Talk:Martha's Vineyard migrant airlift

Expand and rename?
I had created Draft:2022 United States immigrant relocations (and then forgot about it lol) in order to make a similar article to this. I think expanding the scope to include the other governors actions as well as Desantis' newer stuff would be a good idea. -- Pokelova (talk) 20:27, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * - You would need to propose a merger, per WP:MERGE, and I would oppose it, per WP:NOMERGE. This is a very unique topic which had widespread coverage. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:33, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Most of the coverage mentions it in the context of these wider programs. --Pokelova (talk) 00:05, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Agreed for merge. This is part of the same phenomenon. Oxenfording (talk) 18:40, 25 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I think that Martha's Vineyard would best be its own separate article because of the class action lawsuit against DeSantis, so unless (or until) other class actions are filed relating to different governors/destinations, oppose merger for now. InvadingInvader (talk) 07:18, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Pokelova: Add to your draft, Colorado now . In my opinion, you should work on that draft, it has the potential to be a standalone cover-all article, instead of merging it. &#8212;CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 11:58, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Background
User:Magnolia677, after I added federal flights in 2021 to the timeline, you suddenly decided what you think is fundamental. Four paragraphs devoted to Mr. DeSantis' thoughts is WP:UNDUE. Please discuss why that happened. Also, these lawyers stated facts. I have replaced them with the Associated Press. -SusanLesch (talk) 01:54, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The first sentence of this article makes clear Ron DeSantis' actions are the subject of this article. It would therefore seem appropriate and encyclopedic to include DeSantis' publicly-stated explanation for his actions.  I felt direct quotes were the most effective way to accomplish this, but you deleted every one of them.  Is there a reason you do not want DeSantis' explanation included?  Is there some other way to included his explanation that would be of more benefit to readers? Magnolia677 (talk) 09:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It's false to say DeSantis is the subject. The name of this article is "Martha's Vineyard migrant crisis." The only persons mentioned in the title are migrants.
 * Second, you inserted "DeSantis framed the flights to Martha's Vineyard...". Framing is a tactic used in Spin (propaganda).
 * A couple more things. I think we should remove the paragraph "Since April 2022, as a protest..." because it's about Abbott and Ducey in other states. I have no objection to including the view of Mr. DeSantis, but please limit it to statements of fact that don't exceed the boundaries of WP:UNDUE (for example, "depth of detail, the quantity of text, prominence of placement, the juxtaposition of statements"). What I removed was more suitable for Political positions of Ron DeSantis. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You have now removed all explanations from the article as to why DeSantis and others moved the migrants. Whitewashing the article, and removing all criticism of Biden, does not improve the article. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:49, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Good job. Covers everything we've discussed? -SusanLesch (talk) 20:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Article title
The article title is misleading and inaccurate. Spending a few hours on Martha's Vineyard before being rejected and spirited away to a military base is not a "crisis". I would suggest renaming the article "Martha's Vineyard migrant airlift". The input of others would be appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:51, 10 October 2022 (UTC)


 * There is merit to this, being stuck on one of the most affluent islands in the US for a day is hardly a crisis... Tlages (talk) 15:12, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Magnolia677 Agreed. Voluntarily accepting a free plane ticket closer to your planned destination is not a crisis, nor is the term, common, accurate or neutral Amthisguy (talk) 21:28, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 1 May 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Elli (talk &#124; contribs) 07:24, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Martha's Vineyard migrant crisis → Martha's Vineyard migrant airlift – As already discussed, crisis is not accurate. Airlift seems like a better description. Fettlemap (talk) 05:56, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Support per nom. 〜 Festucalex  •  talk  06:26, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Support - more accurate than "crisis" by far Rexxx7777 (talk) 19:20, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support - more accurate. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Adding "Reverse Freedom Rides" to the "See Also" section
It seems extremely inappropriate to include "Reverse Freedom Rides" in the article. I fail to see any connection between a governor paying to have migrants sent to a different part of the country in an effort to bring attention to an immigration crises and how southern/border states are disproportionately affected, and a segregationist campaign to have racist policies reinstated throughout the United States in the 1960s.

Furthermore, all of three of the sources provided for this edit (Guardian, Democracy Now, The Hill) are rated as left leaning by allsides.com. This seems like blatant political interpolation in an effort to negatively associate the migrant flight with racism and segregationism, and seriously brings into question the good faith of the original editor.

