Talk:2011 England riots/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

Requested edit RE: Opening line.

I request that "The 2011 London riots are a series of ongoing public disturbances and lootings in London which began initially in Tottenham, North London, on 6 August 2011 following the fatal shooting of a 29-year-old civilian, Mark Duggan, by officers of the Metropolitan Police Service." be changed to "The 2011 London riots are a series of ongoing public disturbances, lootings and arson attacks in London which began initially in Tottenham, North London, on 6 August 2011 following the fatal shooting of a 29-year-old civilian, Mark Duggan, by officers of the Metropolitan Police Service." - I feel this would better reflect the actual events taking place and it is also well covered by the sources's. Cheers! 90.212.141.106 (talk) 10:42, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

• You're right! I've made the edit. Thanks. Rubywine . talk 10:59, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposed move: 2011 England riots << TOPIC CLOSED

Many media organisations, including the BBC, seem to now be calling this "England riots" as violence has spread. I think it's time to move this article to a more accurate title. --Dorsal Axe 10:48, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I have copied this request and have moved all the replies to the earlier discussion topic which is an active (and formal) discussion of the same issue. There is no point in having two identical discussions in parallel. (Just using the edit request tag to try to lock this down.) Rubywine . talk 11:33, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Addition Request: Effects on Tourism

Effects on Business and Tourism should be added in regards to the business owners losses, and problems faced by the tourists spending their vacation in London — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barieuro (talk • contribs) 10:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Germany issues travel advisory http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/World/Story/STIStory_700314.html --87.202.83.239 (talk) 15:04, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

could damage Britain's image ahead of Olympics http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/8691387/London-riots-could-damage-Britains-image-ahead-of-Olympics.html

& Forbes article London Riots: Who Pays? http://blogs.forbes.com/timworstall/2011/08/09/london-riots-who-pays-or-when-is-a-riot-not-a-riot/

--87.202.83.239 (talk) 15:09, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

London riots disrupt plans http://www.hindustantimes.com/London-riots-disrupt-plans/Article1-731294.aspx -- Barieuro (talk) 08:34, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Tourists with trips planned to London were subjected to pictures of an iconic red double-decker bus on fire as well as misguided claims that the violence had reached the centre of the city and the popular shopping district of Oxford Street. The city's tourism industry could be severely damaged just a year ahead of the Olympic Games http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-2024085/London-riots-Fears-tourism-Olympics-night-violence-looting.html

Keep away from Britain! Governments around world warn citizens to avoid riot-hit UK. Germans warned to exercise 'special caution'. Latvians told to get health and life insurance. Sweden, Denmark and Finland also issue safety advice http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2024159/UK-RIOTS-2011-Keep-away-Britain-Governments-world-warn-citizens.html Barieuro (talk) 08:52, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

VisitBritain pulls marketing campaign in wake of riots - MarketingWeek.co.uk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.194.3.84 (talk) 10:29, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Leeds and Nottingham

Needs to also include Leeds and Nottingham according to this and other sources. 93.174.8.253 (talk) 11:08, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Leeds, Liverpool & Birmingham http://www.channel4.com/news/unrest-spreads-to-leeds-and-birmingham --87.202.71.6 (talk) 12:32, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Not exactly "London riots" locations, though, are they? Maybe the article title needs to be amended? --GuillaumeTell 15:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Poor syntax

Resolved

"Blakelock's suspected killer was the leader of a gang which was replaced by the one Duggan was a member of following his imprisonment for other crimes." This is a ghastly sentence. In the interests of clear communication and good English, can you please re-write it (whoever wrote it)? Melba1 (talk) 12:26, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I didn’t write the sentence, but I changed it to “Blakelock's suspected killer was the leader of a gang which was replaced by the gang Duggan joined after his imprisonment for other crimes.” Is that acceptable? — Timwi (talk) 12:44, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

