Talk:Rainbow Gathering/Archive 3

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

Tone

imho, the article needs a more NPOV, encyclopedic tone -Μετανοιδ (talk, email) 20:08, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Why not try your hand at editing the article? If you're not willing to do that, could you be more specific about your criticism? Dlabtot (talk) 20:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I have removed this tag, since there is no further explanation of its motivation forthcoming. Charles T. Betz (talk)

Paragraphs are good

This sentence: "In an October 2008 report the American Civil Liberties Union stated: The U.S. Forest Service systematically harasses people who attend Rainbow Family gatherings on public lands.[21][22][23]

There is a paragraph about this event in the article, can we get them together ? The disembodied sentence just feels odd to me. Slowart (talk) 19:32, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

It's in the perfect place as a lede to the paragraph. Thank you. Basket of Puppies 20:28, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Your welcome and please note that 2 of the 3 refs for that quote are broken. O.K. you like it's placement, then what do you think of this in the lead of the section ?
In a report dated October 2008, the American_Civil_Liberties_Union stated that the U.S. Forest Service has systematically harassed people who attend Rainbow Family gatherings on public lands.[21][22][23]
I guess it's the little : that I don't like at the opening of the section. Slowart (talk) 02:30, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

2010 Gathering

I was there for all seven days, and I would like to upload some images. Please take a look [1], and note which ones you like.

I have also documented my experiences with the Rainbow Family since the early 80s here. I would be very grateful if you could read it and comment on it. Much of my knowledge is significantly different that what has been reported by the press, which should not be surprising, and hence different from what is in this article. I would like to develop research strategies to deal with the unique problems faced when attempting to create a history for a popular, though often maligned, modern culture.

--John Bessa (talk) 19:28, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

This article is largely sourced from Niman and Sentelle, who are not media figures. So implying that this article reflects a mainstream press bias is incorrect. It may not reflect your own experiences; Gatherings are notorious for being defined in the eye of the beholder. However, the autobiographical notes of any longtime participant do represent a significant primary source, and primary sources are not automatically disqualified. It would be best however if someone else were to read your document and interpret it into the article. Charles T. Betz (talk)
Primary sources aren't automatically disqualified, but self published sources, with limited exceptions are. Dlabtot (talk) 04:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
When you say I am "implying that this article reflects a mainstream press bias," you miss the purpose of my point. I have nothing against the mainstream, as I believe that Rainbow reflects the mainstream--it certainly did during the 70s. I don't think there is anything mainstream about the media, despite how it may describe itself; it is a capital entity looking for profit (as required by law) and cooperating within the scope of other entities that have similar goals. But to borrow your terminology, the non-mainstream press, such as online "papers," seem to be biased from my reading--this is simply a precautionary word about research strategies that any historian or social scientist would grok.
Actually I composed the material here, but it was deleted. (Please send me an email if you want the details of this situation.) So this is not self-published, but what I call "refugee material." In such cases, I side-line my material with Google Docs, which is typically not given to search bots. Everything here is correctly gathered information, factual, and eye-witness. And some of my writing was published on OpEdNews.com, which is actually typical of the non-mainstream press that I criticized. We can't all be perfect ;)
I am proposing following ethnographic strategies; I have access to elders in Woodstock, New York, as one is my barber. We can use a WM sister-site for the research so that we do not violate OR. What I am looking for here is structure, and I might add anyone can easily see that there has been far more conflict here than contribution. Conflict, as I can easily show, is a predictor of bad information in the wiki environment.--John Bessa (talk) 19:29, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

order

Does Niman say we provide order ? What is ungrammatical about removing it?
Self published sources are not generally used unless the author is an expert.Slowart (talk) 23:30, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Legal updates for 2009 and 2010

Hey can someone more knowledgable than I update the legal section. No reason to end the section at the 2008 low point. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.186.169 (talk) 09:23, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Announcements on future gatherings

Please, even if a circle or group makes a decision on a future area to look at for a gathering, that dose NOT mean you list it with the past gatherings. Wiki is not about making announcements. We use reliable verifiable sources about what happened, not what may happen in the future.Slowart (talk) 15:24, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

The event occurred on July 16 when the Vision Council at the Washington Gathering reached consensus and announced it. Announcements on AGR, at least by certain people, are a reliable source. User:Fred Bauder Talk 00:29, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Please see 2012 Summer Olympics User:Fred Bauder Talk 00:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Fred, I looked at your Olympic ref and don't see a list of past Olympics. Future is future, past is past, you may start a list for proposed gatherings but they should found in a real published reliable source, not a blog or and online forum or by someone who should know or even a eye witness. Slowart (talk) 01:17, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

A blog, or mailing list such as AGR is considered reliable with respect to matters about itself which are not controversial. Not that this particular decision is not controversial in itself, but there is no question that the decision occurred and has that content. There are extensive lists of past Olympics, but this is a list of Rainbow gatherings. The thing about the Olympics is that decisions about the locations of future Olympics are regularly made and information published about them. User:Fred Bauder Talk 12:31, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
The vision council decisions would need to appear in a reliable source and then it could be put in the body of the article if needed, not the list of past gatherings. Slowart (talk) 20:57, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

some nice new-ish sources

Longtimers will recognize me as alphasong, and I added a lot of verifiable content through closely reading Nimam and Sentelle a few years back. I was pleased to note the other books available here: http://www.bliss-fire.com/RbBooks.htm and although they may constitute primary sources, they have ISBNs and some are available on Amazon, so they are pretty solid sources that should be accessible for the duration. If folks OTHER than the authors buy and read them and use them to enrich the article (properly cited of course), my belief is that would be acceptable.

