I'm not sure of the significance of adding that, outside of reducing blame of rioters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.7.224.46 (talk) 16:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Nor am I, and it was not those who wanted to shift blame, as I recall this was included at the insistence of those who wanted to show how much damage it had caused. I agree, we do not need it. Slatersteven (talk) 16:26, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Oppose: The RSS is about insurance companies records. If anything, it raises the question how many more damages went unreported. But to include or remove anything to reflect such reasons would be WP:SOAPBOX. Kire1975 (talk) 16:31, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

I was under the impression that the use of the word "insured" was to show documented damages and that there were likely millions/billions more unaccounted for Anon0098 (talk) 05:51, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Whatever you do for the $1-2B, don't put "insured" before the damages in Minneapolis-St. Paul. The Minnesota Department of Commerce estimated that riot losses in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area were $550 million (this article. About 60% of the losses were uninsured locally (this article). So in Minneapolis-St. Paul, it would be inaccurate to say that the $550 was insurance losses as that amount is an estimate of net loss of inventory from looting, cost of buildings burned, cost of vandalism, etc.. That being said, the $550 does not include lost productivity from businesses being closed or from reduced business activity during civil disorder and afterwards. Minnemeeples (talk) 15:11, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

George Floyd Peaceful Protests

I am proposing a name change of the article to 'George Floyd Peaceful Protests', as the word protest alone conjures images of violence and aggression, which these peaceful protests most certainly were not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.105.226 (talk) 19:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

• George Floyd protests is a neutral term. In Minneapolis alone, there were a 164 arson fires over three nights in late May 2020, one of which burned a man alive. All over the place, there was violence by demonstrators and considerable violence by police against demonstrators. While most people protesting did so peacefully and most of the demonstration events were peaceful, the George Floyd protest movement was not an entirely peaceful epoch. In fact, it was a quite tumultuous. Minnemeeples (talk) 20:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

How is “protest” a violent term? Dronebogus (talk) 20:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

This page move will not happen per WP:POV and WP:CONCISE. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

No Anon0098 (talk) 17:06, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

no the word word protest does conjure up images of violence and aggression. Slatersteven (talk) 17:13, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 June 2022

Add murder and intimidation to methods used… unless you want to continue to be disingenuous… even when the riots killed African Americans like myself. 2603:9000:A600:690F:B434:AED8:688F:D36 (talk) 02:33, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

"Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Acroterion (talk) 02:35, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Wouldn't you consider protests that cause this much damage were riots and should be characterized as such. You could say the vast majority were peaceful protests there sure some riots — Preceding unsigned comment added by EternallyPolish (talk • contribs) 02:30, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

The article does this already. While the majority of protests were peaceful, demonstrations in some cities escalated into riots, looting, and street skirmishes with police and counter-protesters. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:30, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Murder & intimidation, source? Slatersteven (talk) 12:37, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

change from protests to riots

You guy’s are clearly biased, I wish wiki went under when you were begging for money. 104.235.33.41 (talk) 02:25, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Do you believe that you are without bias? – Muboshgu (talk) 02:28, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

We go with what RS say, Slatersteven (talk) 12:36, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Ongoing

@Minnemeeples: per WP:RSP The Nation is a progressive outlet and opinions should be attributed and given appropriate weight. IMO "ongoing" shouldn't be based on this source when the last time I can see another RS refer to the protests was in May. Do you have any other sources saying this is ongoing? Thanks, Anon0098 (talk) 00:19, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

btw per WP:DEADLINE I dont really care if we wait for the additional policeman trials like you said but for now I think we should try to get this appropriately sourced, and the end date should be a general "2022" based on inconsistent reporting. Thoughts? Anon0098 (talk) 17:57, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

The article discusses an active protest. It’s an observation, not political commentary. Minnemeeples (talk) 00:37, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

It's commentary to associate the current protests with the worldwide protests and assert the worldwide protests are ongoing because of it Anon0098 (talk) 17:57, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Given that at least one was stated at the time of the murder, and is still ongoing, it seems reasonable to say it is ongoing. Slatersteven (talk) 18:10, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

[[2]] "The autonomous protest zone known as George Floyd Square is still occupied,", that was last month. Slatersteven (talk) 18:15, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

