Talk:List of lynching victims in the United States

Notable lynchings

A few lynchings to add are Joseph Vermillion,George Armwood, Michael Green, Matthew Williams, William Burns, Michael Donald, and Stephen Williams. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 15:17, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and add them, not that you need my permission. deisenbe (talk)}
  • What order are these entries in? Could they be arranged by state, then date or some other way to quickly run through them? This will not be a short list, so some way to sub-categorize is needed. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 21:38, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Everything from that category has been entered. deisenbe (talk) 14:30, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a long, long list of blacks who were lynched (biggest on the Internet)...and why they were lynched. All the lynchings come with a verified newspaper article. https://theinjusticefile.blogspot.com/2015/02/negro-violence-colossal-american.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.93.158.26 (talk) 18:18, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

60 Minutes broadcast

There's a section coming on in tonight's 60 minutes program. If I heard the program's intro correctly someone has a list of 4,000+. There are books on this as well. I'll suggest separate tables by states (with the big ones spun off into their own articles) and add a county column. Smallbones(smalltalk) 23:12, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ROUGH NOTES 4,300 lynchings 1870-1940? Monument in Alabama(?) Bryan Stevenson in Montgomery AL. Public reports in newspapers of lynchings. 800+ counties with lynchings

2 or 3 per page

Frazier, Harriet (2015). Lynchings in Kansas, 1850s-1932. McFarland. p. 228. ISBN 9780786468324.

Most were white horse thieves. 130 incidents, up to 6 victims per. Based on a 1930s text

Also see same author's book for Missouri.

The National Memorial for Peace and Justice. Our article National Memorial to Peace and Justice

Smallbones(smalltalk) 23:35, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the best database I can find is at http://www.thiscruelwar.com/the-long-list/ with downloadable excel file (search for "here") 4,800 entries - not exactly an academic source, but taken from academic databases with 500 added. Let me know when you want to get started. Smallbones(smalltalk) 03:40, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When you say “you”, whom do you mean? I’ve done the ones there already (and I started the list). I think I’ve done my part. deisenbe (talk) 15:14, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"6,500 lynchings between 1865 and 1950, including 2,000 attacks during Reconstruction that weren’t tallied in its previous reports." Wahington Post Smallbones(smalltalk) 21:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Definition

What are the criteria for inclusion on this list, especially what is the definition of "lynching victim" for this list?

I've seen multiple definitions of lynching, and the definition has changed over time and between groups. There is not a clear definition in this article. I don't want to create any controversy over what entries belong (or don't), and don't want to waste time entering some that may later be reverted due to differing definitions of lynching. What should be the criteria for inclusion in this list, including the definition of lynching for this purpose? Jacona (talk) 13:16, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that definition is an issue. If lynching means only extrajudicial executions, then that is one class of persons, but if lynching includes anyone murdered in any circumstances because of his or her race, religion, nationality, or ethnicity (what could be called a "hate crime"), whether during a riot or otherwise, then that would expand the list almost endlessly. For example, were all the victims of 9/11 considered to be "lynched" because presumably they were killed due to their nationality? Were all the persons killed in the 1943 and 1967 Detroit riots considered "lynched?" If lynching is expanded so much as to mean that type of murder, then this list is not going to be very useful. How can we arrive at a definitive definition? Black's Law Dictionary defines "Lynch Law" as "A term descriptive of the action of unofficial persons, organized bands, or mobs, who seize persons charged with or suspected of crimes, or take them out of the custody of the law, and inflict summary punishment upon them, without legal trial, and without the warrant or authority of law. See State v. Aler, 39 W. Va. 549, 20 S. E. 585; Bates’ Ann. St. Ohio. 1904." On the other hand, lynching can have the wider definition. Scribley (talk) 17:46, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Working definition

@Smallbones: Copied here from my Talk page.

Thanks for your quick response. I removed the "incomplete list" tag because it seems to be the wrong one and is likely going to be deleted as a template. But before putting on any template, we need to decide what belongs on the list. Only African-Americans who were actually lynched? How about Mexican-American who were lynched with similar racial motivation? How about white horse thieves? Different academic databases have different requirements to be listed, e.g. one (Tuskeegee?) requires that nobody was prosecuted for the crime of lynching. Does that really matter? In any case, if we can decide what qualifies for the list and get a complete list online, we can likely do away with the incomplete tag. i.e. we can put a set of lists up (probably by state) that are complete according to our requirements. Please let me know what you think. Smallbones(smalltalk) 9:37 am, Today (UTC−4)

Well, Leo Frank has to be included, and he was a Jew, so it can’t be just blacks. I think it’s an extra-judicial killing of a specific person(s) by a group or mob, and never in secret. And it can not be because of a personal geievance towards the victim. Any ethnic group it applies to. I might go along with excluding perpetrators actually convicted, not just prosecuted. deisenbe (talk) 16:12, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Additions Needed

Mack Charles Parker. 1959. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_of_Mack_Charles_Parker Msjayhawk (talk) 02:28, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tasks to be done


Disputed events

H Bromley not a lynching.

The entry for H Bromley seems doubtful. True he was shot dead by a white man but it was not exactly a lynching.

See: https://www.northeastern.edu/law/academics/institutes/crrj/case-watch/bromley.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.210.218.28 (talk) 20:01, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

True, I have removed it. It often appears on lynching-related writings but he was killed by one man, there was no mob involvement. Sheila1988 (talk) 19:32, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

without Santuary Forum

https://www.withoutsanctuary.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=1&sid=f1904ce1d9493329c3931f653c51dbcf&start=50 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.5.184.226 (talk) 04:56, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Larger concerns about this list

I commend the intentions & motivation of this project, but I'd like to offer some complicating factors that should be considered. In 2012-2016 I endeavored essentially the same project under the title MonroeWorkToday.org. I learned some critical lessons (the hard way) about the messiness of history.

