Talk:Critical race theory

message: With this section probably driving the bulk of traffic to the page, I think this section needs to be as well written as possible and would like to start a discussion on that. 
In particular, I think the section could benefit from more information on the history of Christopher Rufo's discovery of CRT and realization that it could be used as a wedge issue. Additionally, the differences between CRT and DEI are not demarcated enough in this section. Finally, the line "in response to CRT being taught in schools" needs a big [citation needed] because I don't believe there are any known cases of curricula that include graduate-level critical theory in k-12 schooling. Perhaps "in response to the perception that CRT was being taught in schools" or "in response to the assertion from Christopher Rufo that CRT was being taught in schools." The section on DEI probably belongs on an entirely separate page, since DEI and CRT are two different things that are wrongly conflated for one another.  Mccartneyac (talk) 13:05, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  improvements to "2020s criticism" subsection 

message: This article is flagged with "multiple issues" and requests for improvement, but editing seems to be turned off.
How does one improve the article if one is not permitted to edit it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.253 (talk) 19:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If you look in the upper right corner of the article page, you will see a lock icon. Hover the mouse over the icon, and you will see text that the article is semi-protected. This means that only established, verified editors are allowed to edit the article. This is gets set when people using anonymous and/or throw-away accounts descend on an article to make changes that violate Wikipedia policies on reliable, third party sources. Please see Wikipedia protection policy for details. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 19:23, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not improvable? 

message: The first sentence literally has too many commas: the one before shape and the one after shaped by are grammatically incorrect, implying the necessary verbs are a parenthetical phrase (almost immediately after the grammatically correct use of commas around an actual parenthetical phrase, social and political). Combined with how often the word and appears in the sentence, the text is easy to misinterpret as a (nonsensical) list.
Please change
:analysing how laws, social and political, and media, shape and are shaped by, social conceptions of race and ethnicity.
to something like
:analysing how social and political laws and media shape (and are shaped by) social conceptions of race and ethnicity.
--173.67.42.107 (talk) 18:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: . A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 22:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  edit request 

message: There is a declaration that schools were resegregated  in the 1960s. That's relevantly and legally false.  Either remove the assertion or contextualize it.
Riventree (talk) 01:41, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You have misread the article, which states that 1960s civil rights laws were subsequently eroded, leading to re-segregation. MrOllie (talk) 03:00, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This is still factually incorrect.  In some cases limited resegregation was attempted, primarily in some southern states, but the overall trend in the US was firmly towards resegregation.  Your reply implies that re-segregation was re-introduced everywhere, which is patently false.  Please correct the original comment to clarify this reality. 187.237.117.227 (talk) 15:02, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resegregation?!?