2022, its no longer ongoing

I fully supported this protests, but this ended back in 2021 after the trial of Derek Chauvin. There are only two editors that keep insisting that this protest is still ongoing, but there has been no protests this year, beside the occupation of George Floyd Square which is more of a tribute to late Mr. Floyd, no WP:RS ever says the protest is still ongoing. Even the sources used such as this [3] non of these states that the protests are on going, they all reflect to the events of 2020. Here this source explicitely says post protest events [4]. These two editors do not know the aftermath, people still pay tribute to the Civil rights Movement that ended in 1968, that doesn't mean the 1950s-1960s series of protests are still on going, there is a new Black Lives Matter protest taht is not related to it. The protests ended in December 15, 2021 with Chauven pleading guilty and everything that has happened after that is the aftermath, learn what an aftermath is, and my statement is backed by Wp:RS unlike your unsourced claims taht the protest is still ongoing: [5]. Dilbaggg (talk) 14:42, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Where does it say anything about "post protest events" The closest it comes is to discuss "by analyzing data collected from a random sample of activists who participated in racial justice-focused protests in the summer of 2020." Which says nothing about when they ended, just that they wanted to ask about that period. NOw they may well have ended, but I am unsure we can fix a date for that. Slatersteven (talk) 14:57, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@Slatersteven did you even read the title of the second source in my new section "lessons-learned-from-the-post-george-floyd-protests/" Also about the date, the third source accepts Chauven's trial as the ending of the timeline of the protests. Like i said countless time, this was a protest not a war which has formal declaration of ending. Protests are over when sources stop refering to the protests as ongoing. Dilbaggg (talk) 15:14, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes I did, its where my quoted passage comes talking about 2020. Slatersteven (talk) 15:18, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

So I am unsure that they mean "post protest" but rather mean the protests were "post-George Floyd" (as they talk about events in 2020, when we know the protests continued into 2021). This is why we need sources that actually say it, as different people will interpret the same thing in different ways. Slatersteven (talk) 15:29, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Also when they ended, and them being ongoing are two different issues, we clearly have sourced content into 2022. Slatersteven (talk) 15:43, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

@Slatersteven Unfortunatley these days I am so busy I cant go for Wp:DR, but trust me Wikipedia community non of the sources or any major news media says that there are any active protests in 2022, and a mere occupational tribute is being misquoted as a protest here. Thats the last thing I say here for now. Dilbaggg (talk) 15:57, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 November 2022

Please add an end date to the protests in the infobox, it is currently set from 2020-present. The first sentence of the article is "The George Floyd protests were a series of protests..." (emphasis mine). Perhaps 2021 can be put as the end date, since it is the last year reported in the article table of contents. Thank you for considering the change in advance. 2601:85:C101:C9D0:A5A4:799:21F3:8714 (talk) 02:21, 7 November 2022 (UTC) 2601:85:C101:C9D0:A5A4:799:21F3:8714 (talk) 02:21, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Oh well, I just saw the above discussion, which pertains to my question. I guess that the outcome of it will answer my proposal, though the discussion seems to have stalled for over a week. 2601:85:C101:C9D0:A5A4:799:21F3:8714 (talk) 02:23, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

You can !vote (pronounced "not-vote") in an RFC yourself, you know. If you think it should end at a specific time, you should say that, especially if you have novel reasoning. Loki (talk) 02:24, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Consensus-establishing being done above. Once closed, the relevant information can be changed. 💜  melecie  talk - 02:27, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 December 2022

Please change the title to “George Floyd riots”. Thank you. 2600:1702:1F0:1A30:3D8C:15BD:3428:78A5 (talk) 18:36, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

THis has been asked and rejected many times, see the archive. Slatersteven (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• George Floyd Mural in Portland, Oregon.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:08, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Edit request of protest dates

George Floyd Square is still an active site of protests. The memorial is still in the street. The names of stolen lives are repainted in the street. A community-built greenhouse is still in the street. There are oversized fists at every community-declared entry point and at the center of the intersection. There are two protest gardens still in the street. And the people still gather every morning at 8 AM and evening at 7 pm in protest. Jeanelleaustin (talk) 09:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jeanelleaustin: This article is about the countrywide protests. It does not negate the fact that some protests might locally still be happening, which is why George Floyd Square occupied protest, which you seem to refer to, lists the end date as "present". Regards SoWhy 09:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

RFC on when the protests ended

The following discussion 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.

---

When should we say the protests ended?

A 2020

B 2021

C 2022

D Ongoing still

Slatersteven (talk) 16:17, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Editors should follow what reliable sources have to say, otherwise it is original research. Cited sources in the article describe protests as ongoing in 2022.

Alyssa Oursler's article, "The ACLU Fights for Minneapolis", in the The Nation on August 31, 2022, stated, "The autonomous protest zone known as George Floyd Square is still occupied, but car traffic now snakes through it. And criminal cases for the other officers involved in Floyd’s murder are still winding through the bureaucratic maze we call the justice system.... Returning to the murder of George Floyd, officers J. Alexander Kueng, Thomas Lane, and Tou Thao will face the state this fall. Lane, who pleaded guilty to second-degree state manslaughter charges, is expected to be sentenced in September. The remaining two will face trial in October."

Marcia Howard, a lead organizer of the protest at 38th Street and Chicago Avenue where George Floyd was murdered, was interviewed by Minnesota Public Radio on May 25, 2022 ("'We are still there holding out for justice:' Marcia Howard on George Floyd Square"). Howard described the autonomous protest zone there as "the longest political occupation in American history" and "a living protest" and that "we are still there holding out justice for George Floyd...".

