Talk:Black Bike Week

2014 shooting
Obviously needs its own section. I nominate Dennis. Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)  (talk)  (contribs) 19:07, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Why? The AP and Reuters and so on reported that it happened during the bike rally. That's all. No reliable sources have drawn any further conclusions, such as that black people's presence leads to shootings, or that bike rallies lead to shootings. It's notable, and it's indisputable that the shooting happened at the same time as the rally. But what more do you wish to add? We now have two sentences which state that the shootings happened and that violence is unusual during the rally. What more do we need to say? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:19, 26 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh, I didn't realize you had added anything. We can just wait for the analysis as it comes in, I suppose!  I wonder whether it is the first shooting that has occurred during any Myrtle Beach motorcycle rally? Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)   (talk)  (contribs) 19:25, 26 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment though, I do notice we've got a big boldface heading for every aspect of the article that the implies evil racial discrimination by Myrtle Beach. Do you think that could perhaps be a sign that this article has NPOV issues? Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)   (talk)  (contribs) 19:28, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Nope. Numerous high quality sources support the existence of institutional racism in Myrtle Beach. It's not an extraordinary claim: we know that such racist government action is quite common. I read the history of Myrtle Beach for this article, and racism is par for the course. It's why the Atlantic Beach ghetto exists, and why other bike rallies were segregated, like the Daytona Beach Bike Week.I'd like to see high quality sources to support this counterargument. Who is credibly claiming there isn't racism in Myrtle Beach's police, businesses, and governemnt? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:39, 26 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, thanks for giving a rather thorough explanation of the POV you are trying to push in clear contravention of WP guidelines. Shall we rename the article to Myrtle Beach is a bunch of racist crackers and here are some great examples y'all? Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)   (talk)  (contribs) 19:42, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Read the sources. Read them. If you don't have access, ask any you can get access. After you've read the sources, then explain what the problem is. You're assuming that the claims of racism are hysteria, and that is extremely condescending. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Non-response, please see my comment below. Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)  (talk)  (contribs) 20:04, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

I hope I was not wrong to start this section myself, but the shootings were not an "event" in the sense the section the information was in was intended for. I thought a bold statement by the governor that this must end needed to be in the article. So far the mayor is standing firm and that may be enough to keep the event coming back, but I think there will be more to this. What makes our country great is that the governor may not be able to force this to end. I only visit the area once a year and it is not on a biker week, and two motels I have stayed in welcome bikers, but so far I have had no problems. I wouldn't be happy if I was around all this, just because of the noise. But I'll try to stay neutral as I watch the coverage and try not to add too much here.— Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 19:35, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * In the past there has been a local vs state conflict over motorcycle rallies in the Grand Strand area, such as when the state overturned the local helmet law. There has also been an intra-city divide between businesses who supported the bike rallies (e.g. the BOOST organization) and local leaders who wanted more upmarket, family-friendly tourism. A previous edit summary said "It is mostly in other communities and Myrtle Beach has made clear they don't want it" but it's not that simple. Also, I believe a review of past news coverage will show that the claim that they black motorcycle rally has more violence or more traffic accidents than the white rally is disputed by Black Bike Week advocates.Here is an article with some background coverage on the individuals involved in the shooting. There appears to be a gang and drugs connection, and they appear to be South Carolina residents, not out of state tourists, who came from the Charleston area to the Myrtle Beach area for a Bikefest-related party.Keep in mind that Wikipedia is not news so we have no need to jump the gun here. We can afford to wait several weeks to months or more in order to allow time for the investigation to be completed. I would place a higher priority on updating the article with the changes in the bike rally over the last 5 years (moving away from Myrtle Beach and mostly over to Atlantic Beach) and not the shooting that just happened. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:15, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The governor's statement doesn't mean anything WILL happen, but it's such a harsh statement it does deserve mention.—  Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 15:07, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not aware of the changes to this rally over the past five years, since I haven't been following it. Perhaps Dennis could take the lead on those changes?  Meanwhile we can of course reflect notable coverage and opinions regarding the shooting.  The governor's comment obviously belongs.


