Jump to content

Talk:Nahel Merzouk riots

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Requested move 1 July 2023

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

Procedural close. No prejudice to further discuss titles for this page – suggest editors step back and take a breath or two. Thanks and kudos to editors for your input; everyone stay healthy! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 03:13, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 French race riots → Nahel Merzouk protests – Merzouk's death is the focus here, and "race riots" evokes a negative connotation. See Mahsa Amini protests. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 17:26, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support move to Nahel Merzouk protests or 2023 French riots. The WP:RS I've seen use just "riot" more than "race riot." TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 17:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The section had this name when I moved it from Killing of Nahel Merzouk. Support, also this should be an uncontroversial move. A discussion is probably not needed since current name is OR, moved. Ecrusized (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Nahel Merzouk riots. Describing this series of crimes as mere protests is ridiculously euphemistic. It includes arson, burglary, looting & attacks on civilians as well as police. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 18:14, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I disagree with this characterization. Protests and riots are both terms used in WP:RS here and are both reasonable for discussion here. Something can be both a protest and a riot. I'm not sure the presence of crime is enough to prefer one term over the other on its own. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:26, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The article currently emphasises the use of "protests" over the use of riots. If it can be described as both, shouldn't they both be used? Alternatively, perhaps something like unrest could be used similar to the 2023 French pension reform unrest. Even this might be an understatement, considering that five times as many police officers have been injured in a matter of four days than were injured over a period of five months. Jokojis (talk) 18:57, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is many times more severe than the pension reform unrest & is mainly riots. The title & content are very biased in favour of the rioters. Criminals aren't burgling & setting fire to buildings in Marseille because a bad driver whom they didn't know was shot nearly 500 miles away. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 19:40, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. The majority of the talk page appears to be in agreement that "riot is the proper term. Jokojis (talk) 21:41, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why would a 'negative connotation' matter when that is the version of events which are occuring? Support moving to a similar sounding name of the above under Nahel Merzouk riots or Nahel Merzouk unrest (even 2023 French riots/unrest, as this has seemingly eclipsed the previous riots in May by sheer scale). Tweedle (talk) 19:21, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The current events are very similar to the 2005 French riots. So I propose Move to 2023 French riots ChandlerMinh (talk) 20:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It seems disingenuous to use a euphemistic term like "protests" at this point. The scale and character of what is going on is far beyond just some people marching around with signs. Cheef117 (talk) 20:31, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support move to Nahel Merzouk riots. Far beyond simple protests at this point, it's escalated into riots now Presidentofyes12 (talk) 23:19, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely. If it was debatable on the first or second day, it is not now. 2600:1702:6D0:5160:D4A7:60FA:6E58:6EC7 (talk) 02:39, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Protest or riot

[edit]

It is poignant to define what this event is to set a proper title, infobox, and lede. Several reliable sources and their verbiage:

Undoubtedly, some images that have emerged suggest this is a riot, while others suggest that these are isolated cases. Riots themselves are violent demonstrations and it is unlikely that the activities of this event are entirely violent. It is pertinent to be mindful of what terms we use and how they may be politically charged; France is not in anarchy as some sources have claimed or are painting the picture thereof. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 20:38, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, the French Wikipedia article on this event uses émeutes, or "riot", as France24 has. Le Monde is using manifestation, or "protest". elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 20:52, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the French media is using the term émeutes (riots) now, including Le Monde (§). No sense rushing to move, but riots is the term we'll likely end up using. (The SNCF doesn't shut down its night-service to Lyon, as was done last night, due to protests.) -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 20:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Some more for you, if you want
Tweedle (talk) 21:03, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not opposed to including more discussion of non-violent civil disobedience or peaceful protesting, but as the article currently exists, it's contents are about rioting but contains a title and picture caption that just say "protest".
If "rioting" alone is inappropriate, then so "protests". Either these uses of "protests" should be switched to the more generic "unrest" or some variation of "protests and riots". Jokojis (talk) 21:54, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looking through both the comments made on Request to move 1 July 2023 topic and the Protest or riot topic, the edit history, the sources used throughout the article, and the unambiguous use of "riots" (Émeutes) on the French version of the article, it seems there's a broad consensus that "riots" is just as, if not more appropriate than "protests". Considering that no editors have come forward to openly oppose the use of "riots", can we close the discussion and allow edits to proceed? Jokojis (talk) 03:48, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I clicked on the first link to CNN, and it says the word "riot" multiple times in the article. The fact they use the word "protest" in the title of their article means nothing. Riot is defined as "a violent public disorder". This is clearly a riot. If there are any peaceful protests going on elsewhere, doesn't matter, the coverage is for the rioting. Dream Focus 05:38, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You quote only English or American press but it seems interesting to quote French press.
    • Le Figaro : Nahel's death: more than 420 arrests after a third night of riots.
    • FranceInfo : Riots after Nahel's death, the tiredness and anger of law enforcement.
    • CNEWS (can't put the link): Riots in France, 427 persons arrested during the night.
    • EuroNews : Riots: Increased police presence in Lyon and Marseille.
    • Ouest-France : A fourth night of riots but with less intensity.
    • Le Monde : Riots after Nahel's death: 719 arrested during the night from Saturday to Sunday with limited incidents.
    • Huffington Post: Riots:719 arrested, "a quieter night", an update on the 5th evening of urban violence.
    • Le Parisien : Riot after Nahel's death: decrease of the violences, "a quieter night" everywhere in France.
    I can quote more and more but here's a substantial sample. HorsePower68 (talk) 09:48, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Start a page move discussion if you want, but this is going nowhere. WWGB (talk) 10:01, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The more recent the news articles, the more likely they refer to riots rather than protests. That makes sense because they've become increasingly violent. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 21:54, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The good news is that the numbers (of arrests, of rioters) are way down. This may be due in part to the family & OM sports fans calling for an end to the *riots*... Perhaps these sources could be added to the reactions section? -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:52, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

3O Response: Request declined as there are already more than two editors involved in this discussion. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:22, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification, I'll move to the dispute resolution noticeboard. Jokojis (talk) 22:40, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Am I correct that there is only one person resisting the change to "riots" while the rest of us would prefer to use what is currently in every single newspaper and televison segment dedicated to the subject? I would say just move the page to 2023 French riots and let that single outlier be grumpy. Consensus is not unanimity. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:58, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From the reports I've heard, the protests have subsided. I support using the term riots. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 23:11, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Collaboration on the "Background" section

[edit]

Facing wholesale reverts while beginning to work on the paragraph, I will be leaving this entry for the time being as a result of this preemptive attitude. I remain unsure why the paragraph starts with "in modern history" when "in recent history" is more appropriate. Some of the ensuing discussion about police brutality in France is related to incidents related to individuals, some of it is related to crowd control.

