Colonel William A. Phillips

Page contents not supported in other languages.

Pogrom?

Seeing as people are moving away from the term riot to describe this sort of event(even though there's a long history of it, see Atlanta Race Riots, Aleppo Riots, 1984 Delhi Anti-Sikh Riots, Elaine Riots, Salvador Peasant Riots), I get the name change, English is a living language, riot doesn't have that connotation of mass violence the way it used to to many people especially post 1992, I get it, not gonna argue that.

But I feel Pogrom is probably the best word to fit what this was, given the racial component of the event and the civilian lead nature of the event(Massacre would fit better if it was top down, this was bottom up lead by citizens, that's a pogrom) 2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:91E0:70D:A479:6EF9 (talk) 00:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a very cogent point, but I basically think of pogram as applying to European Jews, so, unless we have some refs using the word, I would be original research to use it. The Wikipedia has to lag behind things a bit, not lead. So we'd have to wait for other people to start using it. Herostratus (talk) 06:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but like I said there isn’t really a word that fits perfectly at the moment.
Pogrom is usually associated with Jewish events like the Aleppo Riots or Polish Pogroms.
Massacre is usually associated with state actors, armys, or terrorist, and tends to be more top down, not a bunch of random riled up citizens commiting the violence.
Riot used to be the word for this sort of event(I actually did some research into this, most events called ‘race riots’ or even many other riots like the Delhi Sikh Riots or Aleppo Riots are basically this sort of violence. Tulsa Race Riot fits that), it’s historically an extremely big tent term that covers a lot of things, but especially after the LA Riots it’s instead essentially come to refer to either ‘violent out of control protest’ or ‘sports riot’. Elaine and Tulsa got their pages renamed after Watchmen drew attention to them, though interestingly most of those other events still have their pages called Riot.
I will say I don’t think saying ‘Riot’ was chosen as a term specifically to try to coverup the event though, that was just the vernacular for this sort of thing. (Rather the efforts to cover it were hiding bodies in mass graves in the case of Tulsa, and blaming the blacks for starting it in both Tulsa and especially Elaine) 2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:CDEB:A0F3:2A49:ECD1 (talk) 18:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess my issue is different bites of the site are using different terms.
Most pages still use Riot in the big tent sense of the word, including other American incidents like Atlanta or some of the international ones.
There was a list of deadliest riots on the ‘battles and other violent events page’ (which was up for years, but recently taken down due to fighting and brigading regarding whether or not October 7th was a terrorist attack or not), and it used the Big tent definition. Race Riots, Pogroms, Sports Riots, Violent Protests, and Peasant Uprisings were all counted as riots, including both Tulsa and Elaine. And if Tulsa and Elaine aren’t riots anymore, then logically there’s dozens of other pages to be renamed. It can’t be both a big tent term and a very specific term, and unfortunately some people use it one way and some people the other and they aren’t all moving in the same direction. 2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:CDEB:A0F3:2A49:ECD1 (talk) 18:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, List of Indian massacres in North America has many entries, both by and against Native Americans. Most (but not all) are called massacres (some are incidents, battles, etc). Most (but not all) of the American attacks do indeed have a militia with an actual leader who usually had a military title, which I suppose you could characterize as performed by a government, although the militia was probably ad-hoc nearby citizens. Some do have just "White settlers attack an Indian encampment" etc. Presumably these had leaders in the sense of somebody being like "Let's go get 'em boys, we'll march up the the riverbank", but then I suppose the Tulsa event had people doing the same on an ad-hoc basis at times. (Indian government is quite different, and I don't know if you could say any of their attacks were official government acts, but maybe.) Herostratus (talk) 23:07, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You see my point though. A ton of other very similar events, both in the states(most events labeled Race Riots) and outside of the states(Delhi Sikh Riots, Aleppo Anti-Jewish Riots) of this nature are called riots, and internationally the word is very big tent for any sort of 'violent/riotous mob' activity. The issue is mainly america centric, who has recently(post LA riots) taken the term to be a lot more narrow, usually violent protests 2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:5054:2A99:3576:E40F (talk) 19:43, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Getting the Right Words

Language is important. Words like pogrom, or riot, or massacre don't seem to be an exact fit to describe this event. Certainly the opening description "a white supremacist terrorist massacre" taken from a modern newspaper article by a black rights activist is factually incorrect and misleading. First because there were two massacres: the initial one when over 70 black militants shot and killed 10 white Tulsans. The second problem is that we cannot know what was in the 'invaders' minds. Describing them all as 'white supremacists' is a matter of imagination and modern speculation not fact. Indeed since initially many were formally deputized as a legitimate posse in hot pursuit of a large armed gang which had just committed large scale murder, then racism seems to have been a minor motivation if any at all. That opening description is best removed to the end of the page under 'modern views' or some similar category. 92.0.21.222 (talk) 15:51, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in my post, Riot in it's original usage is the best term, there are other pages like Atlanta about similar events in the states, and pretty much all the international incidents like Delhi or Aleppo use that kind of language. The issue is mainly down to modern America post-LA riots using the term in a very specific way that Tulsa and Elaine(and honestly most race riots even if the pages haven't been renamed) don't fit, while most of the rest of the world still uses Riot in a big tent 'any sort of riotous and violent mob action' way, including violent protests, pogroms, sports riots, and race riots, and in that sense these events do fully fit under Riot.

So it's basically about whether you want to go with the international language or the American language on the incident — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D09:1F80:CA00:5054:2A99:3576:E40F (talk) 19:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Repeating yourself will not help your goal. The only thing that will signal a change in wording here is that exact wording change in our sources. Wikipedia follows sources. It doesn't matter how much you argue about the wording if the sources don't support you. Binksternet (talk) 00:19, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Binksternet: Google Scholar shows 694 results for "Tulsa riot" and 674 for "Tulsa massacre". And it shows 1,700 results for "Tulsa race riot" and 1,360 results for "Tulsa race massacre". So the term favored by scholarly sources is "riot", not "massacre". 50.221.225.231 (talk) 06:02, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Slight differences like those are not enough to sway a move request on Wikipedia. Typically, you would have to see 2× difference or more to have enough leverage for change. And there's the inertia formed by the most recent discussion which can be found at Talk:Tulsa_race_massacre/Archive_2#Requested_move_7_February_2020. You would have to put together another move request and gain consensus. Binksternet (talk) 04:38, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tulsa_race_massacre