Sangdeboeuf (talk | contribs) →Request for comment: Already included in Cancel culture |
Hodgdon's secret garden (talk | contribs) →Request for comment: reply |
||
Line 166: | Line 166: | ||
*:Whatever the sense/nonsense of Obama's argument, it's nevertheless proved notable. (Note it's coverage was but recently removed from our article after its long-time inclusion, after all.) Coverage of counter claims about Obama's points' validity -- if taken up in a public forum and if found to be made by somebody appropriately prominent -- would belong in our article, too.--[[User:Hodgdon's secret garden|Hodgdon's secret garden]] ([[User talk:Hodgdon's secret garden|talk]]) 23:51, 18 October 2021 (UTC) |
*:Whatever the sense/nonsense of Obama's argument, it's nevertheless proved notable. (Note it's coverage was but recently removed from our article after its long-time inclusion, after all.) Coverage of counter claims about Obama's points' validity -- if taken up in a public forum and if found to be made by somebody appropriately prominent -- would belong in our article, too.--[[User:Hodgdon's secret garden|Hodgdon's secret garden]] ([[User talk:Hodgdon's secret garden|talk]]) 23:51, 18 October 2021 (UTC) |
||
*::I don't believe anyone has argued against {{tq|the sense/nonsense of Obama's argument}}. Users here seem to be arguing that the comments are not relevant to {{em|this}} article. [[WP:CONTENTAGE|Long-time inclusion]] is beside the point; consensus on what belongs in an article [[WP:CCC|can change at any time]]. In fact substantially identical material is already included under {{xt|{{slink|Cancel culture|Reactions}}}}. --[[User:Sangdeboeuf|Sangdeboeuf]] ([[User talk:Sangdeboeuf|talk]]) 03:52, 19 October 2021 (UTC) |
*::I don't believe anyone has argued against {{tq|the sense/nonsense of Obama's argument}}. Users here seem to be arguing that the comments are not relevant to {{em|this}} article. [[WP:CONTENTAGE|Long-time inclusion]] is beside the point; consensus on what belongs in an article [[WP:CCC|can change at any time]]. In fact substantially identical material is already included under {{xt|{{slink|Cancel culture|Reactions}}}}. --[[User:Sangdeboeuf|Sangdeboeuf]] ([[User talk:Sangdeboeuf|talk]]) 03:52, 19 October 2021 (UTC) |
||
*:::I'm surprised you hadn't removed it (in that I believe that if those with an editing regime similar to the one applied on this page were editing the ''[[Cancel culture]]'' page much, it wouldn't be able to be found there).</p><p>Some acts certain observers think reasonable or even exemplary in, per se, "wokeness" (read: in their "countering of complacency with regard to societal subjugations and nonequalities"(?)), by their very nature, inevitably yet other observers will think these same acts as not reasonable nor exemplary, even overzealous (or, perhaps, simply counterproductive: Indeed, if I understand right, both Obama and McWhorter simply find certain acts counterproductive and even self-identify as supporting the goals of "wokeness"). In any case, encyclopedic coverage includes all prominent views. (And, what's also been deleted from this article are mentions of prominent instances of ''woke's'' various receptions: outside of North America; in political contexts; in religious contexts; etc.)--[[User:Hodgdon's secret garden|Hodgdon's secret garden]] ([[User talk:Hodgdon's secret garden|talk]]) 18:00, 19 October 2021 (UTC) |
|||
== MLK's speech (in various versions 1959-1968) advocating 'remaining awake' == |
== MLK's speech (in various versions 1959-1968) advocating 'remaining awake' == |
Revision as of 18:01, 19 October 2021
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Allyborghi (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Watkina, Abamzai, Ujwalamurthy.
Notable commentary?
- Woke Church: An Urgent Call for Christians in America to Confront Racism and Injustice
diff (last.fm[6] - "[Book's author, Eric Mason, rec'd his ]doctoral degree at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, in Ministry In Complex Urban Settings, May 2007") - The Madness of Crowds: Laver, M. Soc 58 (2021)[7] - " --- is a push-back[ ]by these old-school liberals against a 'woke' movement that now sees them as part of the problem[ . N]ew cultural 'tripwires' which can unexpectedly cause[ ]people accustomed to being revered as 'good'—to fall flat on their faces"
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 18:16, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
- The first cites a primary source for Eric Mason's use of "woke". Moody Publishers is a small Christian publisher; as the author himself is evidently non-notable, I've removed it as WP:UNDUE. The Laver review could be useful under § As a pejorative term, however, particularly the statement
Murray supplements his description of woke culture as 'deranged,' rather than merely intolerant of its critics ... The implication is that, while identity politics merit his attention and criticism, alt-right movements, much more dangerous and also powered by the Internet, do not
. What we should not do is uncritically paraphrase Murray's definition of "woke", because the author does not. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 18:42, 4 October 2021 (UTC)- It's quite natural for any of us editors trying to operate mostly from a secular standpoint (eg of the Academy) to undervalue certain works published within whatever devotional framework; however, in response to "
the author himself is evidently non-notable
": Mason's The Woke Church is big stuff!Mason's books have garnered any number of reviews (I quickly surfed to these two) and the premise of this latest attracts enviable notice (incl. newsweek[8], christianpost[9] [10] [11], patheos[12] [13] [14] [15], christianitytoday[16], [17], atlantajournalconstitution[18]).