The mention of the yellow vests movement should probably be separated from the paragraph as it is related to crowd control and (if included) the question of grenades de désencerclement could be added in the context of the recently outlawed Soulèvements de la Terre. While both contribute to the public perception of violent policing, it is likely that incidents related to individuals rather than crowds are more directly relevant here.

I'll leave this here in hopes that the paragraph will be improved by others (perhaps through discussion here, rather than by authoritarian reverts) from its current hodgepodge, staccato state. Someone should mention the crucial fact that the *2020* Michel Zecler beating was *filmed* in the entry to his office (if memory serves, it may have been his home) and the film was widely circulated. (the source mentions this latter fact) Also, some details don't hurt. The fact that that affair (again, if memory serves, based on what is said in the article) was about not wearing a face-mask (while black) is pertinent. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:37, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to submit this same topic. User:Birdofpreyru and User:ArcticSeeress are engaging in hostile edits against each other. The paragraph is confusing as it currently stands, the first sentence exclusively talks about police brutality, but the following sentences are about the social reaction to police brutality. Jokojis (talk) 22:43, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, seeing as you tagged me, I guess I'll leave my two cents about the section. TLDR: the specific incidents of civil unrest may be unfit for the section.
The section is rather disorganised, and talks about several different things. The header frames it as being about police brutality, but much of the content is about specific incidents of civil unrest. A better idea would be retrieve information from sources that analyse statistics on police brutality in France over a specific time frame or people's perception of police (e.g. distrust) in France, which would give better insight into the background of the incident (of course without any original research). Including specific prior incidents may give undue weight to their significance in this article. As most of the sources are from before 2023, it might be best to exclude them until better sources for them can be found. The Le Monde article may be from 2023, but it doesn't mention the 2005 riots' significance to the current events. Other news organisations such as the BBC, Al Jazeera and NPR mention the 2005 riots in passing, so it might be worth giving it the same weight here.
Side note: I'd suggest not using the word "in recent history" (or similar wording), as it is not specific; see MOS:RELTIME.
As regards your concern about hostile editing: I feel like your wording implies a lack of civility, which I don't really see. If you could point out something specific, then I'd be happy to rectify my further edits (though it may be best to leave them on my user page instead of derailing the conversation here). ArcticSeeress (talk) 23:20, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well... the real context, you guys are not eager to write about, is that islamist terror attacks are routine in France, hence the attitude of police towards arab/margrebi looking ppl. Just on June 8, 2023 a Syrian refugee butchered four kids and two adults (https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20230608-several-children-injured-in-mass-stabbing-in-french-alps), there was a Muslim dude chopping out a head to a teacher (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Murder_of_Samuel_Paty), there were countless previous attacks with knifes, or driving cars on pedestrians, there was Bataclan attack, and so on. And even the cases you write about, like that Adama guy, turns out you just censor out the rightful reasons for the arrest in results of which he died, to present him as a poor victim of systemic racism, rather than a brother (and probably a partner in crime) of a wanted mugger. Birdofpreyru (talk) 10:46, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Justifying the attitude of police towards arab/margrebi by pointing to multiple unrelated incidents of crime whose only uniting factor is the race of the perpetrator doesn't really help show your point that systemic racism is being overblown in the article. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 16:30, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not justifying anything, I am saying that frequent, recurrent ethnic crimes in France are more than relevant background context to a story about yet another police encounter with a petty criminal of that ethnicity, which should be added to the article. Birdofpreyru (talk) 22:09, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing a peaceful moment, I've tried to better organize the section. The 2005 background (unrelated to "police brutality") is on everybody's mind here, racial profiling has also been frequently mentioned in news reports. Concerns about policing have been consistently in the news these past years given the tensions in France around pension reform, deaths resulting from people fleeing police traffic stops, and the "mega-bassines" protests. Feel free to improve upon what I've added. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 02:03, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What about islamist terrorists often knifing down or driving over somebody in France? Isn't it often mention in the news reports? Is it irrelevant context? Birdofpreyru (talk) 10:49, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a reliable source suggesting that Islamic terrorism - - or a knife - - was involved in this traffic stop or the subsequent escalation into youth riots? You are welcome to add reliable sources describing the POV of the police on this incident (though it would likely fit better on the page related to the incident than on the page focused on the reaction to the incident). NB: Similarly, with regard to Adama, the relevant context is the protests it engendered, not whether the event *should* have generated protests. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 11:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As I understood, in this traffic stop were involved three young Arabs driving a Mercedes with no respect to traffic rules and escaping a police request to stop - thus looking a lot like criminals or terrorists in the context you don’t want to write about - when a car as an instrument of Islamist attack was used many times, including in France before. You don’t want this in the article as it will compromise the story you want to talk about an unmotivated and racists police brutality in France towards Muslims. Birdofpreyru (talk) 13:29, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you can find reliable sources that talk about that and its relevance to the killing and/or riots, then go ahead and add it. Be cautious of not providing your own original research or synthesising several different articles, and be wary of giving undue weight to certain aspects that reliable sources do not.
Also, try not to assert that other editors have agendas, as that likely constitutes a personal attack; see WP:ASPERSIONS. ArcticSeeress (talk) 15:51, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article omits any mention of terrorism. Post 9/11, France has the highest incidence of terrorism of any Western country, most of which has been Islamist & disproportionately committed by people of MENA origin. This has included vehicle-ramming attacks, most notably the 2016 Nice truck attack. That could be relevant, especially considering the fact that Merzouk was stopped as he was recklessly, illegally driving a fast car. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 16:14, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW: I looked back at contemporaneous reports about the passage of the 2017 law (Google lets you set the time period for news articles it returns) to see if there was any mention of the 7.14.2016 Nice attack or of terrorism in general by the police lobbying for this law giving them the same rights as gendarmes have. I've read a few articles and they all refer to an incident in Viry-Châtillon in October 2016 unrelated to terrorism. (an example: §) If you want to mark that article (or another from the same time period) up as a reference and add it to the section on the 2017 law to explain the reasons for it, be my guest. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 20:08, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"an incident in Viry-Châtillon in October 2016 unrelated to terrorism" - that's a neat way to describe what turns out to be some youths in a Paris suburbs ghetto setting four policemen ablaze with some fire bombs. And sure it has nothing to do with police shooting another youth illegally driving a Mercedes, denying to follow police orders, and putting in danger the lives of people around and police themselves. Birdofpreyru (talk) 21:56, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose there's not much point reminding you of policies like WP:NOTFORUM. I gave you the material you needed to add a bit of law enforcement POV to the entry. What you chose to do with it is up to you. Cf. WP:HERE. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:40, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Adding my comment here rather than starting a new discussion. The background section suffers really badly from WP:SYNTH. Unless sources can be found explicitly linking the listed incidents to this in a way that is WP:DUE, they need to be removed. So far that seems to include everything in the subsections "Police brutality in France", "Racial profiling", and "2017 law concerning traffic stops". If these are relevant, then it shouldn't be hard to find sources describing them as relevant. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:35, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've done this for 2017 law concerning traffic stops and racial profiling. You are correct, this is not difficult at all. Go ahead and find and add references (e.g. here's one on Adama Traoré... [1] and another on Chouviat & Zecler [2]) if it bothers you and you're inclined to help out. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 12:17, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Thebiguglyalien:: Rather than deleting things, please mark up the references that have been provided to you and add them to the article. Thank you. Deleting swathes of background material is unhelpful. Doing the actual grunt-work of marking up references is helpful collaboration. You deleted the sentences on both Traoré and Zecler, despite the references provided above, clearly connecting them to the current story. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 09:02, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not able to access either of the sources that you provided. But that shouldn't matter, as the WP:ONUS of justifying inclusion is on the editor that wishes to keep the content, not the one contesting it. I maintain that the restored content contains WP:SYNTH and WP:COATRACK issues. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:15, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Let me know what you find when you google Traore Nahel. Do you still think you should delete the Washington Post article providing context in English? I assume that by now you have had a chance to google Zecler Nahel and have found plenty of articles about what you deleted. Concerning the state's condemnation for abusive identity checks, excessive violence, I would refer you to controle au faciès Nahel for dozens of articles saying that racial profiling is a problem. You may also find the interview with a political scientist specialized in policing of interest,[1] as it mentions 10 academic studies showing racial profiling is a problem. He also mentions the 30 people mutilated by police artillery during the Yellow vests protests (another thing I believe you wanted to delete, if memory serves.) Similarly, I'll probably add this article to the entry at some point: [2] because it talks about false reporting. You may not be aware, but three weeks before the riots in Viry-Chatillon (so on 9 June 2023), the seven young men who were wrongly jailed over the affair of the "burned police officers", which led to the 2017 law concerning traffic stops, were compensated in civil court for their wrongful arrest and incarceration (up to 50 months!), the issue of the allegedly false police statements that condemned them is still pending in court. In short, I think you'll find every one of the items in the background section are indeed part of the much-talked about background pertaining to the riots and demonstrations. I may not have time to get to all of this until late in the weekend, so anyone is, of course, welcome to help. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 16:42, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think I've properly communicated what the issue is. We're not talking about whether these things happened or whether there are sources verifying that they happened. We're talking about whether these specific facts are applicable to this specific article based on the sources. Your or my opinion about whether it's applicable to the background is completely and totally irrelevant. Neither of us is qualified to make that decision. If you want to make the argument that they're relevant, then you need to find sources stating that they are relevant specifically to these protests. Until then, it's just a WP:COATRACK. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:25, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you've said that already. You haven't said what you object to though, now that further references have been provided tying things together more explicitly. Also, be aware that the essay you are citing is neither a guideline nor a policy, and says: A coatrack article is a Wikipedia article that gets away from its nominal subject. The title of this entry unfortunately doesn't provide that much guidance as nearly everyone agrees below that it needs to be changed, though that could change over time. For the moment the event being described is primarily (sub)urban rioting, but that may change over time. The essay you cite further says the existence of a "hook" in a given article is not a good reason to "hang" irrelevant, undue or biased material there. I believe I've demonstrated above that the information is relevant, due, and is supported by neutral reporting (or expert opinion, in the case of the citations below).-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 01:45, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Roché, Sebastien (2 July 2023). "Sebastian Roché : « Les mauvaises pratiques policières sapent les fondements de la République »". Le Monde (in French).
  2. ^ Chemin, Anne; Blanchard, Emmanuel (2 July 2023). "Emmanuel Blanchard, politiste : « La France a une histoire longue de racialisation de l'emprise policière »". Le Monde (in French).