  • (1) There may never be, and probably CAN never be, a perfect list of people who met their death by lynching. There are numerous reasons for this, but the primary reasons are that not every lynching was recorded in a newspaper and some mobs acted with complete impunity or freedom from reporting. Also (as mentioned above) any list needs a definition for what event makes 'a lynching' to be counted; people have been arguing over such definitions since at least 1910. The most popular definition was agreed to by the NAACP and the Tuskegee Institute in 1940, but they continued to argue about inclusion well beyond that date. All definitions involve an interpretation about the circumstances & motivations of the perpetrators in relation to the will of the community -- and this can be unrecorded, or unknowable, possibly forever in a gray area.
  • (2) The final result is more properly a database. The data table should, for example, record the primary source(s)/published source(s) that were used for inclusion in the list and which cross-corroborate each other. It is worth questioning if Wikipedia is the best format for storing a database. Based on my experience, the table can be expected to have 6000+ entries.
  • (3) This effort should be informed by historical context and prior efforts of lynching studies from 1995-2016... These efforts trace back to Ida B. Wells in her "Red Record". Numerous modern books/dissertations still struggle to formulate an ever-more comprehensive list. Scholarly research into lynchings earlier than 1866 is still quite new and ongoing: in the past few years, several books were published that have uncovered lynchings previously unknown from the early 19th century.
  • (4) Given Wikipedia's ubiquity, I'm concerned this page will become widely cited as definitive, whereas it will forever be a work in progress, one of numerous interpretations. This particular topic is complicated by its emotional gravity: while many kinds of people have been subject to lynch mobs, it includes especially violent & traumatic acts against certain races of people. Unfortunately, public discourse in the United States has not yet resolved its relationship to white supremacy and this page may forever remain emotionally charged & highly contentious.

There are also some concerns to raise in regards to specifics of data collection:

  • (5) The number of publications to consult is quite large. Here are two bibliographies which try to list large swaths of modern inventories on lynching victims and would need to be included: http://www.monroeworktoday.org/bibliography.html (Sources 1-43); https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01615440.2011.639289
  • (6) When taking data from other authors' lists, there is an ethical consideration to ensure authors are properly cited for their original research.
  • (7) Unfortunately, armchair research with the primary documents of digitized newspapers is frought with possible errors. In literally hundreds of cases, examples have been discovered by modern scholars that old newspapers were prone to report second-hand information; and these included inaccurate names of the victims, an inaccurate race of victim, an inaccurate number of victims, an inaccurate date (off by day or a month, or more), an inaccurate location where it occurred, and/or (in some cases) a report of a lynching which in fact was only a rumor. The best scholarship has utilized a process of triangulation among multiple source documents.
  • (8) The table should leave space to record alternate aliases by which the victim was (erroneously) referred to in newspaper reports.
  • (9) The table should leave space to record both county of the victim's death as well as the county(ies) of origin of the lynch mob participants. (In over 200 cases, modern research found these to be different; as mobs could take victims across boundaries.) Also, the boundaries of counties may have evolved since the time of the event (this is especially true of events in the 1860-1910 timeframe.)

Would it be possible to alter the intention of this Wikipedia page to instead become a List of Lynching Databases? That would be immensely helpful to future researchers and also free this page of the burden of attempting to be comprehensive and accurate. rjrest (talk) 00:41, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the historical data is messy. (I've seen an instance of a book published by Yale University Press that seems to have gotten the state wrong. The Perry race riot was in Florida, not Georgia.[1]) I have also seen incidents on an official list of lynchings for which I have searched in vain for more than the most rudimentary sources. I also wonder about including lynchings in war conditions or with military sanction. This list currently includes Great Hanging at Gainesville. Would the summary hanging of several Seminole captives by William S. Harney during the Second Seminole War count as a lynching? Not a mob action, but certainly extra-legal. - Donald Albury 15:29, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Henry, C. Michael (2004). "Introduction". Race, Poverty, and Domestic Policy. Yale ISPS series. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-09541-8. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); External link in |chapterurl= (help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl= ignored (|chapter-url= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |editors= ignored (|editor= suggested) (help)
The original sources are messy. Looking at old newspapers, I've seen many examples like the one mentioned above in which the city was correct but the state was wrong, some where different names were given for the same lynching, where different versions of the story were told, where people who were reported lynched were not (then were lynched "again" a few days later). That's a problem with the time, and a problem with the material. Southern newspapers started suppressing information sometime in the early 20th century. There were doubtless many, many undocumented lynchings, so there is no way this list will ever be complete. It will most likely contain a few inaccuracies. All we can do is show what the sources say. (Hey, that's a "thing" we still face today, isnt it?) As far as the definition goes, I prefer something general, along the lines of "for a mob to put a person to death without legal approval or permission". Nothing specific about race, ethnicity, national origin, etc. Jacona (talk) 17:14, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If the killing was extra-legal, and the number of perpetrators was greater than the number of victims, it probably was a lynching. The Crisis covered lynchings, I presume from its founding in 1910. I haven't found a general link to past issues, but I have run across links to individual reports of lynchings published in The Crisis. Those reports may have some details wrong (compare this to Newberry Six lynchings), but may have provided more coverage than many contemporary white-owned newspapers. - Donald Albury 18:09, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Access to black newspapers i.e. New Amsterdam News, Chicago Defender, would be fantastic. A couple directories I've seen: [1] [2]. Google books seems to have some of the old issues of The Crisis e.g. go here, roll down, click a year, click on a cover, should take you a volume like here. Jacona (talk) 18:41, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Rjrest: Could you provide a list of Web-accessible databases? deisenbe (talk) 19:45, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This...

...odd content just cut from the article page. Drmies (talk) 17:43, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This will eventually have to be split into lists for each state.

Women Were Lynched

I suggest adding a column for gender. Until now the narrative on lynching implies only men were lynched. The lynching of women adds a more accurate dimension to the act involved. Without such a column the lynching of women is blurred.

To wit a list can be found here of Black women who were lynched in America:

Powered by the Human Spirit Mhotep (talk) 19:21, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The list of women referred to above illustrates a problem: who defines a lynching?

The list ends with Mrs Frank Clay in November 1957 'the last woman in the USA to be lynched'. Yet from a little digging in the local newspaper archive at Henderson NC the evidence points to the possibility, even probability, that Mary Clay was shot by her own husband after she had fatally stabbed him in the groin. So who said her death was a lynching? A little mystery.

Lynchings were a very real phenomenon. But any serious researcher must also be alert to the certainty that some accounts will have been 'improved' and embellished. Cassandra

How to add columns to this table

The heading is easy to change, but then

||

has to be inserted at the correct place in every line. Tedious. Does anyone know of a tool that would do this quickly?

