Talk:2024 Southport riot

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merseyside Mid‑importance

	North West England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Merseyside, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Merseyside-related articles. In so doing it works and collaborates with its mother project WikiProject UK Geography. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Please also feel free to join in the discussions on the project's talk page.MerseysideWikipedia:WikiProject MerseysideTemplate:WikiProject MerseysideMerseyside articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Explaining background to the riot

Does the text need to make clearer what the rioters erroneously believed, i.e. that the attacker was Muslim? Rolling Stone put it succinctly: "The far-right protestors have latched onto the idea that the attacker is Muslim as a way to criticize immigration, a hot button issue in the U.K." Should we have something similar? See also PA saying, "The MCB says Islamaphobic backlash began with a false rumour on the internet which was then stoked by misinformation from a Russian news site, which wrongfully associated the crime with Muslims." Bondegezou (talk) 09:47, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think as more information becomes clear, a section on "misinformation" will be appropriate. There was certainly a lot going around on social media, if we find evidence that this clearly lead to certain actions last night I think that's relevant. Orange sticker (talk) 10:44, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Riot, plural vs singular

The use of plural word 'riots' is throughout this article, including the title. I think that's an incorrect usage. Many acts of violence yes, but the plural is usually reserved for multiple events in time or space. I don't think that's the case here. Any thoughts? -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 10:32, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, however it's probably too soon to declare this event over. More events are being planned in Merseyside, sadly. Orange sticker (talk) 10:45, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Came here to say the same thing. It should be moved to 2024 Southport riot. @Orange sticker: If something else happens, then it can be changed accordingly, but we shouldn't be pre-empting that. SmartSE (talk) 11:01, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. WWGB (talk) 11:30, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Value in 10 or 20 years?

I'm not sure that these two sentences pass the 10 year test:

Prime minister Keir Starmer wrote that rioters would feel the full force of the law.
Home secretary Yvette Cooper condemned the riots as appalling and requested a criminal investigation.

Do we honestly think it is likely that in ten or twenty years time it will appear relevant that these two politicians thought it necessary to say that the police would carry on doing their normal jobs in these circumstances? I don't, and I don't think it's even relevant, or due, for 5 minutes.

Are we taking our readers for fools? -- DeFacto (talk). 11:45, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added quotes from them as well from the same sources. What I disagreed with, was you removing comments from the two most senior politicians as UNDUE when it obviously is, or else the sources would not report what they said. SmartSE (talk) 12:00, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the issue here is WP:NOTNEWS. Orange sticker (talk) 12:17, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You think irrelevant and superficial remarks become significant if they are from the mouths of politicians? -- DeFacto (talk). 12:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Far right

@Bondegezou: If as you say, at least 2 citations explicitly say far right, please could you add citations to the statement so that we can verify them.

The citation from The Guardian 20:05 30 July 2024 that has been used to support "far right", says that Far-right activists on social media have been promoting a protest that has started in Southport now. But it does not explicitly say that the protesters were far right. (It is by the way, far more sinister that the far right were promoting the riot than that they were taking part in it.)

There used to be a citation from The Independent that was claimed to have EDF in the title - but the title was not the one on the website, and the article mentioned Farage not the EDF.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:56, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to quickly say it's the EDL not EDF. I'm guessing this [1] is the article you mean. Orange sticker (talk) 14:01, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is interesting - the citation template that used to be in the article was {{Cite web |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/southport-stabbing-suspect-riot-mosque-attack-victims-name-b2588634.html |title=Southport stabbing latest: 39 police officers hurt as van set on fire by suspected EDL supporters |date=31 July 2024 |publisher=[[Independent]] |access-date=31 July 2024}} Your URL leads to an article that really does mention the EDL, where as the other one did not.-- Toddy1 (talk) 14:10, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Independent reference did back that up earlier, but they have changed the article that the URL links to. Anyway, NYT, Aljazeera, AP are all reporting it. SmartSE (talk) 14:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]