Talk:Henry Louis Gates arrest controversy

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Gates, Harvard, the police, race relations etc. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Gates, Harvard, the police, race relations etc at the Reference desk.

A fact from Henry Louis Gates arrest controversy appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 August 2009 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Sgt. James Crowley, who arrested Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates, has taught a course entitled "Racial Profiling"?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2009/August.

Wikipedia

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Massachusetts / Boston Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (assessed as Low-importance).
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts - Boston (assessed as Low-importance).

African diaspora

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1 (July 24–Aug 1 2009)
Archive 2 (July 31–Aug 11 2009)
Archive 3 (August 3–14 2009)
Archive 4 (August 14–28 2009)

Source of Photo[edit]

I've added some information about the sourcing of the photo of Gates at the moment of his arrest Tombarfield (talk) 14:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I accept the reversion based on external linking, but given that the article mentions the Harvard Crimson and the AP, would it be inappropriate to link to the Demotix wiki page? Tombarfield (talk) 09:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In what context did you have in mind?Mattnad (talk) 11:57, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up meeting[edit]

It has been reported that Gates and Crowley met up again recently [1]. Certainly an interesting postscript to the whole affair. Remember (talk) 20:46, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From a paparazzi POV, it makes sense, but it's slim information. Is there enough value in just noting they met again? "What for" is the information that would make it encyclopedic in my view.Mattnad (talk) 16:55, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Matt, how often does it happen that an arrestee and an arresting officer later sit down together in a pub for an hour-long talk? I agree it would be nice to know what they talked about. Pechmerle (talk) 05:40, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicting beers[edit]

A minor thing - but entirely facts-based: The cited source on this page (Washington Post) lists Gates' beer choice as Sam Adams Light. Interestingly, NPR lists his selection as Red Stripe [2]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Synalle (talk • contribs) 08:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Red Stripe was Gates's original choice, but when it became clear all others participants would be having an American beer, Gates switched his order to a Sam Adams. Pechmerle (talk) 05:37, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was something about how the White House only stocks domestic beers. Squidfryerchef (talk) 05:41, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was some considerable discussion about the choice of beers and what it signified as political theater. As sometimes happens the President and his guests made mainstream choices from large American producers, and I think some beer fans complained that they could have used the occasion to feature microbrews. There was a similar issue regarding factory farm interests when Michelle Obama grew an organic garen. A for White House chef said there is no buy-American policy regarding presidential beer, and that if the President wanted foreign beer he could drink foreign beer. In a Time article,[3] a historian runs down some presidential alcohol choices. Alcohol-wise, Kennedy poured Dom Perignon at most events; Bush junior drank an alcohol-free variety from Heinekin, etc. Given that this is all political theater and that the seemingly trivial issue of beer brands was a well-covered part of it, the rationale for the beer choices might be worth a few words... but not much more than that. - Wikidemon (talk) 06:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think Officer Crowley requested Blue Moon and Obama requested Bud Light. I don't see this mentioned on the article ad it has been over a year since this was last discussed. --76.124.53.220 (talk) 03:35, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nature of controversy[edit]

no actionable proposal to edit article - this is not a chat WP:FORUM

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I question the statement that "The arrest generated a national debate about whether or not it represented an example of racial profiling by police." That really implies that the debate was about whether Cowley was a racist. However all of the evidence show Sgt Crowley behaved properly, indeed impeccably. Professor Gates however was abusive, agitated, and most importantly made racist remarks about Crowley. This was indeed debated subsequently. So wasn't the national debate really about whether Gates' comments, and his false assumption that Crowley was racist, was not itself racist?

Why don't you read the article and some of the sources. The sentence seems to be a a pretty accurate summary of what went on. The latter part of your comment, "So wasn't the national debate really about whether Gates' comments, and his false assumption that Crowley was racist, was not itself racist?" is not supported by the sources I read as I worked on the article. But just thinking logically, even if Gates thought he was a victim of racial profiling, it does not follow that he was being a racist to complain about it (unless you're Glenn Beck [4] and then logic and common sense need not apply)Mattnad (talk) 17:32, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gates automatically assumed that a white police officer was a racist, based solely on the color of his skin. If that isn't racism, I don't know what is. If I was the police officer, I would have shot gates on the spot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.97.133 (talk) 19:49, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Linking in quotations[edit]

Per best practices outlined at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Linking, I've removed the random link added by another user to a quote. If there is a good reason for adding this link, please use this section to make your case. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 04:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Solomonic.