At the same time, you can add what that person's text in the column would be. deisenbe (talk) 19:29, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed change in policy

No new lines unless there is an article. On the one hand, this table is not suited for thousands of names. It has to be cut down somehow. Then, the place to deal with questions of accuracy of data is in an article. We can't manage it here, not the way this has grown. deisenbe (talk) 21:40, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On the one hand, I added all the lynchings in Alachua County, Florida that were included in the report by the county Historical Commission. On the other hand, based on searches I have made, the inclusion of some of those lynchings appear to be based on a single, obscure, and very sparse contemporary newspaper report. Of the 21 lynchings listed, nine are currently covered in two different WP articles that cite secondary sources. There may be hope for finding more information on at least some of those lynchings. Items in lists don't have to have WP articles, and I think there is a purpose to having as complete a list of lynchings as possible. - Donald Albury 00:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There is something to be said (like, a lot) for listing only those that are written up. What one could do is divide the list up by state or by era--I think the first is the more likely choice. (This is how the EJI does it too, of course.) Drmies (talk) 02:12, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm the one who started this list, and in my ignorance, I didn't realize how long it would be. I should have, because I saw mention of thousands, but for whatever good or bad reason I didn't. This list is going to collapse (turn into unreliable chaos) if something isn't done. It's not practical to look at every change in a list of thousands of names. Splitting it into states is a great idea, but it would be very tedious as it would have to be done one name at a time. It's not like List of Confederate monuments and memorials, which was arranged by states from the beginning, so it was easy to split states off from. This list makes it seem that you can see each state separately, or see them chronologically, but the raw data is in no order at all. If anyone has any other idea I'd love to hear it. deisenbe (talk) 20:35, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If we're going to delete all the victims without articles, we should move the article to "List of articles on lynching victims in the United States" else people think this is a comprehensive list.Jacona (talk) 14:55, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As of now I'm not deleting the article-less entries already present. deisenbe (talk) 17:26, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Is the proposal to remove all lynching victims without their own Wikipedia page, or ones with no mention anywhere in Wikipedia? I'm in favor of the latter rather than the former, as I think it would strike a good compromise between notability of victims and value of the list itself. We already have the page category for lynching victims, which in some ways functions as a list of everyone with an article. I think having it include anyone mentioned across the site would be far more helpful, without being too onerous to create.Elaboration Station (talk) 18:18, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The policy is no NEW entries without article. If someone wants to make the effort to remove those already in, and knows how to edit a table, feel free. deisenbe (talk) 14:55, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Why? There certainly did not seem to be any consensus.Jacona (talk) 16:05, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The table would be way too big (thousands). deisenbe (talk) 16:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If it's just a list of articles, why not as talk said, just use the category?Jacona (talk) 19:49, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Because you can sort the table by year, offense, gender, ethnicity, and county. deisenbe (talk) 20:11, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced entries being added

I have just marked several entries in the list with no relevant wikilinks as needing citations. I was tempted to delete the most recently added, but I don't see that anyone has been enforcing the ban on entries without relevant WP articles which was proposed last year. In any case, if quality sources are not soon provided for those entries without any, I will removed them. - Donald Albury 12:46, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, it is imperative that they be sourced! I would respectfully also request that one attempts to either find sources before removing them, per WP:PRESERVE, or better yet help the editors who added them learn how to properly cite them. These entries are often added by newbies, and rather than biting them, it would be so awesome if we could bring them onboard as productive editors rather than discouraging them, when their edits are obviously made in good faith and sources are obviously readily available, as it appears these edits are. I've provided a source for two of them already, and a quick google appears to find sources for some of the others.Jacona (talk) 17:58, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a case at the DRN regarding this page.

This message is to inform interested editors of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute related to this page. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. Any editors are welcome to add themselves as a party, and you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "List of lynching victims in the United States". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! PhysiqueUL09 (talk) 01:19, 4 June 2020 (UTC) (DRN Volunteer)[reply]

Hey, friendly reminder to editors involved on this page that there is a discussion going on at the WP:DRN about the definition of lynching. Feel free to join in! Feynstein (talk) 03:11, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closed This DRN thread is closed and discussion will resume here. Feynstein (talk) 17:14, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of lynching

I'm attempting a restart here. What should be the definition of lynching for this article? Please make proposals and then support them in an orderly fashion. Please do not attack other editors, nor build straw-man claims that they said something they didn't (for instance, absolutely no one has said the list could not include 21st century lynchings). Please sign your posts, and either register, or use the same IP each time you post. do NOT attempt to WP:SOCK, WP:MEATPUPPET.

Obviously, we should start with the current content of the first paragraph of the article, and if it has shortcomings, improve them. After agreement has been reached on what a lynching is, the lead should be updated, and it should be fine to proceed with adding any 21st century lynchings meet the criteria.Jacona (talk) 13:39, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another couple of points about this discussion:
Almost everyone who has contributed to this article has done so for a reason. Most likely they share the same goals and opinions, should you take time to work together.
Lynching and race-related hate crimes are not the same thing: many Italian-Americans, Mexican-Americans, and even some white anglo-saxons have been lynched. The definition should not result in a list that could include virtually any murder victim.
There is no deadline. This is an encyclopedia, not not the news channel.
Please keep this discussion in one place.
Remembering the comment above, please feel free to seek guidance on how to contributefrom the teahouse, my talk page (although I cannot guarantee quick response), or the talk pages of other concerned editors who will most likely be happy to help if you ask for help, rather than being combative. Jacona (talk) 14:18, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not edit other people's comments in a discussion. Jacona (talk) 14:50, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Existing definitions

On December 14, 1940, the NAACP and other antilynching organizations met at Tuskege conference ... they accepted Ames's point that before an incident could be declared a lynching, there had to be a dead body. Second, the victim had to have been killed outside the law. And, because Ames did not want every killing of a black person by a white person counted as a lynching, the conference agreed that only a killing carried out by a group could be called a lynching. The conference debated the meaning of the word group at some length, finally agreeing to disagree, and when the conference adjourned, the word remained undefined. Such uncertainty undoubtedly advanced the NAACP's cause. The NAACP also won when conferees agreed that a lynching occurred when the murderers acted under pretext of service to justice, race, or tradition. Such broad language would allow a wide range of killings to be called lynchings. Under the definition worked out at the conference, killers need only believe they acted in "service to justice, race, or tradition" to qualify as lynchers
From the same article: Killings by law enforcement officers became another bone of contention between the NAACP and Tuskegee. In part, the dispute had its roots in Ida B. Wells's old argument that lynching victims had com mitted no crimes. However, even many blacks assumed that persons resisting arrest must be guilty of some villainy; and blacks who were convinced that a lynching was the killing of an innocent black person did not wish to classify shootings by police officers as lynchings. For years Communist organizations had no such compunctions, insisting that such deaths must be included in lynching tallies. At first, both Tuskegee and the NAACP had refused. In 1936 the NAACP still made the same argument, explaining that it did not want to count as lynchings killings perpetrated by law enforcement while making arrests.
    • Thanks. I could happily accept some version of the NAACP's rather vague definitions above. But I wonder, if they might be considered outdated, as they are more than 80 years old? Jacona (talk) 17:08, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm going to refrain from continuing discussion here per Wikipedia:DRN Rule A. It is not a requirement that anyone else do the same, although the courtesy would be appreciated - especially since you have already framed this section using your personal grievances against an editor. As another editor has pointed out, scholarly sources for the Tuskeegee/NAACP definition have already been provided. Additionally, repeatedly creating new sections to debate the same issue is a form of WP:STONEWALLING, as is discussing specific editors rather than the content proposed. 2600:387:0:902:0:0:0:23 (talk) 16:49, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
1. That's just an essay. 2. That's not what it says. 3. This is the first time the above IP has commented, yet insinuates previous discussion. Jacona (talk) 17:08, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
1. It is the accepted set of "rules" for the DRN and is linked at the beginning of every proceeding. You are not required to participate in the DRN, but as you are ignoring the rules I think we're heading for a failure and further escalation. 2. Please read point 5. 3. Wikipedia:Status quo stonewalling#Avoiding substantive discussion because of who is involved. This kind of discussion belongs in the DRN. 2600:387:0:902:0:0:0:56 (talk) 17:23, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Post DRN definition