Requested move to 2023 French riots

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

The result of the move request was: Clear consensus that "riots" is more appropriate than "protests" and consensus against the generic 2023 French riots. Nahel Merzouk riots is the most popular choice — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:34, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note 1: since the #1 proposed title has been turned into a dab page, it becomes ineligible to be a proposed title unless it, too, is formally dispositioned. "2023 French riots → 2023 French riots (disambiguation)" has been added to this request to meet that requirement. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 22:47, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note 2: 2023 French riots has been reverted back to a redirect, so Note 1 above no longer applies. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 09:05, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note 3: since the proposed title has (once again) been turned into a dab page, it (once again) becomes ineligible to be a proposed title unless it, too, is formally dispositioned. "2023 French riots → 2023 French riots (disambiguation)" has been re-added to this request to meet that requirement. EggRoll97 (talk) 00:57, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Statement by nom: This is very clearly more prominently a riot and far outstrips the previous May riots over pension reform (see to sources below on labelling it as 'France riots'), our current infobox images speak to this testament, however let us strengthen this assertion by going over some sources from various news media outlets:
English speaking news outlets
  • France shooting: Unrest spreads over police killing of teen - "At least 150 people have been arrested across France on a second night of mass unrest over Tuesday's fatal shooting of a 17-year-old boy by police near Paris during a traffic check. (...) On Wednesday morning, President Macron held a crisis cabinet meeting to discuss the escalating riots."
  • The Guardian
  • The Times
  • Why are there riots in France? The violent protests explained, June 30 2023. - "Where are the riots happening? - (..) Racial tensions grew after the Algerian War that ended French colonial rule. The riots are the worst street violence in France since 2005, when three weeks of unrest followed the death of two youths of African origin while fleeing from police."
  • Stop rioting, pleads Nahel Merzouk’s grandmother, July 02 2023 - "A grandmother of the teenage boy killed by a policeman in a Paris suburb pleaded for an end to the violence after five nights of rioting in France."
  • The Times view on the riots: Mayhem in France, June 30 2023 - "The devastation in only three days and nights of rioting has shocked France (...) Across the country, some 3,800 fires have been started, more than 1,500 cars set alight and about 500 buildings, including schools, banks, libraries, shops, supermarkets and police stations, ransacked. Rioters have burst into shops, smashed and looted luxury stores and burnt buses in their depots. Hundreds of police officers have been injured and almost 700 people arrested."
  • France riots: 1,300 arrested in one night as protests grow, July 01 2023 - "More than 1,300 people were arrested in the fourth night of rioting in France as the family of Nahel Merzouk, a 17-year-old shot dead by a policeman, prepared to bury him."
  • Reuters
  • ABC News
  • Over 1,300 arrested in France in 4th night of protests over fatal police shooting of teen Nahel M., July 1, 2023 - "Riots erupted for a fourth night across France over the fatal police shooting of 17-year-old Nahel M., who was laid to rest on Saturday. More than 1,300 people were arrested overnight throughout the country, according to the French Ministry of the Interior, as cars and buildings were set ablaze and stores looted. The damage was widespread, from Paris to Marseille and Lyon, with about 2,500 fires set, officials said."
French news outlets (additional credit to @HorsePower68)
  • Le Figaro
  • FranceInfo
  • Le Monde

This is a fraction of the total amount of news articles on the event, Ctrl+F for "riot" on this Wiki page and get to the bottom to the References section and you will see it pops up 18 separate times compared to "protests" which only pops up 6 times. Tweedle (talk) 23:24, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that is a good point, I will change that now Tweedle (talk) 23:46, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. In the spirit of compromise, I could accept Nahel Merzouk riots as a distant second choice. This does have the advantage of leaving the 2023 French riots page available for a new, synthetic page concerning all the rioting in the year, and will leave the existing redirect in place until such a page is written. That said, anybody searching google for news articles concerning "French riots" produced in the last week can see there are a huge number of articles. As of now "Nahel Merzouk riots" with quotes in Google news yields zero results, so the evidence shows this is not yet the English WP:COMMONNAME ("French riots" appears to be). (nb: 2023 is not going to appear in articles written in 2023). That said, I think it's more important that we correct protests to riots to recognize the estimated >€1 billion euros in damages in the last week and there appears to be strong consensus below for that. Once that major concern is fixed, we won't even have to revisit the revised name if reliable sources should start calling it that. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 23:40, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's a reasonable objection, though based on the references in that entry, the pension reform protests were clearly not primarily described as riots. Wouldn't a see also link be sufficient? -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 23:54, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe make the title more specific. Like June-July 2023 French riots or 2023 French summer riots. Nahel Merzouk riots or Nahel Merzouk unrest would also allow disambiguation. Also, it may be best to wait and see what reliable sources settle on calling the event. The article was moved twice yesterday and has a move history request so moving it again right now may not be best; I'd at least wait for an admin to merge the history from the last move. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 00:04, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
2023 French summer riots I could settle for. My general point being is that it is (to me atleast) that one has clearly eclipsed the other in significance to warrant a main '2023 France riots'. Concur with the BBC who has designated the title of that to these current events and rather has not put any of their work on the pension reform unrest in said sub-topic. Tweedle (talk) 12:52, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support move to Nahel Merzouk riots per reasons stated by TulsaPoliticsFan. Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 01:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tentatively support for move to '2023 French riots'. However, I concur with @TulsaPoliticsFan that it would be desirable to use language that is clear, unambiguous, and most importantly aligns with common and official language usage— something that will become more clear as time progresses. I consulted google trends to see what's actually being used, and it seems that "2023 French riots" led early on, but for the past two days is tied with "Nahel Merzouk riots". I'm aware this isn't an official source, but worth considering.