I don't have much time but my heart goes out to the occasional well intended contributor who posts their own experience which is then deleted as original research. If you really want to contribute, here is a clear avenue. Other thoughts? Charles T. Betz (talk) 03:53, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

They can appropriately be used for information that is not controversial. It is a matter of using good editorial judgment. User:Fred Bauder Talk 12:37, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

List of gatherings

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not a place for potential future gatherings to be announced. Everything on the page is something that has happened in the past, not something that may happen. The list of gatherings is a list of where the gatherings have happened, that's all it is. If you do not agree I'd like to hear your reasoning. Slowart (talk) 20:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Quote about Law Enforcement

I would suggest this quote be somehow incorporated into the article. "It went better than expected, but I don't think I would want to do it again," she said. "It was a lot of work. And I found it hard to work with the Forest Service team. They were pretty antagonistic toward the group." Source: http://www.steamboattoday.com/news/2006/jun/17/voices_of_experience/ She= "Kelly Crosby, the assistant public health director in Modoc County". I think it's important when you have a person who is a member of a county government who comments that the federal government's law enforcement squad is antagonistic and hard to work with. 76.118.180.210 (talk) 06:43, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

2012 annual gathering

The information I added about the location of the 2012 annual gathering is from a reliable source with respect to this subject. User:Fred Bauder Talk 12:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Man killed by police at an Australian Rainbow Gathering, 2012

This may or may not be relevant (I don't know the subject well enough), so I'll just add the link here:

Killing of the 'wild one' shatters peace of remote commune

Manning (talk) 05:38, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not surprised to find no reference to this on the page. I doubt that the simple news report of him coming at police with a crossbow and threatening them then being killed, is the whole story. I can't find any more details than just that. They claim he was holding them hostage at their own gathering, yet 3 people left, went to town and called in the police. They claim he hit people, yet there is not report of injuries. Could it be that these people just decided they didn't like him because he didn't act in a manner consistent with their woo woo world, and they didn't like the violence implied by his knife and crossbow, despite the fact something died when they ate that day, and they asked him to leave. They made him an outsider in a group that preaches inclusion. And when he refused and they couldn't wish him away they called in outside muscle, and oh my, how reality then intruded their self delusions. I'm not saying police did anything wrong, I would hope they are trained in was to make other outcomes than this possible, but they don't always work. But something smells bad here, it just doesn't add up to something so cut and dried. Local news articles about his death and his eulogy do not mention a history of violence. The only person to know the other side of the story is dead.

I'm going to have to add it. Jackhammer111 (talk) 21:32, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

some concerns from a new member

In regards to the Wiki Page for the Rainbow Gathering, I would like to call into question the validity of "People of the Rainbow: A Nomadic Utopia" by Michael I. Niman as a completely reliable source for three specific reasons. First, I would like to point out the ambiguous nature of the topic in general and how Niman's opinions and possibly misinformed facts could be deemed unreliable by many of the people who are being represented by his book. Second, I wish to bring to attention the amount of time that has passed since the research was made for the book in relation to the ever changing quality of the Rainbow Family. And Third would be the lack of other reliable sources that would provide other opinions, facts, and ideas about many of the different categories within the article. I understand the difficulty the many editors have had with this page and appreciate the work that has been done to keep the page as unbiased as possible with the information available. The Rainbow Gathering is not an easy topic to define and the fanatic ways that people feel the need to defend their opinions must be very hard to deal with. Trust me, most people who have attended many gatherings would understand exactly the hardships that this issue can raise. Thank you all for all of your efforts and I would like to offer any help I can with the task of updating this page, bear with me though because I am new to Wikipedia. I would appreciate any help or tips you may have and don't mind constructive criticism in the slightest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by P4i2p0e (talk • contribs) 01:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

origin of the festival

The German entry on the Rainbow Festival mentions a so-called Vortex Festival preceding the first Rainbow Festival. What is this, something like the Darkflower pub in relation to the Flowerpower pub in Leipzig? I think of the Rainbow Festival as a follow up of the Woodstock concert and originally an attempt to preserve the atmosphere and feeling of this music festival. If there was two types of festivals after Woodstock, which was older? Paganism is linked to rightwing movements sometimes, as is perhaps the gothic scene sometimes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.115.66.67 (talk) 17:59, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Rainbow Gathering. 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 06:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Rainbow Gathering. 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 22:03, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rainbow_Gathering/Archive_3&oldid=1086324071"