Talk:1906 Atlanta race massacre

Untitled
The leading paragraph of this article says there were an estimated 250 African-Americans killed during the riot.

Under the heading "Outcomes," it says African-American deaths numbered between twenty five and forty.

Which is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.242.112.208 (talk) 02:34, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I've been watching this article and completely missed that edit! It was the most recent edit, made by 24.98.162.37 (thier only edit in Wikipedia). This article says there were 25 blacks and two whites. This article says:
 * Newspaper accounts at the time and subsequent scholarly treatments of the riot vary widely on the number of casualties. Estimates range from twenty-five to forty African American deaths, although the city coroner issued only ten death certificates for black victims. Most accounts agree that only two whites were killed, one of whom was a woman who suffered a heart attack on seeing the mob outside her home.
 * That's what the reverted version says, so I'll revert. --Sstrader (talk) 15:17, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm currently reading Negrophobia and though I haven't gotten to the aftermath portion of the book I suspected 250 was a little high. 98.242.112.208 (talk) 19:34, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Requested move 31 December 2014

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 04:15, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Atlanta Race Riot → Atlanta race riot – Case fix per WP:NCCAPS and MOS:CAPS and sources. Dicklyon (talk) 04:09, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Support per nominator. J I P  &#124; Talk 20:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Outcomes
... the requirement to possess a license to carry a handgun openly, that was passed by the General Assembly following the Atlanta Race Riot of 1906.


 * ''History Of Georgia's Carry Laws: The Continuing Legacy of Slavery and Racism "In the years following the riot, white voters and the all white General Assembly systematically disenfranchised and then disarmed blacks in Georgia. In 1910, the General Assembly imposed licensing requirements with the intent to disarm blacks by using the same seemingly non-discriminatory manner that successfully disenfranchised Blacks two years earlier. To possess a firearm a license issued by the Ordinary (now known as probate judge) must be applied for and granted. Applicants had to be: a) at least eighteen years old or over b) give a bond payable to the Governor of the State in the sum of one hundred dollars, AND c) a fee of fifty cents. $100 in 1910 is equivalent to over $2000 in 2007 dollars. In the unlikely event a black man could post the bond, the Ordinary, who was always white, since blacks could not hold office, could be counted on to deny the application. Judicial Immunity applicable to the Ordinary meant that Blacks were unable to challenge the license denials." Retrieved 2009-07-27.'

According to GeorgiaCarry.org, one of the outcomes was a de facto ban on firearm possesion by African Americans. If it's true (and I don't say it is or that the source is good enough) we oughta include it in this article. Felsic2 (talk) 17:30, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Atlanta race riot. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060911005520/http://fax.libs.uga.edu/E185x61xM64/ to http://fax.libs.uga.edu/E185x61xM64/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100613155214/http://fax.libs.uga.edu/E185x61xM64/1f/ to http://fax.libs.uga.edu/E185x61xM64/1f/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080520110557/http://fax.libs.uga.edu/F294xA8xG8 to http://fax.libs.uga.edu/F294xA8xG8/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100613072237/http://fax.libs.uga.edu/F294xA8xG8/1f/ to http://fax.libs.uga.edu/F294xA8xG8/1f/
 * Added tag to http://cdm.sos.state.ga.us/u?/adhoc,1175
 * Added tag to http://cdm.sos.state.ga.us/u?/adhoc,1169

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:03, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Tulsa race riot which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 02:45, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It had to do only with having the title follow Wikipedia conventions of the first word being capitalized, and the following words in lower case.Parkwells (talk) 12:38, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Choice of leading sources and image
It seems odd to have the image of newspaper coverage of this terribly American manifestation of ethnic fear and hatred to be a French newspaper, with a quote in the Lead from the French paper. Why not use an American one? The NY Times covered the riot, as did other papers outside Atlanta. I would imagine the Library of Congress may have images available for use in this article, as well as access to other US papers, to see contemporary coverage. Editors should use the books on this topic and not exclusively the primary sources of the papers of the time.Parkwells (talk) 12:38, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Word choice
Delete use of term "pogrom" in the Lead; it is a synonym for this kind of race or ethnic riot, was not part of contemporary usage, and does not add anything to the article. Certainly there has been considerable academic studies of the similarities among riots against ethnic minorities in various societies, and it is not found only between the Russian Empire and the US. Minorities were targeted in Southeast Asia, for instance.Parkwells (talk) 12:43, 30 March 2018 (UTC)


 * "Riot" makes it sound like it was an even fight between 2 mobs, "pogrom" is probably more accurate to describe this as whites attacking a minority group with less power politically. Jamesman666 (talk) 00:28, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

“Subsequent black criminality”?
Under Background, the following sentence appears: “After the end of the American Civil War and during the Reconstruction era, there was violence of whites against blacks throughout the South, as whites reacted to emancipation of blacks, subsequent black criminality, and political empowerment of freedmen.”

“Subsequent black criminality“ is not footnoted and should be sourced and clarified, or removed. This phrase might seem to suggest some natural predilection or propensity for criminality on the part of blacks, or that emancipation caused criminality (i.e., blacks had been “kept in line” by the institution of slavery), while ignoring historical facts such as the Black Codes (which defined criminality differently for blacks; cf. Wikipedia article), the proliferation of false accusations (at times resulting in lynchings; cf. Wikipedia article, “United States” section) as a means to terrorize and control blacks, etc.

Please review. Thanks. 2600:1700:6EF0:7B90:9B6:7802:3ABB:A6C0 (talk) 17:56, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

1906 Atlanta Race Massacre
Please change the title to this. A more accurate name, and one that historians are using now.

https://www.civilandhumanrights.org/the-atlanta-race-massacre-of-1906/

Revtimmah (talk) 16:02, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 * There are groups suggesting this be called a massacre rather than a riot, but it doesn't appear to have caught on yet in the majority of mainstream sources. It doesn't even show up in Ngram or in any Google Book results. There is a campaign to change the name, but I couldn't find any evidence that historians are using the term now, as you say they do. It seems as though for now the current name is still the WP:COMMONNAME, though that may change in the future. It might be worth noting in the article's text that there is an effort to change the name of the event, if sources support that though. I will note that the current prose of the article is not shy in calling it a massacre which is a change that has been in place since 2020, regardless of what the title is. - Aoidh (talk) 13:52, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Now, one year later, there appears to be more mainstream support for the term "massacre" to identify this event. The New York Times article "In a 'City Too Busy to Hate,' New Attention to an Overlooked Race Massacre" portrays the name change as a completed matter among historians of the event. Jno.skinner (talk) 22:25, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. Also came here to discuss this. Here is an additional source describing the change in terminology: https://www.atlantahistorycenter.com/blog/riot-or-massacre-how-one-word-changes-perspective/
 * I think the fact that the consensus was renaming "Tulsa Race Riot" to "Tulsa Race Massacre" also weighs in favor of renaming. Recognitor (talk) 02:05, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * It's been updated. HJ72JH (talk) 02:14, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender, Race and Computing
— Assignment last updated by Chy001 (talk) 17:01, 12 November 2023 (UTC)