The French language version of this article is titled "Émeutes consécutives à la mort de Nahel Merzouk", literally, "Riots following the death of Nahel Merzouk". This is a mouthful, but ultimately it's the most unassuming option.
In any case, if multiple names are actually used, we should document it as such, even if those names might not be the "most accurate" or "most desirable" description. Take the Wikipedia page for the LA riots as an example:
>>The 1992 Los Angeles riots, (also called the Rodney King riots, the 1992 Los Angeles uprising, or Sa-I-Gu in Korean)
Similarly, for the often violent protests in Ferguson in 2014:
>The Ferguson unrest (sometimes called the Ferguson uprising, Ferguson protests, or the Ferguson riots) Jokojis (talk) 03:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. France has a propensity towards protest, and as such we should use the natural disambiguation of Nahel Merzouk protests and 2023 French pension reform unrest as is. This isn't a situation like the 2011 England riots, which gain that title because riots are relatively rare in the UK.
Additionally concur with @WWGB, along with part of @Jokojis - perhaps a insert such as:
>> The Nahel Merzouk protests, also called the 2023 French riots...
may be useful.
After further considerations, and other editors suggestions, Move to Nahel Merzouk riots since the riots are now primary coverage. Couruu (talk) 08:02, 3 July 2023 (UTC), edit 12:27, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So, because a few English people have the original thought that the French riot a lot (what en.wp says about that), we should disregard what the majority of reliable sources are calling the riots and call them protests. We could also repeal WP:COMMONNAME and move France to Frogland... -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 09:57, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Lets not assume bad faith here. My argument is primarily that we should use natural disambiguation; "2023 France riots" is non-descriptive, whereas "Nahel Merzouk protests" is. For clarity, I'm opposing "2023 France" but neutral on protests vs riots. Perhaps unrest might be better. Couruu (talk) Couruu (talk) 10:19, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just teasing you from across the channel where life is a riot. :) -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 11:57, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the French do riot quite often. WWGB (talk) 12:50, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Something being of a regular occurance does not require that we call it something different from what it is (though I see you have clarified and said your opposition is againest '2023 France' and the like). Tweedle (talk) 15:24, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sebbog13 (talk) 01:04, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Apperantly not. In recent times France changed its immigration laws and the Maghreb immigrant are not happy about this. This riot is the venting of their anger against the goverment. BlackOrchidd (talk) 05:16, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. His name, especially his surname, is not particularly well-known. And the riots, while sparked by his death, are certainly not about his death, but about general dissatisfaction, moving on to general love of destruction and looting. And they're clearly riots, not protests. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:39, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, while this definitely the more major riot. I feel like it still should be more precise and we should wait for that name to appear. ✶Mitch199811✶ 16:19, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, move to Nahel Merzouk riots. For similar reasons stated above, I feel like that "2023 French riots" is too vague and unambiguous, not totally reffering to the main topic at hand. For example, in 2023, some other riots may occur (who knows?) – then we'd be left with two riots on the same page. So, for those reasons, I oppose the current move. --WellThisIsTheReaper Grim 17:10, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, cf. prior points about the ambiguity of 2023 French riots. Additionally, I would be in support of renaming all the French riots pages to better represent the catalysts, i.e. Théodore Luhaka riots in 2017 or Zyed & Bouna riots in 2005, as is already the case for Black Lives Matter protests cf. George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Tyre Nichols... I am neutral on a move to Nahel Merzouk riots, and personally very iffy to do so on the basis of selected media sources. Of course I am aware Wikipedia relies on secondary sources but in an effort to retain a neutral point of view, I think we should be more careful around this extremely loaded language. Cf. Politis, Arrêt sur images & Télérama for critiques of the media response. The Arrêt sur images article does reuse the word émeutes (riots) in its title but specifically criticizes Le Monde & Le Figaro, two of the three French-language sources cited in the original statement. NumismaticJunk (talk)
NumismaticJunk (talk) 23:44, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yeah Sebbog13 (talk) 01:02, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As mentioned above, there were riots in Belgium and Switzerland - so I feel like it would be wrong to say that is merely a "French thing", when there have been riots sparked across other countries as well. These riots aren't limited to a single place, which is why I'm in favor of a move to Nahel Merzouk riots. Coverage on this here: 1 2 3 4 --WellThisIsTheReaper Grim 15:50, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
why are so many people supporting to move to french riots if this happened in other countries? Sebbog13 (talk) 17:11, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's fun, I didn't know you could add references to the Daily Mail and the Mirror on talk pages. I guess the former is only blocked from mainspace? -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 17:51, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I suppose so. I was wondering about deprecated sources... --WellThisIsTheReaper Grim 22:28, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to atleast be a general agreement about moving to 'riots' over protests, should we do a subsection on this to gather consensus for Nahel Merzouk riots v 2023 French riots? Tweedle (talk) 22:13, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with that, you can go ahead and do that. --WellThisIsTheReaper Grim 18:13, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as a contributor to French article, if it is true that it has "riot" in title, there is a dedicated section about the semantic debate between "protests" ("révoltes") and "riots" ("émeutes"). From what I have seen at international level, "protests" seems more common in sources. Anyway, I think that 2023 French suburbs protests (or riots) is more appropiate Imagritte (talk) 18:20, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe there were some riots out there, but the international sources mainly describe it as protests. --Mhhossein talk 19:04, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I believe that this is more than just a "riot" and deserves a more description and examination. I say this as there have been notable riots and protests, i.e., Rodney King riot versus 1992 Los Angeles riot, George Floyd protest/riot versus Summer riots. I believe the issues related to this unrest is a combination of multiple issues, race, inequality, class distinctions and should not be filed away under a generic term. I say this even though a day or so ago I commented on another section that a more generic title should be applied. Jurisdicta (talk) 19:33, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

