Talk:Rest in power

Untitled
Thanks for the feedback on this article. I started it because I was reading the Rest in peace article and thought perhaps I could add a section on "Rest in power" (which I've seen being used in social media) as it related to "rest in peace", but the more I read about "rest in power", the more specific and political its usage seemed, rather than a religious expression like "rest in peace". Because "rest in peace" is categorised as part of a series on religion, I decided to start a new article.

I was encouraged by the fact that Wiki already had a disambiguation page on "rest in power", but it only included the book and TV series relating to Trayvon Martin (and neither of those Wiki articles explained why the book and series had that title), and the Wiktionary entry for the phrase suggested that it was a phrase used "chiefly in left-wing politics", but that entry, too, was very brief.

I'm really hoping that more collaboration will improve this article and it will find its place in Wikipedia. Pureriviera (talk) 00:59, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Original research?
I'm re-editing to show where in the sources the cited claims appear – this could mean changing the positioning of the reference number in the text, or adding quotes from the sources to the references so the reader doesn't have to scan through the entire source. I'm also working to find better-quality sources that more clearly show the information. Pureriviera (talk) 00:59, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Neutrality?
Feedback from reviewer: "Needs to be written from the POV of an uninvolved encyclopedia."

I've found at least one source that challenges the usage of the phrase and will look for more perspectives on it.

I've also pulled back the tone, but I'd welcome further feedback on how the tone of this article diverges from the Dictionary.com article on this phrase. Pureriviera (talk) 00:59, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Earlier reference
I have found a newspaper reference to LA street gang usage of the term dating back to 1989. I'm not really up and up on the wikipedian style so I figure I'll drop it here and someone else can update the article proper. https://www.newspapers.com/article/la-weekly-rest-in-power-rip-1989/142183404/ GayFesh (talk) 00:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * That article, written by Hispanic writer Rubén Martínez, is about warring Hispanic gangs in Los Angeles. The main character in the article is gangbanger “Prime”, whose real name is José, since the article reveals that “Prime” dedicates a grafitto to his girlfriend, with the dedication «“Jose and Nerly, por vida”» which translates from Spanish as «José and Nerly, for life».  “Prime” is shot on a vacant lot in a neighborhood «dominated by one of the city's oldest Latino gangs» On a wall near the lot, «Someone points to the “RIP” section: more than a dozen names. “rest in power,” mumbles one of the boys».  If the article is included, the context of the use of the expression «rest in power» by 1980’s Hispanic gangbangers from Los Angeles should be noted. XavierItzm (talk) 03:07, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Neither the victim's nor the speaker's ethnicity or race are mentioned by Martínez in regards to this comment.
 * The comment could have been made by a Latinx person about a Latinx person, but it could also have been said by a Latinx person about a Filipino or Black person (and vice versa). We can't know from context alone.
 * Without any clarification, we can't assume the use was "by" or "to" any particular group, as that would be speculation/inference and thus original research.
 * The best we can say is that the phrase was in use by gangs in LA in 1989. That's probably as far as we can go (e.g., we don't really know the speaker was a gang member and not just a bystander). Lewisguile (talk) 12:38, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You’ve decontextualized the source. José (alias Prime, alias Little Joe, as described in the article) belongs to « » in « »  And what does this Hispanic gang have?  It was a gang roster on a wall:  The claim that plain reading the article is WP:OR is abusive. XavierItzm (talk) 14:23, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * My earlier comment wasn't opposition to context, but to attribution that isn't clear. I believe the text as it's now worded in the History section is fair and correct. I have corrected "Hispanic" to "Latino", since the relevant quoted text uses the latter. I don't think anyone would find what's there now objectionable. Lewisguile (talk) 15:54, 28 February 2024 (UTC)