What does it mean? How can a gang be replaced by a gang? Do you mean in some sort of territorial sense? This sounds like a tabloid-style attempt to make a headline out of thin air. Rubywine . talk 13:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Timwi, I wasn't aware I was overwriting your edit -- sorry about that. Factually, though, very little is known about Duggan, and his gang membership is merely an allegation at this point. My version: "Keith Blakelock was murdered by the forerunner of a criminal gang Mark Duggan allegedly belonged to." Rubywine has a point about tabloid hyperventilation, however, and personally I wouldn't mind dropping the speculation about gangs. ARK (talk) 13:22, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for acknowledging my comment ARK but I have already removed it. It was indeed a little bit of vague speculation, spun into a Daily Mail headline. Vigilance, people. Rubywine . talk 13:28, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Kingsley Burrell

In the "Historical context" section, first sentence, it references that this has been the site of many protests since Kingsley Burrell, with two sources. First of all, I personally have no idea who Kingsley Burrell is. His name is not linked to any article, a search on wikipedia has proven fruitless. Searching the two sources also does not come up with the name Kingsley Burrell anywhere. Who/what is he/it? (I don't even know if it's the name of a person or, say, a building) Is the statement even factual? Can it be backed up anywhere? Could someone please clarify? Fieari (talk) 13:29, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Whos Mr Burrell?86.26.73.230 (talk) 13:36, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

What, you only ever search on Wikipedia? We're not a reliable source you know! Kingsley Burrell died in police custody in Birmingham in March. Google is your friend. Rubywine . talk 14:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

The point I was making was less that I couldn't find the information, and more that it would be an improvement to the article if the information was provided or linked to in any way, shape, or form. Fieari (talk) 17:19, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

At mid day, om the 9th

I think this report is a spoof [[1]].13:36, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Infobox

I move to cut the 'causes' section in the info box. They have no place there. The complex causes, are best discussed at length in the article body. Trying to bullet point an England-wide series of riots is reductionist, misleading does nothing for clarity. Span (talk) 13:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

You move to cut it, and then you just cut it without discussion? I've put it back because the section you've cut out was packed with relevant references, and your edit summary made no reference to having preserved them. I have no objection to pruning the info box, in fact I agree with you that the causes should be discussed in the body of the article. However I do quite strongly object to useful references being deleted summarily. Rubywine . talk 14:12, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

These are the potentially Useful refs: <ref>{{cite web |url= http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/08/08/uk-britain-disorder-idUKTRE7752QX20110808|title= Riots spread on third night of violence|last1=Hemming |first1=Jon |last2=Ambrogi |first2=Stefano |date=August 8, 2011|publisher=Reuters|accessdate=August 8, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Croft|first=Adrian|title=Spending cuts, police blamed for London riot|url=http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Spending+cuts+police+blamed+London+riot/5220997/story.html|newspaper=Vancouver Sun|date=August 8, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44055812/ns/world_news-europe|title=More than 200 thugs arrested in London riots|publisher=MSN}}</ref><ref name="dlammy">{{cite web|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/07/tottenham-riot-broadwater-farm|author=David Lammy|title=Tottenham riot: The lesson of Broadwater Farm|date=August 7, 2011|publisher=The Guardian|accessdate=2011-08-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last=Somaiya|first=Ravi|title=London Sees Twin Perils Converging to Fuel Riot|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/world/europe/08britain.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all|newspaper=New York Times|date=August 7, 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Rioting spirals out of control |date=8 August 2011 |work=London Evening Standard |url=http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23976590-rioting-spirals-out-of-control.do}}</ref> <ref>{{cite web |title=London riots: Military could be brought in |url=http://tvnz.co.nz/world-news/london-riots-military-could-brought-in-4343698 |date=9 August 2011 |work=TVNZ |accessdate=9 August 2011}}</ref><font style="font-family:Monotype Corsiva; font-size:15px;">Span (talk) 14:17, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I've moved the causes out of the infobox into a section in the main article. It should be a lot easier to work on expanding them from there later. I'm really starting to dislike the infobox. It's now full of all sorts of other stuff, for no good reason, and the layout is breaking. Rubywine . talk 15:08, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Infobox: Original research (was: Croydon Casualty)

