Talk:Al Sharpton/Archive 1

message: "In 1995, Sharpton led a protest in Harlem against the plans of a black Pentecostal Church, the United House of Prayer, which owned the retail property on 125th Street to ask Fred Harari, the tenant who operated Freddie's Fashion Mart to evict his longtime subtenant, a black record store, The Record Shack."
Can anyone rewrite this it seems (for lack of a better term) too wordy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Primetimeking (talk • contribs).
:Looks pretty good to me... IronDuke 03:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Freddie's Fashion Mart

message: This sounded a little too pro-Sharpton
:Sharpton's platform includes 10 key issues:
:* Increase voter registration.
:* Increase political consciousness and awareness.
:* Stimulate more people to get involved in the political process.
:* Raise issues that would otherwise be overlooked—for example, affirmative action and anti-death penalty policy.
:* Strengthen our national security by fighting for human rights, the rule of law, and economic justice at home and abroad.
:* Fight to ensure women's rights.
:* Deliver Universal Health Care for the nation, not hidden benefits to the health care industry.
:* Provide a solution to the current educational crisis in the nation caused by Bush.
:* Help working people by giving them the biggest tax cuts - not the rich.
:* Fulfill American democracy by supporting voting rights or statehood for the 600,000 disenfranchised citizens of the District of Columbia.
(My emphasis added)
I hate Sharpton but that is just a statement of facts - redman1936
I agree that these 10 points are a little arbitrary and seem to have been copied from any left-wing campaign brochure.  I couldn't find anything resembling this list at ontheissues.org, which might not be the end-all of sources but certainly seems accurate for the mainline candidates.  If somebody can find a source to cite, please feel free to put it back.Wesbo 03:42, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV section 

message: I'm not a big fan of the guy, but this seems out of place.  The whole first paragraph seems wrong and in broken english: Thats because Al wrote it...he doesn't have an education...just a ticket that he uses to stir up hatred
 What are we going to do about Al he need to ask his wife for so many years to forgive him because he was just chasing ass , tail I would not be suprise if he is Gay, homosexual.
--68.0.21.247 02:28, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-Al edits 

message: There is no reference to Sharpton's accusation that then State Attorney General Robert Abrams also kidnapped and raped Tawana Brawley? Or to Sharpton's referring to Abrams, a jew, as "a Hitler"? Or to Abrams' successful lawsuit against Sharpton? Or to the fact that Sharpton still hides behind his status as a so-called minister to claim he has no personal property that can be dunned to satisfy the damages the court decreed he owes to Abrams? Failure to include any mention of this is what makes Wikipedia such a joke. Also, why isn't the Tawana Brawley incident listed as an instance of Sharpton's "Activism"? Is it because that would be too close to acknowledging that he's just an ambulance-chasing civil rights leader?  The previous comment was authored by Wikipedia logon MikeInNewYork
Where's the section on the Brawley case, and how Sharpton destroyed Steven Pagones' life? I see political correctness is alive and well at Wikipedia.
Really, guys, you'll never get taken seriously by anyone other than college political science professors at this rate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.201.208.254 (talk • contribs) 14:41, 3 August 2005.
:In the time it took you to write that, you could have improved the article by contributing your knowledge to the article. Be bold and add the information yourself. I've already linked to the Tawana Brawley article, since the link was conspicuously missing. The information there seems to be fairly thorough. —HorsePunchKid→龜 22:55, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tawana Brawley? 

