Talk:Driving while black/Archive 1

Talk
This ridiculous, biased and completely uninformative article should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.214.197 (talk • contribs)


 * Why? It's a common enough phrase, and this article explains its origin. 200.184.189.132 18:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is so common that it has spawned new phrases such as the post-9/11 "Flying while Arab" and "Flying while Muslim". --Ezeu 04:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

There should be a section on Ridin' Dirty.

Do not merge
Do not merge this with "racial profiling" This topic should be expanded...

futurebird

I agree. This page is having a bit of trouble standing on its own at the moment, but it is much more a candidate to be fleshed out rather than simply merged. One thing though. I always try to critique articles by pretending I have absolutely no prior familiarity with the circumstances/background information. Thus, despites the quotes around crime I feel the first few sentences sound too much like describing an actual crime. Anyway...I'll see if I find time for this article. –ArmadniGeneral (talk • contribs) 22:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I fleshed it out, and its citations should be secure enough to stand on its own. - Freechild 16:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Spelling
I've altered a recent change that made offense into offence because its a predominately American phenomenon. To make the point, I found just over 1,900 google hits on "driving while black" and "united kingdom"; I found just over 30,000 google hits on "driving while black" and "united states". FYI. – Freechild ( ¡!¡!¡!¡ ) 01:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

"Criticism of the term"
The "Criticism of the term" section simply gives some anecdotal stories and claims that "empirical evidence did not support the claim". Um. Can someone with the book please cite the "empirical evidence" (is it a study, statistics, what?). Why is so much of the section devoted to an anecdote? —Pengo 04:12, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Too many examples?
I feel the 'in popular culture' section of this article contains an unnecessary number of examples; 12, at current count. It seems to me we only need to demonstrate that the term has been referenced in popular culture, not describe every time it has been used. I would suggest cutting this section down to a much briefer one saying something like 'Driving While Black has been referenced in films and TV shows such as X, Y and Z'. Terraxos (talk) 02:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Implication
I have always the phrase to imply that a black person would be unable to afford a road-worthy vehicle and that therefore the vehicle must be stolen, not because of racial profiling.--Auric (talk) 20:54, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Er... that is racial profiling. NewkirkPlaza (talk) 17:29, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Caps?
Shouldn't this article be at "Driving while black", not "Driving While Black?" WP:MOSCAPS. 124.148.222.41 (talk) 06:16, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, boldly moving it.– Gilliam (talk) 07:08, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Driving while black. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120315201237/http://www.montrealgazette.com:80/news/Driver+says+victim+racial+profiling+police+court+hears/6297104/story.html to http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Driver+says+victim+racial+profiling+police+court+hears/6297104/story.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 02:07, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Summary
"Driving While Black" is word play on the name of an actual crime, "Driving While Barred". Many blacks are barred from driving as they accumulate tickets for various infractions.

DWB can also affect whites who are "Driving with Blacks".

''driving while intoxicated, commonly referred to as DWI. Some jurisdictions use the term Driving Under the Influence (DUI); others use Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants (DUII); see "Driving Under the Influence" for other variants.'' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.4.106 (talk) 17:37, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Driving while black. 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/20091007210810/http://www.citypages.com/databank/28/1369/article15168.asp to http://citypages.com/databank/28/1369/article15168.asp
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20000816175839/http://www.pacificnews.org/jinn/stories/6.08/000427-customs.html to http://www.pacificnews.org/jinn/stories/6.08/000427-customs.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:33, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

"Make of car"
It's possible that this section, although it is interesting, takes up too much space for the content that it beholds. For one, it outlines the anecdotal experience of a producer of The Young Turks, and I think it is important to push against the anecdotal experience of individuals (especially if it was not widely covered - and it seems as though it was only covered by The Young Turks network) when talking about such a large term. I am willing to work to find more compelling examples relating to DWB. Additionally, the statistic needs to be cited from a better source - in fact as of now there is no direct link to this source. It is also unclear whether the source quotes another source or whether the report was done by The Young Turks. As of now, I imagine many people would be uncomfortable using The Young Turks as a reliable source of information, especially if the report was not peer reviewed. Stibbals (talk) 05:57, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Real examples?
The weight of the article at present seems to make it sound as though this phenomenon were an Urban Legend. This is exacerbated by the enormous Popular Culture section and no real world examples of this happening, just examples of people talking about similar phenomena. The article would be helped by famous examples of this actually happening, as the term did not arise from a vacuum, but from the observation that black drivers were more likely to be pulled over, more likely to be cited for trivial or trumped up offenses without a legitimate reason for the initial stop, and in other ways were at least implied (although overt cases exist where it is indisputable) that they were stopped simply because they were black. Being stopped for being black ine the "wrong neighbourhood" is a subset of this phenomenon. Rifter0x0000 (talk) 14:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I certainly agree - thus it may be worth citing more studies (as there are a wealth of studies done in each state regarding racial inequities amongst policing on the highway) and as you said, more high profile examples. Johnny Cochran is an example of someone who was violently pulled over, as was Henry Louis Gates, a prominent African American Studies scholar who helped bring the term to popular culture. Stibbals (talk) 15:38, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Generalization?
As of now there is one sentence in this section: "A survey of people's experiences with law enforcement reported that minorities generally have the same perceptions of justice as the majority but very different experiences." I'm not exactly sure if this sentence needs its own section, as I think it would be better added to Origins. I'm not very clear on what generalizations means or what it is referring to. Stibbals (talk) 00:46, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

