Talk:Conflicts involving Critical Mass

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

Organizing by time?[edit]

Shouldn't it make more sense if this article was organized by time? Or at least in an alphabetical order by city?--eks (talk) 18:36, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

POV[edit]

I edited three separate incidents with POV concerns (Seattle, Berkley, and San Fransisco). The July San Fransisco section in specific was overt. Please edit as appropriate.Cptnono (talk) 04:46, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have some concerns with the recent edits by Nolatime in the '97 incident in San Fransisco.

  • The recent edits turned the section into a concern with mass arrests which overshadows the conflicts directly related to that evening's Critical Mass ride.
  • A single undated and incomplete article from the SF Examiner does not supersede the other sources. Please find another or complete source for the number of arrests if you believe it is in dispute.
  • The "By accident or by design: the police riot on Market Street" you refer readers to might be OK in the External Links section but further overweights the section and is out of place. I don't know how valid the source is (especially when compared to more orthodox news sources) and there is obviously a NPOV point to make from the site.
  • Are the Eugene Hill and Bennett Hall paragraphs related?rimmed too much and came across with POV myself. If blame needs to be assigned it should go in in
  • I did not think a statement regarding blame was necessary when I originally edited the section from its nonneutral state. Both sources don't support the final sentence regarding who is at fault (original research/interpretation).Cptnono (talk) 06:04, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Berkeley, California[edit]

I've got some concerns about the wording of the Berkeley incident. The factual description and the legal analysis are inconsistent. The article states that "a motorist met an intersection with dozens of bicycles crossing," but also claims that "it is not clear who had the right of way." If the factual description is accurate, then the issue of right of way is clear. The California Vehicle Code states: "The driver of a vehicle approaching an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle which has entered the intersection from a different highway." The citation supporting the unclear right of way assertion is from an SF Chronicle article which states: "Police have not determined who had the right of way at the intersection." The fact that police have made no determination does not imply that the answer is unclear, only that they haven't made a determination.

I'm guessing the easiest fix would be to change "it is not clear who had the right of way" to "police have not determined who had the right of way." Anyone see issues with this change?

JWaters (talk) 20:30, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incident in New York[edit]

What about adding a link to the video itself? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwkVMT6m7zg Hwttdz (talk) 17:38, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what the protocol for that is. I don't see a problem as long as it is within Wikipedia standards.Cptnono (talk) 19:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ref removed from recent paragraph rewrite. Pogan article should be merged so took info from there. Please use as needed: 

|url        = http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/16/nyregion/16critical.html?_r=1&fta=y
|title      = Police Officer Seen on Tape Shoving a Bicyclist Is Indicted
|publisher  = New York Times
|author     = JOHN ELIGON and COLIN MOYNIHAN
|date       = December 15, 2008
|accessdate = 2009-01-05

Seems like an acceptable base but any rework is OK.Cptnono (talk) 21:02, 3 May 2009 (UTC)`[reply]

Just attempted the redirect. it loks like it is directed to the top of the page so please fix. Thought the following info might be needed in the future if anyone wanted to toy with the seciton:

Cptnono (talk) 03:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ref the documentary 'Still We Ride', there's also a copy at https://vimeo.com/104404523/. And the film is listed in IMDB at https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0784837/. Can none of the links be added to the article or referred to in a footnote? BernardUK 19:01, 13 June 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bernardboase (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Pogan[edit]

FYI. Police officer in a Critical Mass Conflict in New York. Ikip (talk) 16:59, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor just brought it up again in an edit summary. This was actually discussed in depth and it was merged into here. WP:ONEEVENT. However, an editor recently cleaned house and probably took too much out. See: the difference here. I will restore the info deleted to the Conflicts involving Critical Mass page since it is where it belongs. Clean up can go from there.Cptnono (talk) 02:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is in. It looks up to date. I have not been able to find informaiton on the resolution of the civil suit or criminal charges. These may still be ongoing. The basic informaiton needed is Pogan hit him without provocation, lied about it, got caught, and court stuff is ongoing. We have a little too much detial as is in my opinion but that might just be me. I think the edit removing so much of the informaiton might have been a little rash, though.Cptnono (talk) 03:26, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Walnut Creek, California[edit]

On Friday June 20th, 2008, a car accidentally bumped into the rear wheel of one of the participants of the ride. An oral argument ensued between the driver and passenger of the car and the cyclist involved, after which both of the passenger and driver of the car assaulted the cyclist. The police showed up and arrested both the passenger and driver of the automobile involved in the assault. [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.26.145.164 (talk) 12:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/06/20/18509674.php

NPOV[edit]

Weael words in the lede? ("Critics claim") without a balancing viewpoint? What do proponents of the ride think? Is it necessary to have this information in the lede at all? 24.57.77.99 (talk) 00:18, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well it is about conflicts so it will not be all rosey. Agree about WP:CLAIM though. I will fix that. Unless there are sources for their response to the criticism I will be removing the tag.Cptnono (talk) 03:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dispute was not resolved, weasel words still in the lede. 24.57.77.99 (talk) 19:02, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it was. "Say" is not a weasel word.Cptnono (talk) 01:12, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Porto Alegre[edit]

I've added the video of the incident as a reference. I do think it greatly serves as a reference to the incident, a strongly visual one. But don't know exactly how to treat "video as a reference". --eks (talk) 18:36, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removed since it was contributory copyright infringement. An essay with details is WP:VIDEOLINK Cptnono (talk) 01:10, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Conflicts involving Critical Mass. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:32, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Conflicts involving Critical Mass. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:37, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Conflicts involving Critical Mass. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:55, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Conflicts_involving_Critical_Mass&oldid=1211036306"