message: He's a black David Duke, plain and simple, with the difference that David Duke never instigated a pogrom.  This article shows America's most clownish black nationalist in a ludicrously positive light.
If this guy was white, every tenth word in the article would be "neo-nazi", "supremacist", "extremist", "far-right", etc.
I would like to remind other editors to sign your posts on talk pages.  You just need to add four tildes (~~~~) to your edit.  Thank you. Thane Eichenauer 20:21, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Same old double standard 

message: All of the sources are opinion pieces, from right-wing authors. I'm going to remove it until it can be proved. --Revolución (talk) 18:07, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: They may be opinion pieces, but they do contain what they claim to be direct quotes, which comprise a large portion of the excised "Alleged bigotry" section. Do you doubt the veracity of the quotes, or do you think they have perhaps been taken out of context? I don't have any strong feelings on this section one way or the other; just playing Devil's Advocate here. —HorsePunchKid→龜 20:08, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I doubt the veracity of the quotes. --Revolución (talk) 20:14, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Fox News and National Review may be biased against Sharpton, but they don't generally just make things up.  Hereis a Village Voice story that discusses the "white interloper" incident. .--Pharos 20:17, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: okay, fine. Maybe that is true after all, but the other accusations are yet to be proven. --Revolución (talk) 20:58, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please don't remove the paragraph. I think the paragraph is NPOV and the fact that the accusations have to be proven is clear with the insertion of the word "Alleged". --Sebastian Kessel Talk 01:12, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  so it stays even though almost all of the allegations haven't been backed up with evidence? --Revolución (talk) 23:33, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that the references provided constitute some kind of evidence. I'd like to see the "New York Times" quoted as well, but I don't think any of us is qualified to disqualify a valid source. The little renown of the sources is why the "alleged" wording and the POV tag are there. I think it's as fair as it gets.  --Sebastian Kessel Talk 23:41, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still no concrete evidence 

message: Ok, enough with the links to external places. This article is starting to look like it has a lot of Original Research. Also, please read WP:NOT, links should be balanced and few.
--Sebastian Kessel Talk 15:30, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links 

message: The article starts out too naively about the man. In other words, what accredited seminary "ordained” the nine-year old? (For those who don't know, seminary comes after graduation from college.) It also ascribes to him the religious denomination of “Pentecostal” but offers no connection between him and the Pentecostal movement, nor any standing within any of the Pentecostal organizational bodies. The article also does not mention that he does not have a church, nor does he preach on Sunday, nor does he attend regular church service, nor does he even belong to a church.
In 1964, an assembly at P.S. 244 in Brooklyn, was held to honor Al Sharpton's becoming a Reverend.  Our teachers asked us to stand and applaud as he entered the auditorium.  As he left the auditorium he told my sister, "Get out of my way honkey" and told me "move whitey".  His racist remarks continued and anti-semitic comments were added when he attended Samuel J. Tilden H.S., Brooklyn. In the 1960's and 1970's this neighborhood in East Flatbush was Italian, Jewish, Irish, African-American, and Hispanic.  With such a wonderful mix of ethnicities, you would think that he would appreciate all peoples, but this was not the case.  You should not omit the parts about his slurs, because they are real - they were directed at me, my family, and classmates. tchertwenty April 16, 2007
Yet it refers to him as “Reverend.” 
Further, where does he live and where is his National Action Network headquartered? There’s no mention of any of those subjects. After all, when he referred to white business owners in Harlem as "interlopers," he was living in New Jersey.
And to those who object to facts about the man being included, you must not know that the massacre at Freddy’s Fashion Mart was a race-based attack by a follower of “Reverend” Al. Maybe you weren't aware of that because the media didn’t pay much attention to it, but can you imagine the hue and cry if the races had been reversed and a white racist had massacred seven black people? Can you imagine the wall to wall, banner headline, 24/7/365 press coverage Sharpton would have garnered over that crime? After all, the Tawana Brawley fraud dominated the headlines in this city for most of a whole year. (A single allegation of rape, not the actual murder of seven people and the arson of the store.)
Further, the white owner of Freddy’s was not himself raising the rent on the black store owner who sublet space from Freddy’s, but merely passing on the rent increase imposed on Freddy’s by the black church who owned the building.
There’s also no mention of the shakedowns of corporations, which is how Sharpton makes his real money. The money with which he buys his $800 suits. (He famously said that he doesn’t own the suits, but that National Action Network owns them and he just wears them.) 	
Finally, it’s minor but one of the reasons investigators first suspected that Brawley’s “attack” was a fraud was because the swastika (symbol of the National Socialist German Worker’s Party during World War II) was drawn backwards on her body, indicating that the person who drew it (Brawley) did not know it’s true shape.
Eagle in NYC 11:02, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can find credible, factual sources to support some of these things, you should definitely be bold and mention them in the article. —HorsePunchKid→龜 06:37, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Reverend" and other questions? 