I'm reposting the definition I offered at DRN since the IP editor seems to have "abandoned the field" and the definitions above seem lacking in one or more aspects.

An old definition from that era that is still sometimes used by academics today is one from African-American minister Francis James Grimké: "...the summary execution of an offender, or supposed offender, without due process of law, by a self-constituted and irresponsible body of men."(The Lynching of Negroes in the South: Its Causes and Remedy, Francis J Grimké, Washington, 1899) ...Lynch mobs are self-organized; they are not put together by another group or authority as, for example, a posse is. Lynch mobs are also irresponsible; they do not recognize any other authority other than the mob itself and they do not have to answer for their actions as an organization (prosecutions for lynching have always been of individuals).

To Jacona's point about the age of definitions, Grimke's is 121 years old but as an early activist against the practice I think it has merit. Its age is, however, reflected in its language. E.g.: "Irresponsible" is an important qualifier of the definition but seems liable for misinterpretation today. Perhaps further discussion can iron out this and/or other issues. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:08, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, User:Eggishorn - See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard&type=revision&diff=962182247&oldid=962182232&diffmode=source . I will note that 'irresponsible' means not accountable to legal authorities or non-judicial, and is roughly equivalent to 'without due process of law', which is the key to it. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:02, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

I would like to add that, although lynching and racial injustice have long been tragically associated, especially in the United States, not every death that is a racial injustice is a lynching, and not every lynching has been racial. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:06, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 June 2020

Please add the name Frank H. Little to the List of Lynching victims. If he is already listed, I did not see his name. According to a Wikipedia entry about him, Mr. Little was lynched on August 1, 1917 after being tied to the the bumper of a car and then dragged over granite blocks of the street. He was taken to the Milwaukee Bridge at the edge of town in Butte, Montana and hung from the railroad trestle. Mr. Little was 39 years old. Check ref Wikipedia entry for Frank Little (unionist). Additional ref is [1] 173.72.124.94 (talk) 16:48, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are thousands of victims still not on this list. I personally am not editing the list at this time because an IP editor has dragged me to the drama boards, so I'm giving it a break. Please consider registering, learning a little bit about how to edit and add the entries yourself. You will have to first become an autoconfirmed user, but that is very easy. Feel free to contact me on my talk page if you need help! Jacona (talk) 14:22, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Edit requests that are directly relevant to currently-active dispute resolution processes are not appropriate. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:38, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ “Frank Little and the IWW: The Blood That Stained an American Family” by Jane Little Botkin.

Ken McElroy a lynching?

He was killed in a public location by vigilantes with a large number of whitnesses present who refused to testify and may have had some knowledge of the pre planned killing (a town meeting was held the day before his death to discuss how to "deal" with him). He was white however and a dangerous career criminal however never formal convicted always acquitted in court. I'm not sure how "lynching" is being defined here.86.181.79.199 (talk) 08:51, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The definition that has been agreed to recently is at the top of the list article: "Lynching is the summary execution of an offender, or supposed offender, without due process of law, by a self-constituted and irresponsible body of men." Race is not a qualifying factor in determining whether a killing was a lynching and neither is previous (or even current) criminal status. The definition is not about who was killed but rather what was done to them and by whom. I hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 12:16, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The wikipedia article certainly looks like it was a lynching. Follow the sources.Jacona (talk) 12:41, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List order

Are the lists here in any order? (I can't see any pattern) And if not, should they be in one? Or should we just add on to the end as cases are found? Moonraker12 (talk) 11:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that they are not in order. However, if you click on the two little arrows at the top of each column, it will sort by that column. Click again and it will sort in the opposite direction. It would be great to add a default sort. Poke around other tables and see if you can figure out how. See Help:Sorting. Jacona (talk) 13:22, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Since these events are codified by century it would make more sense if they were sorted by date of occurrence rather than alphabetized (or however). Otherwise, why even divide them by century? (Anonymous Coward)

Possible source

https://www.kingscountypolitics.com/the-jim-crow-era-a-solemn-roll-call-of-those-brutally-murdered/ will check it out later. Smallbones(smalltalk) 13:20, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They got the list from Our Time Press at [3] which seems to come from the Tuskegee Institute list. Just over 3,000 on the list about 90% listed as "Lynched" and 10% listed as murdered. How many do we have on our list? Smallbones(smalltalk) 21:31, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Name order

The names on this page are largely, but not exclusively, formatted as last name, first name. Is there a reason for this? If it is for sorting, I would favor the use of Template:Hidden sort key rather than visibly listing names as if they were in a database.  Mysterymanblue  15:37, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the one who did this. Please don't bring in templates like this. I went to it and couldn't even find what it does (though it is deprecated). deisenbe (talk) 11:00, 12 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Deisenbe: You're right, it has been deprecated in favor of Template:Sort. The purpose is to allow items such as "The Brothers Karamazov" to be sorted as if it began with a "B" rather than a "T". I am asking about this because it is hard to imagine that the WP:COMMONNAME of any of these people would be of the form "Last name, First name". Can you give a reason, for example, that "Ahmaud Arbery" should be listed as "Arbery, Ahmaud"? In my opinion, names should be listed in this reverse order if there is a compelling reason to do so.  Mysterymanblue  02:39, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to first name sort, but be sure whatever you do works well, or completely. deisenbe (talk) 09:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Table, again

deisenbe, User:Donald Albury, God I hate editing tables! Anyway, can we do a few things here? I think we need to promote a full date, not a year; combine town, county, state into one single column; "force" the width of the first cell, with the names, which will create screen space for the last cell, with "comments". I have a bunch of articles that need to be added, but I want to wait with that until after we hopefully simplify the table a bit. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:00, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why a full date is necessary, unless we're lookng at sequence of lynchings within a particukar year. Are we? If you want to make one column out of town, county, state, the entrues shoukd be converted (tedious) into stste, county, town, so they'll sort correctly. deisenbe (talk) 20:49, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Deisenbe, why wouldn't we look for a sequence within a particular year? I'm writing up all the lynchings for 1927. I mean, if you're going to list them by year you might as well list them by date. Yes, converting the entries is tedious, and I wish the list hadn't been started this way. And in the mobile app it's even worse. Drmies (talk) 22:27, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with wide columns can be helped to some extent with some maintenance. The 19th century 'City' column had an entry that linked to a dab, "New Bridge", and someone had added a "disambiguation needed" tag to it, making for a long entry. "New Bridge" was apparently the name of a bridge in the middle of nowhere, so no "City" name is available. Putting a line break after every name in the "Name" column would help with the 20th century section. I'm willing to take a stab at that, maybe tomorrow. - Donald Albury 21:39, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Donald Albury, I thought something like that might be the fix, and I appreciate you. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 22:28, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not hard, at all. - Donald Albury 02:09, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think the larger blocks of text could be, at least partially, put into extended foot notes. See what I did with George Briscoe, 1884 (the block of text didn't exist before, but I thought adding it was informative). I also notice that while several names of victims of a single incident are usually listed together, there are some cases where several victims are listed individually, but linked to a single article. It is possible that one article covers more than one lynching, so that the victims should be listed separately (I have done that my self), but I intend to review the cases where victims listed separately here link to a common article. We should also think about some sort of style guidance. - Donald Albury 11:58, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The oversize width of the City column in the 19th century section and of the Name column in the 20th century column were caused by the addition of "disambiguation needed" tags. I was able to remove both "disambiguation needed" tags after looking at the cited sources for the victims and making appropriate edits. As long as we deal promptly with maintenance tags, the columns should maintain the correct width. - Donald Albury 17:17, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was not merged, but article improvement encouraged. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:55, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to merge Lynchings in Elmore County, Alabama into List of lynching victims in the United States. The Alabama article is basically a subset of 8 lynchings that belong in the USA article. Pinging creator of Alabama article: @Aidelprin: Platonk (talk) 18:41, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’d prefer to see the other article expanded. Jacona (talk) 20:42, 26 May 2021 (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.

Eddie Clark Killing in Houston: Lynching?

Eddie Clark was killed by a group of four civilians, a family, who believed he was guilty of previously harassing them, though they targeted Clark based on his car, believing he was someone else. This seems to fit the definition of a lynching. Someone might claim that the fact his identity was mistakenly identified makes it not a lynching, but that seems tenuous, and could be used retroactively after many incidents recognized as lynchings as a reason not to call it a lynching. Above all, the definition of a lynching doesn't seem to hinge on identity per se of the victim.

Sample coverage of the incident: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/22/us/eddie-clark-shooting-houston.html PalimpsestCleaner (talk) 11:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As I haven't paid for access to the NYT, I can't read the article, but I recall seeing coverage of the killing in other sources. This CNN report is open-access. Do you know of any reliable sources that have referred to the killing as a lynching? The previous discussions above at #Ahmaud Arbery: lynching or not? and #Definition of lynching are pertinent to your question. I want to think about this some more. - Donald Albury 15:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The lede defines lynching as

This is a list of lynching victims in the United States. Lynching is the summary execution of one or more persons without due process of law by a group of people organised internally and not authorised by a legitimate government. Lynchers may claim to be issuing punishment for an alleged crime, however they are not a judicial body nor deputised by one.

In this case a group of four persons, organized, unauthorized by any government, set out to execute someone for a perceived crime with no due process. So yeah, this crime would fit that definition. Jacona (talk) 17:41, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have not seen any media outlets call it a lynching as such. Given that the discussion of Arbery seemed to hinge on the facts of the case and not whether independent outlets called it a lynching, I figured perhaps the same can be done here. As an aside, lynching has such a strong racial connotation in the US that people may not even think to classify what fits the definition of lynching if there isn't an obvious racial motivation, as in the case of Clark; a cursory Google search confirms this, that sources overwhelmingly call an incident a lynching because there was some racial/racist motivation (including lynching of Whites for supporting rights of Blacks), when the scenario of group vigilante execution is much more generic. PalimpsestCleaner (talk) 09:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Having reliable sources calling a killing a lynching may help tip the balance (we do generally go with what reliable sources say). It is true that most lynchings in the US have involved white mobs killing "others" (with lynching victims including Chinese, Hispanics, Jews, Italians, Mormons, and others), but some "whites" (i.e, of northern European ancestry and presumably protestant) who were perceived as dangerous criminals were also lynched. - Donald Albury 13:16, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Donald. I totally agree. Jacona (talk) 16:46, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pages in Category:Lynching of Black men accused of assaulting White women

There is consensus to delete the category at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_July_20#Category:Lynching_of_Black_men_accused_of_assaulting_White_women. In case it is useful for this list, the current members are as follows.

North Platte black exodus

Per that article, would Louis Seelman fit this list? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:44, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There definitely were some lynching victims that died when their place of hiding was burned, or when they tried to escape the fire. This newspaper article lists 21 lynching victims in one county, three of which were killed by fire where they were hiding or by being shot while trying to escape such a fire. Although most of the victims in the newspaper's list are in the WP list, two of the three whose hiding place was burned are not. - Donald Albury 17:42, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should the Arbery case be considered a lynching?

The Arbery case does not fit the definition of lynching at the top of this article or the definition on the Wikipedia article on Lynching [1]. The jury acquitted Gregory McMichael and William Bryan on the charge of Malice Murder, suggesting the jury "did not believe either man intended to kill Mr. Arbery." [2]

In other words, the Court found that this was not a lynch mob performing a summary execution. Instead it found 2 of the 3 perpetrators were trying to make an unjustified citizen's arrest and that they never intended for it to end in Arbery's death.

