Talk:Hollister riot

can you source the yellow journalism term in article?

this really shoulce have a foot note at place claim is made.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerdseeksblonde (talk • contribs)

I'm creating a revision and expansion of this page here: Talk:Hollister riot/Workpage. There is a significant degree of secondary sourcing to back up the "yellow news" claim. Although if someone wants to use some euphemism for yellow journalism, that's fine with me -- the events speak for themselves whether you say that phrase or not. I just need to finish reading Brock Yates' book and summarize how the photo was staged, and put in a description of the 50th anniversary and subsequent events.
Want to help? --Dbratland (talk) 20:03, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Brando Mural Chicago.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Brando Mural Chicago.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Brando Mural Chicago.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:19, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Workpage with source material etc

I've had some notes, article text, lists of quotes and lists of sources at User talk:Dennis Bratland/Hollister riot for a while. Feel free to help yourself. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:11, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Ungrammatical

In the paragraph entiled "Media Coverage", a sentence is ungrammatical. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.66.76 (talk) 13:02, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

so ... be bold, and fix it! Garth of the Forest (talk) 23:19, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Ridiculous

This article is so biased in favor of motorcycle "clubs" it reeks of POV. I thought Wikipedia was supposed to be neutral? If neutral it needs to present simply the FACTS of what happened and not the opinion of whoever wrote this trash. I came here to read about an historical event and not a piece of fiction. I don't believe a word this article says since it is so obviously written by someone who's got an axe to grind. Delete it and start over.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.51.145.197 (talk • contribs) 07:25, 18 November 2014‎

Which sources do you want to use that tell a different version than those ones cited here? I don't know of any which seriously believe the original newspaper and magazine accounts were in any way accurate. But if you or anyone else can point out historians who say different, then please give us the titles, dates, and authors so we can cite them. I'd like to add contrary opinions here but from what I can tell there is a very strong consensus. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:27, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

An example might be that in the lead it says: "The strongest dramatization of the event was a staged photo of a drunken man sitting on a motorcycle surrounded by beer bottles." But in the text, that is disputed. The wiki piece seems to take sides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:A000:B486:D100:21C:B3FF:FE78:C4BC (talk) 23:32, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure who you're saying disputes that the photo was staged. Where does it say that? Who disputes it? There are some weak sources in the body of the article that can be replaced with better ones, but the consensus of the quality sources is that it wasn't a real riot. It was a bunch of drunks with poor crowd control. Do you know of any reliable sources who say that the Hollister Riot wasn't overhyped by irresponsible media? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:45, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

The myth that created the reality?

Some years ago I read that the notoriety of the Hollister incident started a dynamic between saddle tramps and locals that led to the rise of the barfighting biker culture. As the story went, after Hollister it became the macho-righteous thing to do to pick a fight with the heathen bikers when they rolled into town. Bikers started riding in groups for mutual protection and started arriving with a we're here, what are you gonna do about it attitude. The willingness to seriously kick ass became a criterion for who would be considered a good riding partner. If someone can nail down a source better than my recollection it could flesh out the significance of the Hollister incident.75.111.54.141 (talk) 19:19, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Except they had been riding in groups for decades before Hollister. That's what a Gypsy Tour is. I'm not sure I'd trust a source that didn't know that. Also, heavy drinking followed by disorderly conduct was not invented at Hollister. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:37, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

"..staged photo"

The above phrase, as things stand, is POV. The section 'Media coverage' has one opinion that it was "staged" and one opinion that it wasn't, with no conclusion drawn. Given that, there is no justification for the lead section to say it was "staged". Therefor I'm reverting. Harfarhs (talk) 11:27, 8 May 2016 (UTC)