message: The most recent edits seem to be considerably biased against Sharpton, and are also likely to be inaccurate.  Could somebody check this? Roy Al Blue 21:09, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Noma12, thanks for contributing. You should know that Wikipedia is not like some other places on the internet. The "talk" pages are for discussing ways to improve articles, not general discussions of the character of the subjects of those articles. If you have concrete suggestions to improve Wikipedia, they will almost certainly be welcome. IronDuke 23:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Check! 

message: That section did not deserve to be removed from the page. Regardless of other editors' wishes, the fact that there is well-documented evidence pertaining to his anti-Semitism negates editors' abilities to whine about POV. If the shoe fits, let him wear it. Based on his quotes, he seems to wear his anti-semitic badge with honour. --Michaelk 03:37, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Readded section on bigotry 

message: Whether positive or negative, just cite the sources.  Nothing should be censored or removed just because it's negative.  Al Sharpton has been involved in different situations just as many other famous figures have.  Their wiki shows it and so should his, but concrete sources need to be there. Iansanderson 04:20, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cite sources 

message: I changed a reference to the shop owner as "the Jew".  I know it's not universal but in American Enlish refering to someone as "a Jew" or "the Jew" rather than "Jewish" sounds vaguely anti-semetic.  That part of the article could also use some clarification by someone who knows what happened.  I infer that the shop owner in quesiton ran Freddies Fashion Mart but that's not clear from the article nor is why Sharpton and a crowd were there.  Was it just some random observation of Als while shopping or was it a protest.
:Someone deleted this section as vandalism. Although the last version was heavily POV and unsourced, the riot following Sharpton's "white interloper" comment was a real event of significance, and has been mentioned in the Christian Science Monitor, National Review, and the Boston Phoenix, three politically diverse sources.  We should attempt a fact-based narrative of this event. Djcastel 16:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Freddie's Fashion Mart

message: Someone removed the information on the Crown Heights Riot and left a see Crown Heights Riot page.
Each article should stand on its own.  Its OK to link to other articles and when I reverted the change I left the link in to the other article but we need a summary of that Riot here as well due to Rev Sharptons actions and relationship to the riot Michaelh613 04:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Crown Height Riot

message: This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it.  Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed.  I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy.  In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright.  If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally.  Thanks. ---J.S (t|c) 07:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube links 

message: Does Al Sharpton have a personal or official web site?  The one linked in the article looks like it points at a domain squatter.  The second one is about a talk show and looks somewhat spammy.  I'm going to remove the first one and re-label the second, I guess.  67.117.130.181 07:04, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, while I don't want to disturb any political balance here, the two "biographical" extlinks look like useless fluff, superfluous given the content of the wikipedia article.  I'm thinking of removing them as linkspam, unless someone objects. 67.117.130.181 07:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If they confirm any part of the article, I would not see them as superfluous linkspam and would keep them. It is better to link to some low-quality biographies than to link to none. Jan —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.88.170.211 (talk) 13:42, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is the opposite of the right thing to do. Jasper23 00:18, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sharpton web site? 