Many people and media outlets are inaccurately calling it a lynching, but I don't think that should be a reason to make this list inaccurate by including the Arbery case. It is very common for people to inaccurately call hate crimes against Black Americans "lynchings", but those cases are rightly not included on this list because they don't fit the definition. For example, cases that have been very widely referred to as "lynchings" include the deaths of George Floyd and Trayvon Martin. [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]

I think the Arbery case should be removed from this list until it's discussed in more detail, because I see there are others on the talk page who realize it does not fit the definition of lynching. And I do not believe there is a consensus yet, which is what was listed on the edit summary as the reason it was re-added on November 25.SamLangClem (talk) 20:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The criteria for the inclusion of material in Wikipedia is Wikipedia:Verifiability, which means that we go by what reliable sources say. We do not use our own analysis of material. If reliable sources call Arbery's killing a lynching, we also do so. I cannot see the New York Times article because it is behind a paywall, but unless that article explicitly says that Arbery's killing was not a lynching, then it is irrelevant to the issue. We cannot base what we put in Wikipedia on your analysis of the trial verdict. - Donald Albury 20:46, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see that the court found this was not a lynching. Lynching was not one of the charges. The vast majority of lynchings have not been declared lynchings by a court of law, they are by definition extra-judicial. The great majority of lynchers were convicted of nothing. I changed the section heading to ask for discussion, rather than make a false declaration. A good discussion to develop a true consensus one way or another is greatly needed! Jacona (talk) 20:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Here's a source that explicitly says this was not a lynching: "The term 'lynching' has been tossed around frequently in connection with the case...Calling it a lynching is hyperbole...The incident wasn’t a lynching" [8]. Also, the majority of sources provided previously to show this is verifiably a "lynching" do not explicitly say this case is a "lynching", instead most of them explain how it is "reminiscent" of lynchings or simply note that some people are referring to it as a "modern day lynching". I don't think there's consensus on this and it shouldn't have been re-added yet. Shouldn't it be taken down until there's some more discussion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SamLangClem (talk • contribs) 22:52, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The source provided above is a bit weak as it is labeled as opinion, but in any case, opinion is what defies whether it was a lynching or not. Based on internet searches for arbery and lynching, there seem to be a great many sources that consider it a lynching and relatively few that argue otherwise. For that reason I believe it merits inclusion - however the definition on the top of the page might need work. The definition of lynching has changed considerably over time, and has been subject to a lot of argument (especially in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but also now). This page is just a list, perhaps it makes sense to actually reduce the space given to definition of lynching and defer to definitions on other pages. In any cases, it doesn't make sense to me to spend a huge amount of effort arguing about it on the list page - if a large number of sources call it a lynching, it should be included.Jacona (talk) 15:03, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I tweaked the definition to acknowledge that it has changed over time: inclusion in the list may reflect that varying definition. Please take a look at what I did - if it's controversial, will be happy to discuss it further. Jacona (talk) 15:09, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
While information about definitions of "lynching", often historical, may be of interest to the reader, we, as editors of Wikipedia, do not get to decide whether individual events fit this or that definition of a lynching. We report what reliable sources say on the subject. We do not remove material from Wikipedia simply because someone objects to it. The consensus of editors active on this page has been to keep Arbery's murder on this list. In order to remove his murder from this list, you need to seek a new consensus by convincing editors that the balance of reliable sources (i.e., those describing Arbery's murder as a lynching v. those saying it was not a lynching) does not support inclusion in this list. - Donald Albury 16:07, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Jacona and Donald Albury have convinced me. Based on how Wikipedia works and the majority of sources, Arbery should be included. I still think it can be argued that many of the sources calling it a lynching aren't reliable sources by Wikipedia standards, as they're opinion pieces that aren't fact checked[9], and many of them just call it lynching in the headline[10]. Also, Wikipedia reliability standards say context matters[11], and this is a politically charged issue where there are many opinion articles saying "this was a lynching" in the headline as a way to take a stance. And since it's so politically charged, when you consider context, it's not surprising that in comparison there are very few sources coming out just to state the unpopular fact that this was not technically a lynching by the traditional definition. But I think I'm fighting a losing battle, because the definition of lynching is changing. SamLangClem (talk) 18:51, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]


References

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching
  2. ^ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/24/us/malice-murder-arbery-murder-trial.html
  3. ^ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/history-of-lynching-violent-deaths-reflect-brutal-american-legacy
  4. ^ https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/george-floyd-was-lynched/
  5. ^ https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/06/08/george-floyd-was-lynched
  6. ^ http://eewmagazine.com/trayvon-martin-modern-day-lynching.html
  7. ^ https://truthout.org/articles/black-lives-matter-is-a-movement-not-a-moment/
  8. ^ https://www.ajc.com/news/local/opinion-lynching-but-arbery-case-certainly-raises-those-ghosts/K846lGdrNUmBFG3zZskYFO/
  9. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Statements_of_opinion
  10. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Headlines
  11. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Context_matters


Killing of Alonzo Tucker

The incident in Coos Bay, Oregon would likely warrant inclusion on this list.--Surv1v4l1st ╠Talk║Contribs╣ 23:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.132.132 (talk) [reply]

You can add that yourself. - Donald Albury 12:17, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Lynching Bristol Tenn not Bristol VA

https://library.artstor.org/public/SS7730736_7730736_9810317


Triple Lynching VA https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=WPhv8xPE&id=CAD1B04634C51190623696A152E339A7805DEF06&thid=OIP.WPhv8xPEmRd1LkWLn5EvUgHaLX&mediaurl=https%3a%2f%2fencyclopediavirginia.org%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2020%2f11%2f10405_20daab7df0ef8a3-768x1179.jpg&cdnurl=https%3a%2f%2fth.bing.com%2fth%2fid%2fR.58f86ff313c49917752e458b9f912f52%3frik%3dBu9dgKc541Khlg%26pid%3dImgRaw%26r%3d0&exph=1179&expw=768&q=Lynching+Bristol+Virginia+Photograph&simid=608048527665355703&FORM=IRPRST&ck=AA8E87B151AA08EFEB7EC9AFDCF68EDF&selectedIndex=18&ajaxhist=0&ajaxserp=0 https://encyclopediavirginia.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/10405_20daab7df0ef8a3-768x1179.jpg 

Hillard Lynching Tyler  Texas

https://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/stereo/item/2015645597/


1907 Higgins Lynching Nebraska https://www.loc.gov/pictures/collection/stereo/item/2022640601/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.132.132 (talk) 02:13, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Photos alone are not enough to support entries in this list. If reliable sources can be found for the Hilliard and Higgins lynchings, than those photos could be included with articles about the lynchings. - Donald Albury 12:17, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is meant to be the article's topic?

Noting how lynching is "often defined" as done in the article's second sentence isn't much help, and could even be counter productive, when the definition clearly doesn't cover many of the listed examples. Defining lynching as "racist murder by a group" also leaves some exceptions, such as murders of Brooke Hart's alleged killers, and even combining the two doesn't cover Drew Conner or the unknown man in Wagoner County in 1922.

"Murder by a group" may cover all the examples, but raises the obvious question of why assassinations like that of Leo Ryan aren't on the list. It's not even clear that many of what are listed are murders by a group, as the article doesn't give enough information to know.

If grounds for inclusion is just whoever has been described as a victim of lynching, then the article is titled incorrectly as it's not actually meant to be a cohesive list except in a purely linguistic sense. It would be like having a list of wars that included culture wars and the Emu War. "List of victims of murders described as lynchings" might be a suitable title though. 2400:3740:211:2700:2DC5:BCA9:D980:45EB (talk) 04:43, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia goes by what reliable sources say, and so this is (at least, should be) a list of events that reliable sources have called "lynchings". If you believe that individual events in this list have not been described as lynchings by reliable sources, then propose their removal from the list. If you know of WP articles about events that hve been described as lynching that are not now in this list, then add them. Trying to define "lynching", and the contents of this list, as anything other than what reliable sources call "lynching" would be original research. Donald Albury 14:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Would you support listing every person described by a reliable source as Mayor of Alexandria in the same article? If not, why would you support everything described as being a lynching in the same one? 2400:3740:211:2700:18BE:6B1:2088:81B6 (talk) 12:38, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You mean, like combining List of mayors of Alexandria, Virginia and List of mayors of Alexandria, New South Wales? Those are, after all, different cities. The title of this article is, "List of lynching victims in the United States", and so its scope is all lynchings that occurred in the United States that are labelled as such in reliable sources. I do not see how that would justify combining the lists of mayors for two different cities. Donald Albury 16:30, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Like how those are two different cities, this article list examples of different phenomena. 2400:3740:211:2700:18BE:6B1:2088:81B6 (talk) 22:39, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Like an article listing all mayors of Alexandria regardless of which city, this article seems to list events that reliable sources have called lynchings regardless of the crime. What should be done about that? 27.33.254.198 (talk) 12:46, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is fine. What do you think should be done about it? Donald Albury 18:32, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Would an article listing all mayors of Alexandria regardless of which city be fine? 27.33.254.198 (talk) 02:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Once again, an article listing all mayors of Alexandria, regardless of which city by that name, would be a nonsensical topic, much like this article's. No reason to doubt that has been supplied. There are a few options to fix it:

  • Rename the article into something like "list of victims of murders which have been described as lynchings in the United states". Due to the disadvantages of the other options listed below, this is my preferred approach.
  • Split the article based on types of lynching. This is disadvantageous due to the lack of discrete types, that likely being a contributor to the current state of disorder.
  • Pick a type of lynching and limit instances to that type. This has the downside of necessitating a reduction in information provided, which would also be likely to motivate further disagreement.

203.214.55.56 (talk) 12:11, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the title of this article. — Jacona (talk) 15:41, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you believe that? 203.214.55.56 (talk) 03:27, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Date and Year or just Year?

Some of the rows use the year and date in the year column while others only use the year. I understand this for many of the older Lynchings where there might not be accurate information for the exact date, but some of the lynching where the exact date is known still only use the year. I think it would help readability if this stayed consistent throughout the article. Should the date be used or only the year? Qwexcxewq (talk) 02:54, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted edits adding a full date with the justification that the colume header says "Year", not "Date". Off hand, I'm not aware of this being discussed before. My personal preference is to give just the year. Almost all of the lynchings in the list are from decades ago, and I don't see any value in specifying the day and month, while, as you note, giving just the year for all entries reduces clutter on the page. Donald Albury 18:34, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1922 victim with b on handkerchief's name

despite sources saying otherwise the victim is actually harry brotherson as confirmed by an article here:https://www.newspapers.com/article/nowata-daily-star/142765162/ 72.2.243.103 (talk) 19:43, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accusation

Why does this page have an Accusation section? It seems like it wouldn’t be necessary, as it could be put in the comment section. 174.215.22.101 (talk) 15:08, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That column is used to identify the alleged crime that was used to justify the lynching. I see no benefit in folding that into the Comments column. Donald Albury 15:46, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Missing lynching from Jan 20, 1916?

I'm working on the Silent Parade article, and one of the sources mentions a lynching in Lee County Georgia on 20 January 1916. Five victims. Sources are:

  • The Crisis, April 1916 Vol 11, NO 6,

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Crisis/RFFh8BonnVQC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22the+crisis%22+april+1916++%22lee+county%22&pg=PA279&printsec=frontcover

And:

Names of victims: Felix Lake and his 3 sons: Frank, Dewey, and Major; and Rodius (or Bodius) Semore

I cannot find the lynching victims in this list ... am I looking in the correct place? I can add them, but I wanted to make sure they are missing, before doing so. Noleander (talk) 02:58, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything in the list for Felix Lake, nor do I see an article containing the name. Go ahead and add that lynching to this list. Donald Albury 13:50, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I added them in to the 1916 table. If it looks like I made any mistakes, let me know and I'll fix them. 17:13, 2 April 2025 (UTC) Noleander (talk) 17:13, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1876 Malden, Kanawha County, WV

Rufus Estep: Murder of Thomas Lee Josh Dawson: Murder of Thomas Lee Thomas Hines: Murder of J.W. Dooley Date: January 24, 1876

Thomas Lee’s Death Certificate can be found on WV Cultures website.

Newspaper Article: Cleveland Daily Herald dated:1/26/1876

VirginiaChronicles.com Daily Dispatch Volume 49 Number 23, 27 January 1876 50.24.6.210 (talk) 20:49, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is the precise definition of lynching used for this list?

I'm working on Silent Parade article, which relates to lynching, and I happened upon this list. On the face of it, the list seems rather un-encyclopedic: It is not at all clear what criteria are used to include/exclude attacks. The list does not lay-out a concrete definition of "lynch" to be utilized for the list (or if there is a concrete definition, I cannot find it) Granted, the word "lynch" is defined differently by different sources; and the definition may change over time. But for _this_ list, WP should select one particular definition and stick to it.

I think this list would be much more encyclopedic and objective if we established a solid set of criteria, perhaps by:

  1. Establish a concrete definition of "lynching" that must be satisfied before an attack is included in this list
    a) Decide if it is a requirement that it is an extrajudicial punishment; that is: the attackers must feel that they are punishing the victim for an actual or perceived crime
    b) Decide if all hate crime murders based on race are automatically included in this list, or not
  2. Clearly state the definition at the top of the list (and in this Talk page)
  3. Establish what kind of sourcing is required to meet the WP:V and WP:RS requirements
  4. Decide if a public figure merely stating "it was a lynching" is sufficient, or must a RS establish the various criteria (e.g. extrajudicial)

To be clear: hate crimes need to be prominently documented with WP, but not all hate crimes are lynchings, and not all lynchings are hate crimes.

