Talk:Antisemitism in the United States

Wiki Education assignment: Writing 2 - Digital Futures
— Assignment last updated by Zmuhl (talk) 22:33, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I think Antisemitism in the United States in the 21st century should be merged into this article, as a lot of the content seems duplicated. GnocchiFan (talk) 12:26, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support as this article seems to already cover the 21st century too. --Dan Carkner (talk) 13:37, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support: In agreement with Dan. There is a significant enough duplication of events across both articles and two further articles: List of antisemitic incidents in the United States and History_of_antisemitism_in_the_United_States. Merging these two articles (as proposed) would be a good start. Nonovix (talk) 21:13, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support Merging the articles and updating the 21st Century section. --Nycarchitecture212 (talk) 12:15, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support merging the discussion of major themes (already somewhat duplicative) and types of events. But instead merge the list of specific events to List of antisemitic incidents in the United States and List of attacks on Jewish institutions in the United States. The Antisemitism in the United States article is quite long and contains extensive discussion of the topics and patterns, but then a seemlinly cherry-picked list of a few recent examples in Antisemitism in the United States. Therefore, this section should be reduced not expanded. DMacks (talk) 04:41, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support I see no real reason to have separate article for these. It is not as though antisemitism in the 21th century is different from antisemitism in the 20th century... Debresser (talk) 23:42, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Support. Uncessary split created by well-meaning students and instructor, but not really needed. If it was analytical and made claims that the 21st century is different, maybe we could keep it, but this is really just a low quality list of some random antisemitic incicents in the USA in the early 21st century. Merge what is due and reliably referenced and move on. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:31, 5 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose I think there is enough notable content for article to remain. However, article needs improvement. However, I do not think that this means article should be merged since there is a enough material on 21st century antisemitism. Homerethegreat (talk) 17:36, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

*Support merge since there seems to be a mirroring problem between both articles. Hogo-2020 (talk) 06:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Support per OP and others in support. Not seeing a valid reason to have separate articles with so much overlap between them. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 13:26, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Support Likewise agree with others in support. W9793 (talk) 14:33, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Enough sources for both articles and I also think the circumstances for each article (causes, history, etc.) vary, making it two distinctive topics. Hogo-2020 (talk) 06:46, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Enough content for both articles.  // Timothy :: talk  22:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Support, given that there is heavy overlap. Most of the Antisemitism in the United States is about the 21st century, and there is no clear division in the topic at the turn of the century. Even with if there was no trimming as part of a merge, the total would be <100k characters. Klbrain (talk) 16:02, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

too much detail distracts readers
Most readers have a limited amount of time to read an article, and if it is too long they will skim it. Part 6 is a problem--too much detail and all copied from long articles. I am trimming it so that people will not get distracted with petty details about criminals and skim over the main themes of antisemitism. Rjensen (talk) 06:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

the bias rule states: "reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective." see WP:BIASED
Please do not delete reliable sources because of a false misunderstanding of the bias rule. The rule applies to editors not to sources. The bias rule states: reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective see WP:BIASED Rjensen (talk) 19:18, 11 May 2024 (UTC)