 * I note with interest your comment about Myrtle Beach leaders wanting more "family-friendly" tourism. Are these the same leaders that are racist for wanting to place limitations on the rally?  Or are they a separate cohort of residents who only oppose the rally for non-racist reasons?


 * One final note: we don't necessarily need a secondary source to report the rally organizers' view that complaints of violence are overblown. Articles about a given subject may use self-published sources by the subject to substantiate the fact that the subject has made a particular claim.  So, a press release would be enough provided it is actually issued by this group or somebody genuinely representing the group.  Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)   (talk)  (contribs) 16:31, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

This is a Wikipedia Article, not a Newspaper.98.203.36.3 (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Maybe not, but I think we've agreed the shootings and the governor's statement need to be mentioned. I added the fact that she was in the area but for a different reason, and to make sure no one was talking about cancelling the event, I included one statement saying that wasn't planned. If a section devoted to this is not needed, are there any other mentions of past violence we can use to make a more general section?— Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 13:30, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

I think we are jumping the gun with the shooting. This is an encyclopedia, not a News headline source. The Governors' statement is definitely Notable "when used fully", but the shooting haven't been stated as being related to the Rally. There are sources stating that the shooting were not related to the rally. Even the Police chief stated "He didn't think the shooting were rally related", and the Mayor of Atlantic beach stated that "the shooting were done by non bikers, and that the criminals probably never visited Atlantic Beach". There is even an entire story in the Post and Courier detailing the criminal past of the victims and their connection to a local area gang "Town of Lincolnville," or TOL" and their involvement in other shootings:  One Shooting was during a Thanksgiving Day parade, should we add that to a Thanksgiving Wiki Article?    The Story is here: http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20140601/PC16/140609936/1006/gang-activity-in-myrtle-beach-homicides-sparks-closer-look-at-charleston-groups

I personally hate when a subject gets hot in the Press and Wiki Editors rush in to add their contribution, and change long standing contributions to keep up with the New headlines. 98.203.36.3 (talk) 06:52, 8 June 2014 (UTC)


 * The governor of the state connected the rally to the shooting and said it needs to end. There's no way to keep the opinion out of this article. Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)   (talk)  (contribs) 16:03, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I found a statement connecting the shooting to the rally, and although it isn't proof, it does seem to justify including the shooting, for now.— Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 18:51, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Edit war over a statement.
I added the statement

Atlantic Beach Mayor, Jake Evans said on June 2, 2014 that after Mondays Town council meeting, "We don't plan to end Bikefest." .

This is the Official Response, but was removed.

Also the Quote being used from Gov Haley is being paraphrased.

Here full quote is: "It is time for that Bikefest to come to an end, and that is the way that I am going to talk to the elected officials of Atlantic Beach." - Gov Haley

Afterward the Elected Official of Atlantic Beach responded.

Can someone verify or tell me what I'm doing wrong?

I feel Gov Haleys' whole quote is necessary, because it gives a different meaning from the paraphrase. The paraphrase version say "The rally is over" and full version say, I will get the Officials of Atlantic beach to stop the rally.

I feel that Mayor Jake Evan Response is noteworthy, especially when taken into context with Gov Haley full quote. 98.203.36.3 (talk) 17:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Also there is an edit war taking place on this page, even on older existing content. I noticed 4 attempt to change wording to imply a different meaning on existing content.


 * You seem to be a bit confused. You added a direct quotation immediately after a sentence paraphrasing the quote.  We don't need both.  As for others trying to "change wording to imply a different mean", I assume you mean the edit which you reverted here.  In the edit summary you made an accusation: "Someone tried to change that Statement in a very slick way to imply something else."   But it's far from clear what you think the other editor was trying to imply or why it would have been wrong.  Meanwhile, I have had to revert multiple changes you have made to the article because your written English is pretty bad. Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)   (talk)  (contribs) 17:20, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Mayor Jake Evan's Response deserves a place in the Article. It is the Official Statement from Atlantic Beach "the organizers of the Rally.