Thoughts? Noleander (talk) 19:38, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There have been a few discussions about the definition of "lynching" on this page; about six years ago, about four years ago, and about two years ago (see the headings "Definition", "Definition of lynching", and "What is meant to be the article's topic?" in the Table of Contents). First, if reliable sources call an event a "lynching", we call it a lynching. Beyond that, we tend to accept an event which involved extra-legal killing of one or more persons by a self-organized group acting without any legal authority as a lynching. Anyone who believes that an incident that is included in this list was not a lynching is welcome to challenge it, and a determination of whether it should remain in the list can be reached by a consensus of editors on this talk page. You can see a couple of such discussions higher on this talk page about the killing of Ahmaud Aubery. Donald Albury 20:32, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Donald Albury - Thanks for taking the time to explain some of the history. An RfC might be a good idea to solidify the guideline for what is included/excluded in the list. I don't have time to initiate an RfC now, but here are some notes in case the topic comes up again:
  • WP:RS requires reliable sources. If a victim, or an acquaintance of the victim, says it is a "lynching" is that sufficient? Ideally, an academic/scholar/legal source would be required to meet the "reliable" aspect of RS (for example, as is required in List of genocides). Regardless, the required level of sourcing for this list (casual vs newspaper vs academic) should be prominently displayed at the top of the list article.
  • The word "lynching" often used rhetorically or for effect, such as "high tech lynching" applied to Clarence Thomas's experience in confirmation hearings. If a source says that event was a lynching, should the event be included in this list? Does the nature of the source matter: Thomas himself? A conservative commentator? A NY Times editorial? A scholar? ... if so, the guideline should say so.
  • The list is currently a mixture of hate crimes and lynchings. Although there is overlap, they are different. Lynchings, in most definitions, require that the attackers felt they were punishing the victim for a perceived crime (racial animus not required); hate crimes, in most definitions, require racial/religious/etc animus, but not a punishment factor. This mixture may be due to the fact that WP does not have a List of hate crimes in the United States article.
  • Whatever the inclusion/exclusion guideline is, it should be clearly stated at the top of the List article. It is not there now.
  • The lead paragraphs of the list should shift from discussing lynching (which belongs in Lynching in the United States) and instead focus on inclusion/exclusion guidelines.
  • The guideline can change over time, but the current consensus should be prominently displayed at the top of the List article. That way, as the pool of active editors change over time, inconsistencies in the list are less likely to occur. The goal is to avoid time-consuming case-by-case discussions, and instead shift to discussions of changes to the guideline.
I don't mean to impugn the hard work of editors that have worked on this list .... but there is always room for improvement. Noleander (talk) 23:56, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be premature to start an RfC on a definition at this time. Various organizations concerned with lynchings in the US have tried and failed to agree on a definition, resulting in various overlapping definitions. The first step would be to workshop proposals to see if there is some agreement among interested editors about how lynching should be defined. Any specific proposal that does not already have some support is likely to fail in an RfC. Moreover, I see no urgency in establishing such a definition. The only event on this list that I remember being contentious was that of Ahmaud Aubery, and it was called a "lynching" in reliable sources. There is a vast overlap of "lynchings" and "hate crimes". We have adopted a rule that new entries should have a WP article, which means there has been some coverage of the event in reliable sources. There will always be marginal cases, no matter how well crafted a definition is used, but as long as disputes about whether an event belongs on this list are few and far between, I do not see any benefit from having a tighter definition. Donald Albury 11:43, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If defining lynching can't be done, the obvious solution is to move the article to ""list of victims of murders described as lynchings in the United States" or something to that effect, as I posed in 2023, which no one was willing to argue against. Including every event described as a lynching when inconsistent definitions are being used is as absurd as listing all the Mayors of Springfield on one article . 61.69.163.132 (talk) 06:11, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per the policy at Wikipedia:Article titles#Deciding on an article title, the five characteristics of an article title in Wikipedia are:
  • Recognizability – The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject area will recognize.
  • Naturalness – The title is one that readers are likely to look or search for and that editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles. Such a title usually conveys what the subject is actually called in English.
  • Precision – The title unambiguously identifies the article's subject and distinguishes it from other subjects.
  • Concision – The title is not longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects. (See § Concision, below.)
  • Consistency – The title is consistent with the pattern of similar articles' titles. Many of these patterns are listed (and linked) as topic-specific naming conventions on article titles, in the box above.
I believe that your proposed change to the article title is inferior to the current title under all of the above characteristics. Donald Albury 14:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Given how the article's lack of focus has been repeatedly raised, what I proposed is unambiguously much better on "Precision" grounds. I also fail to see how it's any worse on "Consistency" or "Recognizability". You still haven't answered the question of whether you'd be okay with a list of Mayors from different cities of the same name for the obvious reason that you wouldn't be. It's an excellent analogy for this article, which if you disagree about we can discuss. As it stands, you've given zero reasons as to why there's anything wrong with it. 61.69.163.132 (talk) 07:28, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1874, Charles Howard lynched in Des Moines, Iowa

Should I add this lynching of Charles Howard in Des Moines, Iowa on December 15, 1874? Here's a newspaper article and part of a book (pages 525 - 530) about it. It's also mentioned in this book and on this webpage that references a book. I can't access this article, but it may clarify if Howard was Black; the preview from a Google search says, "In 1874, a journalist in Des Moines, Iowa, anticipated the lynching of a Black man, Charles Howard, might haunt that community forever. “The stain upon our city..." MidwestMoss (talk) 23:48, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those sources look acceptable for an entry. While the list includes lynching victims who were White, the article you found does indeed include that quote identifying Charles Howard as Black (page 5). (I was able to access that article via the Wikipedia Library. Once you have completed 500 edits on any Wikimedia project, you will eligible to apply for access to it.) In the meantime, I can add the citation for that article if you go ahead and add an entry for Charles Howard. Donald Albury 13:04, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I've added the entry. And thank you for letting me know about the Wikipedia Library. Much appreciated! MidwestMoss (talk) 18:51, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rasheem Carter

I removed an unverified claim that Rasheem Carter was lynched, but the edit was quickly reversed. The entry is sourced to an op-ed by Carter's family's attorney, Ben Crump, which I don't believe meets standards for reliable sources. That aside, there doesn't seem to be sufficient evidence of homicide to include Carter on this list. BergerCode (talk) 20:23, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe Thomas Coleman belongs on this list

After looking through the sources listed both on this article and on his page, nobody's really sure if multiple were involved with his assassination or not. Even the final jury verdict referred to the culprit as "person or persons". Although a lot of modern articles about it take the "lynching" theory as fact, even his main Wikipedia page states that he may have just been stabbed by a relative of the woman and there was no lynching involved.

I don't believe something that "might have been a lynching?" belongs on a historical list of documented lynchings. ~2026-81922 (talk) 17:56, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

allikas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_lynching_victims_in_the_United_States