# Talk:Orangeburg Massacre

The linguistic similarity is the reason for the inclusion of the term, which I failed to redirect in the first edit.  However, the term "massacre" implies POV and so is properly handled (which should serve as a useful model in cases such as this article but of course this asks too much from the romanticists). --TJive 22:20, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

I am reverting the scare quotes (as you term them, too) and changing the link to the name of the page.DJ Silverfish 14:43, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
Changed my mind.  Shootings doesn't look right.  Massacre is the more common term for killing unarmed people. DJ Silverfish 14:48, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
I was being ironic.  And it doesn't matter what you think "looks right".  If it doesn't conform to NPOV (much less the actual name of the link) it needs changed. --TJive 21:40, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
Your irony was not "very obvious". Anyway, the link is fine as it is. DJ Silverfish 19:45, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
I don't recall saying my irony was "very obvious".
Anyway glad we agree. --TJive 23:52, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Can't bear the slightest possibility of equivocation, eh? --TJive 05:59, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

Moved here from page - needs references, better writing, etc.
Jack Bass needed to ask some of the people that were involved in the massacre. Even though I haven't read his book.I think that the book is a some what false account of what happened that night. My teacher told us that there was a platform in front of a building and that an Orangeburg police officer went onto the platform and took out his revolver and shot at the building. To make it seem like the students at SCSU shot back at them. Shortly after,the building was torn down. The goverment didn't want anyone to do a forensic test and see that the angle the shots came from that it couldn't have came from the campus. Pollinator 00:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Seems like pure speculation that can't really be validated in my opinion. - Deron Dantzler 03:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I used to teach history at Orangeburg Wilkinson HS a few years ago, and used to hear all sorts of versions of what initiated the shooting from my students. My favorite: One officer slipped an fell, discharging his revolver as he did so. The other officers heard a shot, looked over to see the first officer going down, and then opened up on the crowd in front of them. But that was hardly the only version. To me, the key lesson was always how basically good intentions on the part of both McNair and the SNCC were scuttled by the highly charged environment that was Orangeburg. With emotions running that high, and neither side willing to give an inch, somebody was bound to screw up and thus a bad outcome was almost inevitable. 71.68.212.110 (talk) 02:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)Bullet308

The article says the three students killed were college students, but wasn't one of those killed a high school student? Badagnani 00:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

You are correct, Delano Middleton was a 17 year old high school student. [1] and [2]  Thanks. --Knulclunk 16:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
The article should state what kinds of students each was, and their ages. Badagnani 17:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes.--Knulclunk 17:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Done. Will add more soon. --Knulclunk 02:57, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

It appears that this article was blanked at some point without explanation. 
Everything including categories was deleted. Somebody really wants to censor this article. Skywriter 00:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

"School shooting" seems like the wrong description for "attack type". Is there a non-POV term for "heavy-handed police response to violent yet unarmed protesters"?--Knulclunk (talk) 03:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The article text states that 27 people were injured in the massacre, but the info box says 28. Which is it? I recall being recently taught in a high school Vietnam War class that the injury count was 27.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cornman7001 (talk • contribs) 12:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC) 
I have seen the injured number at 30 on other sites and such with names so I am curious what the real count is. Also, according to this article: http://www.foxcarolina.com/news/15252407/detail.html a new name was added to the injured list in 2008 so it should (I suppose officially) be 28.
Novadestin (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Smithsonian Article titled Soul of the South written by Paul Theroux from July-August 2014 - states that "....27 were injured, some of them seriously, all of them students, riddled with buckshot."

OPPOSE. I see that the page has been moved and returned twice to Orangeburg Massacre. As Orangeburg Massacre seems to be the generally accepted term for the event, I see no reason to change it. The number of victims hardly seems to matter in this case.  Has the event been historically called anything else? 
For example, the more famous Kent State Shootings, though often called Kent State Massacre, is commonly called the less POV Kent State Shootings as well. I am unsure if the Orangeburg event has similarly neutral name.--Knulclunk (talk) 04:01, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
It has no such less POV term in common use. I attribute this mostly to the fact that "The Orangeburg Massacre" as a phrase just sounds better than any alternative...it just kinda' rolls off the tongue, dont you think? In the same way that "The Kent State Shootings" flows better than "The Kent State Massacre". Even though the body count at Kent State looks more like a "massacre" than Orangeburg ever really did.

I've added 3 citations from primary sources that address the question of violence and weapons in the crowd. Since this seems to be the most controversial aspect of this article, I'd like to remove the two notations on citations and neutrality. The previously cited sources were recent, which could leave them open to POV questions.  I hope this clears things up. Ynottry (talk) 04:57, 28 November 2010 (UTC)Ynottry

Quoting from the page: Linda Meggett Brown wrote that subsequent events in the spring of 1968: the assassinations of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert Kennedy, the Democratic presidential candidate; and the Tet Offensive in Vietnam, overshadowed the events at Orangeburg.[6]
The Tet Offensive was in January, 1968, so not subsequent to the massacre, nor in the spring. 
71.53.58.24 (talk) 02:05, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

In the Background section of the article it states that the shooting occurred in February of 1968. The sentence following that says that "In the fall of 1968" there was a move to convince the owner to desegregate and that he "was unwilling to desegregate; as a result protests began on in early February 1968." Since this event led to the protests of February 1968, it could not have occurred in the fall of 1968 because that would be after the protests/massacre. I would guess that it should say "In the fall of 1967." Since I don't know this for a fact, I haven't changed it, but someone should change it to the correct year. 
I will change this typo/grammar error:
"began on in early February 1968"
Ileanadu (talk) 13:20, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

It appears the charges were "Imposing summary punishment without due process of law".  Any RS for this? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 16:49, 1 October 2014 (UTC).

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Orangeburg massacre. 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 this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070222063838/http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2001/US/02/08/cabell.debrief/ to http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2001/US/02/08/cabell.debrief/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070614003246/http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reports/03-3NRfall/8-11V57N3.pdf to http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/reports/03-3NRfall/8-11V57N3.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:49, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Orangeburg massacre. 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 this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101206135943/http://www.mupress.org/productdetails.cfm?PC=194 to http://www.mupress.org/productdetails.cfm?PC=194
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:47, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Why are all the pictures of All-Star from 2015? Are there not any pictures from 1968 or an adjacent year? 199.120.30.203 (talk) 20:34, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Does it talk about how the protesters were being violent and flipping over cars and stuff though? 2600:387:C:6E11:0:0:0:C (talk) 14:49, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

@Ben76266 @Adflatuss, I don't want to start an edit war, but I don't agree with this recent addition. The claim that "no one expected the shootings" isn't true, several observers were worried there would be violence and there were several journalists on the scene. It's true that there were limited photos/videos made of the events because it was at night, but that's already discussed in a sentence in the last paragraph of the section. I'm open to moving/reworking that sentence, but I don't think we should repeat ourselves. SilverStar54 (talk) 12:07, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

I see it is repetitive. 〜 Adflatuss • talk 13:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)