As for "
Moody Publishers[ as ]a small Christian publisher
": For what it's worth, Moody Publishing does a fair job of marketing its titles and its devotional-author stable includes quite a few "well-knowns." Including Gary Chapman: I just surfed to Amazon's "best sellers in Christian books" and Chapman's books (published by Moody's Northfield Publishing imprint) are at both its #2 spot and #5 spots. There might be other Moody-imprint titles there but the list page doesn't highlight publishers. By the way, Moody's author-stable also incl. Nancy Leigh DeMoss, Tony Evans, Erwin Lutzer, J. Oswald Sanders, Juli Slattery, A.W. Tozer. Moody says it publishes over 50 new titles per annum (these often reviewed in major venues), for over a thousand total in their current catalog (nonfic and also fic, incl. what's advertises as "award-winning" titles in the children's, fantasy, sci-fi, young-adult, mystery genres). A portion of its English-language titles are intended for African-American, LatinX, and "urban-influential" readership. It has multi-language offerings (with some works[ prob. bibles? ]having been translated into over 70 languages) and branch offices upon five continents.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 18:26, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
- The point is that the publisher is a niche publisher, not a mainstream, general-interest publisher, let alone an academic one. Book reviews that don't mention the use of "woke" are off-topic, and several of the sources you mention are not generally reliable anyway. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 18:35, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- The sourcing provided possess adequate independence. (I could have provided others less so[19] [20]: Admittedly, sometimes, someone such as a pastor's theological teaching or analysis can be found to be notable only within the religious community in qustion but not outside of it. With that caveat, certain publications (Patheos, Christian Post, etc.) are considered independent of the type of religion to which they give journalistic coverage (more examples: L'Osservatore Romano and Our Sunday Visitor with regard to Catholicism and Sojourners and Evangelical Press Association with regard to Protestantism). Provided Mason's (or another devotional writer's) analysis or thoughts about a matter had been absent such independent third-party sourcing, establishing its notability, if, per chance, (such as) an academic press had chosen to publish it, this could be taken by wikieditors as conferring some amount of notability sans such coverage; but, we needn't go that route.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 20:45, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- Another activist sermon, delivered by MLK in 1963 in Mo Town, was released as a recording by a "race"-label. A "ghettoization" of this event (alleging it as soelely "important within its own community(!)" and that the independent sourcing that would otherwise prove this speech notable must be disregarded in light its publisher(-as-a-vinyl-recording)'s "niche"-audience status) would unnecessarily hinder Wikipedia's assemblage of knowledge about the US 1960s Civil Rights Movement. To reiterate: Although it's true that some things are notable only within a minority community; if these do become noted-upon, by general-news venues, they indeed become notable for Wiki's encyclopedic purposes.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 18:47, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- Independence is only one factor in establishing reliability. The other main one is a source's
reputation for fact-checking and accuracy
. We specifically prefer respected mainstream publications over niche publications. If you could cite somegeneral-news venues
for your proposed addition, that would be great, thanks. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:27, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Independence is only one factor in establishing reliability. The other main one is a source's
- The point is that the publisher is a niche publisher, not a mainstream, general-interest publisher, let alone an academic one. Book reviews that don't mention the use of "woke" are off-topic, and several of the sources you mention are not generally reliable anyway. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 18:35, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- It's quite natural for any of us editors trying to operate mostly from a secular standpoint (eg of the Academy) to undervalue certain works published within whatever devotional framework; however, in response to "
- The first cites a primary source for Eric Mason's use of "woke". Moody Publishers is a small Christian publisher; as the author himself is evidently non-notable, I've removed it as WP:UNDUE. The Laver review could be useful under § As a pejorative term, however, particularly the statement
- 3. Cont. Re the woke church:
- SBC pastor Thabiti Anyabwile, writing in The Gospel Coalition)[21], argues (in an article entitled "Woke Is . . ."), "We have to teach people how to be their ethnic selves in a way that's consistent with the Bible and how to live fruitfully in contexts that don’t affirm their ethnic selves. Hence, we need a 'woke church.'
"But it's not just African Americans who need a 'woke church.' All people need it.[ ]We may need to find biblically richer and more careful ways of doing the work, but that the work needs to be done seems evident to me. Keep on Dr. Mason!"
- Page 84 in Voddie T. Baucham's 2021 Fault Lines: The Social Justice Movement and Evangelicalism's Looming Catastrophe[22]: "At the heart of the 'woke' movement lies the idea that the sin of racism is no longer to be understood as an individual sin." (Btw: Fwiw, Eric Mason's cited four times in this book published this year by Simon & Shuster.)--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 17:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- christianpost[23] - "
'Why are people and groups like Thabiti Anyabwile, Tim Keller, Russell Moore, the Southern Baptist Convention, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, 9Marks, the Gospel Coalition, and Together for the Gospel (T4G) being identified with Critical Social Justice on one side of the fault, and people like John MacArthur, Tom Ascol, Owen Strachan, Douglas Wilson, and the late R.C. Sproul being identified on the other?”
[ Baucham ]asks in the introduction of his 270-page book.'It is not a stretch to say we are seeing seismic shifts in the evangelical landscape.[ ]'
"
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 17:58, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- 4. Anyabwile's notabilities as public intellectual/evangelical religious figure
- southernbaptisttheologicalseminary[24] - "Thabiti Anyabwile, church planting pastor at Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, D.C., defends the value of expository preaching at an African-American pastors' conference at Southern Seminary, Oct. 27."
- usatoday[25] - "[ ]Our Take on Leaders of Change"
- washingtonpost[26] - "MacArthur clearly wants to paint the participants -- including prominent pastors Tim Keller, Russell Moore, Thabati Anyabwile and John Piper[ ]."
- christianpost- "[Ryan Burton King then named a long list of high profile evangelicals such as Russell Moore, president of the SBC's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, and Washington, D.C. Pastor Thabiti Anyabwile of Anacostia River Church who have spoken out against racial sin in America."
- relevantmagazine[27] - "It's not hard to find examples of people dismissing the conservative likes of Dr. Russell Moore, Thabiti Anyabwile and Beth Moore as 'Marxists' or 'Leftists' because they speak up about justice issues that are often broadly categorized as falling under the 'woke' umbrella[ ]."
- patheos[28] - "#Woke Evangelical Timeline" - "[ ]Anyabwile,another prominent black pastor in evangelical circles who has also criticized white churches for harboring racial prejudice[ ]"
- baptistnews[29] - "Anyabwile, a pastor at Anacostia River Church in Washington who supports the idea of reparations for slavery, is one of a small number of influential blacks in the[ Southern Baptist Convention ]downplaying the threat of a so-called 'Social Justice Movement.'"
- christianitytoday[30] - "Thabiti Anyabwile's Love-Hate Relationship with the Limelight: As a Pastor, He Prefers to Avoid the Public Eye. Here's Why He Doesn't."
- christianitytoday[31] - "Interview with Vince Bacote[author of Reckoning with Race and Performing the Good News]" [ - "Q."] I have read and done interviews with both your colleague at Wheaton, Esau McCaulley and the historian Jemar Tisby. Their books, Reading While Black and The Color of Compromise are terrific. I am grateful for these voices and certainly for yours. I am under no illusions that all African Americans are in total agreement on how to address the vexing problem of race in America. Thabiti Anyabwile would disagree on various points with Voddie Baucham. It is the same outside the church with John McWhorter and Ibram X. Kendi.[ ]" ["A." W]e can better assess the contributions of each if we approach them by asking questions like 'what point are they trying to make?' and 'what brought them to this approach?' and 'how does this help me to be more truthful about the complexities of race and the range of responses we need to address this with faithfulness?' This will help us to be learners first who seek to discover more truth and respond better to questions of race."
- More from Anyabwile's "Woke Is . . ."[32]:
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 20:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)"Woke: A Lineage.[ 'W]oke' today is pretty close to the Afrocentricism of the 1980s[, ]a word coined by Dr. Molefi Asante[. T]here was the Black Arts Movement and Black consciousness movement of the 1960s[. ]That period gave us 'Black' as an ethnic identifier[. ]To be 'woke,' then, builds on this discovery: that being 'Black' is something to take pleasure in.[ T]here was in the 1920s the New Negro movement of the Harlem Renaissance[. T]o be Ethiopian, Negro, Black, or African-American (choose your descriptor and time period) has always involved a massive project in self-definition, self-determination and self-affirmation in a national and world context characterized by anti-Black racism and oppression. That's the one thing these periods have in common. That's why some version of 'woke' appears in nearly every generation.[ ]" "
Woke Church?[ 'W]oke church' continues in the tradition of Martin Delaney, Edward W. Blyden, Henry McNeal Turner, Alexander Crummell[. By the world's ]mockery, scoffing, and hatred they make some form of being 'woke' necessary. So may the church get woke and stay woke.