Now, that may be proverbial and comprehensible to the sort of people who can casually edit an encyclopedia—like us—but not to the other 99%. Kids, teenagers, Latvians and Mongolians who find their own Wikipedias inadequate for esoteric subjects.

In his speech, Gates is reaching for a 50-cent word, a superlative, at that point; he is going all sesquipedalian on us.

As I just did in my previous sentence. Bing, bing, BOOM, with a 1, 2, 3 rhythm I borrowed from Gates.

I don't expect 99% of people to take my meaning here, so if you want to link wikt:sesquipedalian there, that is fine with me.

And that is precisely what Gates is doing.

Varlaam (talk) 16:49, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Using Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking as your guide, please explain how linking to this word helps readers understand the controversy. Viriditas (talk) 20:04, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This entire article is biased and would best just be deleted. There is no controversy. A man was breaking into a house and when the Cambridge police questioned him he became beligerant and used abusive disrectful language. The article is written by someone who still wants this to be a controversy. The controversy is the President's iaapropriate reactions to the point of having a press release and berating the Cambridge police: inappropriate because this was not a matter of the federal government and inappropriate for the President of the United States to insert himself in the middle of a local police issue. The President's priority is to safeguard the safety of the United States and its citizens not take sides in a local issue.Danleywolfe (talk) 14:46, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gates was breaking into his house. If he was white, the officer would never have been called in the first place. Having met and talked with Gates, I find it completely unbelievable that he was arrested in the first place. This elderly man can barely walk due to a lifelong disability, so the arrest was made for no reason whatsoever. Can you imagine someone arresting your disabled grandfather because he locked himself out of his house and decided to crawl through the window so he could get in and take his medicine? This is the kind of thing black people have to deal with all the time. This is not a white person problem. The president has nothing to do with this. I much prefer to know the honest opinions of our leaders than to have them remain silent on the sidelines. Leadership requires communication. It is not a matter of taking sides. The fact of the matter is, taxpayer's money was wasted by arresting this man. I would much prefer to see the police use their funds efficiently to fight actual crime, not to put black men in their place. Further, as citizens, we should be able to talk back to the police without fear of reprisal or arrest. Living in "fear" of authorities breeds contempt, not respect. "People should not fear their government; the government should fear its people." Viriditas (talk) 03:35, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. I was forced to break into my own home in Rockville, Maryland, and the cops were called. I am white. So was the neighbor who made the call. And no, I'm not a guy who looks like a thug; I'm a technical editor. When he got there, the officer was all business, demanding to know who I was, and demanded proof that I lived there. Being a law-abiding sort, I gladly showed him my ID, since I realized how bad it looked, and he nodded, apologized for the inconvenience, and gave me some advice on where to keep a spare key outside the home in case it happened again. Amazing what can happen when you don't look for persecution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeeJaye6 (talk • contribs) 15:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This was a notable event. It had ripples for months. 'nuff said.Mattnad (talk)

Non-neutral photo[edit]

I would like to request that the picture of Sgt. Crowley be replaced with one that is more neutral, or at least in line with that of Professor Gates. As it stands now, Professor Gates has a neutral-to-friendly expression, while Sgt. Crowley is frowning, and looking aggressive. This is beyond Wikipedia's rules on neutrality. A simple Google Images search for "Sgt. James Crowley" yields a lot of friendly-looking shots of him that can go perfectly well with the shot of Gates.

I would replace the picture myself, but unfortunately, I have no idea how to upload a pic to Wikipedia. DeeJaye6 (talk) 15:51, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's not as simple as picking a photo we'd like. We need a photo that does not have copyright restrictions. If you can find a better photo that doesn't contravene copyright, I'd be happy to take a look and upload it if appropriate.Mattnad (talk) 02:26, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also disagree that he looks aggressive in the photo (assuming you're referring to the side-by-side image of Gates and Crowley in the infobox). The problem is the lack of context afforded by a cropped image. The photo in question is actually a crop of this photo of the three toasting at the "beer summit". If it looks like he's scowling, it's mostly because he's leaning forward. Wilhelm Meis (☎ Diskuss | ✍ Beiträge) 01:02, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unbelievable[edit]

14 years later, and Wikipedia is still referring to this travesty of policing and racial profiling as a "controversy", when it was never such. If you've ever met Dr. Gates and taken a moment to talk with him in person, there's no way anyone could possibly mistake him for a criminal (I said this on the talk page back in 2009 and I feel it needs to be said again). We need a new title. Viriditas (talk) 21:18, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]