Talk:Lynching of Claude Neal

Untitled
It bad enough that this happens but racism is still as bad today as it was back then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.203.44.181 (talk) 19:59, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Editing issues
This needed a Lead, so I established one. The article also needs more sub-headers to organize the material. Even if it is about a single event, it needs some context. I'm sure the book has more about the population of Escambia Co, FL; the economy (in the midst of the Great Depression), and other factors bearing on the violent response of the mob.Parkwells (talk) 13:15, 3 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Diesenbe, I disagree with some of what you include in the Lead. It is supposed to summarize main events, not tell all details, such as that Cannaday had been missing since the night before. I think it needs more work.Parkwells (talk) 14:25, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Graphic violence
This is an important article, as it illustrates just how serious a problem racism has been (and arguably still is) in the USA and in many parts of the world. However I am a little conflicted about the issue of graphic violence. I've been reading Sarah Churchwell's 2018 book Behold America, and at pages 188 and 189 she discusses the lynching of Neal, which incidentally she describes as the last publicized lynching in the USA. The details are confronting and even shocking, even more confronting and shocking than the details already included in the current Wikipedia article. I won't repeat the details that Churchwell provides here, but sufficient to say they are the stuff of nightmares. This raises for me the question of how far do we or should we go as editors in describing violence. Let me draw an analogy. Sometimes the crime of rape also involves shocking mutilation of the victim, as well as the general humiliation and personal violation inherent in the crime. If as editors we are writing about particular historic rape, should we be including such details? I don't know. I am aware of the argument that the truth needs to be told, but equally there is an argument that at some level we need to be respectful of the victim. Plus the level of detail we provide may be psychologically damaging for some, especially those readers who themselves have been victims of violence, be this sexual or racial. I would be interested in any general discussion on this. Sue2016 (talk) 15:45, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Proposed split
@Roastedbeanz1 tagged this article for a split but didn't describe a rationale. Personally I disagree with any prospective merge because these two incidents are very intertwined in their coverage and seem best covered together. In addition neither part is particularly long so splitting it would make both parts worse, IMO PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)


 * There's been no discussion so I'm removing the tag. If anyone wants to discuss this further ping me pls PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:11, 2 January 2024 (UTC)