There is no deadline. What's the urgency? Why not wait a few weeks until after the state criminal trial of police officers Thao and Kueng has concluded? Jury selection in their trial begins October 24, 2022, according to this source and others. An early demand of protests was to hold all four officers responsible for Floyd's murder accountable. There is still one more trial yet to go. Minnemeeples (talk) 23:42, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

So D? Slatersteven (talk) 12:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Polling is not a substitute for discussion. A discussion is not a substitute for verifiability. The opinions of editors do not matter (see "I just don't like it"). Editors should base their discussion on information that can be verified in reliable sources. Minnemeeples (talk) 14:15, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

While the nature of the protests have changed and even dwindled, reliable source have in 2022 discussed them as ongoing.

Jenae, Julia (April 22, 2021). "‘ONE DOWN, THREE TO GO,’ CROWDS CHANT AFTER CHAUVIN VERDICT, OTHER FIRED OFFICERS AWAIT TRIAL". CourtTV. Excerpt:

Minutes after Derek Chauvin was convicted for the murder of George Floyd, activists chanted “one down, three to go!” in reference to the three other fired Minneapolis police officers, who are awaiting a trial of their own.

Ska, Akičita Šuŋka-Wakaŋ and Georgiades, Niko (January 24, 2022). “Caravan for George Floyd as Federal Trial Begins for Officers Lane, Kueng, and Thao”. Unicorn Riot. Excerpt:

With a caravan of dozens of cars, protesters in St. Paul continue to demand justice for George Floyd as the federal trial begins for the three former Minneapolis Police officers who assisted Derek Chauvin while he murdered Floyd. Thomas Lane, Alexander Kueng, and Tou Thao, all fired from the Minneapolis Police Department, face federal charges of violating George Floyd’s civil rights. Opening statements began Monday, January 24.

"3 ex-cops convicted of rights violations in George Floyd killing". CNBC. February 24, 2022. Retrieved February 24, 2022. Excerpt:

Public reaction to Thursday’s verdicts was muted, with only a tiny handful of protesters visible outside the courthouse, which was surrounded by fencing throughout the trial.

"2 injured in shooting near George Floyd Square, MPD says". KMSP-TV. March 20, 2022. Retrieved March 20, 2022. Excerpt:

Police did not clarify where in the 3700 block the shooting happened, but it was between 37th and 38th streets on Chicago Avenue. George Floyd Square at 38th and Chicago remains a memorialized intersection occupied in protest after former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in May 2020.

Rowan, Nic (May 20, 2022). "Minneapolis Hasn't Recovered From George Floyd's Death". Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Retrieved May 25, 2022. Excerpt:

To the visitor, the lack of order is most readily apparent in George Floyd Square. The barriers that blocked traffic during the past two years are gone, but the four-block area is still essentially an autonomous zone. City buses don’t stop there. Cars are often abandoned in the middle of the road. The trashed Speedway gas station has become a makeshift outdoor living room. The city has proposed refurbishing the square as a community plaza, but the mixture of racial-justice activists, residents, and local gangs vying for control make it unlikely. “This is still an active protest space,” says activist

Minnemeeples (talk) 15:13, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Its time to let others have a say, this is an attempt at DR. Slatersteven (talk) 15:15, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

• A, because "the George Floyd protests" were an event, not a description covering every single protest of the murder of George Floyd. That event lasted for a few months in 2020, and is long since over, despite the fact that there continue to be protests of the murder of George Floyd and related issues. It's similar to why "the LA riots" were over by 2020 even though there were riots in LA in 2020. Loki (talk) 04:38, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

• D, because as the article itself notes in the last paragraph of the intro, with sources that talk about it, protests are ongoing. Agree with Minnemeeples- there's no deadline, leave it be! :) Hentheden (talk) 23:18, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
• This article is about the George Floyd global protest movement and as such it is not likely to stop anytime soon. We may be able to verify an end date for the George Floyd protests in Minneapolis–Saint Paul. But for this article, it's probably not even necessary to include a start and end date in the infobox, since the timeline is much better described in prose. ––FormalDude (talk) 00:04, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

• I was working through this issue on the the NYC-specific article, and what I came to might also apply to this article: the focus is primarily the protests which took place between May-July 2020, but the article also covers court cases, police reforms, and any other event directly connected to those May-July 2020 protests, regardless of when they take place. It can also include memorials, art projects, etc. that are directly related to Floyd. But as for protests themselves, it seems useful organizationally to consider them part of a broader Black Lives Matter movement (or 2020–2022 United States racial unrest). Floyd will undoubtedly be part of related protests for some time, along with the names of other victims of police violence, but we're not seeing so many protests called explicitly "George Floyd protests" after those few months. In other words, A, with exceptions. It's not exactly true that the George Floyd protests absolutely ended on a certain date, but we're not going to have any such date because of the nature of his protests fitting into a larger movement. At the end of the day, we have to clearly define our subjects, and I think we can say this article focuses on the events of 2020, while also acknowledging that protests continue (without detailing them, and pointing to other relevant articles). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:30, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

