Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghetto riots


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. While it seemed hard to decide at first, the relist revealed a majority 'keep'. (non-admin closure) Captain Galaxy (talk) 09:34, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Ghetto riots

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Several reasons for deletion, which broadly fall under verifiability (WP:V) and and neutral point of view (WP:NPOV):
 * The term 'Ghetto Riots' is not in common use by any reliable contemporary historians, as far as I can tell. All the sources I've found which reference this term are from the period in which it was occurring and just after (the 1968-1971 range). I have not been able to find any contemporary sources that reference 'ghetto riots' or any comparable name for this series of events. In fact, I haven't found any indication that this particular series of riots should be regarded separately from the Civil Rights Movement in general.
 * This article covers a topic that is covered much more effectively by other pages, such as 'Mass racial violence in the United States' and 'Civil rights movement.' Both of those pages cover this period in greater detail, more effectively describe and link to the events discussed in this article, and do a better job of contextualizing riots within other historical events occurring at the time. This page isn't adding anything to our understanding of this topic.
 * There are a variety of issues with neutral point of view. The best examples of this are in the Introduction and Background sections, which make a variety of unsubstantiated assertions. The name of the article itself is also debatable, given the controversial connotations of the word 'ghetto,' and the fact that the term 'ghetto riots' is not used by any contemporary historians. Of course, these impartiality issues by themselves aren't cause to delete the page, but in conjunction with the other issues listed, I think it makes more sense to just delete it than to try and repair it.

In short, this article uses a term that is no longer in use for a series of events which are well-explained elsewhere, and has overarching POV issues. It should be deleted.

This is my first time nominating an article for deletion, so apologies in advance if I'm not following the right process here. Thanks! Coffeespoons (talk) 21:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Discrimination-related deletion discussions. Coffeespoons (talk) 21:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Coffeespoons (talk) 21:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coffeespoons (talk) 21:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Coffeespoons (talk) 21:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose No problem Coffeespoons, I don't really know the proper deletion process either. I'll add my two cents. There are modern scholars and commentators that refer to this period as the "ghetto violence of the 1960s" or more often the "ghetto rebellions". You are right that the specific term "ghetto riots" I've found to be mostly used by scholars in the 1960s and 70s. I'll drop some links for the modern usage of "ghetto rebellions". I do recognize that this phenomenon is separate (although related) to the civil rights movement. While the civil rights movement was a long mostly non violent organized protest movement for desegregation, these riots were spontaneous and unorganized clashes in American cities. I think issues of the article's naming and neutrality are real and can be fixed. I think we should also expand and add info that describes more about this unique phenomenon in American history. This page has some problems, but I'd rather see it fixed than deleted.Mangokeylime (talk) 00:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=hxH5WoQVMJQC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=ghetto+rebellions&ots=kOO8txjAQR&sig=ciVeSV_e2aqfEaD_SWJYD3-5sc8#v=onepage&q=ghetto%20rebellions&f=false
 * https://socialistworker.org/2011/08/12/urban-revolts-and-social-change
 * https://search.proquest.com/openview/771c7129afb137779b2a056ecf4b9fb2/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=42222