Dated June 2, 2014 after Gov Haleys' statement. Jake Evans said on June 2, 2014 that after Mondays' Atlantic Beach Town council meeting, "We don't plan to end Bikefest." Source: http://www.carolinalive.com/news/story.aspx?id=1052561#.U5MlkPldWSo

Why do you feel that this doesn't deserve a place in the Article? 98.203.36.3 (talk) 17:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)


 * It is already in the article. You are confused. Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)   (talk)  (contribs) 17:39, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

The Article says: "The previous day, Atlantic Beach Mayor Jake Evans said the event would not be cancelled".

Full statement from source: -- "Atlantic Beach Elected Official did not attend Friday's meeting "The one in Conway with Gov Haley" and could not be immediately reach for comment.

But on Thursday "the previous day", Atlantic Beach Mayor Jake Evans said the Town has no plans to cancel next year's event...." --

Now, new information is available from the Atlantic Beach Official Town meeting on June 2, 2014.

During the Town's Meeting, "after Gov Haley's' statement", the town issued the statement: "We don't plan to end Bikefest."

Why would you use the statement before Gov Haley's statement, but not include the response?

It is the Official "response" to Gov Haley's statement.

--- The use of "previous day", is a slick way of misleading the reader. The previous day the Mayor said the event wouldn't be cancel, then the Gov said it should be canceled the next day.

Also before I added Gov Haley's whole quote, it gave an even different meaning.

Gov Haley said: It is time for that Bikefest to come to an end ..... The previous day, Atlantic Beach Mayor Jake Evans said the event would not be cancelled.

I don't think people are being neutral with thier edits.

98.203.36.3 (talk) 18:09, 8 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Ok, I see now that mayor made the same statement on two separate dates and you're referring to the latter date. I don't have a problem with reporting the more recent comment and describing it as a response to Haley, since that's what it was.  But please drop the accusations of bad faith.  Your English is not especially good and so your article prose and talk page comments are both a bit confusing. Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)   (talk)  (contribs) 19:00, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I didn't mean to mislead anyone. I felt the governor's statement was important. It just happened that the mayor had the opposite view, so I tried to present both points of view by saying "The previous day" the mayor said this. He didn't say it after the governor said what she said.— Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 19:11, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I have no objections to the full quotes if this is really needed to make clear what was said. We don't usually quote that much and a summary is usually enough.— Vchimpanzee  ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 19:52, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * It took me a while to figure out, but the mayor did actually reiterate his intention to not end bikefest. If you look at the "Carolinalive" source pasted above, it mentions a statement he made on Monday, June 2.  The quote itself is found only in the headline, so I missed it the first time around. Centrify (f / k / a FCAYS)   (talk)  (contribs) 17:57, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Black Bike Week
Cyberbot II has detected links on Black Bike Week which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://www.cityofmyrtlebeach.com/PDF%20Forms/Nuisance%20amend%20Sept%2008-57.pdf
 * Triggered by  on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:31, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Black Bike Week. 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 tag to http://www.thesunnews.com/2010/06/09/1521080/mb-helmet-law-quashed.html?storylink=mirelated#ixzz0qrIO8v00
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100207090530/http://www.palmettoscoop.com:80/2010/02/04/sc-supreme-court-hears-myrtle-beach-helmet-law-cases/ to http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2010/02/04/sc-supreme-court-hears-myrtle-beach-helmet-law-cases/
 * Added tag to http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1296783.html

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) 13:50, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Unreliable source
This source says the same loop route used in 2016 will be used in 2017. I believe that going by the statement, this is also the route shown in the article from 2015 which I worked hard on. I believe I added that to the article. However, despite my efforts to get it corrected, the same writer has repeated incorrect information that was also in the source above. I have emailed the paper trying to get it corrected again. A map appears to show the same route that I put in the article.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  17:46, 27 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Looks pretty reliable to me. The news site is just quoting what the City of Myrtle Beach and the police announced. If you click through the link they give, the city says this is the route. Same thing on this other map they provide. What route are you trying to get the paper to publish? Shouldn't you be emailing the city and asking them to correct it, if it is wrong? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:21, 27 May 2017 (UTC)


