Talk:Protests against responses to the COVID-19 pandemic

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

Objection to deletion proposal

It's news. Covered by many mainstream news outlets. See references in the article and at 2020_Lansing,_Michigan_protest and 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Michigan. Communpedia Tribal (talk) 00:18, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Upon reading WP:Not News, which I now have, I see that your objection to the article is probably that it is news, but not news of sufficient notability. All I can say off the top is that it seems notable to me; it's not like it's some minor event from alocal newspaper, such as somebody's house burning down or something like that. It's a trend in the United States that is occurring in several states, and is connected to an obviously very significant issue, the 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic. Communpedia Tribal (talk) 00:28, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'll also just note that it does not fit the description of any of the examples of inappropriate news content given in WP:Not_News, which are: "routine news reporting of announcements, sports, or celebrities." Communpedia Tribal (talk) 00:43, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If there are important doubts about the article's relevance, an AfD should be started. --Jamez42 (talk) 04:08, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've reviewed the article through as part of the new pages curation process. Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 02:46, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Probably closed, but Keep - we also had a similar page, the Xenophobia and racism one, which again, was a trend even though it constituted several small, otherwise unnotable confrontations. Augend (drop a line) 05:19, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a group of events/protests that is applicable to multiple States and covered by multiple news.SWP13 (talk) 15:14, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Slate

A lot of sources note that the protests are Republican backed and include far right groups, but this from Slate is more nuanced. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/04/behind-reopen-businesses-protests.html Slate's not as great source, but this is a thoughtful piece. I wonder if we should include its implicit distinction between grass roots and astroturf here? Guy (help!) 11:45, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a useful distinction to make. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:55, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

This page was renamed today to Protests in the United States over responses to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic, by User:Jamez42. I have moved it back to the original title pending discussion. In my opinion the proposed new title is a clumsy and uses unnecessary disambiguation, since there are no other articles about such protests. I gather that the user's original intention was to give the article a worldwide view [1], then changing his mind to make this a United States-specific article, with presumably the intent of creating other articles about protests in other countries. Personally I would like to see all of the protests in a single article - the "worldwide view". Even if the U.S. dominates the article, as seems likely, that is still no reason IMO to break up this type of topic/activity/movement into a bunch of geographic splinters. What do others think? -- MelanieN (talk) 16:52, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MelanieN, I agree with you. Moves should be discussed moving forward. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:56, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So what are your thoughts on the subject, Another Believer? Any preferences? -- MelanieN (talk) 17:46, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
MelanieN, I'm fine with the current tile and layout. True, the content is U.S.-centric, but that's also mostly where protests seem to be taking place, and the page can always be expanded with non-U.S. demonstrations. If the page were to be moved to a U.S. title, I think Protests over responses to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States would be better than Protests in the United States over responses to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was hoping to see the reception of the title in the case there was a focus only about the United States. I want to clarify that I'm not thinking about starting a separate article based on each other country and that I agree that the best option is to have a single one with a worldwide view, but I don't know how common protests are elsewhere. I will try including content from other articles, I think it's a good solution to those that might have problems being too lengthy. While I'm at it and if I may, I would also like to propose the title Protests during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic or Protests as a response to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic to broaden the scope. Peace! --Jamez42 (talk) 20:15, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About the lead sentence