  "It's not exactly true that the George Floyd protests absolutely ended on a certain date" Yes, this is why I think we should not include a specific end date and rather describe the timeline in prose for clarity. ––FormalDude (talk) 22:18, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

• I'm actually with FD on this one. Might be best not to include a start/end date. However if we are going to, I'd go with A per Rhododendrites. The global protests took place almost entirely within 2020. Maybe we can include a note with a source saying very few protests extended into 2022? Also re WP:DEADLINE, that's just an essay not a policy and I would instead direct you to WP:DEADLINENOW. PS Courtesy pinging Dilbaggg (talk · contribs) since he started this discussion above. Anon0098 (talk) 18:15, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
• Yeah seems like the worldwide protests ended in 2021, while the main phase ended in 2020. The occupation of George Floyd square seems to be the only remaining event that continued into 2022, and I don't think one event should drag the end date years later than when it really ended.Yeoutie (talk) 00:08, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
• I am going with A, I added this source that slater stevension and minempeles guys the only two who act like they are owqners of this article and the view of other editors or even actual sources don't matter what they say goes removed, this source: [6] Dilbaggg (talk) 13:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Going to revert to that due to majority view but it will be a one time revert, however I expect slater guy and minemples guy to try provoke ediut war which I wont engage in. Anywthing that happened after November 1 are just aftermath of the protests. Dilbaggg (talk) 13:03, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes I did, as I am unsure your edit had consensus I see 2D , 3 A, 2 "lets not even have a date", 1 B. So let an uninvolved ed close this. Slatersteven (talk) 13:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

@Slatersteven so you see the consensus is here, only you two poick D because of egos and that you dopn't want 2 years of cherry picked info to be proven wrong, but facts are facts the protests ended a long time ago, its just aftermath now, 5 people do not support your views so you see October 1, 2020 was the end date of the protests. What is happening now is the aftermath. The Civil Rights Movements ended in 1968 but aftermath and subsequent protests happened even after that but they are not part of the 1955-1968 Civil rights Movement, you ahve to udnerstqand the difference between mainstream protests and their aftermath. Dilbaggg (talk) 13:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

No as I have not expressed a view, but it is clear form my actions it is D, so in fact we have 3d's. And the same people who do not support my view do not support yours either. And read wp:npa. Slatersteven (talk) 13:23, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

I have made a formal close request so fresh eyes can judge what is the consensus. Slatersteven (talk) 13:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC) mainstream protests and their aftermath. Dilbaggg (talk) 13:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

There is absolutely no source that reports that protests are still on going and you are actually counting stuff like court trials as protests which is just misleading and pure WP:NOR violation! Thats the alst of what I would say here now, but time for you two to step beside and let uninvolved editors to give the absolute verdict, no WP:RS or news media reports this as ongoing and learn what Aftermath is! And this to me is the most unbiased format for any future judges: [7]. Dilbaggg (talk) 13:25, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, WE have had a say, it is now down to an uninvolved editor to decide what the consensus is. Please allow them to read this without further comment in order to make their job easier in deciding what consensus has been decided. Slatersteven (talk) 13:27, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

• B or maybe A, not C or D. This is per the text of the article itself, which describes very little activity after 2021. The fact that protests in Minneapolis itself continued does not mean that George Floyd protests as a general phenomenon lasted that long. Crossroads ^-talk- 22:32, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Are you solely basing your conclusion that the George Floyd protests as a general phenomenon have ended on the fact that sources show less activity after 2021? If so, that is WP:SYNTH. ––FormalDude (talk) 22:36, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
    • The burden of proof that the "George Floyd Protests" are still an ongoing phenomenon in almost 2023 lay with those making it. In any case, another alternative would be to have separate time ranges for "worldwide" and "Minneapolis". But something needs to be done. Crossroads ^-talk- 22:00, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

References

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.

Separate date ranges in infobox for 'Minneapolis-Saint Paul' and 'Elsewhere'

As can be seen above on this talk page, and in the edit history, defining whether or not the protests have ended has proven controversial. The argument they have not ended, as far as I can tell, seems to hinge on the single George Floyd Square occupied protest, basically only covering a few blocks of street in a single city. This article, meanwhile, does not mention any protest activity outside of that place after May 25, 2021.

It seems misleading and frankly very odd to equate the worldwide phenomenon that we had in 2020, and lingering into 2021 with the trial of Chauvin and then the 1-year anniversary, with the single protest in Minneapolis. I mean, even then name, George Floyd protests, shows it's about a general phenomenon, not a single protest.

To demonstrate the proposal, I have implemented it as a WP:BOLD edit here. Even if this is reverted, however, 2022 (rather than "ongoing") should be what is in the infobox, per the RfC closure above. There is not a consensus for describing the protests (plural), as a general phenomenon, as ongoing.