For interested editors, there is a discussion here about whether to disambiguate or redirect 2023 French riots during this move discussion. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:42, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect has now been changed to a disambiguation page for the second time since this move discussion was opened. I have created this section on the pension reforms protests page related to rioting in order to have a legitimate target for the redirect, since referring to the largest series of protests in 21st century France as riots would be POV. That said, the section in question needs a lot of work, because prior to its creation -- after the redirect was created -- the entry had virtually no information whatsoever on rioting. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 08:23, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would call it the 2023 French uprising, because there's already an article called the 2005 French riots. Besides, peaceful protests are rarely a thing during this unrest. SpringField23402 (talk) 15:40, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that uprising would make much sense. It isn't much of a "revolution" or "rebellion", per se. --WellThisIsTheReaper Grim 18:14, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Now the page has been moved for the third time during this discussion, and the talk page discussion linked above has been summarily deleted has now been moved back. It's fun to see the lengths that people are going to to add a disambiguation link to a page that fails WP:CATDEFINING for "2023 French riots". Now if only I knew the proper way to link to a section of that page... looks like I'm going to need to read the damn manual, though its abundantly clear this is a case of MOS:DABNOENTRY since neither page title currently contains the word "riots". :) -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 01:03, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I've sorted the proper way to redirect to a page section, via a redirect to that section. However, all nine support voters should be annoyed because by back door machination those who opposed the title have seemingly rendered the title ineligible. Perhaps I've misunderstood. And perhaps we should just rename the page Florian M. riots thereby protecting the minor's name and the policeman's last name... after all, the riots are more in protest of Florian M.'s actions than of Nahel M.'s actions. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 01:50, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Metropolitian and territories

[edit]

Apart from these two, does France have other territories that are mentioned in the infobox? Parham wiki (talk) 21:05, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Firearms usage?