message: An anonymous user keeps including a paragraph of Sharpton endorsing Bernard Jordan on BET.  There is no citation to this endorsement only a citation to a birthday party.  This should not be included without citations of the endorsement and I can find none on google.--PTR 19:03, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bernard E. Jordan 

message: Now the entry makes no sense. We have Sharpton responding, but we don't say what he is responding to. This entire incident begins with the NYPost. That can't be avoided. I thought we had an agreement... it would be good if you would restore what you have removed. If you want to add context you feel is missing, please be my guest. IronDuke 00:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: After looking at the history, I believe you have violated 3RR. Self-reverting would probably be a good idea here. I'm going to leave this on your talk page as well. IronDuke 01:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a Bio article. The text relating to the NYPOST article needs to be properly referenced to the article. That means that the text must closely match the source. Anything less will not fly on a bio article. This should have been fixed on the talk page before going back into the article. I removed this because it needs to match the source and also so you can see the part of the article that needs fixing. I also don't know why you added extra sources? Doesn't make any sense. Also, I have not violated the 3rr. Look closer. Jiffypopmetaltop 01:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, I take that back. The part I removed was pure 100% plagiarism. God the NYP can't write. Jiffypopmetaltop 02:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What is this, the CNN story is like three weeks old! I have never heard of this "controversy". Wow! Jiffypopmetaltop 02:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Perhaps too much has been removed

message: I think placing a category is very suggestive and are a POV. Wikipedia policy is that we should state the facts and let the reader decide. The facts of sharpton's controversies are appropriately in the controversy section. Muntuwandi 13:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We're just discussing this at the category talk now. People seem to be agreeing that we must emphasize that being in this category does not mean the subject is an anti-semite. See, for example, Abe Foxman. IronDuke 02:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia gives many strong impressions. The category is a simple matter of fact, not a judgment. IronDuke 02:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Thanks for coming back to talk, Chifume. A couple points: 1) Please sign your posts with four tildes  ~~~~ . 2) You are right about Allen. I added the cat. Feel free to join any ensuing discussion there. 3) This category isn't saying Al is an Antisemite. Just that he's been involved in some controversies on the subject. This is not a matter of opinion. You see what I'm saying? IronDuke 16:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IronDuke, I see that you are adding the antisemitism category to people and then using Foxman as an example of people in this category. Why is it that you are only adding people to the list that have been accused of being anti-semitic? Its pretty clear that you want to label these people as such. Anyways, carry on, the more the merrier I guess :) --Backroomlaptop 21:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just added it back to Foxman... IronDuke 21:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Category

message: Shouldn't there be some unbiased reference to the criticism that Al Sharpton tends to act as if he's the 'go to guy' for anyone who has done anything morally or racially wrong against african american people? This has been paraodied in South Park and is quite obvious in reality - Anytime anyone on the air happens to say something that can be considered racist, Al Sharpton seems to be at the forefront, blowing the issue out of proportion, demanding apologies, calling for firings, etc. I'm not racist myself and I can understand Mr. Sharpton's position but this gets annoying and I'm sure it's one of the major public criticisms of this celebrity.
:Do you know of anyone who is a respected authority who has criticised Sharpton for this? IronDuke 15:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 'Sole Representative of Black People in a Racist Situation' Criticism 

message: I placed the tags on the page for many reasons. Putting al sharpton in the antisemitism category is selective editing to show one particular derogatory pov. Jiffypopmetaltop 02:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But if you remove the cat, you cannot keep placing the POV tag there. And if you click on the category, you will see it is meant to indicate involvement in the subject, not guilt of it. Please list any other reasons for the tag. IronDuke 15:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not? This is not the only problem I have with the article. I believe this category is being used as a swipe against Sharpton, just like it was against Jesse Jackson. Selective inclusion in this category shows a negative pov. This is a poorly designed category and it should not be included in this article. I don't care what the "reasoning" is on the category page, this category was obviously poorly thought out as rabbis can be in the same category with hitler. Jiffypopmetaltop 15:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you don't like the category, perhaps you could try to put it up for deletion (although I wouldn't recommend that). In any case, I think it's potentially quite useful; imagine, say, a student who was trying to research antisemitism and wanted to know what it was, who had been accused of it, and who was doing the accusing. Sharpton's name could well be relevant, having nothing to do with whether he is guilty of being an antisemite. What other problems do you have with the article that make you want to use the POV tag? IronDuke 15:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Selective use of categories is enhancing your pov. I can show you the talk pages of other articles where you tried to add the tag where people agree.There is no compelling or urgent reason for an anti-semitism tag. For the uninitiated, the implication is that the tag is referring to Sharpton as an anti-semite. Why even have it? Jiffypopmetaltop 16:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps a better name for the tag could be chosen that would indicate that it was about the subject generally, and not a statement of belief about a particular person. What do you think? IronDuke 16:07, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, that may be a good idea. Anti-semitic incidents or acts would be a good category name. However, that would go on the incident page on not on bio articles. Jiffypopmetaltop 16:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV Tag