"
- Restraining from a standard for notability more stringent than Wikipedia's own, these additional book/periodical citations I've provided show that Mason is notable. (Absent rebuttal, after 24 hours, I'll reinstate the edit [see diff] concerning him.)--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 20:52, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Most of these are niche sources, and most have nothing to do with Eric Mason. Anyabwile's The Gospel Coalition piece is a blog, and therefore not usable in any case. Baucham's book is a polemic, and was published by Salem Books, an imprint of the conservative publishing house Regnery Publishing, not Simon & Schuster. (S&S has published plenty of senationalist garbage anyway). The Christian Post is not a mainstream source, but even they include a quote calling Baucham's book a "polemic". I'm not seeing any basis for mentioning Mason's commentary here. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 22:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC) edited 08:25, 13 October 2021
- Your standards and WP's are starkly removed from each other. Just as books printed for the niche-audience of Hebrew speakers(*) aren't by that mere token rendered unnotable, neither are Christian-audience books on the subject of< wait for it >Christianity.
- ______
- (*)Although I don't know what %age of the world's est. 619 million evangelicals are English speakers, I'm sure they dwarf the Hebrew-speaking world.
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:12, 10 October 2021 (UTC) - Even though the implication that The Gospel Coalition is "self"-published seems disingenuous, even were it (I contend it's not): wp:SELFPUBLISHED only advises caution.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:12, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Christianity and evangelicalism are not the subject of the article. Men make up half the total human population, but men's magazines are generally not considered mainstream, reliable sources. WP:SELFPUBLISHED says (my bolding):
self-published material such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs (as distinguished from newsblogs, above) ... are largely not acceptable as sources.
The word "blogs" is right at the top of the page. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:18, 10 October 2021 (UTC)- Why such non-Wikipedia like prejudice against independent religion news sources? (Geez. What's next? Surely not rmvg all business-related sources -- plus, along with them, the nytimes's Roman Catholic Christian conservative opinion-columnist Douthat -- from our coverage given to "woke" capitalism!
Bottom line is that Thabiti Anyabwile is, it seems, one of the two best-known evangelical advocates for a "woke" multi-racial Christian awakening and renewal. (Any arguments against this contention?) - Secondly: Imagine a Venn diagram with one circle inside of another. Blogs (the diagram's larger, inscribing circle) include members that are self-published (a smaller circle inscribed within it). That said, some blogs remain (represented by a good part of the remainder of larger, inscribing circle) that are not self-published but, rather, published by a news publication. As it so happens, with concern this essay published by Anyabwile about the "woke" church, it doesn't happen to be self-published at all, but, rather, published by the "blog" portion of the news site The Gospel Coalition-dot-org.
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 00:00, 11 October 2021 (UTC)- Even if we were to treat Anyabwile's blog as a newsblog rather than a personal blog, the source is still not a mainstream source, and the statements in the blog are still Anyabwile's opinions. Religious publications are targeted to a specifically religious readership, not a general one. They exist to promote a certain religious point of view, so by definition do not have a disinterested viewpoint. Hence the material is WP:UNDUE. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 00:11, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Why such non-Wikipedia like prejudice against independent religion news sources? (Geez. What's next? Surely not rmvg all business-related sources -- plus, along with them, the nytimes's Roman Catholic Christian conservative opinion-columnist Douthat -- from our coverage given to "woke" capitalism!
- Christianity and evangelicalism are not the subject of the article. Men make up half the total human population, but men's magazines are generally not considered mainstream, reliable sources. WP:SELFPUBLISHED says (my bolding):
- Most of these are niche sources, and most have nothing to do with Eric Mason. Anyabwile's The Gospel Coalition piece is a blog, and therefore not usable in any case. Baucham's book is a polemic, and was published by Salem Books, an imprint of the conservative publishing house Regnery Publishing, not Simon & Schuster. (S&S has published plenty of senationalist garbage anyway). The Christian Post is not a mainstream source, but even they include a quote calling Baucham's book a "polemic". I'm not seeing any basis for mentioning Mason's commentary here. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 22:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC) edited 08:25, 13 October 2021
- Restraining from a standard for notability more stringent than Wikipedia's own, these additional book/periodical citations I've provided show that Mason is notable. (Absent rebuttal, after 24 hours, I'll reinstate the edit [see diff] concerning him.)--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 20:52, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
ColorLines / Eternity / Premier Christianity / Wear Your Voice
- 5. 5may2021 ColorLines [33] "How 'Woke' Became a Slur: Three Scholars Explain the Complex History of the Polarizing Buzzword": "[ UofVA's Meredith D. Clark ]: 'It is a quick way to signal to others that whatever those people over there are saying is not real, not substantial, this is something that's easily dismissed, you shouldn’t pay attention to it. And that is the same sort of treatment that has been reinforced over and over again through anti-Black policies and social practices used to try to cement our position at the bottom of society.[ ]There’s nothing for us to take back from them, it's up to them to figure out what it is that they don't want named and why[ they ]are willing to co-opt our term in order to keep it from being named."
- 6. 6jul2021[ Australian Christian newspaper ]Eternity [34] - "Weaponized Words: First 'Intersectionality', Now 'Woke'" -"[ D]o Christians need to choose between staying alert to earthly injustice and being spiritually awake, or can they do both? Civil rights leader and Black pastor Martin Luther King Jr clearly did not think the two aspirations were in opposition but rather entwined, judging by his discussion of the subject in a 1965 commencement address at Oberlin College, Ohio – Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution."
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 22:28, 10 October 2021 (UTC)"There are all too many people who, in some great period of social change, fail to achieve the new mental outlooks that the new situation demands. There is nothing more tragic than to sleep through a revolution. There can be no gainsaying of the fact that a great revolution is taking place in our world today. It is a social revolution, sweeping away the old order of colonialism. And in our own nation it is sweeping away the old order of slavery and racial segregation. The wind of change is blowing, and we see in our day and our age a significant development. Victor Hugo said on one occasion that there is nothing more powerful in all the world than an idea whose time has come. In a real sense, the idea whose time has come today is the idea of freedom and human dignity. Wherever men are assembled today, the cry is always the same, 'We want to be free.' And so we see in our own world a revolution of rising expectations. The great challenge facing every individual graduating today is to remain awake through this social revolution.
"I'd like to suggest some of the things that we must do in order to remain awake and to achieve the proper mental attitudes and responses that the new situation demands. First, I'd like to say that we are challenged to achieve a world perspective. Anyone who feels that we can live in isolation today, anyone who feels that we can live without being concerned about other individuals and other nations is sleeping through a revolution. The world in which we live is geographically one. The great challenge now is to make it one in terms of brotherhood." --- MLK, June 14, 1965"Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., ' Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution". Graduation Moments: Wisdom and Inspiration from the Best Commencement Speakers Ever. Honor Books. 2004.
