Talk:Los Angeles May Day mêlée
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
i think this should go in current events on the cover page, but not sure whether it's up to snuff, or how to link it there. little help? Chantoke 10:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Mêlée was improperly capitalised, so I changed it (WP:CAPS), but mêlée itself is an improper term to use in the English encyclopedia - if only because its using French alphabetical conventions. Altercation or incident would be better. -Stevertigo 03:39, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- Melee is the correct title, because that's how it is referred to in Los Angeles. At the time of this post, a google search yields 1.17 million hits. --Dems on the move 00:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, 54,100 hits. I'm not convinced. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 22:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
- Melee is the correct title, because that's how it is referred to in Los Angeles. At the time of this post, a google search yields 1.17 million hits. --Dems on the move 00:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
54,000 is not sufficient enough? Perhaps it's because I raised too much expectations with 1.2 million. --Dems on the move 14:50, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] title
Maybe there should not be any accents in the word mêlée for this article since the common spelling is usually just melee. I had trouble finding this page, and I trust others will to. For easier exposure of this article, I suggetst the title just be The Los Angeles May Day melee, a common search phrase I believe people will use. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.138.115.183 (talk • contribs).
- Obviously you found the page. If all the accents are the correct usage (as is evident by the article mêlée, then that's how this article should be titled. We can create as many redirect pages as needed to make this page easier to find. --Dems on the move 00:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- If you read the article you linked, mêlée is the French spelling, melee is how it is spelled in English. The title of that article is Melee; Mêlée redirects to it. The spelling should be changed to melee in the title of this article, pedants be damned. --Mugsywwiii (talk) 19:45, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree that it should be changed to melee. Its simpler to search for, and that is how the event is being entitled in current publications and news casts.
Melee is not an appropriate term in any case because it indicates a battle between police and resisting protesters. No one who was there, or who watched any of the extensive video coverage, could possibly imagine that this was a 'melee.' The 'melee' term was used in the late-filed reporting by reporters who weren't present. Later news stories, and the record of events that emerged in the police hearings, indicated that what took place was more like a 'police attack' on a peaceful crowd. Having been there and been shot at, and seen friends shot and beaten, and seen even mainstream reporters clubbed, shot, bruised, injured and even hospitalized, it disturbs and saddens me that this wikipedia entry simply reflects a late-night byline rather than a deep reading and viewing of all sources.
Also, this article is written like crap. Parts of this article read like political commentary, which is inappropriate for an encyclopedia. There are a lot of missing, or plain wrong, facts. 600 officers outnumbered the protesters 15:1? --xchsxbigxmike
i agree. also, "in support of illegal immigration" sounds a little neo-con, doesn't it? isn't it more like in support of immigrants rights or something along those lines? that's similar to calling pro choice protesters "pro abortion" protesters. Strutt (talk) 16:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- No, it's factual. There isn't any issue about the rights of legal immigrants. The issue this rally and all the rallies are about is illegal immigrants. The whole point of the rally was to demand that the government close its eyes to illegal immigration and pretend that the people who engage in it are fine upstanding people who have every right to be here. -- Zsero (talk) 21:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- The 15:1 ratio was clarified in this edit. You can help Wikipedia "decrapify" this article by contributing to the article. Just press the edit button. Here is what the template {{sofixit}} has to say about complaints such as yours:
- Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).
- Cheers, --Dems on the move 22:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
i removed the word racist where it appeared before Los Angeles police because it is an opinion and this is not an editorial page. if i had more time i would take the hatchet to a lot of this article. not only is it poorly written, a lot of it almost sounds like a political rant. save the politics for a blog. this is a totally inappropriate venue for airing political views.
[edit] a little clarification
In the beginning of the description of the incident, it says "which the rally permit expressly prohibited". I've never heard of a permit prohibiting something, are we sure it shouldn't say that the permit "didn't allow" it? Murderbike (talk) 17:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- No, permits expressly prohibit things all the time. They specify things that must not take place at the event, places the crowd must not go, etc. Not obstructing the streets around the park would be a perfectly normal provision in such a permit. -- Zsero (talk) 17:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Merge proposal
I just found the article MacArthur Park rallies controversy, about the same subject. Obviously, these two articles should be merged. I don't have any preference on what the title should be, but this article is more developed, so I've suggested that one be merged here rather than vice versa. Terraxos (talk) 00:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)