message: Better sources are needed for the allegations against al sharpton in the market criticism section. Jiffypopmetaltop 02:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not add to whatever line you think has not been sourced (or, better yet, find a source). Also, you keep (blinldy, I think) reverting sources I've put in. Please have more care. IronDuke 15:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't you source it properly if you want it in the article? I revert your sources because they aren't good enough and just throwing a bunch of sources on the end of a paragraph is really shoddy editing. Your sources generally don't fully match the text anyway. Good sources and accurate sourcing = no problems. Get to it. Jiffypopmetaltop 15:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the encouragement. Let me also urge you to do some actual work on the article (Which appears to be the single focus of your WP contributions of late). You complain of shoddy editing, and yet seem unwilling to do any editing of your own. Having said that, can you be very specific about which sources are bad, why they are bad, and what sources you woudl accept? IronDuke 15:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Happy to cite at point of entry. So, would you say that we ought not to be using the Village Voice and San Francisco Examiner in WP articles? Also, why then have you removed my NYTimes cite, if it is an acceptable source? IronDuke 16:17, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nytimes cite was an abstract. Jiffypopmetaltop 06:01, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So what? It still supported the facts in question, and not everything has to be linkable. I could simply write New York Times, and date. If you want to help on the article, I'd appreciate it. If you want to obstruct and undo multiple editor's hard work for no discernible reason, I'd appreciate your not doing it. And you haven't answered my other questions. IronDuke 14:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations missing tag

message: This is quite incomplete. Why is there nothing here about his role in the murder at Freddie's Fashion Mart? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.239.39.35 (talk) 
:There is, but someone keeps removing it. Can you sign your posts with four tildes "~" and leave them at the bottom of the page (where I will move this section after a bit? Thanks. IronDuke 15:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a section on Freddy's that is considerably more NPOV and better sourced than the version that kept getting deleted. Djcastel 15:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you could use the Village Voice and San Fran Examiner sources, too. It doesn't really matter, though; this incident is very, very well-sourced. Thanks for your efforts. IronDuke 15:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Freddie's

message: Militaryace 00:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed Homosexual Slur 

message: Don't forget about the Duke lacrosse rape case.  He was his same ol'-lyin'-Tawana Brawley-self in that too.  
--Kalmia 15:25, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What if he never comments on it? seems like he is ignoring the issue. Raitchison 18:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Duke Rape Case]]

message: Sharpton became the de-facto representative for the Cato family.  During the funeral he referred to "diamond merchants" considered a code word for Hasidic Jews    , for shedding "the blood of innocent babies" 
leading marchers shouting "No Justice No Peace".Jiffypopmetaltop 06:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: This needs help

message: What's left to do?  If it's all referenced, the tag can be removed. patsw 21:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Jiffypopmetaltop 21:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. (for the time being) patsw 01:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Unreferenced" tag 

message: His actual residency is a matter of controversy.  The Village Voice ran an article indicating that --while he is active in affairs relating to Brooklyn-- he actually lives in New Jersey.  Can anyone shed light on this matter? Dogru144 22:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Jersey residency