[edit]

Should a paragraph be created to write about the usage of firearms, such as Kalashnikovs, by rioters? Numerous videos have been filmed of rioters with shotguns, handguns and Eastern European/Soviet firearms. Maxttck (talk) 01:08, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but this needs verification through reliable sources, and not just videos. If you can find some, then you can go ahead and add a paragraph to the relevant section. ArcticSeeress (talk) 03:54, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Aside from this paid Substack article, I don't believe there is any coverage. NumismaticJunk (talk) 23:47, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Now it’s locked, would it be possible for someone else to edit it to include this info? 179.50.162.76 (talk) 01:46, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It has been added, but should be removed as the paywalled miltantwire.com is probably not a reliable source and the information is not due if it only appears in specialized sources but not in mainstream media reports. Cf. its use on en.wp Suggest either getting consensus here or asking about the status of this substack at WP:RSN before reinstating. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 10:23, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I purchased the article and it contains videos and photographs of the rioters with the mentioned weapons. There is no bias and the publication focuses on visual confirmation and identification of weapons from verified videos and photographs Maxttck (talk) 12:45, 7 July 2023 (UTC
Feel free to start a thread at WP:RSN with your conclusions concerning the blog's reliability. I've looked into this a bit more. I see they have a staff and have occasionally been cited by reliable sources. They have not been cited on this particular issue however, so at least for the moment it appears to be undue. However, if you find any other more standard references to these matters feel free to post them here or at the RS/N thread now opened concerning this issue. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 12:50, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Refs

[edit]

Bookku (talk) 09:45, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Misinformation

[edit]

@Plumeater2 keeps removing mention of Hindu nationalists pushing misinformation about the protests and adding a statement about British and Russian nationalists. This is despite the cited France 24 source explicitly mentioning Hindu nationalists and only mentioning one British and one pro-Russian account, with no mention of British or Russian nationalists.

I have brought this to the talk page to avoid the WP:3RR limit, and to establish a consensus on what should be included. Isi96 (talk) 07:39, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps unsurprisingly, it has been reverted again, Despite the WP:ONUS being on @Dilbaggg: to get consensus for their edits, they have not engaged on the T/P as per the WP:BRD process on either this subject, or the firearms subject sourced to the "miltiantwire.com" substack they added. They've also re-introduced an error from a misreading of the Fortune article. As you say the France 24 source explicitly mentions Hindu nationalists (the logicallyfacts.com source they deleted from the paragraph names the BJP and provides links to the tweets they are referring to) The France 24 source also identifies the British account as a "far-right" Britain First figure and the Russian account as... a pro-Russian account. That said, logicallyfacts.com -- used repeatedly in the Misinformation section -- is used about as rarely on en.wp as militantwire.com.
Perhaps they will engage on the talk page now that they've been pinged... in the meantime the militantwire.com stuff should be removed pending consensus for inclusion, as mentioned above, and "Hindu nationalists" should be restored as it is indeed explicitly sourced. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 19:34, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SashiRolls I've gone ahead and WP:BOLDly restored the material, hope that's alright. Isi96 (talk) 19:44, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The text on Twitter post this article refers to, doesn't mention anything related to misinformation against any religion. Neither does anything in video refers to any particular religion. The words "muslims" should be removed in misinforation section. Jcr1234 (talk) 03:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Source [92], the post by Logically has one twitter account as source refering to BJP (Bharatiya Janta Party), the sentence in this article should be moved to "Public Officials and Media". Jcr1234 (talk) 03:56, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

internet restrictions

[edit]

"A fake press release supposedly from the Interior Ministry circulated on social media. It claimed that Internet access would be temporarily restricted in certain areas of the country."

Was the internet temporarily restricted in certain areas of France? If it was restricted, what's the value of perpetuating official lies? 79.166.4.32 (talk) 14:05, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Last names

[edit]

While Le Monde, Les Echos, Le Figaro and Le Parisien seem to have strictly respected the anonymity of the dead minor, never publishing his full name, the regional and international press were less obliging. Will it be the same now that a regional press has released the name of the police officer (apparently after it had been circulating on the internet for a while already)? Already the interior minister has filed a request with the equivalent of the attorney general to force the offending paper to retract the article (which won't do much good at this point). Whatever will the NYT do? And the Daily Mail? Will *.wp be more like the former or the latter? Personally, I would urge restraint, just as I would have done with Nahel's last name. But I'm aware that others will surely disagree... -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:19, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BDP likely applies first as this is about someone who is deceased. Note that there is an exemption from BDP for [...] contentious or questionable material about the subject that has implications for their living relatives and friends, such as in the case of a possible suicide or particularly gruesome crime. I don't know about what happened, but if you believe that the exemption applies, then you can ask for consensus on extending WP:BLP. That would easily allow for keeping the full name out of the article, especially with the collective Presumption in favor of privacy policies. --Super Goku V (talk) 02:48, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New page

[edit]

I suggest we create a new page called 2023 unrest in France or the 2023 French unrest, which would relfect both the Nahel Merzouk protests and the 2023 French pension reform unrest, which should be moved back to 2023 French pension reform protests. 84.232.208.32 (talk) 07:22, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I actually agree with this suggestion as it would create a more global recognizable article. I think the suggested titles of the pages are clear and identifiable of the incident. Would be interested in other contributors thoughts. Jurisdicta (talk) 03:08, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I very much agree with the spirit of this suggestion. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 19:02, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A title such as ‘2023 Nahel Merzouk Unrest in France’ or ‘2023 French Nahel Merzouk Unrest’ may be easier. Consolidation of both articles may be difficult as it could lose the distinction between the two. Maxttck (talk) 19:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly a title not referring to Nahel M.’s name would be more recognisable and easy to find, or adding ‘2023’ to the title. I think consolidating the Nahel M and Pension Reform unrest would possibly overshadow one or the other. Maxttck (talk) 19:33, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree with something along the lines of "2023 French unrest". I think it would show in a broader sense the Nahel Merzouk and pension reform unrest events. --WellThisIsTheReaper Grim 19:35, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
About a week ago, I suggested writing a new global page called 2023 French riots, which would include elements both from the Florian M./police violence riots (this page) and from the pension reform protests page (specifically increasing black block mobilization). I suspect we haven't seen the end of the protests against police violence given the events of 8 July and the call to demonstrations. At some point, the prefectures will probably either have to restore the freedom of assembly or ask Macron to declare a state of emergency, which he's been reticent to do for obvious reasons. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 19:48, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

8 July: banned protests

[edit]

At 13:51 I made a good faith addition to this article. At 16:50 I was reverted, named, and threatened in an edit summary, should I choose to reinstate the edit without consensus. I am therefore submitting a more developed version here (for clarity the original text is is in steely blue below). How can this text be improved? Does anybody agree with @Dilbaggg: that the call for protests across France, their banning due to fears of re-igniting passions, and the filmed violent reaction of the BRAV-M in Paris was "unrelated" to the Nahel M. protests (the current title of this page) or unrest? Thanks for any input you may have.

