This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

African diaspora High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Crime and Criminal Biography: Serial, mass, and spree killers High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of crime and criminal biography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Serial Killer task force (assessed as Low-importance). Death Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Disaster management Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Discrimination High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. Military history: North America / United States C‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history C This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale. Associated task forces: /  North American military history task force United States military history task force Oklahoma: Tulsa Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oklahoma, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oklahoma on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OklahomaWikipedia:WikiProject OklahomaTemplate:WikiProject OklahomaOklahoma Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Task-force Tulsa (assessed as Top-importance). United States: History High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as High-importance).

Why is “In an event colloquially referred to as the Tulsa Race Massacre” in a note when it could’ve been part of the main text? Can I edit it out? Win090949 (talk) 11:09, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why? Slatersteven (talk) 12:03, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Because the incident is not proper? A specific event was given a colloquial name. Precisely why I changed the former, which had "Tulsa Race Massacre" in the lead in a way I felt was improper. Grayson (talk) 12:59, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Slatersteven why are you reverting my edits without discussion? If you have an issue with how I am formatting the new lead, you have every right to bring that up to me here. I won't engage in an edit war, I find those to be childish and detrimental. But I ask that we discuss before you revert. Grayson (talk) 13:04, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have an issue with your choice of words (as you seem to do as well as you have virtually just reinstated the original wording). Slatersteven (talk) 13:11, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I do too, yes. I really shouldn't be changing it as much as I am and I apologize for that.

Do you have any recommendations for me? I strongly dislike the previous lead that existed before I began making edits. I will be all ears on any changes you suggest. Grayson (talk) 13:15, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No I do not as I see nothing wrong with it, if you have issues, revert and then raise concerns here, as I do not know what you object to. Slatersteven (talk) 13:19, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It seems we do not have any issues then.

Apologies for the misunderstanding. Grayson (talk) 13:21, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What? I said I had an issue with your edit, not the text you altered. Slatersteven (talk) 13:22, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. What specifically do you have issues with? I have admittedly made many edits.

And as said above, if you have any suggestions to reach consensus please share them with me! The only thing I am opposed to is fully returning to the former lead before I began my edits here. Grayson (talk) 13:26, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It has to be returned to the pre-edit war version. Whilst we work on this, it is down to you to make a case, not me. But (as an example) why change "white residents" to "white people", they were residents, and not an out-of-town mob? Slatersteven (talk) 13:32, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the article accordingly. I agree with you that "people" instead of "residents" is improper, I really shouldn't be changing words around as much as I do. I need to be more decisive with my edits and I apologize. Grayson (talk) 13:44, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have now reverted back to before you started, there were far too many issues to deal with on a case by case basis, now you an argument for what you want changed. Slatersteven (talk) 13:52, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There was no issues with the version you just reverted.

MOS:AVOIDBOLD was implemented to the lead for a reason... it is not proper. Grayson (talk) 14:00, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I already told you, I have more than one objection, you ignored me. I told you to restore to this version, you ignored me. I have told you I am not going to go through everything I object to on a case-by-case basis. It is down to you to get consensus, it is not down to me. You are the one who wants to make changes, now make a case. Slatersteven (talk) 14:07, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You're the only one objecting. If you refuse to go by a case-by-case basis (which isn't that difficult, as I did not change that much) then I'm restoring to the version I just made at your behest. How am I supposed to make a case when I don't know your position? Grayson (talk) 14:11, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have told you I object to pretty much every change you made. Do not edit war. I did not ask you to make the change you made, I just gave those as two examples. This is why I will not do it case by case, because you will then make another change, then another untill we end up back at the place we started from. I am now out of here with a NO to any change in the lede. Read wp:bludgeon and let's see what others think. Slatersteven (talk) 14:17, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I admittedly can see how I am bludgeoning, and will put this aside for now. At some point I would like to reimplement MOS:AVOIDBOLD, perhaps putting a draft here instead of making edits so people can chip in. In the meantime I'm all set here. Grayson (talk) 14:26, 13 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The opening paragraph is problematic. It is not an accurate, objective, or factual summary of what comes later.

Currently it reads:

The Tulsa race massacre was a two-day-long white supremacist terrorist massacre that took place in the Greenwood District in Tulsa, Oklahoma, United States, between May 31 and June 1, 1921. Mobs of white residents, some of whom had been appointed as deputies and armed by city government officials, attacked black residents and destroyed homes and businesses.

Problems:

1. It didn't last two days but only 14 hours from 10pm to noon the next day. The actual 'invasion' of Greenwood took place only on 1st June.

2. Some activists have called the event a 'white supremacist racist terrorist massacre', but since the conflict began with 75 armed blacks killing ten whites, this description is simply inadequate to describe the whole event.

3. Since the ten white deaths were not in Greenwood then the whole event took place in 'Tulsa' and not exclusively in Greenwood.

4. Though many people have used the word 'massacre' to describe the event there has never been any hard evidence to confirm that there ever was a 'massacre' in the normal sense. The official death toll remains 13 white and 26 black dead. Most, if not all, of the black victims were undoubtedly armed and amongst the 75 black militants who had just killed ten white Tulsans.

5. Were there white 'mobs'. Or just one mob? And if there was a white 'mob' wasn't it in hot pursuit of a black 'mob'? Probably best to omit the word 'mob' altogether.

6. Did the white mob 'attack black residents' or simply or mainly 'fight with' armed black militants?

The fundamental problem is in using quotes from opinion pieces as if they were statements of fact.

But it's better to avoid 'emotive' words and just to let the facts speak for themselves.

So I'd propose modifying the opening para to read:

The 'Tulsa race massacre' was a 14-hour-long conflict that took place in Tulsa, Oklahoma, United States, between late May 31 and noon on June 1, 1921. Following a shooting incident, white residents, some of whom had been appointed as deputies and armed by city government officials, pursued armed black militants into the black district of Greenwood where the pursuers fought residents and destroyed homes and businesses.

Does anyone object? Or can anyone do better? If not I'll make the change. ~2026-11259-89 (talk) 16:09, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

We go by what RS say, so you need to provide sources. Slatersteven (talk) 16:42, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't make any of these changes without consensus. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]