 * It is not reliable because George Bishop Parkway is nowhere near 29th Avenue North and the newspaper just keeps telling us that it is. The map is accurate. I just wanted to make clear that what is in the Wikipedia article is correct even if it appears to disagree with a source. The important detail is that the source says the 2015 route will continue to be used.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  17:49, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I double-checked the sources for the loop route. This is the route sued in 2015 and although one detail is missing, I believe it is the same route being used now. This is the route used in 2016. Quite a few details are left out but I believe we can conclude it was the same route. However, the Wikipedia article says nothing about the route. And the above link, at the beginning of this section, is one of three using text that gives the incorrect information about George Bishop Parkway. The maps for all three years appear to be the same. Meanwhile, I continue to get no response and I have to wonder if anyone is even around to cover anything.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  17:56, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Why not just cite the police and not the news? If the police say their planned route goes by way of Daytona Beach and Nome, Alaska, then the article should say that is what the police announced they planned to do. We can verify they made the announcement and that's good enough. Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:06, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the Wikipedia article does state the same route used in 2016 was followed, and the map, though not the text, makes that clear. The Wikipedia article doesn't actually say the same route was followed all three years. I'm just making sure no one looks at what is there and wonders why the text of the source isn't consistent with the Wikipedia article.


 * And while this is discussion of the topic, not the Wikipedia article, my objective with the paper is that some biker or someone in the general public who has to follow this route is going to go by the text and while traveling up S.C. 31, they're going to wonder, "Where the $%#@ is George Bishop Parkway???"— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  18:16, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Have you planned many trips using Encyclopedia Britannica or World Book as your guide? An encyclopedia is not Let's Go or Fodor's. WikiVoyage does have a Myrtle Beach article, which is the perfect place for travel guidance and advice.Wikipedia is not responsible for every claim made in every source that we cite. Just because we cite a news article for some simple statement, that doesn't mean we are vouching for every other statement in that source. We aren't even vouching that the fact we cite is true. We're saying, "this is in the source". That's all. If you look at the source, the thing in the Wikipedia article should match.Anyway, if the police are the ones choosing this route and they're the ones out there enforcing it, marking off routes, directing traffic, and blocking turns, then why do you need Wikipedia to tell you which way to go anyway? None of this makes sense, and none of this is relevant to an encyclopedia article. Just cite the city or the police departments announcement, and keep it general. Hardly any readers care what the names of the streets are and they don't belong in an article like this. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:20, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Again, I was just pointing out that someone might notice that the source is inconsistent with what the article actually says. I included the specific streets several years ago (I felt it was important enough to describe and what better way than to just list all the streets) and no one has objected so far. I just did it because they were listed in the source. More important is the problem people outside of Wikipedia might be having.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  17:07, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Once again, this is discussion of the topic and not the Wikipedia article, but the ultimate goal is to make sure what is here matches the reality if they do this next year. No response from the paper. Someone here suggested the police, and that might be the solution.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  19:56, 31 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Comments that aren't related to improving the article are likely to be deleted. See wp:talk and wp:notforum. Please go ahead and fix this article. We have alternatives now so there's no reason to keep a source you object to. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:24, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm not the one objecting. I was posting in case anyone did object.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  20:32, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Effects on people not part of event
I don't want to add too much information but here are some newspaper sources related to difficulties ordianry people who live in the area, and tourists not part of bike week, are having:

http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article154931104.html#storylink=cpy http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article153907004.html http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/article153115009.html

The third one has a video that shows my favorite place to eat breakfast when I visit. A video might also be an acceptable source but I don't have sound here.— Vchimpanzee  •  talk  •  contributions  •  18:53, 8 June 2017 (UTC)