- ColorLines is published by an advocacy group and should probably be used with attribution if at all. Otherwise it could go under "Further reading". The commentary from "conservative Christian" newspaper Eternity is opinion and therefore WP:UNDUE. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:04, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Of course such as the black church has been an incredibly important feature within the history of the anti-racist struggle and does continue to be in its post-Floyd iteration. Per WP guidelines, Wikipedia celebrates a multiplicity of notable viewpoints, and the editing stance that instead holds "niche" POVs as necessarily fringe is considered idiosyncratic. It's interesting that small to mid-size presses along with major publishing-house subsidiaries' special-interest imprints all of whose "niche" market is women (ah -- considered as such: despite the fact that the world's slightly higher %age women than men) often seem to "rule the roost"[sic] with concern issues involving improving societal mores and praxis: e.g., Seal Press is feminist. Robin DiAngelo's and Crystal M. Fleming's publisher, Beacon Press, has a religious affiliation (it's at the same time the sectarian press of the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations). Does this mean that such as DiAngelo's and Fleming's POVs must be considered therefore not notable? No, we see if such authors have been noted/reviewed in independent places. The SBC's back and forth with concern whether the "woke" struggle should be thought appropriate or inappropriate in the context of the[ evangelical ]church has received notice not only to the nines in the church press but also in such general interest papers as the wapo and others.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 16:06, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- Please link the
WP guideline
that saysWikipedia celebrates a multiplicity of notable viewpoints
. By my understanding, WP:NPOV expressly states that we should avoid giving undue weight to viewpoints outside the mainstream. See also WP:FRINGE. No one is proposing we cite Robin DiAngelo or Crystal M. Fleming, or anything from Seal Press, in this article. Feel free to link to any reliable,general interest papers
supporting your proposed addition. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:42, 11 October 2021 (UTC)- I respectfully disagree. I believe the "cites" in books and the church press make Mason notable and I believe the scores of cites I've provided from the church press -- along with those immed. below, in which Anyabwile's name is peppered throughout -- make Anyabwile notable. The wsj: "'Our Lord Isn't Woke.' Southern Baptists Clash Over Their Future: The Big Evangelical Denomination Is About to Elect a New Leader to Help Set Its Course after the Trump Presidency ... nytimes wapo nymag wapo latimes theguardian apnews nbcnews theatlantic theatlantic
- But (per the first clause of the Serenity Prayer) I accept:
- You believe that, because Mason's book's publishing house has a missionary status and the book's not-insubstantial notice quite naturally has been in the evangelical press, you believe it insignificant. (Thus: Mason's book, because it's "insignificant," "shouldn't be covered in WP.")
- You believe the "woke church" adherent Anyabwile is "not prominent." (Not that he's "prominent albeit within a religious milieu" [See, also: usatoday; theweek: "Pastor Thabiti Anyabwile, an influential voice among some American evangelicals." -- which is still prominent per WP's guidelines -- but: "not prominent." Thus: His views, because he's "not prominent," "shouldn't be covered in WP."
- However (to repeat): I respectfully disagree.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:57, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- "Prominent" in the contect of due weight means prominent in reliable sources. Religious sources are not generally reliable, end of story. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:46, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- Please link the
- Of course such as the black church has been an incredibly important feature within the history of the anti-racist struggle and does continue to be in its post-Floyd iteration. Per WP guidelines, Wikipedia celebrates a multiplicity of notable viewpoints, and the editing stance that instead holds "niche" POVs as necessarily fringe is considered idiosyncratic. It's interesting that small to mid-size presses along with major publishing-house subsidiaries' special-interest imprints all of whose "niche" market is women (ah -- considered as such: despite the fact that the world's slightly higher %age women than men) often seem to "rule the roost"[sic] with concern issues involving improving societal mores and praxis: e.g., Seal Press is feminist. Robin DiAngelo's and Crystal M. Fleming's publisher, Beacon Press, has a religious affiliation (it's at the same time the sectarian press of the Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations). Does this mean that such as DiAngelo's and Fleming's POVs must be considered therefore not notable? No, we see if such authors have been noted/reviewed in independent places. The SBC's back and forth with concern whether the "woke" struggle should be thought appropriate or inappropriate in the context of the[ evangelical ]church has received notice not only to the nines in the church press but also in such general interest papers as the wapo and others.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 16:06, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- ColorLines is published by an advocacy group and should probably be used with attribution if at all. Otherwise it could go under "Further reading". The commentary from "conservative Christian" newspaper Eternity is opinion and therefore WP:UNDUE. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:04, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- 7. thetablet.co.uk[35] - "After a successful period as head of community fundraising and public engagement at Christian Aid, Chine McDonald is to lead religious affairs think tank Theos as its new director, where she will be replacing outgoing director Elizabeth Oldfield starting in January 2022. Chine McDonald read theology and religious studies at Cambridge, before embarking upon a career as a journalist, broadcaster, author and public theologian. She's a regular guest on programmes like Thought for the Day, Prayer for the Day and the Daily Service, has written for a number of regional and national publications, and serves on the boards of several charities including Christians in Media, Christians Against Poverty and Greenbelt Festival." Premier Christianity (UK's #1 christian mag)[36] - Chine McDonald [2021 author God Is Not a White Man"]: "When I read the news about the SBC meeting, I was struck by a comment from Mike Stone, a pastor from Georgia, who had hoped to become the next president of the denomination. 'Our Lord isn't woke,' he said. Now, I realise here that I may be in the comfort zone of my echo chamber, but my thinking is that the Lord Jesus was in fact one of the wokest of the woke."22may londontimes (Chine McDonald)[37] - "A re-examination of the pervasive white superiority that has been embedded in Christianity for centuries is about far more than just being 'woke'."
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 18:00, 12 October 2021 (UTC)- Both of these are opinion pieces. The views of a religious think-tank director are WP:UNDUE in this topic area. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:46, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- 8. wearyourvoicemag[38] - "Four years later[ 2012], Trayvon was killed while his murderer walked free and Black America was rudely awakened. The collective Black response to injustice ushered in the time of being woke. Kara Brown wrote a piece for Jezebel titled 'In the Aftermath of Ferguson, Stay Angry and Stay Woke.' The piece was a reminder that being woke is not a moment in time or an observation you make on Twitter, but rather a journey or a goal to reach."
