Jump to content

Talk:50501 movement

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Low neutrality?

[edit]

I think the 50501 protests are article-worthy, however on first read, this article feels like it's written exclusively to support the protests. The Locations and Protests by State sections in particular seem to exist to make the protests seem HUGE rather than providing useful information to readers. Ajemoskowitz (talk) 01:45, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on removing the Locations section at least? As the content in both of the sections mentioned above significantly overlaps. Ajemoskowitz (talk) 01:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a great point, more context is needed. Perhaps a number of protesters beside each location.
Most of the descriptions include the number of people present.
As for neutrality, each description provides sources from news outlets. The potential dramatazation of the protests is the fault of the reporters, not the wikipedia page. Our job, after all, is to document publicly available information. If the only reporting done is sensationized, there's not much we can do other than remove the page entirely. Skoorrevir (talk) 02:00, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, sure. I might still flag many of the state- or city-related snippets as lacking substance. The article makes clear the protests were nationwide, so I'm not convinced yet that minor details about specific protests (such as what some protestors may have chanted in San Diego) is providing something useful to readers. Ajemoskowitz (talk) 02:08, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ajemoskowitz good point. I mean shouldn't everything in the article serve to provide context to 50501? The chants certainly do not contribute, unless they are specifically about one of the states intents. Chants like "down with Trump and Musk" may still be relevant Skoorrevir (talk) 04:34, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think about removing the "locations" section, as it shares the same purpose as "protests by state"? Ajemoskowitz (talk) 02:14, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We are currently trying to move the cities/states from the locations section to the protest by state one. It takes time, but we are working on it. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 19:12, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It should be written as "this exists, make up your own mind." It should not have reactions. As far as support, it's going to support the movements by its existence. As of right now the article is a perfect example of many Wikipedia criticisms. 75.163.91.117 (talk) 00:27, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Protest goals

[edit]

The article currently describes one of the goals of the protests as "Resignation of Donald Trump," however I am not seeing that goal mentioned in sources. Ajemoskowitz (talk) 01:57, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Not My Presidents Day"

[edit]

Should this article mention Not My Presidents Day as background/context?

Conversely, should the Not My Presidents Day article mention 50501 and the similar event in 2025? ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:20, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've also redirected Not My Presidents Day (2025) to here. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:34, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 4th

[edit]

Can the article reflect the new protest date? [1], [2] Rosa Olmos (talk) 05:49, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, wait for it to happen. We can't use bluesky for a source. Once it happens, there will be enough reliable sources for us to start adding it to the article. In the meantime, we need to work on adding the other two protests to the article. We are behind and if it stays that way, we won't be able to document all the protests. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 11:42, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. So we have MSNBC & CBS talking about the 4th of March: [3], [4]. The 50501 event calendar says 4th of March: [5] And we can list future missions to Mars ahead of time: List_of_missions_to_Mars#Future_missions

Or have a full article about a future, yet to be released video game: Grand Theft Auto VI. There's even a whole category for upcoming video games: Category:Upcoming_video_games_scheduled_for_2025 Or products: Category:Upcoming_products Rosa Olmos (talk) 12:40, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Expecting the article might be updated quite a bit today. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:27, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, we need to catch up. I am going to finish moving the locations section to the protest section tonight Mikeycdiamond (talk) 16:47, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: Fork out 50501 protests in February 2025?

[edit]

A number of protests are being held today, so this article is going to continue to grow. One issue is some of the paragraphs don't have specific dates, so this is going to get harder to maintain. I want to float the idea: Should we fork 50501#Protests out to 50501 protests in February 2025? Then, we could keep a summary of February 2025 protests here and have a new section specific to the March 2025 protests? ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:35, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikeycdiamond, Adolphus79, Opm581, and Sarsenet: Curious if you have thoughts, since you've participated in other discussions related to content organization. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:25, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should just add dates. Considering this article is going to be a first of its kind, we will be the ones setting the precedent for movements of this size in the future. After I finish adding moving protests from locations to protests I am planning on moving the protests section to the 50501 protests page (and removing the redirect that it has). Mikeycdiamond (talk) 19:40, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mikeycdiamond Ok, since I don't object and a couple other editors have expressed support for forking 50501 protests above, I've been bold. Feel free to copy move over the remaining "Locations" listings when you are ready. Meanwhile, I've included a link to 50501 protests within the History section of this article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:51, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Following another discussion at Talk:50501 protests, there are now pages for 50501 protests in February 2025, 50501 protests in March 2025, and 50501 protests in April 2025. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:47, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arkansas

[edit]

At midday on February 17, 2025, Presidents’ Day , about 70 demonstrators gathered at a busy intersection in Jonesboro to protest President Trump’s many undemocratic acts since taking office last month. Participants held signs criticizing Elan Musk and DOGE; calling out Trump as a convicted felon; “Democracy not Oligarchy”; and “We elected a President, not a King”. 199.38.125.97 (talk) 07:30, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have reliable sources for this? We can't add it to the article unless you have sources. Opm581 (talk) 07:48, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ideologies of the 50501 movement

[edit]

Before adding an ideology to the infobox, please add a reliable source to go with it. Lazarbeem (talk) 21:21, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure the article should have two infoboxes. We might be getting to a point where splitting 50501 movement and 50501 protests could be helpful. (?) ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should wait until we have all of the first protests in the article. I am planning to continue to work on it when I have more time (probably on the weekend). We are so close to having all of the first protests in the article. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 00:36, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, it seems @SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: is adding ideologies based off what users on the reddit think and say. I say we should remove it altogether until we have a reliable secondary source(or sources). Mikeycdiamond (talk) 00:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, I somehow doubt that 50501 is about the 2 state solution. Some people on Reddit also want to reclaim the Gadsden flag from MAGA. If you read /r/fednews, there's no talk about radical feminism. Feds just want their job back. Rosa Olmos (talk) 17:00, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What I removed from the infobox