I hope that this works as a compromise, via clarifying the nature of what is going on and what is not. Crossroads ^-talk- 19:58, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

I like the compromise of splitting the dates at least. I have a feeling the end dates are still going to be disputed, but it looks good how it currently stands imo Anon0098 (talk) 18:54, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Remember the Consensus Result

This article is about the countrywide protest, there is a separate article on international protests, and the only protests into 2023 (its more of a tribute than protest) is the George Floyd Square occupied protest which has its own article and linked there, but the countrywide sources are over, many sources like [[8]] says the protetsts died down on the early hours, aka midnight of May 26, 2021 and the consensus have agreed, so the occupation which can hardly be classified as a protest and this article on the countrywide protests must be kept seperate. Dilbaggg (talk) 15:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Peaceful protests and riots

It might have been mentioned elsewhere but is this level of detail needed in the very first line? I am not denying the riots but those were a criticism of certain actions not the purpose of the peaceful protests. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 23:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

The lead sentence as written does not comply with MOS:LEADSENTENCE. It's crammed with too much argumentative information, has redundancy (the word "protests"), and etc. Also, usage of "peaceful" and "riots" in the lead sentence seems fall into a false balance trap rather than provide a more historical or neutral framing. It is worth discussing if an improvement to it can be made. The article, however, has had a lot of editors and gone through a lot of consensus processes, so prominent changes can be challenging to make.

Here is a suggestion for the first sentence:

Protests and civil unrest over the murder of George Floyd began in Minneapolis on May 26, 2020, and spread to cities around the word, with most notable events taking place in 2020.

The first paragraph would also need some tweaking. Minnemeeples (talk) 15:54, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Definitely should be stated as "riots" Protests don't include violence. Jawknee21 (talk) 05:33, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

"Protests don't include violence." Welcome to planet Earth. Check the category on Category:Protest-related deaths. Protests nearly always involve violence. Dimadick (talk) 05:49, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Dimadick, when you write Protests nearly always involve violence, I have to respond with . Frankly. you are wrong, except when it comes to societies that criminalize all protests and all free speech. I think that your remark is an example of confirmation bias. If Demonstration A brings 10,000 people to the streets and the event is entirely peaceful, then that event will probably get negligible coverage in reliable sources. If, on the other hand, Demonstration B draws 10,000 mostly peaceful people to the streets, and 100 of them start breaking windows, and one of them injures a police officer, then the coverage will be intense, overwhelming and intended to discredit the cause. I have been attending demonstrations since 1968 when I was 16. A large majority were peaceful. The small minority that weren't, had unique as opposed to generalized causes, and the violence was often provoked by law enforcement authorities. Demonstrations of all sizes take place all the time, and most of them are peaceful. Cullen328 (talk) 05:16, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

"the violence was often provoked by law enforcement authorities." In Greece (where I live), demonstrators are regularly attacked by the riot squad of the police and beat up. We have had instances of 20-something police officers attacking 70-year-old men and women who were protesting for pension reform. Violent protestors are rare, but police violence is quite frequent. Dimadick (talk) 11:02, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Paid or not paid

The difference between a protest or demonstration like occupy wall street and riots is the peaceful action of the participants.

This time, protests were violent just like Jan 6th. TO BE Classified as riots or attacks (full stop).

But I can conclude that someone was funding those acts of riots, mitigating and stirring this deliberately on medi during the year of elections, and showing on the media inclusive Wiki itself that they are innocent sheeps, not actually burglary shooting altercations and looting as well. wiki can delete my comment because I did not comply with the first amendment as usual when it comes to telling bare truth. (Smiley) 2001:8F8:1137:7C25:1D52:8225:6146:4C1D (talk) 15:22, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Read wp:or, what you conclude is not relevant. Slatersteven (talk) 15:24, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Please fix a typo

There’s a typo in between “court” and “a” that’s in the “Protests” 2001:EE0:5729:20F0:BC2F:75BC:BE1E:123E (talk) 02:56, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done, thanks! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:22, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

No mention of ANTIFA Violence

How come there is no mention of ANTIFA or the Youth Liberation Front or any other left wing violence? It simply refers to every violent incident as either an activist or a right winger. This is a false dichotomy. Based environmentalist (talk) 14:12, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Antifa is mentioned a few times in the article, such as George_Floyd_protests#Extremist_participation and George_Floyd_protests#Conspiracy_theories. If you have reliable sources to justify further discussion, please feel free to present them. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:24, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

thank you - bottom of my heart, I want this to be a truthful and open place for discussion, I'm not a right winger. I actually have friends that called themselves antifa that summer Based environmentalist (talk) 20:59, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