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 17:19, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Request for comment
Suggested text:
Former US President Barack Obama argues that the attempt for ideological purity by individuals claiming to be woke is counterproductive. "This idea of purity and you’re never compromised and you’re always politically 'woke' and all that stuff, you should get over that quickly. The world is messy; there are ambiguities. People who do really good stuff have flaws. People who you are fighting may love their kids, and share certain things with you."https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/31/us/politics/obama-woke-cancel-culture.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10/31/obama-woke-shaming-bipartisan-support-yang-coulter-gabbard/ https://www.npr.org/2019/10/31/774918215/obama-says-democrats-dont-always-need-to-be-politically-woke https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50239261 Obama doubts the efficacy toward progressive change of certain activist' tactic of online shaming. "There is this sense sometimes of 'the way of me making change is to be as judgmental as possible about other people, and that’s enough.' Like if I tweet or hashtag about how you didn't do something right or used the wrong verb. Then, I can sit back and feel pretty good about myself because, 'Man, you see how woke I was? I called you out.' I'm going to get on TV. Watch my show. Watch Grown-ish. You know, that's not activism. That's not bringing about change. If all you're doing is casting stones, you're probably not going to get that far."https://www.huffpost.com/entry/barack-obama-twitter-activism_n_5db9292ee4b0bb1ea3716bb7 https://graziamagazine.com/articles/yara-shahidi-interviews-barack-obama-about-cancel-culture/ https://www.marianne.net/monde/barack-obama-appelle-les-progressistes-cesser-d-etre-sectaires-et-manicheens
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 15:40, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
This wholesale addition will not necessitate removal or change to any other text in the article; and, I suggest it be threaded in -- by its date? -- into influential uses of/commentary about woke; however, an alternative would be for the article to maintain, as at present, essentially separate "pro"/"con" sections, in which case, it could either inaugurating a new section about criticism of the woke movement or else be used somewhat ill-fittingly to expand slightly the article's existing section concerning derogatory use of the term.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:02, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose per my comments at Talk:Woke/Archive 1#Use vs. mention. This material tells us nothing new about the topic of the article, which is the word woke. Obama's commentary and the news coverage of it focus on the topics of cancel culture/callout culture, Internet activism/slacktivism, and online shaming, all of which have their own articles. Per WP:NEO, we need sources that are about the term, not just sources that use the term. Efforts to expand this article are complicated by the fact that the term nowadays is used mostly as an insult, which makes any use of the term as a "lens" through which to view other topics inherently POV. Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and I doubt this one-off usage by the former president passes the two-year test, let alone the ten-year test. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 18:53, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- It doesn't require wp:Crystal balling to know it will still be notable ten years from now. (Cf., for example):
"Woke" in other Wikipedias
|
---|
|
- The contents of other Wikipedias proves nothing, since Wikipedia is not a reliable source. In fact only a crystal ball would enable one to claim that these passages would even be there in 2029.
Criticism of the woke movement
is unavoidably POV, since virtually no activists identify themselves with such a "woke movement"; that term is only used as a partisan insult. Which published, reliable sources describe Obama's comments asinfluential
? --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:08, 9 October 2021 (UTC)- [Comment threaded in after above material collapsed]: Foreign wikipedia's inclusion of Obama's "nuanced" criticism of the lexical entry woke I used nuanced to mean his contrasting effectively-advancing-its-cause with such criticisms of imperfections that Obama implies performative.]) were provided by me so their respective reliable sourcings could be gleaned (and not to "cite Wikipedia" itself as a reliable source).--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 15:19, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- Obama's criticism of woke was reported in an unfathomable number of reliable sources literally from around the globe. (Thus, to claim it is not notable would be somewhat akin to claiming that even MLK's 23jun1963 Detroit iteration of his "I Have a Dream" activist sermon is not.) Be this as it may, in that sources in the proposed text say in their headlines and article-body text that Obama criticizes woke, and in that this criticism is so very notable, indicates our article ought to include this material in some fashion.
- However, if certain Wikipedians believe, if my understanding of them is correct, that what Obama did was something other than to criticize woke -- and that these sources did something other than to report on this same -- and promote and propose this understanding in accordance with a more correct understanding of woke's meaning: such is fine -- but only as their philosophical arguments and not as an editing rationale, in that so doing would run contrary to the necessity of the non-active stance required in the gathering of Wikipedia's tertiary material. Indeed, for such a philosophical argument as this to actually make its way into the article would require that sources be found that make it, after which it could be presented in paraphrase with them cited. Skipping this step in order to impose certain Wikipedians' understandings of a term's meaning by stealth simply isn't the Wiki way.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 15:39, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- Yesterday's weather was also reported around the globe. That doesn't make it encyclopedic; Wikpedia is not a newspaper. To make a claim that something was
influential
, you would need a reliable source documenting said influence. I'm not seeing where any of the sources sayObama criticizes woke
, full stop. Can you give an example? --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 22:38, 9 October 2021 (UTC)- Yes, if prefer a paraphrase(*) that's better than the one in the 6dec2020 Essence[https://www.essence.com/news/politics/obama-criticizes-woke-culture-says-its-not-real-activism/ ("Obama Criticizes 'Woke' Culture, Says It's Not Real Activism: 'If All You're Doing Is Casting Stones, You're probably not Going to Get that Far. That's Easy to Do.' - President Barack Obama"), do please advise.
- _______
- (*)Btw, if there's a choice between Wikipedia:OVERQUOTING and Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing, WP seems to prefer the latter.
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 16:11, 10 October 2021 (UTC)- Quoting that source:
President Barack Obama on Tuesday said that 'woke' young progressives who use social media to call out problematic people—and who don’t understand that people who do good things sometimes have flaws—are not real activists, USA Today reports ... In a discussion, moderated by Grown-ish star Yara Shahidi at the Obama Foundation Summit, the two-term president fell back on the old centrist line that young progressives are seeking 'purity' and slammed 'woke' culture as not being activism at all ... 'This idea of purity and you’re never compromised and you’re always politically woke and all that stuff, you should get over that quickly,' Obama said to light laughter. 'The world is messy. There are ambiguities. People who do really good stuff have flaws. People who you are fighting may love their kids and share certain things with you.'
Here we see that Obama criticized'woke' young progressives
and'woke' culture
, but nowhere does it explain what Obama meant by woke. Once again, the comments are clearly focused on call-out culture, Internet activism, and political correctness (i.e. "purity"), which are not the topic of this article. The only statement directly about woke isThe truth is not that 'woke' (read: Black, Latinx, and Indigenous) progressives are unwilling to compromise; the question is what things are they willing to compromise on.
Equating woke with these specific groups needs better sourcing than one opinion piece IMO. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 22:22, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Quoting that source:
- Yesterday's weather was also reported around the globe. That doesn't make it encyclopedic; Wikpedia is not a newspaper. To make a claim that something was
- The contents of other Wikipedias proves nothing, since Wikipedia is not a reliable source. In fact only a crystal ball would enable one to claim that these passages would even be there in 2029.
- (Summoned by bot) Suggested for where? Is it a change, a wholesale addition? Is there implied text removed? It would help to provide [any] context for those who weren't already part of the discussion. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 22:32, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- I added such info below the suggested text; thanks.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 22:54, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose: contributes almost nothing to an understanding of woke. Specific uses of the term currently in the article seem focused on ones that specifically address the meaning of the word or ones that drove popularization of the term. The proposal suffers from including both excessively long quotations and unnecessary paraphrases of them. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 03:07, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose - It doesn't seem to add much to the understanding of Woke. Sea Ane (talk) 05:22, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- Comment. I can see the first two sentences of this fitting in the "As a pejorative term" section and being somewhat useful to the reader, because the former President is kind of using it sarcastically here. But certainly not the whole thing as it's written. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 14:07, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- None of the sources say it was sarcastic, though. And they all focus more on issues of cancel culture and online shaming, not the word woke. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:50, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose it could possibly be part of a larger new section, but there's nowhere to plug it in right now. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 19:55, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose -
It doesn't seem to add much to the understanding of Woke
- as a term. This is simply use of a term and it isn't even really clear what Obama means. An "attempt for ideological purity by individuals claiming to be woke is counterproductive" - I would have thought that "An attempt for ideological purity by individuals claiming to be almost anything might be counterproductive"! Merely claiming to be virtuous is usually hypocrisy, but Obama says nothing about the 'virtue' supposedly claimed, nor much about those making such claims. He uses a trendy word to make a point he has made many times, that progress can require pragmatism and compromise. My teachers were making much the same point to me many years ago! Pincrete (talk) 16:29, 16 October 2021 (UTC)- Whatever the sense/nonsense of Obama's argument, it's nevertheless proved notable. (Note it's coverage was but recently removed from our article after its long-time inclusion, after all.) Coverage of counter claims about Obama's points' validity -- if taken up in a public forum and if found to be made by somebody appropriately prominent -- would belong in our article, too.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:51, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- I don't believe anyone has argued against
the sense/nonsense of Obama's argument
. Users here seem to be arguing that the comments are not relevant to this article. Long-time inclusion is beside the point; consensus on what belongs in an article can change at any time. In fact substantially identical material is already included under Cancel culture § Reactions. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 03:52, 19 October 2021 (UTC)- I'm surprised you hadn't removed it (in that I believe that if those with an editing regime similar to the one applied on this page were editing the Cancel culture page much, it wouldn't be able to be found there).
Some acts certain observers think reasonable or even exemplary in, per se, "wokeness" (read: in their "countering of complacency with regard to societal subjugations and nonequalities"(?)), by their very nature, inevitably yet other observers will think these same acts as not reasonable nor exemplary, even overzealous (or, perhaps, simply counterproductive: Indeed, if I understand right, both Obama and McWhorter simply find certain acts counterproductive and even self-identify as supporting the goals of "wokeness"). In any case, encyclopedic coverage includes all prominent views. (And, what's also been deleted from this article are mentions of prominent instances of woke's various receptions: outside of North America; in political contexts; in religious contexts; etc.)--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 18:00, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
- I'm surprised you hadn't removed it (in that I believe that if those with an editing regime similar to the one applied on this page were editing the Cancel culture page much, it wouldn't be able to be found there).
- I don't believe anyone has argued against
- Whatever the sense/nonsense of Obama's argument, it's nevertheless proved notable. (Note it's coverage was but recently removed from our article after its long-time inclusion, after all.) Coverage of counter claims about Obama's points' validity -- if taken up in a public forum and if found to be made by somebody appropriately prominent -- would belong in our article, too.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:51, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
MLK's speech (in various versions 1959-1968) advocating 'remaining awake'
"Cites":
- This was published on September 14:
"The birth of Black Lives Matter marked a turn in progressive politics; five years into Obama's tenure, activists spoke more bluntly about their disillusionment with his vision of long-range change; they wanted Americans to 'stay woke' to injustice, a spirit of awakening that reached back to Marin Luther King Jr., who said in 1965, 'There is nothing more tragic than to sleep through a revolution.'"
Evan Osnos (September 14, 2021). Wildland: The Making of America's Fury. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. p. 53. ISBN 9780374720735.Also, there's:
- nytimes (Jamelle Bouie)[43] - "I want to make a point about the term 'woke'[ I]ts origins are in African-American vernacular, where it referred to a broad awareness of anti-black oppression. The metaphor of being 'awake,' for example, drives Martin Luther King Jr.’s 1965 speech 'Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution.' Like so much other black slang, it's been borrowed and diluted[ ]."
- Greg Garrett (2020). A Long, Long Way: Hollywood's Unfinished Journey from Racism to Reconciliation. Oxford University Press. p. 3.
The Atlantic writer Vann Newkirk[: ]'What[ King ]talked about was how to stay woke, as lots of people say.'
- legalinsurrection[44] - "Lisa Jackson, vice president of environment, policy and social initiatives at Apple Inc., who gave Monday's commencement address at Oberlin College, echoed the commencement speech that Martin Luther King Jr. made to the Oberlin College graduating class of 1965. [ ] 'He spoke about remaining awake through a great revolution,' she said. 'Or as you might say now, "Staying woke."'"
- aftenposten.no[45]: "George Floyd. "Martin Luther King Would Ask Us to Stay Awake" - "King was as 'woke' as today's anti-racists. [ ] «There are all too many people who, in some great period of social change, fail to achieve the new mental outlooks that the new situation demands. There is nothing more tragic than to sleep through a revolution. » In the same speech, King addresses an argument that is also widely used in the Norwegian context, namely that racism will resolve itself over time."
- lemonde[46] - "Historian, specialist of the United States, Pap Ndiaye is professor at the Institute of political studies of Paris and visiting professor at Northwestern University. Author of The Black Condition (Calmann-Lévy, 2008) and American Blacks. On the march for equality (Gallimard, 2009), he co-wrote with Andrew Diamond Histoire de Chicago (Fayard, 2013). [ ]
- lemonde[47] - "Before arriving in France, the term[ 'woke' ]spread across the Atlantic in the historical context of the struggle for black rights. "This slang expression has traveled in the African-American world from the 1960s," historian Pap Ndiaye explained to Le Monde in February. This specialist in the social history of the United States recalled that the great figure of the American civil rights movement, Martin Luther King, had urged young Americans to 'stay awake' and to 'be a committed generation', during a speech at Oberlin University, Ohio, June 1965."
- clarkuniversity[48] - Ron Jones: "The movement exemplified King's broadened mission of advocating for the rights of citizens across racial, ethnic, and gender lines — an amplified iteration of 'woke,' a term King had employed as early as the 1950s. [ ] 'There is nothing more tragic than to sleep through a revolution,' King said."
- Seton Hall's Forrest Pritchett[49]: "The concept of "stay woke" is inspired from a commencement address at Oberlin College in 1965 delivered by Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr."
- dailymephian[50] - "Before 'Stay Woke,' Dr. King Told Us to 'Remain Awake' through the Revolution"--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 00:30, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
- Despite the mention of MLK's "stay awake" motif in the article was removed (diff, the citations provide scholars' opinion that this motif during King's era clearly links to use of its slightly more vernacular hashtag/etc. correlate during our present electronic-social-media ("Floyd"? "woke"? ) era.--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 21:18, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- I'm only seeing one source here that was actually cited in the article (Garrett's A Long, Long Way) and it hardly says anything about the word woke, and that only by way of quotation. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:17, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
only seeing one source
- Here's more:
- 11. Vicki L. Crawford, Lewis V. Baldwin (2019). Reclaiming the Great World House: The Global Vision of Martin Luther King Jr. University of Georgia Press. p. 260.
King seemed concerned about the sustainability of such a movement over time. While the 'awakening' of the masses was reason to be encouraged, more important was 'remaining awake[' - ]'our ability to stay awake, to adjust to new ideas, to remain vigilant and to face the challenge of change.'23 Perhaps it is noteworthy, then, that among black millennials in the United States, the popular vernacular phrase 'Stay woke,' which quickly spread across social media and beyond the United States, has come to describe the imperative to remain vigilant concerning the ever-shifting systemic injustices and political machinations that impinge upon their everyday lives. For black millennial activists, remaining "woke," as a mode of social consciousness, involves no less than keeping track of the interlocking systems of global oppressions that render the lives of people of color, black people in particular, vulnerable and dispensable.
I suggest text that might resemble (after trimmings/expansions/etc. in var. places?):
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 20:43, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Beginning in 1959, the metaphor of "remaining awake" appears in various versions of a speech by Martin Luther King, Jr. entitled "Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution."[1][2] Scholars Vicki L. Crawford, Lewis V. Baldwin – who quote King's speech of this name (delivered in 1965 at Oberlin College) where King spoke of "our ability to stay awake, to adjust to new ideas, to remain vigilant and to face the challenge of change" – believe: "Perhaps it is noteworthy, then, that among black millennials in the United States, the popular vernacular phrase 'Stay woke,' which quickly spread across social media and beyond the United States, has come to describe the imperative to remain vigilant concerning the ever-shifting systemic injustices and political machinations that impinge upon their everyday lives."[3]
- I've added a condensed, paraphrased version of the quote from scholars Michael B. McCormack and Althea Legal-Miller, who wrote the chapter in question from reference #3 above. #2 is a primary source, and #1 is another religious treatise; not reliable IMO. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:05, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- I'm only seeing one source here that was actually cited in the article (Garrett's A Long, Long Way) and it hardly says anything about the word woke, and that only by way of quotation. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:17, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
References
- ^ Phil Snider (2018). Preaching as Resistance: Voices of Hope, Justice, and Solidarity. Chalice Press. p. 50.
- ^ Martin Luther King. "'Remaining Awake Through a Great Revolution'" (PDF). The Papers of Martin Luther King, Jr. Vol. V. Threshold of a New Decade, January 1959 December 1960. Stanford University's The Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute. p. 219.
- ^ Vicki L. Crawford, Lewis V. Baldwin (2019). Reclaiming the Great World House: The Global Vision of Martin Luther King Jr. University of Georgia Press. p. 260.
Summary style
This article has a laser-like focus on the word woke's use in North America (albeit with one child article's being created that concerns its use in a business context). However, per [[wp:Summary style, and, in light of the fact that Wikipedia doesn't ghettoize, per se, business, politics, religion, etc.: Concerning coverage given to the use of the lexical entry woke internationally or even in the English-speaking world in a religious context, where on Wikipedia ought these topics be contributed?--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 15:32, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
(1) DeRay Mckesson #StayWoke t-shirt (2) Mckesson/Brittany Packnett & StayWoke.org
Off-topic. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:57, 14 October 2021 (UTC) (non-admin closure)--not off topic. on the topic of the #staywoke hashtag!--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 20:29, 16 October 2021 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Widely-circulated images of activist DeRay Mckesson's 9jul2016 arrest while wearing a t-shirt with the hashtag "stay woke" appear, for better or worse, to have been credited with supercharging the phrase's general usage.
|
- Material concerning prominent BLM activist Mckesson's iconic photo of being arrested in the #StayWoke hashtag t-shirt was in the article for over a year before its extremely recent deletion (diff), thus, How can the propriety of its deletion be considered any kind of foregone conclusion? According to my understanding, for example, under Per wp:BRD, the deletion of longstanding material is wp:Bold; yet, I politely did not resort to a simple wp:Revert bringing the matter back to the status quo, in of its eventual settlement within a talkpage discussion dedicated to it. I believe it obvious this material belongs in coverage given the #StayWoke hashtag in our article, an effort to forego the matter's discussion here seems to me precipitate at its least. The opposing editor's response to my courtesy being this attempt to preemptively close the discussion seems improper (certainly: unusual!). --Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 21:05, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- If you want to include material in the article, then propose material to include in the article. As I said in my edit summary, the fact that Mckesson wore the hashtag on a T-shirt one time tells us nothing about the word woke. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:24, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- [Cmt threaded-in, later]: As you can see, some add'l sourcing's been added, in the below version of the article's longstanding content with regard to the founding of StayWoke-dot-org.
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 17:30, 18 October 2021 (UTC)--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 20:52, 18 October 2021 (UTC)In 2015, prominent activists DeRay Mckesson and Brittany Packnett began an online-organizing tool they named StayWokeLaurie Collier Hillstrom (2018). Black Lives Matter: From a Moment to a Movement. ABC-CLIO. p. 105. Laurie Collier Hillstrom (2018). Black Lives Matter: From a Moment to a Movement. ABC-CLIO. p. 111. Mohammed, Joy (5 July 2017). "White People Ruined "On Fleek" And Now They Took "Woke"". (it was officially launched as nonprofit in 2017"New Tool Helps Activists Take Resistance to State Capitols". www.colorlines.com. 3 April 2017. Dupere, Katie (4 April 2017). "Interactive tool helps activists resist the Trump agenda at the state level". Mashable. "The Resistance Just Got Smarter". GOOD. 6 April 2017.).
- [Cmt threaded-in, later]: As you can see, some add'l sourcing's been added, in the below version of the article's longstanding content with regard to the founding of StayWoke-dot-org.
- You'd additionally deleted long-time content within the article that makes mention of DeRay Mckesson's co-founding the activist organization entitled Stay Woke.Laurie Collier Hillstrom (2018). Black Lives Matter: From a Moment to a Movement. ABC-CLIO. p. 105.
Note that especially the "When Twitter Got #woke: Black Lives Matter, DeRay McKesson, Twitter, and the Appropriation of the Aesthetics of Protest" chapter (pp. 247-266) in The Aesthetics of Global Protest: Visual Culture and Communication (McGarry, Erhart, Eslen-Ziya, Korkut, & Jenzen, eds., Amsterdam University Press, 2019)[64] [See collapsed material at the top of the thread.] tell of this BLM protest photo with its hashtag of the phrase Stay Woke being identified specifically with the BLM movement and with social justice (whereas, incidentally, the phrase and hashtag had meant, not too previously, more generically as something akin to merely one's "remaining roused, when exhausted," and so forth).
