Jump to content

Talk:Uhuru Movement

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cassandradefalco. Peer reviewers: Irhollan, Hayleebilbray, Dfpotts, Aabouche.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

sounds like an advert but isnt

[edit]

I see the notice but i think it is okay, it is on a fine line but is okay---Halaqah 12:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added a paragraph about their heckling of Obama at a recent event in Florida. It hit the national media, so there should probably be a note about it here. - anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.174.11.24 (talk) 21:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Condemnation and suspicion

[edit]

Who condemns these groups as "racist"? And who doubts that they intend what they advocate?

  • racist -
  • purport -

Even if they are racist liars, we can't say so directly. We must cite sources who make this assertion. --Uncle Ed 15:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, it's may be that it isn't their intentions that are in doubt, but rather, the very existence of the cause for which they claim to fight: "liberation" of Africans both in Africa and beyond? I thought slavery (at least as an officially recognized social institution) ended centuries ago. And colonization, well over 50 years ago.

Merge

[edit]

Too many individual articles - yes, I know I created some myself. They could all be condensed into two:

I'm not sure there is an actual "movement" here, despite his attempt to start one. --Uncle Ed 18:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge it into his personality, because that is what this really is.--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ (talk) 22:15, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mistake, I assumed this was something else, after seeing the site, i have to say we do not need to merge, it is a pretty substantial piece of work. and notable enough to exist.--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ (talk) 17:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removed reference to Lovelle Mixon events

[edit]

the article cited doesnt mention uhuru house at all, just the linking of lovelle to an unsolved rape. if someone wants to find a news report of their actions in oakland, bring it on, but this wasnt it. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:57, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Referenced material was removed in a previous edit, leading to the speedy deletion nom. I have now replaced that material. It seems this article might be a target for POV editing. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:23, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm removing the Mixon events again as the links are dead and it violates the NPOV policy.Esplace (talk) 00:49, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Links are not dead and there is no violation of NPOV. Quis separabit? 01:08, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The statements Many people and the majority are not statistically verifiable. The article should state simply what happened without the prejudice of someone's opinion about the support. It absolutely violates the NPOV.Esplace (talk) 01:12, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't understand what you are trying to establish. Please wait for other editors to opine and try to establish a consensus, which may include editing or trimming the text as it currently stands. Or you can go to ANI and explain your position there. Do not continue to revert my edits or you will be in violation of 3RR and can be blocked from editing. Forewarned is forearmed. Quis separabit? 01:16, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To be more clear: The section on Mixon is specifically problematic. Out of the 4 external links, 3 are dead. "On the other hand, many black Oaklanders, as well as those belonging to other racial groups, seemed largely opposed to such sentiments" This statement mentions racial characteristics which seem 1. out of line. Why not residents or citizens if the link provides such information. It seems to be trying to pain the UM in a negative light since "many other black people" disagree with them 2. "Many" is nonspecific enough to need little verification while still maintaining a rhetorical weight. In other words, what is "many"? Why not "some" or "few"? There is no data to back up the claim and none would really be needed since the threshold for "many" is nonexistent. The next sentence " a clear majority of those who regularly campaign against abuses of police power also rejected any attempt to attach legitimacy to Mixon's murder rampage" contains the term "a clear majority" which is not clear. It also talks about his murder rampage, a crime for which he was never convicted. Esplace (talk) 11:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Uhuru Movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:29, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Uhuru Movement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:26, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Is no one going to mention the mention and even spotlight the movement got in The Enforcer(1976)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.120.22.106 (talk) 09:55, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Uhuru_Movement&oldid=1195381505"