About the lead sentence, currently In the United States in April 2020, protests were organized by Republican-connected groups[1] in several locations across the United States[2] against the measures state governments were taking to combat the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic.: I think “Republican-connected groups” is too narrow. The local protests are being organized by a wide variety of state or local groups: a few frankly political/Republican, many generic right wing or anti-government, and many other special-interest groups that are piggybacking on the current situation. There are multiple examples where the local protest has been organized by a gun-rights group or an anti-vaccination group. How can we reword the opening sentence to make it more broadly true? -- MelanieN (talk) 18:23, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The protests are organized by right-wing activists copying and pasting language written by the Michigan Conservative Coalition funded by Greg McNeilly a "Republican political strategist" onto Facebook events. If you've got other sources about the organizers, post them and let there be a discussion. Kire1975 (talk) 18:37, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they are copying the language and the tactics of the Michigan Conservative Caucus, which is of course Republican aligned. But "they", that is the ones who are doing the local organizing, are not all alike. They are a variety of groups focused on some far-right cause or other - often a single issue such as gun rights, anti-vacc, or militia groups - trying to harness the frustration over the current situation for their own purposes. As for the protesters themselves, some are very frankly political, waving Trump flags and wearing MAGA hats. And some just want their jobs back. I think we misrepresent the protests if we make it sound they are just another Trump rally. -- MelanieN (talk) 20:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@MelanieN: @Kire1975: I think there's an issue with the lead sentence too, personally, because while some large movements were organized by Republican connected groups, I know many a liberal antivaxxer and antivaxxers have been actively involved in this event too. I think we should cut out the Republican-connected part. Just saying because I think it misrepresents the protests as an element of conservative political agenda instead of a relatively freestanding one. My two cent spiel, contradict me but please provide reasons :) Augend (drop a line) 05:23, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
find some reliable sources to justify the change and it should be no problem Kire1975 (talk) 08:18, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have always been unhappy with "Republican" in the lead and would like to remove it. While most of the organizing groups are on the right or far-right, none of them are formally representing the Republican party. As for reliable sources about some of other organizing groups: “While protesters in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and other states claim to speak for ordinary citizens, many are also supported by street-fighting rightwing groups like the Proud Boys, conservative armed militia groups, religious fundamentalists, anti-vaccination groups and other elements of the radical right.”[2] Source for pro-gun groups as organizers: [3] Source for anti-vaxxers as organizers: [4] All three of these references are already in the article. -- MelanieN (talk) 00:11, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I defer to my previous comment, specifically the sentence with the bold word in it. Kire1975 (talk) 00:29, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, McNeilly is a Republican. We know that. He is also the president and founder (not funder) of the Michigan Freedom Fund (not the Michigan Conservative Coalition); those were the two original sponsors of the Michigan protest and encouragers of many others. There is no doubt that the two groups have a conservative or Republican orientation, but they are not the Republican party. And a wide variety of groups organized protests in other states - often groups focused on a single point of the right-wing agenda, but I don’t think a single protest was organized by a Republican party organization. Here’s the bottom line: I provided the sources you asked for, showing that a wide variety of groups organized rallies. Now you provide me with a source that says the protests were organized by "Republican-connected groups", in those words. No source? Then why do we say it? I think it would be valid to say “right wing groups”, as some sources do, and I would accept that wording as a substitute, but implying that the Republican party itself was organizing the rallies is not acceptable to me. And by the way, check out the reference which is attached to "Republican-connected groups" as verification; it doesn't even mention McNeilly. For you to just continue pointing to McNeilly does not cut it. -- MelanieN (talk) 02:56, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a list of politicians speaking at and promoting these rallies? What are their party affiliations? Kire1975 (talk) 08:44, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Kire, I have seen the paragraph and references that you added to the Background section, about the Republican connection, and you have convinced me. "Republican-connected" groups and individuals were indeed involved in organizing these things. I'm going to use your most-convincing source as the reference for "Republican-connected", replacing the current source which does not make the case as convincingly. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:19, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ultimately, I think there will need to be a sentence or two above what the lead sentence is now. We have sources indicating protests in India, Lebanon, Brazil and Israel down below on this talk page but because the first sentence is the way it is, the worlwide view of the subject is not represented. The anti-vaccine group that organized the protest in California does not appear to be a Republican group per se, but if anything, it is the exception to the rule. Mention should be made but the nationwide phenomenon is very much driven by Repulbican connected groups so I am glad we came to an amicable resolution on that question. Kire1975 (talk) 00:44, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tag

Do we need the tag that says, "The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject." ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:32, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JzG: Curious what you think based on your most recent edits. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:39, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I checked: the ones that are not US are not protests against the coronavirus response, they are either opportunistic or unrelated (e.g. "Residents of the 23 de Enero parish in Caracas announced that they would protest in defiance of the quarantine as a response to the murder on 21 March of three men that were playing dominoes outdoors during the quarantine" - that's an anti-brutality protest, not a COVID-19 response protest in the sense of the US "covidiot" rallies). I think this article should probably be renamed with a US-specific title. Guy (help!) 21:42, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
JzG, This source implies protests are not limited to the United States. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:48, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Another Believer, example: "Tens of thousands of migrant laborers stranded without work or a way home staged demonstrations last week in the Indian city of Mumbai, crowding together in defiance of social distancing rules." This is clearly very distinct from a Republican-led partisan protest against a governor's policies in the US. The US protestors aren't homeless, aren't stranded with no way home. Their signs complain about first world problems like wanting a haircut or a burger. Guy (help!) 18:34, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
JzG, I agree the protests are different in India vs. US. So, what? ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Another Believer, see my comment at the bottom. Several different kinds of protests against different situations (lockdowns but only where Democrat, versus authoritarian brutality, versus abandonment of low-status / caste people). These are not a single subject, and the US protests are more than big enough for a standalone article. Guy (help!) 18:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
JzG, I'm not opposed to having a U.S.-specific article, but we only need one if a single article covering demonstrations around the globe is too long. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:48, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If someone would either add a section at the bottom of this article with information about protests in other parts of the world, or else start a draft "Coronavirus protests worldwide" or something, we would have something to talk about. Right now we seem to agree that protests elsewhere should receive coverage, but we don't even know what that coverage would look like and have no starting point. I don't feel able to do that myself. Maybe some of our more globally-oriented editors? -- MelanieN (talk) 19:11, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do over the weekend unless someone else gets a start on it first. I should have some time to at least do something with it. Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:18, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Or maybe not as this just got moved. It's almost like no-one read the talk page... Blue Square Thing (talk) 03:28, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Worldwide examples have been added. Time to retire the tag? Kire1975 (talk) 18:46, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kire1975, Yes. ---Another Believer (Talk) 13:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I've removed the tag. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:10, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

India, Lebanon

---Another Believer (Talk) 21:48, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More on India:

---Another Believer (Talk) 21:49, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil

---Another Believer (Talk) 21:52, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Israel

---Another Believer (Talk) 21:55, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge request

Snow close. Merge has been done, Michigan article will be redirected. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:05, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I propose that the article 2020 Lansing, Michigan protest be merged into Protests over responses to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. The Michigan protest was just one of numerous such protests; we can't have an article about each one. Much of the material in the Michigan article duplicates what is in the Protests article, and the rest can be merged. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support merge for the reasons stated above by MelanieN. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 04:50, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge per MelanieN. --- Augend (drop a line) 05:24, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge with a rewrite. The content at the generic protests page isn't really suitable to keep - it feels as if it were written during the protest and lacks any form of detail. This article is obviously too long to just move it there, but there are key points that need to be included. I'll see what I can do over the next few days. There are also sections on the same protest at 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Michigan and Gretchen Whitmer (Tenure section). I've worked mainly on the last one which is one paragraph with multiple sourcing. Blue Square Thing (talk) 06:51, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge and with the 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Michigan if needed. --Jamez42 (talk) 09:28, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge - The Michigan protest wasn't the first (I believe that was Ohio), but it is (to date) the largest and most notable, so a case could be made for a stand alone article, but I think all or most of the information about the Michigan protest is essential to putting context to the subsequent protests. Right now this article (the generic protests one) is mostly a list of the various protests and lacks context, which is one of the problems with writing an encyclopedia article during the event instead of afterwards (i.e. what NOT NEWS is trying to prevent. Merging would mean there is only one article to maintain and will allow that context to develop. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:19, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge. There's a lot of duplicate content. Guy (help!) 18:30, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge per WP:NEVENT. There's not really anything that makes this protest any mores significant than any of the others. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 22:08, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Several of us have been merging material from the Michigan article into this one. I would appreciate it if a few of you would take a look at the two articles, compare them, and see if we have retrieved what we need. If so we can snowclose this merge and make the other article into a redirect. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:01, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this is a snow-close result and the merge has been done. I will close it. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:05, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

United States

I think it isn't a common format, but is it possible of feasible to merge the states subtitles into regions, such as "East Coast", "West Coast", "Midwest" or something similar? That could help merging sections that are only a few lines long, specially if the list keeps growing. --Jamez42 (talk) 09:35, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting idea. I'm not sure regions would work - making the states alphabetical is probably better than poorly-defined regions. But let's continue to think about whether the current format - a separate subsection for each state - is really the best way to do it. Under this system will we wind up with 50 subsections, and will that be cumbersome? Might we ultimately wind up with some kind of table format? -- MelanieN (talk) 16:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
MelanieN, I propose we have U.S. subsections for Midwest, Northeast, South, and West, per List_of_regions_of_the_United_States#Census_Bureau-designated_regions_and_divisions. We can keep details sorted alphabetically by state within each subsection, but this would greatly reduce the number of subsection headings. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:53, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've taken a first stab at restructuring the article. There are now (short) sections for other parts of the world, and U.S. content is grouped together, now with fewer headings. Feedback and/or further improvements welcome, but I think this keeps information organized by state without a super long table of contents. ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:21, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks, that's a start for a more global approach. If more material can be added in those areas it will result in forking the US material into a separate article, as has been recommended already. I was skeptical about regional grouping but I'll wait a few days to see how it works. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:51, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Another Believer: Looking at the new regional format: I think it needs tweaking. The states that have multiple paragraphs have subheadings, but the one-paragraph items are hard to locate; in many cases the state name isn't even bolded. How about this: begin each paragraph with the name of the state and a colon. For example:

North Dakota: Even though Governor Doug Burgum has not issued a stay-at-home order, about 150 protesters gathered outside the North Dakota State Capitol in Bismarck to demand the state government re-open concert venues, movie theaters, gyms, nail salons, massage parlors and barber shops.[27][28]

Then we can easily alphabetize all the states within the region. Maybe even eliminate the subheadings, which are not ideal because they show up in the table of contents while the other states don't. We could use state-name-and-colon at the beginning of the first paragraph of states like Michigan even though they run to multiple paragraphs. -- MelanieN (talk) 21:54, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
MelanieN, I say be bold and make whatever improvements you think are best. I'm definitely open to other formats. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I tried it in the Midwest section and I think it works OK. I'll do the rest. -- MelanieN (talk) 22:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
OK, done. I think that looks pretty clear without the clutter of subheadings. -- MelanieN (talk) 22:38, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kire1975: I see that you changed the format so that each state is now a separate level-3 heading. That is the kind of subsection clutter that Another Believer and I were trying to avoid. You said you were afraid that if the regional sections were just paragraphs without subheadings, they would become a "wall of text". I didn't see that happening, but let's discuss it. -- MelanieN (talk) 15:16, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Indiana: Approximately 250 people gathered..." is very cluttered as well. Can't read the text. I don't mind if the states just become bold text that doesn't create new individual headings, but the way it was before was cluttered as heck. I have changed it now. Please discuss. Kire1975 (talk) 16:06, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'm OK with that. It gives the look of subheadings, without the table of contents clutter. Another Believer, what do you think? -- MelanieN (talk) 16:23, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of all this, can we get some consensus on which states are in which section? The West section seems rather huge. May I suggest adding a Great Plains section since we can't go directly to each state now in the contents? It's all debatable so we should get some consensus here first. Kire1975 (talk) 19:26, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Kire1975, I'm fine with the current format, at least for now. I chose the regions per List_of_regions_of_the_United_States#Census_Bureau-designated_regions_and_divisions. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:22, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Order of states.

Currently, the protests are listed in alphabetical order by state. The section above this argues for re-arranging them by region of the country. While I think a regional arrangement might be a way to present information that gives it some more context than alphabetically, I'm wondering if chronological might be better? The small protest in Ohio on April 9 was followed by the large protest in Michigan on April 15, which sparked the protests in other states over the weekend from April 17-19.