"One 26 year old man dead from a shooting in Croydon" is currently listed in the infobox as if he were a belligerent for the rioters. As his reasons for being at the scene are currently unknown it would seem prudent to list as a "civilian" rather than a belligerent on one side of the conflict. LukeSurl ^{t c} 15:09, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Excellent point. Actually I'd like to move almost everything out of the infobox. It's very reductionist and as you've pointed out, misleading. Rubywine . talk 15:16, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the way it is currently set out suggests that not only was he one of the rioters, but he was killed by the police. He could have been a bystander killed by rioters, or his death could be completely unrelated to the riots. Best to take it out completely. (Also, is it right to list local businesses and residents as parties to the conflict? That implies they are actively taking part, rather than just having their property destroyed. We don't have "The residents of the East End of London" as cobelligerants in The Blitz. Conversely, we don't know that some local residants aren't taking part in the riots themselves).62.172.108.23 (talk) 15:28, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

It seems to be an over-eager attempt to systematize (sp?) something inherently messy and complicated. That whole section of the infobox could just be deleted, and I'd be happy. Why should we try to itemise the parties to the conflict, especially at this early stage? I think it's veering way too close to original research. Apologies LukeSurl, but I'm renaming this topic because I think it deserves broader discussion. Rubywine . talk 15:35, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Also was he a 26 year old or a 29 year old the article says 29 the infobox says 26?

Oh and by the way why are some people immediately convinced by what the police has to say about an incident like this? Have you forgotten Jean Charles de Menezes --87.202.83.239 (talk) 15:18, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I've worked out how to make the edit I discussed above. LukeSurl ^{t c} 15:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Historical context: challenge to neutrality

"Placing the riots in a broader context, suspicion and resentment towards the police was attributed by one commentator to the 333 people who have died in police custody in England and Wales since 1998 without a single officer having been convicted of a crime. Other exacerbating factors include high poverty and unemployment, the growing gap between rich and poor, and the lowest social mobility in the developed world."

A good chunk of the above was removed by User:Rms125a@hotmail.com on the grounds that it is not neutral, with an HTML comment inserted querying why anybody should be convicted if no crime has been committed, and also some other comment about race. I reverted that edit, because it is POV. I believe the analysis above is stated in a neutral and objective tone. I'm putting this here for discussion. Rubywine . talk 15:24, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

9 August disturbances

Use this section to discuss disturbances on 9 August

The current list of events for 9 August is quite extensive and implies that they have been happening today. Well, they have but 2am. This isn't very clear and we need to try to avoid the implication that it is separate to last night's events. violet/riga _^[talk] 16:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Events that happened overnight should really go under the previous day's heading, with the timings in prose. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 16:52, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

It might in fact be a good idea to re-factor the whole article and use 'nights' rather than 'days' as main classifications, thus: First Night (6/7 August 2011), etc. ARK (talk) 17:03, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

West Bromwich

Being reported by BBC News but no sources yet. violet/riga _^[talk] 15:39, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

That "Breaking News" notice has now gone with no further mention. violet/riga _^[talk] 16:07, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Some windows smashed, crowds now dispersed. Not worthy of inclusion. violet/riga _^[talk] 16:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 84.51.161.16, 9 August 2011

84.51.161.16 (talk) 16:58, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi - the number of deaths in police custody in the UK since 1998 and excluding 1998 is 433 (not 333 as appears in the current article about the 2011 riots. Wikipedia is itself the source for those figures, at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_deaths_in_custody

Thanks

Not done: Wikipedia should not be used to cite itself as it would be considered a circular reference. Topher385 (talk) 19:23, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Playful way

...make polite requests for justice for the family of the man who had been shot while in possession of an imitation firearm which had been converted, in an innocently playful way, to fire live ammunition...)

Playful way?, Should this be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.234.74.91 (talk) 17:36, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Removed. Cannot see how it could be playful in any way, and none of the three sources refers to that. -- Fuzheado | Talk 17:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC)