Revision as of 21:15, 26 January 2022 editJMF (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users57,159 edits →... and slave-trader.: ten seconds on google news search← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:29, 26 January 2022 edit undoGovvy (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers36,247 edits →... and slave-trader.Next edit → | ||
Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
:::::::You wouldn't have to spend all day. Ten seconds on Google News search using {{code|"Edward Colston" "slave trader"}} gives . Even the Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph call him a slave trader. Others call him a people trafficker and mass-murderer but there is no need gild the lily (in reverse). --] (]) 21:15, 26 January 2022 (UTC) | :::::::You wouldn't have to spend all day. Ten seconds on Google News search using {{code|"Edward Colston" "slave trader"}} gives . Even the Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph call him a slave trader. Others call him a people trafficker and mass-murderer but there is no need gild the lily (in reverse). --] (]) 21:15, 26 January 2022 (UTC) | ||
:As you and others have said, "...was involved in the slave trade" are weasel words. They were apparently inserted to obscure his status as a then-prominent, and now historically significant, slaver who derived vast wealth from the transatlantic slave trade. ] (]) 20:41, 26 January 2022 (UTC) | :As you and others have said, "...was involved in the slave trade" are weasel words. They were apparently inserted to obscure his status as a then-prominent, and now historically significant, slaver who derived vast wealth from the transatlantic slave trade. ] (]) 20:41, 26 January 2022 (UTC) | ||
{{ping|AndyTheGrump}} Firstly, you shouldn't swear, even if you went to ANI, that might back fire on you. You really need to be careful. The editing you have applied to the article, seems to be removing the context and the citations. This is not helpful, you are effectively removing what I consider the better side of the man. Nothing is simply black and white, yet what you're doing is turning the article into that. People should read an article and make up their opinion on the evidence that the article shows. Not one side of what can be created, the whole picture needs to be there, not your POV pushing ideology. ] (]) 23:29, 26 January 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:29, 26 January 2022
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Edward Colston article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 10 days |
Edward Colston has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: January 7, 2022. (Reviewed version). |
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Edward Colston was copied or moved into Statue of Edward Colston with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on October 11, 2021. |
... and slave-trader.
The edit by Kronix1986 has been reverted as "not discussed". So, per WP:BRD, let me open the discussion.
WP:LEAD says that the lead should be a succinct summary of the body content. The current text "was involved in the Atlantic slave trade" is weasel worded: he wasn't just vaguely associated with it as shareholder or even a non-executive director, he was the chief executive of the company. He was a slave-trader, no ifs, not buts. Is there really any credible basis to argue otherwise? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:37, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- No, and it's mealy-mouthed to suggest otherwise. His "involve in the Atlantic slave trade" consisted of, err, buying slaves. That makes one a slave trader. Unless we are on a spiral reductio ad absurdum to the point where the only slave traders are those captaining the ship or working out of Slave Square. SN54129 11:13, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- The lead of this article went through a consensus, so any substantial change would probably need to go through another consensus. As SN5 pointed out, its correct in what it says, it's not weaselled. Govvy (talk) 11:34, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- Where and when was this consensus arrived at? AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:49, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- The lead is a summary of the article body, and the article body needs to verifiable from reliable sources. Currently there is nothing in the body that would support adding that to the lead. -- DeFacto (talk). 12:14, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- Don't be ridiculous. Colston was deputy governor of the Royal African Company. A slave-trading company. A company that traded in slaves. The sources cited in the article make it entirely clear that Colston derived a significant proportion of his wealth through the slave trade. I hove no idea why anyone should think it even remotely appropriate to try to play this down, but if they are going to, they are going to have to find better justifications than vague claims about 'consensus', and facile suggestions that the deputy director of a slave-trading company isn't a slave trader. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:57, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- For clarity, "Deputy Governor" equated in modern terms to CEO, given that the Governor was the King. Cf Vice-Chancellor. "Major slave-trader" is an accurate summation of both the body content and the sources. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:05, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- Or perhaps, per the Daily Telegraph, a "prominent slave trader"? AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- @AndyTheGrump: Since when do you feel that the Royal African Company was a slave trading company only?? You really need to review the article. Govvy (talk) 15:44, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- No, I don't need to read the fucking article. I am fully aware of what the Royal African Company traded in, and what Colston traded in. And I've no idea what the heck you are trying to prove here, but I'd have to suggest that it is singularly ill-advised. You might do well to consider how this vacuous stonewalling in apparent defence of a major slave-trader might look if it were brought to the attention of WP:ANI. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:05, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- I could probably spend the entire day finding sources which describe Colston as a slave trader. Given how common the description is though, I've got to ask are there actually any sources out there that suggest he wasn't? Because otherwise, It would seem rather a waste of time proving the obvious. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:41, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- You wouldn't have to spend all day. Ten seconds on Google News search using
"Edward Colston" "slave trader"
gives hundreds of hits. Even the Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph call him a slave trader. Others call him a people trafficker and mass-murderer but there is no need gild the lily (in reverse). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:15, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- You wouldn't have to spend all day. Ten seconds on Google News search using
- @AndyTheGrump: Since when do you feel that the Royal African Company was a slave trading company only?? You really need to review the article. Govvy (talk) 15:44, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- Or perhaps, per the Daily Telegraph, a "prominent slave trader"? AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- For clarity, "Deputy Governor" equated in modern terms to CEO, given that the Governor was the King. Cf Vice-Chancellor. "Major slave-trader" is an accurate summation of both the body content and the sources. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 13:05, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- Don't be ridiculous. Colston was deputy governor of the Royal African Company. A slave-trading company. A company that traded in slaves. The sources cited in the article make it entirely clear that Colston derived a significant proportion of his wealth through the slave trade. I hove no idea why anyone should think it even remotely appropriate to try to play this down, but if they are going to, they are going to have to find better justifications than vague claims about 'consensus', and facile suggestions that the deputy director of a slave-trading company isn't a slave trader. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:57, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
- As you and others have said, "...was involved in the slave trade" are weasel words. They were apparently inserted to obscure his status as a then-prominent, and now historically significant, slaver who derived vast wealth from the transatlantic slave trade. Kronix1986 (talk) 20:41, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
@AndyTheGrump: Firstly, you shouldn't swear, even if you went to ANI, that might back fire on you. You really need to be careful. The editing you have applied to the article, seems to be removing the context and the citations. This is not helpful, you are effectively removing what I consider the better side of the man. Nothing is simply black and white, yet what you're doing is turning the article into that. People should read an article and make up their opinion on the evidence that the article shows. Not one side of what can be created, the whole picture needs to be there, not your POV pushing ideology. Govvy (talk) 23:29, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Categories:- Misplaced Pages good articles
- History good articles
- All unassessed articles
- GA-Class African diaspora articles
- Unknown-importance African diaspora articles
- WikiProject African diaspora articles
- GA-Class biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- GA-Class Black Lives Matter articles
- Unknown-importance Black Lives Matter articles
- WikiProject templates with unknown parameters
- GA-Class Bristol articles
- High-importance Bristol articles
- WikiProject Bristol articles
- GA-Class Politics of the United Kingdom articles
- Low-importance Politics of the United Kingdom articles
- Pages in the Misplaced Pages Top 25 Report
- Selected anniversaries (October 2021)