Perhaps some combination of a chronological and regional presentation might be best? Discuss the small Ohio and large Michigan protests first, then divide the other states by region and chronologically within the region. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:27, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tricky, but possible - can you see a sensible order to use? Given that there are smaller-scale protests elsewhere in the world, btw, I think there's a very strong case for adding the words in the United States to the article title. It's really quite misleading, not to say amero-centric, to leave it as it is. Blue Square Thing (talk) 14:44, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I thought someone moved it yesterday? It's since been moved back, see the discussion above. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:00, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:02, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend keeping the states in alphabetical order, at least for now. Right now, the states being displayed in any other order would just be confusing or arbitrary unless there's a very clear understanding of how they follow chronological order. I have a feeling there are too many demonstrations in too many states to establish a very clear timeline, so alpha is probably best longterm. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:28, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a fan of chronological. The first protest was in Michigan and the background section has sources that say most of these protests were created by copying and pasting the language from the Michigan protests into other Facebook events just to get press coverage. But then there's the fact that there multiple events on multiple dates and there will no doubt be more events so we would have to do it chronologically by event, which is cumbersome. Maybe list the states chronologically by the first protest? Some of the first protests happened on the same day, so then it could be alphabetized? I dunno. Maybe wait to see if a more discernible pattern emerges. Good discussion. Kire1975 (talk) 15:42, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think chronologically will work. It will quickly get confusing and nobody will be able to find anything. And what if there is a protest in Ohio on a Saturday and another one the following Saturday - would that be two entries? I think keeping them in order by state, alphabetically, is the only logical and usable/helpful format. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:03, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Title

This discussion is moot, since a separate US article has been split out. This is now a world-wide article, not just US, and we need to decide what to call it. There is a Move Request below for those opinions. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:23, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The title suggests that the content of the article is about worldwide protests against coronavirus response. However, the content only talks about U.S. protests. Therefore I suggest changing the title to something like "United States protests over responses to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic" or "2020 United States anti-lockdown protests". What do you think?--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 16:27, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SharabSalam, I've shared sources above discussing demonstrations outside the U.S. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:28, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Another Believer, well, I don't think they are as notable or as big as the U.S. protests. I think this article should probably be only about the U.S. protests.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 16:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Currently the content of the article is only about the U.S.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 16:33, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The small protests about other countries can be added to the main coronavirus pandemic articles.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 16:37, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We have a lot more and more detailed information about the U.S. so it may, after all, need a separate article and title. We should discuss, in a separate section, what that title would be. At this point we don't really need a separate title because there are no other protest articles so no disambiguation is needed.
From a brief look at the references Another Believer provided, I do think we may need a separate article or two for global protests. (I would oppose making separate articles for each country, however.) Protests in other parts of the world seem to be somewhat different from the U.S. protests. In the U.S. they are focused on "reopening" cities, and their motivation seems to be as much partisan as economic. Europe seems somewhat similar but with with a different flavor; I haven't read enough to characterize properly. In the third world the protests seem to be more like generic explosions of rage - rage against the government and people's living conditions, where the shutdown was just one last outrage piled on top of already seething resentment. We may need three(?) articles to cover the different aspects of protests. If someone wants to start some drafts we could have a better idea of the nature, history, and scope of protests in other parts of the world, and that might give us a better idea how to group and title them. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:11, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
MelanieN, Agreed. I think for now, we should focus on making this article international, and then fork out a U.S.-specific page when appropriate. No need to create entries for other individual countries at this time. See related discussion below. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:14, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
MelanieN, nice descriptive overview about three types of protests. Three seperate articles may be needed because of different motivations for each population. Whew! --Steve Quinn (talk) 17:37, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposing alternate titles

This discussion is moot, since a separate US article has been split out. This is now a world-wide article, not just US, and we need to decide what to call it. There is a Move Request below for those opinions. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The article content is only about United States protests, therefore I am proposing new titles:

  1. United States anti-lockdown protests (we can add "2020" at the beginning of the title)
  2. United States coronavirus lockdown protests
  3. United States protests over responses to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic

--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 16:44, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I prefer the first and the second as they are the titles that are used mostly by the media like NYT etc.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 16:48, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't understand why this page must be U.S. specific when demonstrations have also taken place outside the US. Seems this page just needs to be expanded to incorporate information about protests in other parts of the world as well. We have have a separate page specific to the U.S. if/when needed. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:09, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SharabSalam, thanks for starting a discussion. But I think it is way too early for a formal Requested Move because we have not yet settled on what the new title should be. There are dozens of possibilities, not just these three. Would you mind changing this from a formal RM discussion to a more unstructured discussion, along the lines of "What should the title of this article be?" Then if we can narrow it down to one choice we can just do the move, or if we wind up with two or three possible choices we can then have an RM to choose which one. Thanks. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:16, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Another Believer that we don't need to change titles yet. But we need to plan ahead, because I think it is inevitable that this page will wind up being just about the U.S. For right now let's just let everybody brainstorm, suggesting possible names for an article about the United States protests. IMO one of the first things we need to settle on is the order of the various parts of the title, particular what the first word(s) should be since the first word or two tells the reader what it is about. SharabSalam suggests leading off with "United States". I think that is too generic and it would be best to lead off with "Protests", such as "Protests related to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States", or "2020 coronavirus", such as "2020 coronavirus protests in the United States". Other ideas? Let's hear them! -- MelanieN (talk) 17:23, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that leading with the "United States" in the title is generic but also too clunky. I'm trying to come up with a proposed title - but I don't think I can do better than "2020 coronavirus protests in the United States." So, for now I support that.
As an aside, I think it is premature to post an "official" move request, where editors will see this request at a central request board, because there isn't an actual proposed title. This is not what "official" move requests are for. These generally have a seven day window, with people either supporting a proposed title or not. Sorry to say, someone seems to have jumped the gun. This move request should be withdrawn until we have an actual proposed title. Then perhaps the move request can be placed in a following section. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 17:50, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Better yet, we could probably just go ahead and change the title when there is informal agreement. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 17:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I closed the formal move request. The formal request was premature. We don't have proposed alternate title yet. For further explantion see my above post and MelanieN's post. OK. So, let's move on with proposing titles. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 18:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It really depends on what this article is about. See the Tag section above and the examples underneath it posted as examples of protests elsewhere in the world. In South Africa, for example, there have been protests over food shortages and the lack of deliveries of food aid. That seems to be, at least partially, a protest over the response by the South African government and its failure to deliver aid. In Niger there have been protests over bans on community prayer gatherings. That certainly seems to fit the current page title, but how about protests in France over how police have dealt with immigrant groups during the lockdown? I'm not entirely certain what we're aiming to include here? All of that or just some of it? Blue Square Thing (talk) 18:24, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Right. As it stands, the US protests are a specific thing: Republican-organised and featuring the usual rogues' gallery of neo-Nazis, militias and the like. Other countries' protests seem different in character. Clubbing these all together in one article seems ill-advised: better to have country-specific articles that deal with the idiosyncracies of each country's situation (the authoritarian Maduro etc) and then have either an overarching article or a category to collect them. There's more than enough on the US protests for a standalone article. Guy (help!) 18:29, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Blue Square Thing. Hi. It seems there is agreement that this should be about the United States and that other articles should probably be created because other regions of the world have other motivations. For example, as you say, South Africa the protests are about food shortages and the lack of deliveries of food aid and the government's failure to respond in this regard. In Niger - it's community prayer gatherings. France - it seems to be discriminatory behavior toward immigrants. And so on. So, it doesn't make sense to put all of these different types of protest into one article. What do you think about this? ---Steve Quinn (talk) 18:35, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps this needs to be the parent article with shorter summaries and the child articles with more detail can be split off as required. I think there's certainly a case for a US article as a separate one at that point in that situation. I think I'd rather do that than try to keep this article about US protests - the title makes more sense as an overview article (although that, in itself, may need some tweakage - the discussion in the Tags section exemplifies why).
I think I'd call the US article Protests over responses to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States. That way if there is a need for any other child articles there's a very simple naming convention that can be applied. Assuming that there isn't a better idea or a more established naming convention in these case. Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:05, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to propose again Protests during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic or Protests as a response to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic, which could help with the scope issue mentioned before. I personally prefer the latter, which I believe is a middle ground between the former and the current title. --Jamez42 (talk) 21:35, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd favor something along those lines. I like "protests during" better than "protests over the response" or some such, because different protests have different targets. As for "in the United States", we can add that later when there are articles called "Protests during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic in (other country)". Right now it would be unnecessary disambiguation. -- MelanieN (talk) 22:59, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, protests during is an interesting idea (although I suppose it opens up the possibility of completely unrelated protests making their way in, but I guess common sense (!!!) can be applied there. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:36, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whats wrong with United States anti-lockdown protests (we can add "2020" at the beginning of the title) or United States coronavirus lockdown protests? Those are the titles that are used by the mainstream media.--SharʿabSalam▼ (talk) 09:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with naming a country like that is that you'll then need a parent article which covers everywhere else. It's better, as MelanieN suggests, to work the other way around and split an article off as required. Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:36, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody moved the page to "in the United States" again. Since we are still discussing and have not reached consensus about what to call it, I have move-protected it until we decide on the title. -- MelanieN (talk) 04:15, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the semi-protect. About this thread, it looks like it's dying on the vine. I will post a notification on one or two project talk pages. I have a suggestion for a title, how about "2020 pandemic protests"? That probably won't fly so, "Protests during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic" is also OK to me. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 03:33, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Venezuela

