Talk:Groveland Case

Concerns about NPOV
This article seems to be largely written from the perspective that the men were guilty and gives heavily weighted credence to the claims of police (for instance in the lead stating that the men attacked the sheriff rather than the sheriff claiming he was attacked) and contains several unsourced biased statements such as "The physician who examined Norma Padgett was not called to the witness stand by the prosecution, and the defense never called him either fearing more damning evidence could be revealed upon cross examination." (Emphasis added.) I'm going to go back thru some of this and seek some additional sources, right now this seems skewed. JamesG5 (talk) 17:08, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * A lot of that biased content was added recently without any sources to back up the changes. The article's already lacking in citations, so additional sources would definitely help here. You might have some luck pulling some references from Groveland Four. Both articles rely heavily on Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America by Gilbert King. clpo13(talk) 17:22, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Too many articles
There is confusion by having articles entitled Groveland Four, Groveland Boys, and Groveland Case, and it is difficult to ensure that such related articles all have the most accurate information. I see no record or explanation about why there are so many articles. Oh, I see Groveland Four and Groveland Boys were merged. Still unclear as to why Groveland Case is separate, as it has same basic information. This makes no sense.Parkwells (talk) 21:02, 12 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge. -Inowen (nlfte) 06:27, 15 January 2019 (UTC)