Any link to "Reverse Freedom Rides" should be excluded until some comprehensive discussion on the matter takes place, adequate reasoning is provided (beyond simple links to speculation by tabloid-esque American news outlets, made by DeSantis' political opponents no less), and consensus is formed. 136.49.235.80 (talk) 18:22, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Merged from an older thread: How do other folks feel about including Reverse Freedom Rides as a §See also link? Since the point of the section is to include tangentially related topics, and since reliable sources make the connection between these events, I see the link as helpful to the reader. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:02, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Blindly following allsides is unwise (see its WP:RSP listing for some reasons), and the provision of any sources at all goes beyond what a see also link requires. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 18:28, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not blindly following, allsides is simply the first media bias surveying website that pops up when googled. Anyone who's experienced the current domestic American political sphere, or is familiar with their news media, is aware of the Guardians', Democracy Now's, etc. biases and tendency to portray anything associated with the American Republican party as "racist" or some other similar such connotation.
 * I suspect if you punch said websites into most online media bias surveyors, or search through other such projects that survey media bias, you will find similar if not identical results. To me, this situation is like adding "Communism" to the Affordable Care Act Wikipedia article's "See Also" section, just because Fox News and The Daily Wire made such a comparison. It reeks of political interpolation, and attempts at negative association.
 * People are free to make the association between the migrant airlift and reverse freedom rides if they want, but I don't think it's the job of an ostensibly unbiased encyclopedia, which has WP:NPOV as a stated guideline, to make that association for people. Least of all because some news outlets with obvious biases said so. 136.49.235.80 (talk) 18:46, 25 May 2023 (UTC)


 * The more I look into this, the more I think the connection to the Reverse Freedom Rides should be mentioned in the body of the article and not just in a §See also link. I'd propose starting a §Reactions subsection in §Aftermath, eventually to include reactions from involved local politicians, related organizations, national leaders, and the media. I'd start it off with something like Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:40, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm sure you could find multiple newspapers making such comparisons. But are you also keeping tally of how many newspapers covered the airlift and didn't make any such comparison? What would the ratio between the two be if you did? It seems like textbook confirmation bias if you're searching the web for news articles that support explicitly a comparison you would like to make.
 * It's also worth nothing that all three of the newspapers you just cited are also all rated as "left-leaning" by media bias surveyors. Seems like a blatant quid pro quo to cite exclusively left-leaning newspapers to support an action on a Wikipedia article about an event done by a conservative politician. 136.49.235.80 (talk) 02:33, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
 * "Quid pro quo" is either a mistaken use of the phrase or an unwarranted aspersion. Please strike or amend it. I acknowledge that most sources about the airlift do not make the historical connection, which is why my draft language is so short. One sentence is warranted based on the strength of the sourcing. This many major news outlets (at least three newspapers of record from two countries) can't be so easily dismissed. We could also add a citation to something like Newsweek, rated as "Center" by allsides. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 05:39, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Newsweek is not very reliable, but I definitely agree that it is worth a sentence or two that those three reliable sources you mentioned have made the connection. Their alleged political leanings are not particularly relevant, unless there are right-leaning reliable sources specifically disavowing such a comparison. --Pokelova (talk) 06:40, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tie-break! Happy to leave this for a few days to see if anyone else chimes in. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:14, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Friendly reminder that consensus-forming, and decision making on Wikipedia in general, is WP:NOTAVOTE.
 * It also very blatantly biased as well as academically dishonest to cite exclusively left-leaning political newspapers, to support some otherwise baseless claim comparing the acts someone very politically relevant in the present day, to a racist, segregationist-era political campaign.
 * I would have far less of an issue including this if there was any amount of historical research actually being done to back these claims, or they were citing a historian in support of these claims. Instead it is just unsupported speculation by political pundits from the opposite side of the aisle vis-a-vis DeSantis, seemingly charging him with racism in an oblique manner. Overall seems like very weak citations for a rather serious claim. Should Barack Obama and the Affordable Healthcare Act be associated with communism/socialism in their respective articles, simply because some right-of-center political newspapers claimed they were? 136.49.235.80 (talk) 20:36, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
 * None of the 2 sources given for that claim give any evidence of a city near Marthas Vinyard being used. Are you using New York City to fulfill the Near Marthas vineyard langauage of the claim? That's the closest city mentioned by both articles. Given that it is 250 miles away I feel like calling it a city near Martha's Vineyard is a bit of a stretch. AlwaysLegitEdits (talk) 23:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)