Anyway, after the phrase's popularization, DeRay & colleagues utilized the phrase in their work. (At the book's p. 262, the chapter speaks of DeRay's #StayWoke-branded activism.") Along with DeRay-&-colleagues' utilizing this branding for the Stay Woke organization, of which our WP article had long made mention, he likewise co-created the "staywokebot," designed to assist movement activists with talking points. Also, his memoir has been characterized in various places and in various ways as his evangelization of staying in wokeness. And, according to NPR's Chicago affiliate WBEZ's segment[65] entitled "Stay Woke 101: DeRay Mckesson Teaching #BlackLivesMatter Seminar In Chicago", DeRay's prominence as an expert on "social justice, social media, and organizing" is reflected in his status as a fellow at the University of Chicago's Institute of Politics. Per this sourcing, IMHO if anybody has become prominent in activism branded "Stay Woke", author/activist Mckesson has.
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 22:15, 17 October 2021 (UTC) - Craig Watkins (2019). Don't Knock the Hustle: Young Creatives, Tech Ingenuity, and the Making of a New Innovation Economy. Beacon Press. p. 168.
."#Woke." - To consider the vitality of connected activism, consider the political journey of DeRay Mckesson[...
--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:14, 17 October 2021 (UTC) - "
[...P]ropose material to include in the article[...].
"
- Thanks. I suggest this edit (diff).--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 23:23, 17 October 2021 (UTC)- The existence of the online survey platform "Stay Woke", like the T-shirt, tells us little to nothing about the topic of the article. This might belong in Mckesson's bio, but it's WP:UNDUE here. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 00:08, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- The StayWoke organizational tool of 2015 was not the only thing mentioned in the edit you've reverted, the 'founding of StayWoke.org was covered as well. IMHO, both have pretty good sourcing (vis-a-vis, just for example, that for the "Stay Woke: Vote" organization that remains being covered in our article).--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 00:30, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- The existence of either nonprofit is no more pertinent to this article than the T-shirt or the online survey, no matter how well-sourced. It's another trivial use of the term "woke". We need sources that are specifically about the term. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:50, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- Per wp:Editwarring, Has one commenced? In that longstanding material about StayWoke-dot-org has now been removed from the article twice despite there being a talkpage stalemate with concern whether we should do so (one participant for its rmvl; one, myself, against).--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 17:35, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- The existence of either nonprofit is no more pertinent to this article than the T-shirt or the online survey, no matter how well-sourced. It's another trivial use of the term "woke". We need sources that are specifically about the term. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:50, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- The StayWoke organizational tool of 2015 was not the only thing mentioned in the edit you've reverted, the 'founding of StayWoke.org was covered as well. IMHO, both have pretty good sourcing (vis-a-vis, just for example, that for the "Stay Woke: Vote" organization that remains being covered in our article).--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 00:30, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- I oppose the reintroduction of that specific edit, for pretty much the same reasons as Sangdebouef. That said, I suspect there's something relevant to say about the photo of Mckesson and its effect on the use of the term. Hodgdon's secret garden, to give you some credit: you certainly have your fingers on a lot of sourcing. The wearyourvoice source attributes some increase in the popularity of th eterm to Mckesson and StayWoke.org; are there any others that say something similar? Firefangledfeathers (talk) 18:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- The existence of the online survey platform "Stay Woke", like the T-shirt, tells us little to nothing about the topic of the article. This might belong in Mckesson's bio, but it's WP:UNDUE here. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 00:08, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- You'd additionally deleted long-time content within the article that makes mention of DeRay Mckesson's co-founding the activist organization entitled Stay Woke.Laurie Collier Hillstrom (2018). Black Lives Matter: From a Moment to a Movement. ABC-CLIO. p. 105.
Get Woke, Go Broke
Not sure for sure why this info keeps getting scrubbed from the article, and then commentary about it buried in the archives, but it seems pretty transparent and does Wikipedia no real credit. The lack of neutrality doesn't convince anyone of the rightness of the prevailing ideology, it just encourages them to pursue their own ideology even further
In 2018, science fiction author John Ringo published a paper in which he argued that brands using overt political commentary in their advertising ran the risk of losing market reach and having profits decline. The idea has been encapsulated by the expression "get woke, go broke." [1] High profile examples of this phenomenon include the release of the film Terminator: Dark Fate.
- "Another possible reason for the new movie's lackluster performance would be its reputation as a "woke" reboot of the franchise... Whether this is true or not, this reputation could have soured some potential ticket-buyers from attending Dark Fate showings in an era where many Americans are starting to feel movies, TV shows, and other forms of entertainment are just getting too politically-correct. Coined by bestselling author John Ringo, the phrase "Get Woke, Go Broke" certainly comes to mind." (Jeremy Dick, MovieWeb).[2]
Other high-profile marketing campaigns to which the term have been applied by observers include Nike's Colin Kaepernick ads,[3][66] and Gillette's "toxic masculinity" campaign.[4][5]
"Advertising is increasingly the battleground of the culture wars, with big brands like Target, Nike and Starbucks copping backlash, and praise, for taking sides in divisive social and political issues like race, gender and sexuality. But by alienating roughly 50 per cent of potential customers, many brands end up taking a hit to their bottom line - "Get woke, go broke.""[6]
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.0.48.147 (talk) 16:02, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
- None of these sources are about the topic of the article, which is the word woke, and several are unreliable opinion pieces. Overall this material is highly WP:UNDUE. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:09, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
Dejuana Thompson & WokeVote-dot-us
This longstanding content was just removed from the article.
while the following year, Dejuana Thompson of Birmingham, Alabama established Woke Vote, an organization devoted to registering millennials.Duster, Chandelis R.; Tuakli, Foluké (December 14, 2017). "Black women stepped up for Doug Jones. Here's what motivated them". NBC News. Botel, Megan (18 August 2020). "'Crucial voices': the US women leading the fight against voter suppression". The Guardian. "Get Woke". Woke Vote.
According to my understanding of wp:BRD, the deletion of longstanding material, such as this is, is a wp:Bold component of BRD, which I've wp:Reverted (diff). In order to re-remove this material, talkpage consensus must be reached. Thus far, only two parties (its remover and myself its reinstater) have proffered !votes and we two await additional input (incidentally helping us avoid anything approaching an wp:Editwar).--Hodgdon's secret garden (talk) 17:12, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- We should remove it. It helps slightly as an example of woke’s connections to millennials, but it’s not a particularly illustrative or due example. If such a better illustration/example exists, I might support it, but the connection to millennials is easy to understand without one. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 17:22, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
- As I said earlier, It's another trivial use of the term "woke". We need sources that are specifically about the term. There's nothing in WP:BRD about how long something has been in the article. However, WP:V states that the onus to achieve consensus is on those seeking to include disputed material. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:44, 18 October 2021 (UTC)