Template:Did you know nominations/Council for United Civil Rights Leadership
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by BlueMoonset (talk) 16:23, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
Council for United Civil Rights Leadership
edit... that on 19 June 1963, ninety-six White business leaders and philanthropists met to establish a Council, which controlled dissemination of funds to the nation's largest Black civil rights organizations?
- Reviewed: Flag of Senegal
- Comment: Should run on 19 June 2013!
Created by Groupuscule (talk). Self nominated at 20:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC).
- Article: The article is long enough and was nominated for DYK on the date of its creation. It appears to be properly referenced, except for the following paragraphs:
- "Organization" section: the list of organizations and the Forman quotation following the list.
- "Malcolm X" section: all the text in this section.
- Hook: The hook is of an appropriate length (exactly 200 characters). However, it doesn't appear to be supported by the article. The hook states that "on 19 June 1963, ninety-six White business leaders and philanthropists met to establish a Council", but the article states only that the 96 persons "met for a fundraising breakfast at the Carlyle Hotel in Manhattan", which doesn't seem to be the same thing as establishing the Council. In contrast, the article quotes David Garrow as follows: "Taconic Foundation's president recommended that the black leadership establish the Council for United Civil Rights Leadership (CUCRL) ... No one dissented from his plan." (Emphasis added.) Also, based on the list of organizations involved in the Council, the Council appears to have been established by Black civil rights organizations. These apparent inconsistencies need to be sorted out before the article can appear in DYK. — SMUconlaw (talk) 16:27, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
- Great, thank you for the review. I have added appropriate citations. I agree with you that the hook is imprecise, if not inaccurate, and for that matter could be shorter. How about:
- ALT1
... that on 19 June 1963, White business leaders and philanthropists raised $800,000 over breakfast in support of a Black civil rights Council?
- There are still a few paragraphs in the "Malcolm X" section missing citations. I've marked them with {{citation needed}}. As for the hook, "Council" seems a bit vague. What about the following? — SMUconlaw (talk) 07:44, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
- ALT2: *
... that on June 19, 1963, White business leaders and philanthropists raised $800,000 over breakfast for the Council for United Civil Rights Leadership established by Black civil rights organizations?
- ALT2: *
- ALT1
- Thanks again and please let me know if you have other suggestions for improving the article beyond DYK. groupuscule (talk) 00:13, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
- How about:
- ALT3 *... that on 19 June 1963, White business leaders and philanthropists raised $800,000 over breakfast in support of a Black civil rights leadership Council?
- This is a little shorter and a little clearer. (The council wasn't really established by the groups... it was established by Stephen Currier with cooperation from the groups' leaders. But ALT3 avoids the need for nuance either way.) I added citations for the other Malcolm X quotations (they're all from the same speech). Aloha, groupuscule (talk) 19:35, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
I would prefer that the name of the Council actually appear in the hook, but have no strong objections to ALT3. You may want to change "White" to "White American" in case it is not clear that the hook refers to the USA. I'll leave it to the DYK volunteer to make the final decision on the wording of the hook. The article and hook are good to go. — SMUconlaw (talk) 19:51, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
- Cool! (DYK: Please run the hook on 19 June :-) Thanks) groupuscule (talk) 20:37, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
- Article: The article is long enough and was nominated for DYK on the date of its creation. It appears to be properly referenced, except for the following paragraphs: