Talk:List of George Floyd protests outside the United States

Name

Shouldn't it be something like "George Floyd protests outside the United States"? My international is another person's national... (Alternatively, we could add the U.S. to North America, with just a link to the U.S. protests. --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 16:32, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Mdaniels5757, Not really, as the event happened in the US which is why that is the main article. But I get your point Idan (talk) 17:50, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

I am discussing this here; I really think this name is inconsistent with the other article, even if the U.S. is still the focus. The international scope here is more typical of a landing page for an instance of international protests. ɱ (talk) 22:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Mdaniels5757, there's no need to quibble; the title is just fine as it is. Here are some relevant definitions from leading authorities:

Merriam-Webster Dictionary (American): 1 : of, relating to, or affecting two or more nations: international trade. 2 : of, relating to, or constituting a group or association having members in two or more nations: international movement. 3 : active, known, or reaching beyond national boundaries: an international reputation.

Cambridge English Dictionary (British): involving more than one country: international politics, an international team of scientists Textorus (talk) 03:08, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Video

I just found/uploaded this video of demonstrations in Montreal. The quality is pretty good, but I hesitated to add it to the article because it begins with a credit, and some don't really like that. Putting it here in case other editors want to use it. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 11:28, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Another in London. Still good in that it's a montage, but quality's a bit less. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 02:05, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Some protests are illegal

The article should state that many of these protests severely breach COVID restrictions. In the UK, public gatherings of more than six people are banned. Coronavirus: Are protests legal amid lockdown? Where in the article should we state that? Jim Michael (talk) 15:37, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

You could say state the end of the lede or put a non-bulleted sentence right under the sub-sub-subheading "United Kingdom"; either way, it should be accompanied with a citation to a reliable source, like any other claim in Wikipedia. Although the mere fact of being illegal or at least unadvised does not seem to be preventing protests from occurring anywhere in the world, interestingly. Textorus (talk) 16:00, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

The fact that many of the protests are breaking laws (even if peaceful) - as well as going against common sense - by gathering in crowds during a pandemic is relevant enough to include. The police choosing not to enforce the restrictions when days earlier they were breaking up & moving on much smaller groups in parks is also important enough to include. Many mainstream media sources having massively changed their sentiment from saying that people were stupid & irresponsible to gather even in small groups to being positive about the huge protests days later is also both contradictory & relevant enough to include. Should we create a new section to include these points? Jim Michael (talk) 16:09, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

I strongly disagree, there haven't been many sources at all on this "hypocrisy". It really isn't lede-worthy, and is just speculation, as crowd limits vary per state and country, and many are not even in effect anymore. ɱ (talk) 01:21, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

There's no doubt that gathering in crowds during a pandemic is reckless, irresponsible and for some will cause their own or other people's deaths. Many mainstream media sources have reported it. It's not mere speculation - in the UK, gatherings of over 6 people are illegal, which means that all the protests in the UK are illegal. Similar details should be given in the article for other parts of the world in which gathering in crowds is against the law. Ignoring that would be a major omission & make the article very biased on the side of the protesters. Jim Michael (talk) 05:57, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

i believe what you are looking for is here. american leaders seem to merely express concern, while non-american leaders express criticism. i conjecture that the difference in response is either because americans had already flouted the coronavirus restrictions for weeks prior during their anti-lockdown protests, or because their leader does not personally appear to be taking the restrictions seriously himself. also, violations of new zealand's lockdown restrictions is discussed there, so perhaps you can add others you are familiar with, such as the united kingdom's, there as well.

i'm not sure about your argument that omitting them from this article would make this article biased toward the protestors. if anything, i would assume that omitting them is making it biased against the protestors. i've read about a lot of protests that have been restricted in size or outright banned due to the virus, and many would-be protestors have complied with the ban. for the protests that never happened due to a ban, i haven't added them to this list because ... well, they didn't happen. i've also omitted details regarding protests where the media has reported that the crowd would have been much larger if all the people who had arrived but turned away upon seeing the crowd had stayed instead. if the coronavirus restrictions were fully covered in this article, i believe it would illustrate that there would have been far more support for the protesters had the restrictions not been there.

also, i agree with ɱ regarding the hypocrisy that you are describing, as i haven't heard about this myself. plenty of police are choosing to enforce the restrictions, and how they are doing so is pretty much one of the major points of the protests in the first place. it's been said that the american police are committing a major error by using police brutality in protests against police brutality.

that being said, i don't keep up with all the sources around the world, and would be interested in reading any sources that would illustrate this phenomenon that you describe. if you were going to write about them anyway, would you mind listing the sources here? thanks in advance! dying (talk) 10:27, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Omitting the mass breaches of the COVID restrictions implemented earlier this year would make the article biased in favour of the protesters because it would omit the fact that many of them are breaking the law, as well as being recklessly irresponsible. In the UK, all gatherings of more than 6 people are against the law, regardless of how closely packed together they are, whether or not they're wearing masks etc. The fact that they haven't been stopped from crowding & only a tiny number have been arrested is in sharp contrast to police breaking up & moving on much smaller numbers of people gathering in parks, at parties etc. last month. Some mainstream media sources have criticised the protesters for illegally gathering in crowds, but some other mainstream media sources have quickly changed from harshly berating small groups for sunbathing, cycling etc. last month to now being positive about much larger groups gathering in reaction to someone they previously had never heard of being killed 4,000 miles away. Jim Michael (talk) 11:24, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Notes

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

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

• Hyde Park 3 June 2020 John Boyega Speech.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:52, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

splitting the article

@TJMSmith: since the article is currently of a rather manageable size, i'm not sure if further splitting of the article is justified at this time. admittedly, i would have argued that the split of new zealand was premature as well. dying (talk) 00:33, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

I am currently expanding that article. I think there is enough content and sources to justify it. A summary of its contents can/should still be included here. TJMSmith (talk) 01:13, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

that's true. i actually have no objections to the quality of the articles that you had created, as they are much better than some of the cut-and-paste jobs i have seen before. also, i had not previously realized that there were that many other relevant reactions to include, so i agree that the new zealand protests merit their own page. i had assumed that new zealand would eventually be split off, but i had thought the split was premature at the time. seeing the content you have provided on the new page, i believe i was wrong.

i should also add that consensus on the "List of George Floyd protests" page (at least as far as i understood it at the time) was originally to not split off the states or cities unless they were significant, and many of the splits only started occurring once the references on the page eventually kept breaking. with that in mind, unless there is a consensus for this article to do anything else, i would personally lean toward not splitting the page at this time. happy to take a poll on the issue, though. dying (talk) 03:36, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

@Buttons0603 and TJMSmith: i recently learned that i had not been providing proper attribution when splitting articles, including when i created this article, and have rectified this by adding templates on the two relevant talk pages, as seen on both the talk page of the source article as well as on this page (as seen near the top). since you two split a few pages off from this one, would you two mind also adding the appropriate templates to provide proper attribution? thanks in advance! dying (talk) 06:33, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I will do that for the page I split. Buttons0603 (talk) 13:43, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Done! Also, it looks like Australia now has enough content to merit its own page. I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but am willing to start it. I believe a separate article gives editors a more flexibility on the formatting and contents of the subject; it permits the subject to be expanded. TJMSmith (talk) 14:16, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

you're right; i agree that the events of australia appear to merit their own page at this point. there seems to be a lot going on regarding the george floyd protests there aside from the protests themselves. if no one else has any objections to you starting the article, i'm interested in seeing how you expand on the subject. dying (talk) 15:02, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Done :) TJMSmith (talk) 21:07, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposing move

I think a more accurate title "List of George Floyd protests outside of the United States". It is both more descriptive having "list" in the title, and using "outside the united states" is clearer to readers in other countries. –DMartin 01:29, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

@Dmartin969: i was somewhat surprised to see that this page was moved before i was even aware that someone had proposed a move in the first place, since the move was executed roughly an hour after it was first proposed here, without any courtesy notifications.

although i won't personally request a move to another article name, having no good suggestions myself, i wanted to comment that the current article name ("List of George Floyd protests outside the United States") did occur to me when i first created the article, but i did not decide to name it that because it seemed too americentric. although the protests did begin in america, the movement appears to be about much more than just america now, so it seemed strange to me to place the protests in a page that categorized them as "outside the United States". this seemed especially relevant considering that the whole point of the protests is to stop treating people as outsiders, whether it be based on race or another social construct.

also, although i couldn't think of an appropriate name for the article that conformed to the "George Floyd protests in" pattern, l'esprit de l'escalier provided me with the name "George Floyd protests internationally" about a day later. dying (talk) 03:05, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

hong kong and taiwan

should their candlelight vigils be included in this article? as far as i understand, these two vigils are held annually for tiananmen square. i currently find no sources for these vigils explicitly referencing floyd, but my chinese is rather rusty.

i worry that adding such protests to the list, which are clearly regularly held, may falsely imply that they were held because of floyd. in addition, from what i understand, the massacre at tiananmen square was largely a result of the application of military force (even though police brutality was still partly to blame) and the event did not really have much to do with racism.

similarly, i think this is why the anti-bolsonaro protests aren't listed here. even though they weren't regularly scheduled, the media have found no connection between them and floyd, and have not reported them that way, as far as i am aware. in fact, the media seem to deliberately make a distinction between the anti-bolsonaro protests and the george floyd protests. so, i hesitate to make a false connection between the tiananmen square vigils and george floyd if there isn't one.

if there's consensus on expanding this list to include pretty much any kind of protest against the abuse of power, then i have no issues with including hong kong or taiwan in this list. alternatively, if there's a picture of one protester holding a picture of floyd in either the hong kong or the taiwan vigil, i'm okay with including that one here too. in the meantime, i'm going to comment those two entries out for now. dying (talk) 09:09, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Dying, No the candle light protests held on June 4th should not in the article in my opinion. Any other protest where it is obvious that they are ALSO protesting in solidarity with Floyd should. Idan (talk) 13:35, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Date format

Per MOS:DATETIES, I'm changing this article to "June 2" style. Please do me a favor and be consistent with these ;) Mouthpity (talk) 16:31, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Zimbabwe

has anyone found a description of a protest in zimbabwe? i keep on seeing references to the existence of one, such as in the new york times, but haven't actually found a source describing such a protest. however, i have found sources stating that a scheduled protest was blocked by the police. in addition, zimbabwe's minister of foreign affairs has commented on the situation, and i'm not sure if sources are conflating those comments with a protest. dying (talk) 09:55, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

What qualifies as a protest?

I have found a video of a small BLM/George Floyd protest in Bucharest Romania, but have not found any news article covering the topic. Does this count as a protest?

(This is my first post on a talk page of a Wikipedia article! Excited to begin contributing.)

Marcia Barnett (talk) 20:52, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

@Marcia Barnett: I think that would qualify as an acceptable primary source per WP:primary, as long as it's perfectly clear what they are protesting and it isnt analysed in any way in the article. –DMartin 22:38, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

oh, impressive work, Marcia Barnett! i had a feeling that there would be one in bucharest soon, but hadn't been able to find one myself.

in general, to be considered for inclusion in wikipedia, information has to be verifiable by being supported in a reliable source. what constitutes a reliable source is arguable, but there are guidelines specifically for youtube. personally, i would be hesitant to cite a video posted on a personal youtube account since other editors may not find it a reliable source, and i am assuming you had felt the same since you posted to the talk page about it. so i found a more reliable source for you.

https://www.dcnews.ro/au-ajuns-in-romania-proteste-in-bucuresti-video_752581.html

to confirm that this romanian source isn't simply a personal web page or something similar, i found a page on romanian wikipedia describing the source.

anyway, welcome to wikipedia! hope you enjoy your time as an editor here. dying (talk) 22:38, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

by the way, here is another source that also explicitly states that the protest was held at university square.

https://www.fanatik.ro/proteste-in-piata-universitatii-pentru-moartea-lui-george-floyd-dupa-cateva-minute-manifestantii-s-au-vazut-nevazuti-video-19227267

also, Dmartin969 makes a good point regarding the original video's usage as a primary source, as the fanatik source states that the protest lasted for only a few minutes, and was filmed and posted, so the video may be the main evidence for the protest in the first place. dying (talk) 23:41, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much everyone! I wasn't expecting such a detailed and helpful response. Made my first article edit with your help. Thanks for welcoming me into the wiki community! Marcia Barnett (talk) 02:18, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Press mention of Wikipedia article

• https://slate.com/technology/2020/06/wikipedia-george-floyd-neutrality.html

---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:36, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Split

Support split - This article is well over 100 kB, and parts of it should be split to articles entitled List of George Floyd protests in Asia and List of George Floyd protests in Europe. --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:19, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

oppose split by continent for now. i currently see no issues with the article's size. splitting due to size is usually carried out because either the article is too long to read, or it is causing technical issues. as this article is a list, users are unlikely trying to read the whole article in one sitting, but are there to get a general idea of what is on the list. also, the page itself does not appear to be causing any technical issues. editors of the original "List of George Floyd protests" appeared to have no issue with keeping the list as large as it was, which ended up being over 400k in length, and splitting generally only happened organically when a specific city or state warranted its own page. later on, splits were made in an attempt to address technical issues when the list of references on the page kept on breaking, but once it was discovered that the map was the element breaking the page, splitting slowed down significantly once the map was removed.

currently, i believe splits from this page are happening organically when someone feels a specific country warrants its own page. also, they have been carried out by editors who are doing more than just executing a simple cut-and-paste job. for example, if you visit the new zealand page, you can easily tell that the split was warranted. there are other countries that might merit a split as well due to the amount of relevant content a separate page could address, but i believe the reasoning behind those splits would be more focused on whether there was enough content for the new article, and not whether this article was considered too long.

in addition, i believe the current arrangement of sorting the list by continent was done largely so that users could quickly find neighbouring countries once they had found a country of interest, and not because george floyd's death had a similar impact on countries within a specific continent. splitting the countries off by continent might imply otherwise.

also, splitting the article by continent may result in a worse user experience, as the article would no longer be a simple long list that would also allow a user to easily search for any countries of interest. for example, if the european countries were split off, a user who is unfamiliar with the page but searches for "belgium" to see if anything had been done about the statues of king leopold ii may not be able to quickly find the relevant information because belgium was no longer listed on the page, having been buried in the european article instead. also, because the way countries are split by continents can vary from list to list, it may be simpler to keep each country mentioned at least once in the list, instead of burying the country names in their respective continent article(s).

in summary, although some countries may have enough content to warrant being split off into their own articles, i do not feel that it would be appropriate to split off continents from this list at this time. dying (talk) 01:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Notes

• George Floyd protests in Germany - Should George Floyd protests in Germany be split from this article? --Jax 0677 (talk) 03:12, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Seems like there's no consensus for splitting, so I've r emoved the {{very long}} and {{split}} templates from the article. -- Mikeblas (talk) 21:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 20 June 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 05:40, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

---

List of George Floyd protests outside the United States → List of George Floyd protests – To prevent systemic bias, I suggest making List of George Floyd protests the base page for all nations of the world, and adding George Floyd protests in the United States as one of the entries, just like George Floyd protests in Canada. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:49, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose This article mentioned about the protest that happened outside the United States. Because this article that happen inside the United States already too long, that article was split by domestic and international protesters. I think you link was targeted for Lists of George Floyd protests that was a base name which actually is a disambiguate/list page that only contains wikilink list of protests from United States and Internationally that appears nothing in that article. I think that can be sure for you to contribute to that article instead this. 114.125.247.73 (talk) 23:13, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose That would require List of George Floyd protests outside the United States to pay lip service to the U.S. protests, and I find that unnecessary and redundant. It's OK to be biased because the killing happened in the U.S. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:08, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Protests in 2 South Korea military bases

Should this be included in the list of George Floyd protests in South Korea?

"The protesters, who also sang 'God Bless America,' gathered June 4 at Osan Air Base on South Korea's west coast.

On June 11, another demonstration was held at Camp Humphreys, about 60 miles south of the Demilitarized Zone separating North and South Korea, as first reported by Stars & Stripes."

"The demonstrations at Osan and Camp Humphreys were believed to be the first on any military installation worldwide since Floyd's death. Peters said he was unaware of any others, and Pentagon officials said they also did not know of any." [1] 2603:9000:D708:BB70:0:A48A:BCC2:F05C (talk) 16:27, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Countries in western Europe.

I have always considered UK, Ireland, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, etc. to be in west Europe. Therefore IMHO the UK and Ireland cannot be considered to be in northern Europe (agree/disagree).SethWhales ^talk

because i am aware of the controversy that may arise when areas are divided by political boundaries, when i split the europe section up, i had based it on the standard that the united nations uses, which explicitly states that "[t]he assignment of countries or areas to specific groupings is for statistical convenience and does not imply any assumption regarding political or other affiliation of countries or territories by the United Nations". i had seen other wikipedia pages use the same standard, and thought it might be useful here. the standard was used to split asia and africa as well, and i had left a comment under each continent section heading so editors about to change the scheme may have at least understood my reasoning.

that being said, i have no personal attachment to the un m49 standard, and would be happy to use a different standard if it is just as effective. can you justify the reasoning behind your desired split? can your scheme also be effectively applied to all the other countries on the page?

also, thanks for bringing the issue to the talk page. dying (talk) 11:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

[restored comment after edit made in good faith. dying (talk) 03:55, 21 April 2021 (UTC)]

• agree I think we should follow the Wikipedia consensus of classifying countries to be consistent. I.e., we should group the countries by which category they are listed in Wikipedia and/or use the classification in the article themselves. E.g. The United Kingdom article states that it's in Western Europe and Category:Western_European_countries lists the UK; therefore, it should be sorted here under Western Europe. The same is true of Iran in Western Asia not Southern Asia.

W.r.t. dying's position, there isn't (as far as I'm aware) a standard for what country falls into what region which is why we have rely on other reliable sources and consensus on a case-by-case basis. I do not believe the UN statistic groupings to not qualify a standard. The page even says, "the assignment of countries or areas to specific groupings is for statistical convenience and does not imply any assumption regarding political or other affiliation of countries or territories by the United Nations" (emphasis added). At the end of the day, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia designed to be read by human. Most readers would expect Iran to be under "Western Asia" because that's colloquially and academically where it's classified most often. — motevets (talk) 16:37, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Flags

Why are flags being used to portray countries? Flags should be used "where the subject officially represents that country or nationality". The protestors in no way represent their country. The flag icons should be removed. Thoughts? WWGB (talk) 02:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

I agree. --_Mrwoogi010^✉ 17:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Antarctica Protest

There was a protest in Antarctica at McMurdo station. Workers have attested to it and there is photographic proof but they cannot be publicly affiliated with their company while holding political positions. This makes verifying it pretty difficult without breaking anonymity. What is the right move here? Desertambition (talk) 04:41, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Desertambition, what are you doing on such a chilly page? :P (wait, I guess Antarctica is technically a desert...) Anyways, technically it would be disallowed WP:Original research to include mention of the Antarctica protest, but per WP:IAR, I'm alright with it. I'm going to tag that section with {{better source needed}}, though, since Reddit is absolutely not a reliable source. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 08:39, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Can we count as protests only group exceeding 10 000 people?

Outside of some countries in Western Europe and the whole Anglo Saxon world, protests don't exceed 1000 people. For example there were maybe only 1000 people "protesting" in Brazil, a country with 210 million of inhabitants, it's not like 99.9999999999% of people didn't give a shit about the event. So from what number can you call a gathering "a protest"? If with ten friends I go in the front of the parliament with a sign, it this a protest?