@JzG: The colectivo "Tres Raíces" is currently imposing a para-policial curfew in the 23 de Enero barrio of Caracas to prevent further infections. The responsability of the murders is disputed, but I believe that the protests are over a response to the pandemic fall under the scope of the article. As of the other countries, the title proposals could help broadening the theme. --Jamez42 (talk) 21:41, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

curfew? murders? protests? not sure what you're suggesting. If you have a good source, that might help. Kire1975 (talk) 03:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Kire1975: Sure, the text I'm referring to is the following:

Nicolás Maduro announced a ban on protests on 12 March as a measure to prevent the spread of the outbreak in Venezuela.[1]

Residents of the 23 de Enero parish in Caracas announced that they would protest in defiance of the quarantine as a response to the murder on 21 March of three men that were playing dominoes outdoors during the quarantine, of which members of the colectivo Tres Raíces were responsible according to neighbors and relatives.[2][3]

It was removed in this edit: [5]. The information about the curfew itself can be found in the main article of the pandemic in Venezuela:

On late March, the colectivos Tres Raíces and La Piedrita started imposing a paramilitary-enforced curfew in the 23 de Enero parish, increasing repression and imposing closure times to businesses.[2]

I should also note that there have been several protests, riots and lootings in the country as a consequence of the unrest and shortages there. If the scope of the article is broadened, I can help adding information about them. --Jamez42 (talk) 13:42, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Digital, Periodista (2020-03-12). "El sátrapa Nicolás Maduro prohíbe las manifestaciones en su contra "para evitar el coronavirus"". Periodista Digital (in Spanish). Retrieved 2020-04-20.
  2. ^ a b Galaviz, Daisy (23 March 2020). "Colectivos imponen toque de queda en el 23 de Enero por el coronavirus". El Pitazo (in Spanish). Retrieved 25 March 2020.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  3. ^ "Familiares señalan colectivos por asesinato tres vecinos del 23 de Enero". El Pitazo (in Spanish). 22 March 2020. Retrieved 25 March 2020.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)

Dominican Republic

Looks like there are significant protests in Puerto Plata but the only source I'm seeing is not reliable yet. Keep an eye out. Kire1975 (talk) 03:19, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest broadening to all forms of resistance

I wrote the Chinese version of this article with a broader scope. The title is Resistance towards responses to the ... Content wise, instead of listing each country, I start the article with reasons behind the resistance, followed by ways people have resisted (protests, violence, legal actions, just ignoring), the governments' responds to the resistance, and possible influences on the disease spread. --Yel D'ohan (talk) 05:22, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Potential overlap w/ Strikes during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic

Just FYI, there's also Strikes during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:20, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's a difference between strikes over unsafe working conditions and protests calling for an end to lockdowns. It doesn't seem like there's much overlap, although I can maybe see adding these articles to each other's see also sections. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 13:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 May 2020