On 8 July 2023, "around 100 political parties, labor unions and associations for police reform called for demonstrations across France", specifically demanding the abrogation of the 2017 law permitting police use of firearms as well as "an in-depth reform of the police, its intervention techniques and its arsenal." Olivier Véran, the spokesperson for the government, said that the signatories of the press release titled "Our country is mourning and angry" were "adding fuel to the fire".[1] The memorial march for Adama Traoré was banned by the prefecture north of Paris, and the decision was upheld by a court "fearful of reigniting recent unrest sparked by the police killing of 17-year-old Nahel M."[2] The violence of the arrest of Yssoufou Traoré by the BRAV-M was filmed, and the violent treatment received by the three journalists covering the story led Christophe Deloire, secretary general of Reporters without Borders, to say "Taking down journalists to prevent them from filming or photographing an arrest is an unacceptable violation of the freedom to inform."[3]

-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 19:02, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’d support this addition to the article, it is certainly related to the ongoing tension regarding Nahel’s death. Maxttck (talk) 19:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Gratian, Paul (8 July 2023). "Mort de Nahel : plusieurs marches « de deuil et colère » contre les violences policières samedi". Ouest France (in French).
  2. ^ Le Monde with AFP (8 July 2023). "Protesters rally against police violence in several French cities". Le Monde.
  3. ^ Mestre, Abel (9 July 2023). "Questions arise over violent arrest of Yssoufou Traoré, whose brother died in police custody in 2016". Le Monde.

Quartier de reconquête républicaine

[edit]

I have partially transformed a French article, now in Draft:Quartier de reconquête républicaine. Xx236 (talk) 09:24, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]


End date

[edit]

There are differing opinions on whether the protests are ongoing or ended, and if they have ended, on what date did they finish. Thoughts (and sources) please. WWGB (talk) 14:46, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a complicated question, in part because of the page title. The riots were over by 4 July as the source in the entry says. Rioting over the 14 July weekend was down in comparison with last year (there are often episodes of rioting on the 14 July). I've added a more "official" reference to the Interior Minister's declaration to the Senate for this aspect.
On the other hand, a demonstration against police violence has been prohibited by the government again this Saturday, as was the case last Saturday. ([3]) Adding to the complication is that the deaths of Adama Traoré, of Nahel Merzouk, and of Alhoussein Camara (a teenager shot on his way to work in June 2023) are all currently in the news. So protests against police violence are not over. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 10:53, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
According to the timeline in the article, the last actual disturbance was 3 July. On subsequent dates, there was planning and discussion about protests/riots, but no reports on any disturbance happening. WWGB (talk) 12:17, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you seem my point about the difficulty of saying the "protests" are definitively over given that requests for authorizations to demonstrate against police violence were denied on the 8th and on the 15th?
As for the violent episodes, it does seem that the night of the 3-4 July was the last as there were only 72 arrests that night: "des heurts sporadiques se poursuivent, notamment dans le Rhône (à Saint-Priest, Vénissieux, Vaulx-en-Velin, des véhicules sont incendiés), mais les arrestations sont en baisse, avec 72 interpellations, contre 157 la veille ; et pour la première fois, aucun policier ni gendarme n’est blessé." (source) Perhaps this is a better source than the Minister of the Interior testifying to the Senate? -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 12:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Events happened on july 8 and July 10, and this souce sattes that the protests ended on July 15, 2023. [ttps://www.echoroukonline.com/french-researchers-warn-of-a-major-explosion-in-france-due-to-racist-crimes] Thus we must set that date as the end date of the protest as saying it is ongoing or stating other dates is WP:OR, this is a WP:RS confirming the protets were over as of July 15, 2023 and we cannot accept any other date.[1] Dilbaggg (talk) 10:01, 21 July 2023 (UTC) This 15 July source also refers to the protests as a thing of the past: [reply]
  1. ^ https://www.echoroukonline.com/french-researchers-warn-of-a-major-explosion-in-france-due-to-racist-crimes
this souce sattes that the protests ended on July 15, 2023 Your source says nothing of the sort . -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 20:13, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from previous page at this title

[edit]

Add note on alternate spelling of Nahel?

[edit]

Some sources in France and some signs say "Nael" 51.179.135.28 (talk) 12:16, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@51.179.135.28 Early French media reports misreported his name as Nael. Nahel is correct. Couruu (talk) 15:08, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article name

[edit]

Would "2023 France riots" be more in line with naming policy? Don't want to propose a full move request just yet. Couruu (talk) 15:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There have already been other riots in France in 2023 though, for example 2023 French pension reform unrest. Having it be named for Nahel M. (the person who was killed by the cops) would be in line with the article about the George Floyd riots, though that article is titled "protests" instead of "riots," and covers the peaceful marches together with the rioting. Of course there's also been some peaceful protesting following the killing of Nahel M., but this hasn't been covered so extensively - either here on Wiki or in the mainstream media. -2003:CA:871E:B82:39B7:FBC5:9D24:9743 (talk) 15:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@2003:CA:871E:B82:39B7:FBC5:9D24:9743 Ah, thank you, I forgot about the pensions entirely (and had a feeling there had been, hence the lack of move request). The reason I brought it up was because the name reads a little clunkily since the victims surname is not released. Couruu (talk) 15:29, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Even so, I think that a name like "Paris Riots" or "Paris protest" would be better used since this time the riots are concentrated in the big city. 186.32.217.16 (talk) 03:58, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Killing of Nahel Merzouk

[edit]

PopularGames and Nfitz: For what it is worth, I agree with merging this article into the article about the Killing of Nahel Merzouk. This is because the killing is a notable crime and the subsequent riots are a consequence of that crime. It makes sense to cover them together in the same article, as the riots have been triggered by the killing. There is also a matter of process. Once an article has been merged it then needs to be split. Simply undoing the redirect does not address the merger that has already occurred, and has the makings of an edit war. Ideally, a merging discussion should have taken place, but in this case I think WP:SNOW applies. If anyone thinks that this article should be resurrected, then please discuss splitting the riot content from the Killing of Nahel Merzouk article, on that article's talk page. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 03:09, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the murder is more of an excuse for the looting, and what these reflect are the ethnic and social problems that France is facing at the moment (let's remember that the French have also made riots). It is also the result of Macron's lack of legitimacy and authoritarianism. 186.32.217.16 (talk) 04:03, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Events were removed