@Based environmentalist: If you have a reliable source that supports your conclusion, then we can talk about adding it. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 14:25, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Just look at the names on the first link here - if you look up their names or social media accounts, many of those arrested pledge allegiance to antifa or the youth liberation front. If I can find a way to post pics to this discussion, I will do so

https://ktvz.com/news/oregon-northwest/2020/07/03/portland-police-feds-make-10-arrests-in-federal-courthouse-attack-riot/

https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2020/09/arrest-warrant-against-michael-reinoehl-for-2nd-degree-murder-unlawful-use-of-a-firearm-unsealed.html

https://www.wtvr.com/news/local-news/arrests-made-items-seized-amid-unlawful-assembly-in-richmond

https://www.foxnews.com/us/portland-antifa-rioter-charged-assaulting-police-case-dismissed-30-hours-community-service

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/14/portland-capitol-riot-cases-481346 Based environmentalist (talk) 20:55, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

The article text literally mentions "antifa" at least seven times and it discusses the context of "antifa" involvement at length. According to highly reliable sources cited in the article, there was little evidence to support that "antifa" was largely responsible for all of violence and destruction. Below are sources cited in the article and excerpts.

"As Trump Blames Antifa, Protest Records Show Scant Evidence". Voice of America. Associated Press. June 6, 2020. Retrieved June 9, 2020.

Excerpt:

The Associated Press analyzed court records, employment histories, social media posts and other sources of information for 217 people arrested last weekend [...] only a handful appeared to have any affiliation with organized groups. [...] Social media posts indicate only a few of those arrested are left-leaning activists, including a self-described anarchist. But others had indications of being on the political right, including some Trump supporters.

Feuer, Alan; Goldman, Adam; MacFarquhar, Neil (June 11, 2020). "Federal Arrests Show No Sign That Antifa Plotted Protests". The New York Times. Archived from the original on June 11, 2020. Retrieved June 13, 2020.

Excerpt:

Despite claims by President Trump and Attorney General William P. Barr, there is scant evidence that loosely organized anti-fascists are a significant player in protests. [...] A review of the arrests of dozens of people on federal charges reveals no known effort by antifa to perpetrate a coordinated campaign of violence. Some criminal complaints described vague, anti-government political leanings among suspects, but a majority of the violent acts that have taken place at protests have been attributed by federal prosecutors to individuals with no affiliation to any particular group. [...] Dermot F. Shea, the city's police commissioner, acknowledged that most of the hundreds of people arrested at the protests in New York were actually New Yorkers who took advantage of the chaos to commit crimes and were not motivated by political ideology. John Miller, the police official who had briefed reporters, told CNN that most looting in New York had been committed by "regular criminal groups."

Mannix, Andy (December 20, 2020). "Court records, FBI contradict Trump's claims of organized 'antifa-led' riots in Minneapolis after George Floyd's death". Star Tribune. Retrieved December 21, 2020.

Excerpt:

Despite outgoing-U.S. Attorney General William Barr echoing Trump's blame for "antifa," federal prosecutors in Minnesota do not cite the term "antifa" — short for anti-fascist — or any other leftist group in a single charging document, and investigators here say the evidence doesn't support those claims.

"We haven't seen any trend of antifa folks who were involved here in the criminal activity or violence," said Michael Paul, special agent in charge of the FBI's Minneapolis Field Office.

Paul said a "smattering" of opportunistic crowds amassed spontaneously after Floyd's death, in most cases following no plan and pledging no apparent affiliation. Paul said some participants may self-identify with antifa or other ideological groups, and "you can't say those folks weren't out there."'' Minnemeeples (talk) 14:30, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

The article exonerates and admonishes ANTIFA while scouring small groups like the Bugaloo Boys which have faded into obscurity - meanwhile, Atlanta just had a series of high profile incidents with Antifa damaging construction sites and attacking cops. We can't just put our heads in the sand and call them an 'idea' - every local journalist knows they were out in force in Portland, Los Angeles, Washington DC, Richmond. A friend of mine in Richmond, VA was shoved to the ground and had hios camera broken by black bloc. I know not everyone dressed in black is antifa, but we can certainly recognize patterns of association. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Based environmentalist (talk • contribs) 20:41, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Please read WP:NPOV, WP:POV creep and WP:POV warrior. Kire1975 (talk) 23:46, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Will do, thank you. Again, I am only seeking a fair discussion. Ted Wheeler in Portland was mentioned. On January 20, 2021, a group of Antifa identified black bloc vandalyzed Democrat Party HQ in Multnomah County, carrying a sign reading "We don't want Biden, we want revenge." It was a group of about 80 people, it wasn't small. Wheeler later announced at a press conference that these black bloc violent protesters need to be unmasked. He is clearly referring to Antifa.