[edit]

@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: please provide a source (in here or in the article). Mikeycdiamond (talk) 00:31, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox edit warring

[edit]

@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: Respectfully, several editors have now reiterated that addition of ideologies to the infobox requires a reliable source. You appear to be engaging in edit warring by re-adding what others have removed without justification. Anti-Khomeinism and Anti-Kimilsungism–Kimjongilism are not core ideologies of 50501. Just because an individual user on the subreddit expresses a certain view does not mean that said view is an "ideology" in the movement. In fact, I question the presence of this infobox altogether -- Pages for other peaceful activist movements like #MeToo do not have infoboxes, and the current infobox Template:Infobox militant organization does not properly fit the article. I would encourage we discuss on the talk page before adding further content to the infobox. Alxeedo TALK 01:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, no government is an ally to this movement in any official sense whatsoever. I will remove these from the article in order to maintain accuracy. Alxeedo TALK 01:04, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Really, how is this even edit warring? Like, are you aware of the news of the movement? What caused you to notice there is something like this on the article? SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 01:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
An editor removed Government of Canada (see here) and I thought you added it back, but I may have been incorrect, so apologies for that. I'm not trying to be inflammatory however I would encourage more caution in adding to these infoboxes and discussion on the talk page as necessary. I am aware of the news of the movement and the subreddit. However individual subreddit users' views do not necessarily reflect views or goals of the movement as a whole. As an example, Anti-Kimilsungism–Kimjongilism is not a primary focus of this movement, even if many protesting happen to agree with the ideology in question. Regarding the addition of state governments or political parties to the infobox -- I would urge against this unless these parties have officially aligned themselves with the movement. Again, just because an individual politician participates in protests does not mean their party or government endorses the protest. As an example, I'll cite this NPR article: "The group says it is not affiliated with any political party, and they describe Monday's protest as a "call to action."" I hope this makes sense. Alxeedo TALK 01:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should not rule out any additional ideologies the 50501 members may had, so we should keep an eye on that because there could be new sources coming since this is still ongoing. I think the best thing is to add the current event template (which I will probably will). SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 01:29, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Current events template may make sense. I'm not necessarily saying that no further ideologies should be added whatsoever -- what I'm saying is that, for an ideology to be notable enough to include on the page, it should be backed up by a reliable source which directly states that a given ideology is associated with the movement. Individual subreddit users' comments are generally not reliable enough to be considered evidence that an ideology is shared by the movement as a whole. (Additionally, I won't die on this hill, but I still question the relevance of the first infobox altogether, since 50501 is not a militant organization.) Alxeedo TALK 01:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"March Fourth for Democracy"

[edit]

I've redirected March Fourth for Democracy and March 4th for Democracy to here for now, per sources:

---Another Believer (Talk) 17:38, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just me or is the number of quality sources dwindling? Mikeycdiamond (talk) 17:49, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's now a page for March at 50501 protests in March 2025. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:46, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reactions from Republican Officials ??

[edit]

Really weird to have this as a section. Probably should just be reactions from public officials and have both Republican and Democratic responses. -- The Cunctator (talk) 01:50, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I don't see why we should only have reactions from Republicans. That section should also have reactions from Democrats, as well as from non-American public officials (if any of them have reacted.) Opm581 (talk | he/him) 02:00, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is the way it currently is because the only quotes I found was official's speeches at the event or republicans reacting to it. Mikeycdiamond (talk) 17:04, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What the Republicans said is pure party line propaganda and it is not encyclopedic. 75.163.91.117 (talk) 00:21, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Whether quotes are "propaganda" or not, they can be included in an article as long as they are not told from Wikipedia's voice. The article shouldn't take any stances, but it should have information on relevant stances. x RozuRozu • teacups 22:02, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Day of Action

[edit]

New related page for the April 19 protest:

---Another Believer (Talk) 13:54, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't 50501 call of its upcoming protests the next day of action? Mikeycdiamond (talk) 19:16, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure, I was just following what sources have said, but you're welcome to flag issues at Talk:Day of Action. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:38, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Page moved to 50501 protests in April 2025. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:46, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute

[edit]

I don't normally make major changes to pages like this, only minor ones, but there has been a seemingly ongoing dispute between those in charge of 50501 over leadership. I don't personally think it should be included in the article until the dust settles and/or a reliable source covers it, since right now it's just a bunch of wild speculation, but I felt I should put that here. GrandDuchyConti (talk) 12:19, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there was a trademark filing and there's been a ton of in-fighting surrounding it. Pertinent, but still developing. 174.29.250.156 (talk) 21:04, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like the situation has been resolved now, should it be included? GrandDuchyConti (talk) 20:16, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I searched up "50501 leadership dispute" but it seems like all the "reliable sources" (so, not Reddit) covering it are only about the protests. I'm not sure if it's notable enough for inclusion yet, but if there are good sources then there's probably no harm in mentioning it, IMO. I doubt we can use WP:ABOUTSELF for Reddit, since a dispute involves several people and thus violates "2. It does not involve claims about third parties". x RozuRozu • teacups 21:11, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@XRozuRozu Thats fair, I suppose. Hopefully a reliable source covers it eventually. GrandDuchyConti (talk) 21:15, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:50501_movement&oldid=1288314029"