Yoshmaster (talk) 16:47, 4 June 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete, per nom, this is a content fork of other, better articles that do not have the same WP:FRINGE and WP:NPOV problems. Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, The use of the term "ghetto" is thoroughly covered in both the sources cited in the article and those cited by Mangokeylime. The specific term "ghetto riots" may not be specifically used in the literature, as a scholarly consensus is absent and is not meant to be a set name like a battle in a war, but it is a descriptor of a string of related events that, per Mangokeylime's source, "turned them from episodic outbreaks of discontent into a force that transformed U.S. politics." You're right that it is not separate from the rest of the Civil Rights Movement, but it is distinct, characterized by the same tactics, time period, similar locations, and caused by the same material conditions, and so I don't think it can be accurately described as just "mass violence." Would we delete all of the articles about medieval Peasant Rebellions to a more general article about "mass violence"? I would think not. You talk about claims being unsubstantiated, so name them. Additionally, it is a useful content fork that helps organize a series of multiple related events through its table and helps readers understand why they're related by being a standalone article. Ultimately, I don't believe a deletion is warranted. Ashleyisvegan (talk) 20:07, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: The riots were a real, historical event. Removing the page for them would seem to imply that they either weren't historically relevant, or that they didn't happen at all. If you have real concerns about the tone/neutrality of this page, then the page should be revised to reflect those concerns. Surely, deleting the page would have the opposite effect? It certainly isn't neutral to erase history.
 * Keep and rename and probably refactor, maybe 1960s urban unrest in the United States. A number of sources speak of a distinct period from 1964-68. This appears to be a notable topic, and could benefit from more modern scholarship. There is a recent book-length treatment from Cambridge University Press in 2018 that appears to reference a number of other quality sources.--Pharos (talk) 02:18, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think it is reasonable to suppose that the timing of the deletion motion may be related to the Killing of George Floyd and subsequent (now)-current events.  The article has multiple sources, refers to notable real events of civil unrest, and is reasonably sectioned.  In my view, wholesale deletion is not the answer here-in one sense, the fact of our considering the article right now is some indication of its relevance.  Echoing Pharos above, I think what's warranted is a PAGE MOVE, a straightforward process to re-title the thing into its specific American, 20th century context.  "Ghetto riots" is unspecific. (Which "ghettoes"?  Which country?  Which historical period?) MinnesotanUser (talk) 08:32, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I believe the current title was chosen to differentiate the riots from the Opposition to United States involvement in the Vietnam War and the various other things mentioned at Counterculture of the 1960s. One possibility is to name the article after the category, Category:African-American riots in the United States. Is the deletion request really about the title though? Nemo 22:23, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Category:African-American riots in the United States, which shows just how frequently these occurred. Most of these articles refer th=o them as race riots and not Ghetto riots. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:34, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Rename -- This is currently a poor article on an important subject. I would have expected us to have an article on it already.  If not, this might make the beginnings of one. We cannot redirect an article to a category; and its main article is List of incidents of civil unrest in the United States, which is a general list covering many kinds of event.  Perhaps Race riots in the United States in the 1960s.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. largely for the reasons mentioned by MinnesotanUser. (Though the article needs work.)-- Surv1v4l1st ▌Talk 02:29, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 06:29, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep The time period that this article covers (1964-1968) accurately describes a period where there were an unusually large number of race riots. If keeping the article's name is impossible, it should at least be renamed. Scorpions13256 (talk) 17:31, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, none of the nom's rationales for deletion hold water. Taking them in order;
 * Our criterion for naming articles is not "in common use by any reliable contemporary historians", rather, it is WP:COMMONNAME. This was certainly the common name in the 60s and 70s.  Here is a book with the phrase in the title, and another with that as a chapter heading.  More are not hard to find.  The claim that historians no longer use the phrase is dubious at best.  This 1999 paper includes the snippet "Smith and Hawkins (1973), for example, reviewed some early studies of citizen attitudes toward police. Many of these were conducted following ghetto riots in the 1960s." This 1993 paper has the phrase in its title, and even more recently, this 2016 book uses the phrase in several places.
 * The claim that Mass racial violence in the United States covers this better and in context is ridiculous. The nominated article is about a specific episode in US history in the 1960s. The Mass racial... article covers everything from pre-Civil War slave revolts, through Native American massacres, to anti-Catholic violence.  I find it difficult to accept the article binds all these into a single contextual whole.  The 1960s riots are given only one paragraph, hardly better coverage than a full article can do.
 * Lack of NPOV is cited, but the only explicit complaint seems to be the term ghetto riots. There is a vague handwave to the background section, but that is fully cited.  I haven't checked those particular sources, but I saw very similar passages in the sources I did look at while doing my own searches.  Articles are not usually deleted for POV problems unless they are so severe that there is nothing salvagable in the page.  In any case, so far I see no case to answer on POV, and as the nom has admitted, such problems can be fixed by ordinary editing, as can the title of the page if editors think it is so offensive. SpinningSpark 18:40, 12 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. A quick look through newspapers.com tells me the term "ghetto riots" was indeed in wide circulation and was often followed by "...of the 1960s", so the article reaches the standard of, yes, this was an actual & notable thing.  A quick look through wikipedia tells me the overall topic seems not to be covered elsewhere.  These kinds of groupings of historical events can lead to bad habits like synthesis and OR and lazy generalizations if we're not careful, and the article needs some help, but it's worth keeping.  --Lockley (talk) 02:17, 18 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.