In Portland, as in other cities, crime hit record levels in the aftermath of George Floyd. They cut the police budget in June of 2020, then had to reinstate it in November 2021 after crime increases and public outcry. Covid could be a contributing factor, but shootings tripled in 2022. Prosecutors who had championed 'defund the police' - such as Chesa Boudin in San Francisco and Marilyn Mosby in Baltimore, were removed among soaring crime rates over 30%.

https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2021/04/mayor-ted-wheeler-extends-state-of-emergency-asks-public-to-help-unmask-violent-demonstrators.html

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/portland-among-u-s-cities-adding-funds-to-police-departments#:~:text=Now%2C%20a%20year%20and%20a,by%20an%20additional%20%245.2%20million.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Based environmentalist (talk • contribs) 16:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Neither of those articles you linked mention Antifa in any way. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

antifa was a miniscule element of the protests. Considering that as many as 26 million people participated in the BLM protests, 80 antifa is indeed a small number. TFD (talk) 16:50, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Antifa is not an organisation, so how would we even add it? "some anti fascists were arrested"? Slatersteven (talk) 16:52, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Please read Democrat Party (epithet). Kire1975 (talk) 23:23, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

You left this comment on my talk page, did you intend it as a continuation of the discussion here?

Look - I am a 45 year old man, I have two advanced degrees and have worked as a journalist trained in AP style - so Im not a troll or a 'right winger' - I simply noticed that the George Floyd Protest (like many other Wiki entries) is heavily biased with sources from the left. It's bad enough that Wikipedia finds Mother Jones and Vox to be reliable, yet not actual newspapers like the New York Post. It's bad enough that the George Floyd page needs to be locked at all. Yet - are you telling me that I can't even discuss apparent biases or omissions on the talk page? Based environmentalist (talk) 16:26, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Kire1975 (talk) 23:38, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Fix typo

Change “social awaking” to “social awakening”. 142.167.21.12 (talk) 12:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done EvergreenFir (talk) 15:25, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Murder of Garrett Foster

Foster's murder is briefly mentioned:

On July 25, 2020, 28-year old armed Black Lives Matter protester Garrett Foster was shot and killed in an altercation with a motorist in Downtown Austin. Foster identified with the boogaloo movement and had expressed anti-racist, libertarian, and anti-police views in his Facebook posts. Police said initial reports indicate that Foster was carrying an AK-47 style rifle, and was pushing his fiancée's wheelchair moments before he was killed.

Daniel Perry was convicted of murder and sentenced to 25 years. This section should be rewritten in line with Wikipedia:MURDERS. Additionally it should be moved out of the Boogaloo section or deleted. Though Foster identified with the Boogaloo boys, his murder was not an act of Boogaloo violence. The one-sided "altercation" wasn't an act of Boogaloo violence either, Murder of Garrett Foster seems pretty definitive that Foster didn't point his weapon and doesn't have any sources saying that he committed any other act of violence.

The prosecution contended that there was not evidence that Foster had pointed his weapon, and other eyewitnesses contradicted this account by the defense. The prosecution also focused on the fact that Foster's weapon was recovered with its safety on and no cartridge in the chamber, so it would not have made sense for him to point his weapon. Jurors were shown footage of Perry's police interrogation, where he said regarding Foster and how Foster held his weapon: "I believe he was going to aim it at me … I didn’t want to give him a chance to aim at me".

— Murder of Garrett Foster

In light of Perry's posts revealed post-trial ("I am a racist" and such), perhaps this section belongs directly after

A large number of white nationalists did not appear in response to the protests, although "a handful of apparent lone actors" were arrested for attempting to harm protesters.

Wacketeer (talk) 02:09, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Insured damages

The lead should clarify that the "$1–2 billion in damages nationally" only includes insured damages, as the article explains. For example, [9] estimates that only half of damages were insured in Minneapolis/St. Paul, the rest borne by businesses.

Please change "$1–2 billion in damages nationally" to "$1–2 billion in damages nationally, not including uninsured damages" or "$1–2 billion in insurance-covered damages nationally." Thank you. 2600:1702:4360:15F0:ACAF:E6E4:C18A:2A31 (talk) 19:17, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done per cited sources. Thanks. —⁠PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 04:16, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2023

Add a subsection on 'Political Impact' under 'Social impact' based on the paper "Weather to Protest: The Effect of Black Lives Matter Protests on the 2020 Presidential Election" (Klein Teeselink & Melios, 2021) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3809877. This paper shows that George Floyd protests caused a marked shift in support for the Democratic candidate. They also show that protests shifted people’s attitudes about racial disparities. Boukekt (talk) 12:51, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.

This is an incorrect use of the edit request function. You need to actually write the text you want included in your subsection. Xan747 ✈️ 🧑‍✈️ 18:47, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Proper English is "first anniversary"

Throughout this article people have used the solecism "one-year anniversary." These should all be changed to "first anniversary." The word anniversary means a yearly commemoration -- from the Latin anno. 68.237.53.122 (talk) 00:51, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

"One-year anniversary" appears in the titles of four sources. "1 year anniversary" appears in another. "First anniversary" does not appear in any of the titles of any of the sources, but it does appear once in the body of the wikipage. Hope this helps. Kire1975 (talk) 02:08, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Further, nothing becomes a solecism by being labelled so. What is the alleged grammatical error with "one-year anniversary"? Kire1975 (talk) 02:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 November 2023

2600:1016:B002:5ACE:E19D:ED4F:6DFB:D915 (talk) 16:39, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Liu1126 (talk) 16:41, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Academic source

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1745-9133.12577 Xx236 (talk) 09:30, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Missing contributing factor and potential misnomer

Hello, I am a newcomer. I submitted a similar request earlier. It was a wall of text, unclear and poorly formatted so I requested a deletion of it. My mistakes were pointed out and I would like to try again in a more appropriate manner please.