DWW (WTF?)
Racial profiling in this manner is not strictly limited to non-caucasions. While living in a small town, I discovered that many white people (in this town) were users of methanphetamine, including the wife of the county sheriff. On numerous occasions, I personally was pulled over for many trivial reasons. The first question asked of me was "do you have any drugs on you?". Naturally, I did not, as I was not a "meth-head". Non-caucasions were harrassed in this town even more than caucasions, but never asked if they were in possession of methanphetamine. I just felt I should inform that racial profiling from white officers can include racial profiling of other caucasions (WTF).
 * Well said! 199.112.128.15 (talk) 23:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Doesn't sound like the commentator has any suggestions to make this article better. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:55, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Reasons for Redirect
The article relies too much on discussion of the variations on "driving while black" to establish the importance of the term itself. In fact, only one source used in the body of the article actually uses the term "driving while black, and that is the student-published Minnesota Law Review. "Driving while black" is a vernacular term for a form of racial profiling, and so while someone should be able to search for the term here, a redirect to "racial profiling" is perfectly adequate coverage that will give the reader plenty of understanding of the term. Otherwise, we could have a different redundant article for every single possible variation - "driving while hispanic", "driving while asian", whathaveyou. And besides, this is Wikipedia, not Urban Dictionary.76.231.150.69 (talk) 21:54, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
 * While the guideline does state to be bold, this article is too controversial for you to move without discussion. Aside from that, the guideline regarding notability is more relevant than your arbitrary determination of the term's worthiness for inclusion. The term is popular vernacular that also has a lot of reliable sources supporting its inclusion in WP. • Freechild talk 02:33, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * My determination was not "arbitrary" - remember to be civil in discussions. My determination was based on the fact that there was only one source that actually used the term in the article. The rest of the sources focused either on racial profiling or "variations". Even if you loaded up the article with other sources that happened to use the term and mention that it is a form of racial profiling, that's all you'd have - an article saying "Driving while black is a form of racial profiling. Article X says driving while black is a form of racial profiling. So does article Y. So does article Z." The only way anyone has been able to fill out enough text to make this look like a real article is by loading it up with discussion of the variations. This is not a recipe for a balanced article when the "variations", which should be a minor part of the article, becomes the major part of the article. That's why what I said above stands.76.231.150.69 (talk) 14:40, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * So bring this conversation to an AFD rather than acting unilaterally- let the community decide. • Freechild talk 15:32, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * AfD is for deleting articles, not merging or redirect. As a matter of fact, using AfD to propose a merger is discouraged
 * Furthermore, as AfD policy states:"5.If the topic is not important enough to merit an article on its own, consider turning the page into a useful redirect to an existing article – something you can do yourself without opening an AfD case.". In the interest of consensus, I have opened a merger discussion per wikipedia merging policy.76.231.150.69 (talk) 19:55, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I disagree that this page be merged, as it is clearly a notable topic with reliable sources. Please do not merge it again without further contributions from other editors. • Freechild talk 06:09, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You don't get to revert a merge just because you "disagree" with it and make a vague claim about its alleged "clear" notability. The merger was proposed at the top of the driving while black article and in the Racial profiling article's talk pageTalk:Racial_profiling all by the book according to Wikipedia policy. The discussion was up for 18 days, you had plenty of opportunity to participate, and chose not to. If you had read that discussion, you would have seen that another editor did contribute, and agreed with the merge. And no one else weighed in so WP:Silence applies. You are the one in the wrong here for reverting the merge without having participated in the merger proposal discussion.76.231.150.69 (talk) 06:25, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: MarkyMark162.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Stibbals. Peer reviewers: Nick M-PS489, Newton3254.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer-Review
Peer Review for: Stibbals

Great job adding the "Origins" section to the article, and citing all of the information as well. It was also interesting to see the example of New Jersey that you provided; this really helped to ground my understanding of how and to what degree racial profiling against blacks while driving really occurred. Although the "Generalizations" section was not part of your contribution to the article, it could use some attention. This section should either be eliminated and the information moved to another section, or the section should be expanded enough that "Generalization" is appropriate to be its own section. The section of the article titled "Examples" could also use an update and some re-organization. The most recent example is from 2014, but the sections begins with an example from 2009, and ends with an example from 2002 - consider arranging these examples in chronological order to make the section easier to read, and more helpful to the reader. Overall your contributions sound encyclopedic and add to the value of the article!

--Nick M-PS489 (talk) 19:19, 8 March 2017 (UTC)