# Talk:Martin Luther King Jr.

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Martin Luther King Jr National Historic Site (36233249121).jpg
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:38, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

I added some material explaining the "language of the unheard" quote. Some of this was removed. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Martin_Luther_King_Jr.&diff=prev&oldid=1311346471
This is the material in question, with disputed parts underlined.

> Amid recurring riots in the mid-1960s, King reaffirmed his commitment to nonviolence. He first used the phrase "a riot is the language of the unheard" in a 1966 interview, and later repeated the phrase in his speech titled "The Other America". King emphasised that riots were the result of a failure to improve economic conditions and to address racial injustice, but also condemned them as "self-defeating and socially destructive". He vowed to oppose the use of violence as both ineffective and immoral in the face of growing dissent from more militant activists.Certain conditions continue to exist in our society, which must be condemned as vigorously as we condemn riots. But in the final analysis, a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it that America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the Negro poor has worsened over the last few years. It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice, equality and humanity. And so in a real sense our nation's summers of riots are caused by our nation's winters of delay.I feel that these details are necessary and valuable. His stance towards more militant activists is barely covered elsewhere in the article (his rejection of "black power" is also not mentioned). The blockquote may be long, but it's become one of his most known quotes, so deserves a good explanation. There are plenty of less consequential blockquotes in the article, including in that section. It is also not true that he emphasised that riots were 'the language of the unheard' - that was incidental, his main point was that he opposed them. This needn't necessarily all appear in the Nonviolence section, but there isn't any obvious place to cover it within Activism, and it makes sense to keep it together.
Fedjmike (talk) 23:33, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

I've re-removed this pending consensus for its inclusion. I don't agree that this level of detail is warranted. If there are other less consequential blockquotes in the article, those should be addressed directly. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:37, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
What reason do you have for saying that it's unwarranted? I provided a number of reasons for its inclusion above. The reference to growing militancy is crucial and not mentioned elsewhere. The clarifications about first vs later usage are useful to know that it did not only appear in one context. The blockquote shows the careful balance he struck between sympathising with the discontent while nevertheless condemning the actions. He also offers a measured critique of those who place too much emphasis on condemning riots. The phrase "language of the unheard" is widely known but can easily be misunderstood, so this detail is important to understand his position. King was noted for his rhetorical skill, so presenting precisely how he expressed himself is as important as what he expressed. Fedjmike (talk) 22:38, 8 October 2025 (UTC)
First, this isn't Wikiquote - that project is dedicated to demonstrating precisely how subjects expressed themselves, but this one is to provide an encyclopedic summary. Second, there are many facets of the subject to cover, so it is necessary to keep to a high-level summary in this article - if needed, more specific details can be presented in subarticles. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:05, 8 October 2025 (UTC)
I like it. I think it's a good addition, a very slightly deeper dive into the mind of the man and the tensions of the mid-1960s. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 23:54, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

I request for Nelson Mandela to be added to the See also section, please. 2A0A:EF40:127F:CA01:AC17:92C6:5C23:5A9 (talk) 15:52, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: lists related to similar figures are in the 'see also' section, I feel like singling one out isn't appropriate.  jolielover♥talk 17:27, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

No where in the article does it say he is that and yet someone added him in that category.. why? 27.123.172.127 (talk) 10:27, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Agree--I dropped it. Rjensen (talk) 12:13, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Very new user here, so please pardon if I'm doing this incorrectly. I came here specifically to see if a stub article was suggested for Judge Mitchell. is that something that could be added here? And his title - Judge - should be capitalized.  NamelessTown (talk) 18:24, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

why is his political affiliation not mentioned? 2600:1702:6785:CC10:B8AB:1ABA:16A:11C4 (talk) 00:40, 24 October 2025 (UTC)