Located in the section: "Background"; subsection: "Murder of George Floyd"; paragraph three; last sentence. The last phrase says Floyd's death was attributed to underlying health conditions and "potential intoxicants". It cites citation 83.

Paragraph 4 of citation 83 states: "The report says the underlying health conditions, combined with Chauvin’s restraint and any possible intoxicants in Floyd’s system, likely contributed to his death." The current sentence does not include "Chauvin's restraint" when listing factors and says the death was attributed to these factors, instead of the factors likely contributing to his death.

I request that Chauvin's restraint be added to the list of factors and it say that these factors likely contributed to Floyd's death. My reasoning is that this more accurately reflects citation 83. Pierce Havoc (talk) 18:32, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree. I made some changes to better reflect the source. Please review. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:52, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes. It looks good. Thank you. Pierce Havoc (talk) 19:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for keeping it brief and easier to understand. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Brevity is the soul of wit. Well done. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:22, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

"BLM race riots" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect BLM race riots has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 4 § BLM race riots until a consensus is reached. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 17:59, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

"George Floyd race riots" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect George Floyd race riots has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 4 § George Floyd race riots until a consensus is reached. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 20:01, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Unclear and Incomplete Information Regarding the Autopsy Reports

The following discussion 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.

---

The first edit request regards this sentence that currently states:

A May 26 autopsy conducted by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's Office found that there were "no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation", and instead attributed the death to underlying health conditions and "potential intoxicants".

I request that the entry read something similar to(it doesn't have to be exactly the same):

Pending the Medical Examiner's full report of the May 26th autopsy, its speculative preliminary findings, which were based on not yet complete autopsy information, opined that there were "no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation" and the "combined effects of Mr. Floyd being restrained by the police, his underlying health conditions and any potential intoxicants in his system likely contributed to his death". The preliminary report made no claims to the cause or manner of death, as contributing factors are not the underlying cause of death . On June 1st the complete autopsy results were finalized, listing the cause of death as "cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression" and the manner of death was listed as a "homicide". The full autopsy report revealed that several preliminary findings were incorrect: strangulation and traumatic asphyxia did occur during Floyd's "subdual, restraint, and neck compression". It also contradicted Chauvin's theory that drug overdose was the underlying cause of Floyd's death.

The second edit request regards this sentence that currently states:

On June 1, a private autopsy commissioned by the family of Floyd found the death to be a homicide and that Floyd had died due to asphyxiation from sustained pressure, which conflicted with the original autopsy report done earlier that week. Shortly after, the official post-mortem declared Floyd's death a homicide.

I request that entry be changed to something similar to (doesn't have to be exactly the same):

On June 1, a private autopsy commissioned by the Floyd family was released a few hours before the Medical Examiner's full autopsy report results. It differed on the contribution of heart disease to his death and the cause of death, which it listed as "asphyxiation from sustained pressure". However, both the private autopsy report and Medical Examiner's report agreed that the manner of death was homicide

Citations:

1. Derek Chauvin's Arrest Warrant => https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/6933246/Derek-Chauvin-Complaint.pdf
2. Derek Chauvin's Order of Detention => https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/AmendedComplaint06032020.pdf
3. Hennepin County Press Release Report of George Floyd's Autopsy => https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/MNHENNE/2020/06/01/file_attachments/1464238/2020-3700%20Floyd,%20George%20Perry%20Update%206.1.2020.pdf
4. Hennepin County's Full Autopsy Report of George Floyd => https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/medical-examiner/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf
5. Associated Press Fact Check: George Floyd’s autopsy report is not new, does not say he died of an overdose => https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-george-floyd-autopsy-new-892530421961

Pierce Havoc (talk) 00:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Please don't write walls of text. I'm not going to parse through that and I doubt anyone else will. Keep it short and simple. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose - No reasons given. Kire1975 (talk) 12:32, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose - I don't see the need for such detail -- and frankly we shouldn't be trying to read all this stuff. We report on analysis by reliable sources. We do not perform our own analyses. O3000, Ret. (talk) 01:14, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose agreed,. Slatersteven (talk) 18:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

After reading these critiques and learning more about the talk page process, I can see that my topic is a wall of text, terribly unclear and horrendously formatted. I would like to request a deletion of this topic here to clean up the page and try again in a more appropriate manner. I have also submitted a separate similar topic in an attempt to be clearer, more concise and format better. I apologize for any inconvenience I have caused. Pierce Havoc (talk) 18:43, 19 January 2024 (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.