[edit]

Last time I checked this article the bomb threats against L’happy Café and the vandalization of a holocaust memorial (with anti-police slogans and “We’re going to start a Shoah” written nearby) was under the events, but when I checked back today that’s gone? 2600:8805:3E0C:AA00:4C54:A3DA:9C00:F2EA (talk) 00:54, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Search for "Telegram" and "anti-police slogans". Neither event was removed. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 20:33, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, my bad, I was searching for the quotes that used to be there (the “We’re going to start a Shoah” and the quote about killing f*gs for the Quran 2600:8805:3E0C:AA00:F5A4:536D:D660:5039 (talk) 15:34, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
you are confused. Those formulations were on the killing of nahel merzouk entry, bur were removed. They were never here as those incendiary statements are not key aspects of the riots as covered by RS. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 17:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

POV problems in the section on Police revolt

[edit]

The first paragraph of this section has the following problems. 1) WP:COATRACK, the nominal subject of the section is "Police Revolt", the details concerning the 80-year old woman in Marseille have nothing to do with the subject of a police revolt or the Nahel M. riots (the woman died 5 years before they took place). Nahel's lawyer (not a neutral source) does indeed mention the story (though it is not mentioned that he is the one making the connection). This could be added (in much revised form) to the Yellow vests protests page, or potentially to background (concerning lack of prosecution of the police) (again in revised form) but it definitely does not belong in this section. 2) WP:COATRACK, the details of the 2018 "Maria affair" should also be added to the Yellow vests protests page (if they're not already there). An anchor could then be added to the page and a redirect created so that readers could learn the gruesome details, which are only very parenthetically relevant to a section on a "police revolt" as they took place 5 years prior to the 2023 rioting. 3) The first paragraph (and notably the first part of the first sentence) poisons the well for all the information that follows. I had this closer to NPOV, but the 2018 stuff has been added back despite the (ES) explanation as to why it was removed. Separating the "police brutality" into a dedicated section distinct from "police revolt" (and toning the rhetoric down considerably) would be a possible way forward. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 20:09, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also removed some opinion presented as fact from another section, which had been restored with the claim that it was supported by the cited Mediapart article, which is not true. The Mediapart article does not talk about mainstream coverage of the Hedi affair. (As it happens, I'm a subscriber and have read the article several times.) Please provide the exact quote supporting the removed claims (e.g. about who would or would not have ever been prosecuted) here on the talk page if you disagree. If I somehow missed them, they can perhaps be attributed to Mediapart. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 20:30, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SashiRolls, regarding WP:COATRACK the subject in the Maria Case, Zineb Case, Hedi Case, Nahel Case and Nahel riots is police violence. The Maria Case and the killing of Zineb Redouane are two emblematic cases of police brutality in impunity since 5 years in Marseille. They both were not yellow vests. In these two cases the judiciary has to fight the police. The police refuses to cooperate with the public prosecutor/the judiciary: they refused to record the criminal complaint, they refused to testify, they practiced omertà. David B. even evaded the hearing by suddenly joining a private company for a military mission… in Togo!
Angelina, passée à tabac en 2018 : "Hedi et moi, on devrait être morts, c'est nous les victimes !", 03/08/2023
′Affaire Nahel′ « Sans vidéos, il n’y a qu’une seule version», Brice Grazzini, avocat de Maria, marseillaise victime de violence policière, analyse l’affaire Nahel, 30/06/2023
A police 'strike' is illegal. We should state it more clearly and not beat around the bush. But the Marseille police 'strike' to protest the detention of one of their peers is illegal and illegitimate. Striking for better working conditions, more holidays or more money would be illegal, but at least legitimate. The strike is about the police and their hierarchy organising impunity and anonymity for police crimes. Macronist politicians are not sanctioning the mad 5% police officers, they are supporting them! And now officially calling for the creation of “special legal status” for the police to guarantee their impunity. It's the 101 how to turn a constitutional democracy into a police state. With the opposition calling for the "guarantee of the rule of law" and "the independence of justice".
La France devient une « démocratie policière » avec « des moyens et des prérogatives exceptionnelles » 24/07/2023 → Sebastian Roché, research director at the French National Centre for Scientific Research sees "no precedent, under the Fifth Republic, of an association between the two highest police officials [Veaux and Nuñez] to publicly question a decision of the judiciary, and more broadly the general principles of law enshrined in the Constitution". He considers that "their statements violate the very principles of the democratic police, which is supposed to be neutral and act with reference to the principles of law". And he recalls that “the equality of all before the law appears in article 6 of the Declaration of the Rights of the Man and of the Citizen of 1793. It is a fundamental pillar of democratic states: there can be no privileges, as under the Ancien Régime”. Roché sees an attempt to establish “a fourth power, that of the police administration, which would have a say in the work of the magistrates and the making of the law by the assemblies. It's dizzying."
Regarding your last comment, I made a mistake there. It was not in Mediapart but Contre-Attaque. Here: "Une caméra de vidéosurveillance a filmé toute la scène. Les médias n’en ont presque pas parlé. Sans ces images, accablantes, les policiers n’auraient jamais été poursuivis, et le tireur n’aurait jamais été mis en détention. Les médias qui, d’habitude, se précipitent sur les moindre détails d’un fait divers et n’hésitent pas à étaler les éléments du dossier se sont bien gardés de diffuser ces informations." 27/07/2023. My apologies. --93.211.220.190 (talk) 11:57, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed this text from the section on the "police revolt" as it is unrelated. I have removed the POV tag as a result. NB: the 2018 material would be better added to the Yellow vests protests page, insofar as it happened during police action during that social movement (I remember adding the story of the 80-year old closing her shutters back at the time, but did not follow up on the associated judicial affair). In the background section of this article, something could be added about the difficulty of prosecuting the police after "bavures". This entry is not the place for the principle description of the Maria affair either, though I agree that very brief mention could be made of the connection.-- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 10:11, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nahel_Merzouk_riots&oldid=1256820065"