Talk:Juan Crow/Archive 1

Common
This a very common term used by critics of the bill. See (1.8 million google hits) or  (53 news hits in past month). See also, REDIRECT. This does not qualify for speedy deletion. Take it to WP:RFD if you must. Savidan 01:15, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It's been expanded into an article now. Toddst1 (talk) 18:51, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

RfC
An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 16:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Neologism
It should be noted that "Juan Crow" is a neologism coined sometime in the 2000s to describe immigration enforcement laws. There have never been any laws in U.S history that specifically target "Latinos"/"Hispanics" or people Spanish origin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrventura (talk • contribs) 14:27, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Your second statement sounds WP:Exceptional.  Toddst1 (talk) 18:10, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of Mendez V. Westminster reference (unrelated)
"Juan Crow" is new term coined in the media in the 2000s to criticize immigration enforcement by comparing them to Jim Crow Laws. There have never been any actual "Juan Crow" laws ever in U.S history. "Juan Crow" isn't a real phenomenon. The earliest reference to the term found was in 2008.

The term is unrelated to the Mendez V. Westminster case, which was a case that challenged Mexican special needs education in Orange County California in the 1940s.

Including the reference to Mendez v Westminster, makes it seem like "Juan Crow Laws" actually existed and were used to force Mexicans into remedial schools in the 1940s. That is untrue. Mendez V. Westminster is unrelated to the "Juan Crow" neologism.

I propose deleting any mention of Mendez V. Westminster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ 64.9.249.65 (talk • contribs) 20:06, 25 June 2018 (UTC) (believed to be Wvrentura logged out)
 * Oppose: Just because the term hadn't been in use, doesn't mean what it refers to didn't happen. Given your statement above as well as this WP:FRINGE claim, it your POV is more than clear. Toddst1 (talk) 16:48, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * And I've restored it. Toddst1 (talk) 03:37, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Wholesale removal of cited material by Wventura
Wventura has continued the highly POV editing on this page, removing wholesale cited material - which I have reverted. I'm starting this discussion to see if there is any support for his removal of this material and to understand the rationale behind them if it isn't WP:ADVOCACY. Toddst1 (talk) 22:34, 6 October 2020 (UTC)


 * None of the material was cited. All untrue claims. "Juan Crow" is just a term invented in 2008 by Robert Lavato to criticize immigration enforcement. There were never any actual "Juan Crow" laws in American history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrventura (talk • contribs) 23:00, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That is not correct. You twice removed several citations, breaking the remaining reference that was looking for the definition of the named citation. Dispute the citations if you feel appropriate, but you can't just unilaterally remove them long with the statements they support when you have no consensus for the removal.  Toddst1 (talk) 23:45, 6 October 2020 (UTC)


 * What sources? The only source given for all the wild claims was a link an immigration advocacy website - not an academic source. This is now a completely fictional article forwarding a myth, rewriting American history, and ruing the integrity of Wikipedia. If Toddst believes that there was such a thing as "Juan Crow Laws" in the 19th and 20th century like this article claims, he should be able to post the actual statutes to those laws. He can't because they don't exist. "Juan Crow" is fiction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrventura (talk • contribs) 23:56, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
 * We have a better idea - and it's the way it works around here. You want to delete the sources so you itemize them and tell us why you think they should be deleted - rather than just sharing your opinion on the topic - which we don't care about.
 * And by the way, I've restored the case law, Mendez v. Westminster that you conveniently whitewashed out of the article, ignoring the lack of consensus above. Toddst1 (talk) 00:36, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Assertion of term's first use by Lovato
There are 3 sources in the article that supposedly support the claim that Lovato coined the term and was the first to use the term "juan crow." None of these sources that are live (one is dead and I can't check) support this genesis. I have tagged the sources as and  with explanatory reasoning. I believe the material is not WP:V and should be removed unless supported with sources that back up the claim. Toddst1 (talk) 03:02, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
 * BTW, a quick search shows it in use in 2006 before Lovato: https://www.google.com/books/edition/Law_and_Class_in_America/dMMqAmkAyyYC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Juan+Crow%22&pg=PA331&printsec=frontcover. Toddst1 (talk) 04:14, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

"In 2008 Robert Lovato coined the term 'Juan Crow'" Mendoza, José Jorge (2015). Doing Away with Juan Crow: Two Standards for Just Immigration Reform. APA Newsletter on Hispanic/Latino Issues in Philosophy 15 (2):14-20.

"See Lovato 2008 for a discussion of the term Juan Crow, which he coined and has since become popular among activists"

"Lovato reminded us that Juan Crow, a term he coined, is alive and well in this “Post-Racial”"

"Roberto's Juan Crow article, which analyzed the system used to isolate and control immigrants, has conceptualized and popularized the term "Juan Crow,'

Multiple academic sources credit Rob Lovato for coining "Juan Crow". Even his own wikipedia page.Wrventura (talk) 02:43, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrventura (talk • contribs) 17:55, 7 October 2020 (UTC)