Closing. The request became moot when the parent articles about the pandemic were changed to say "COVID-19 pandemic" and this article was changed to match. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:17, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Protests over responses to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic → Protests over responses to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic – This is for uniformity of the page articles, as consistent with every other page regarding the pandemic Starzoner (talk) 02:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is not ready to close or move. The discussion has only been open for a few days. Only a few people have responded and their opinions are all over the map. Let's give it a week at least. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • My opinion: I oppose the original proposed move to Protests over responses to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. The argument was that this would produce "uniformity of the page articles, as consistent with every other page regarding the pandemic". That argument is no longer valid; after an extensive discussion, the parent page 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic was moved on May 4 to COVID-19 pandemic. For that reason I support the new proposal to say COVID-19 pandemic, and that appears to have consensus. The question of "protests over the responses to" the pandemic vs. "protests related to" the pandemic has not yet been settled. Personally I prefer "related to". @SharabSalam, Steve Quinn, Blue Square Thing, Another Believer, Jamez42, Starzoner, X1\, DarkGlow, Kire1975, and Sdkb: Pinging previous discussants for their opinion on "protests over the responses" to the pandemic vs. "protests related to" the pandemic. -- MelanieN (talk) 16:37, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - "Protests related to COVID-19 pandemic" This provides clarity with minimum verbiage. And it's in agreement with other "COVID-19" titles.---Steve Quinn (talk) 20:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That isn't actually support if it's a title that's different from the proposal. Kire1975 (talk) 19:58, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the ping. I support moving the article to a title that includes "Protests related to the COVID-19 pandemic", choosing the most optimal title. --Jamez42 (talk) 22:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The move to "COVID-19" has been performed. It looks to me as if most people here prefer "related to" rather than "over". Would anyone object if I move it to "related to"? I'll wait a day or two for comments. -- MelanieN (talk) 23:43, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. article split off

Please see 2020 United States anti-lockdown protests. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 31 May 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move (non-admin closure) Mdaniels5757 (talk) 01:31, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Protests over responses to the COVID-19 pandemic → Protests over government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic – The article only covers protests against government responses to the pandemic, so the title should reflect that. FallingGravity 20:14, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - the title is WP:PRECISE because it is specific about what kind of responses they are. Interstellarity (talk) 20:53, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose at least currently - are there any notable protests over non-government responses to the pandemic that are notable enough to have a Wikipedia article? If not, there's no need for excess precision. And if some minorly notable protests against non-government actors exist, why not just include them in this article? Only if the content is so substantial there's a spinoff article should there be a need for this distinction (e.g. protests over corporate responses to the COVID-19 pandemic ?) SnowFire (talk) 00:17, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per SnowFire. buidhe 01:24, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

More protests

India: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/wont-take-vaccine-till-farm-laws-are-junked-protesters-101610915953485.html

Vienna: https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-austria-protests/thousands-march-in-vienna-against-coronavirus-restrictions-idUSL8N2JR0DC

Amsterdam: https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-netherlands-protests/thousands-protest-in-amsterdam-against-dutch-coronavirus-lockdown-idUSL1N2JS0AR — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.64.108.244 (talk) 08:21, 18 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Canada

Content from the section on Alberta Canada added on February 22, 2021 is the same or similar to content I added to the article Alberta Legislature Building. I needs to be pruned and summarized for this article.Oceanflynn (talk) 21:13, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This content was also used in a new article COVID-19 anti-lockdown protests in Canada which is a fork from this article.Oceanflynn (talk) 21:48, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Check the numbers, maybe...

From what I have heard it was more than 1000 people in Sweden, not 300-500. Maybe worth checking such things.--Mats33 (talk) 12:32, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Biased language

The section on Australia proposes that:

It is believed that several protesters were "fake tradies" who could be described as "professional protesters". Police responded with rubber bullets, batons and tear gas. Various media outlets were critical of the police's heavy-handed response to the protesters and bystander civilians.[224][225][226]

It was John Setka, head of the CFMEU who claimed that in the referenced article. The sentence should read:

"CFMEU president, John Setka, who was a target of some protests, claimed that several protesters were...etc." The existing sentence given the impression it was a generally held belief by most people, which is not supported by evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:44B8:4115:6B00:C159:EDA4:81C2:5382 (talk) 07:05, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-restriction protests?

According to the lead and infobox, protests in favor of measures to contain the virus are basically a coequal part of this. However, I can't see evidence of this in the body. It seems to be a very marginal or rare phenomenon at best, and certainly given majorly WP:UNDUE weight at present. Crossroads -talk- 01:04, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Protests_against_responses_to_the_COVID-19_pandemic&oldid=1195124359"