Template:Notaforum

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Core This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is listed on the project's core biographies page. Georgia (U.S. state) Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia 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.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state) Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Crooked Creek (Georgia), Ed Defore Sports Complex, Audery Mill Creek, More (Georgia)... More (U.S.)... Assess : Rate articles from Unassessed Georgia (U.S. state) articles and Unknown-importance Georgia (U.S. state) articles. Citing sources : Unreferenced Georgia (U.S. state) articles Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category. Geographical coordinates : more Georgia (U.S. state) articles missing geocoordinate data Infobox : Georgia (U.S. state) articles without infoboxes Map : Wikipedia requested maps in Georgia (U.S. state) Photo : Wikipedia requested photographs in Georgia (U.S. state) Stubs : Work on stubs in articles in Georgia (U.S. state) stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) radio station stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) road stubs and Georgia (U.S. state) geography stubs. Other : *Deletion sorting: Please see the collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Georgia (U.S. state) - compiled by WikiProject Deletion sorting Help out with articles placed in Category:Georgia (U.S. state) articles needing attention Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability Tag the talk pages of Georgia (U.S. state)-related articles with the {{WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)}} banner. Get Georgia (U.S. state) to a featured article quality standard Georgia (U.S. state) Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia 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.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state) Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Crooked Creek (Georgia), Ed Defore Sports Complex, Audery Mill Creek, More (Georgia)... More (U.S.)... Assess : Rate articles from Unassessed Georgia (U.S. state) articles and Unknown-importance Georgia (U.S. state) articles. Citing sources : Unreferenced Georgia (U.S. state) articles Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category. Geographical coordinates : more Georgia (U.S. state) articles missing geocoordinate data Infobox : Georgia (U.S. state) articles without infoboxes Map : Wikipedia requested maps in Georgia (U.S. state) Photo : Wikipedia requested photographs in Georgia (U.S. state) Stubs : Work on stubs in articles in Georgia (U.S. state) stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) radio station stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) road stubs and Georgia (U.S. state) geography stubs. Other : *Deletion sorting: Please see the collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Georgia (U.S. state) - compiled by WikiProject Deletion sorting Help out with articles placed in Category:Georgia (U.S. state) articles needing attention Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability Tag the talk pages of Georgia (U.S. state)-related articles with the {{WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)}} banner. Get Georgia (U.S. state) to a featured article quality standard Christianity: Saints / Anglicanism / Baptist Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Saints (assessed as Top-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by Baptist work group (assessed as High-importance). Anti-war (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anti-war, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Anti-warWikipedia:WikiProject Anti-warTemplate:WikiProject Anti-warAnti-war Human rights High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. 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. Philosophy: Social and political Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Social and political philosophy Template:WP1.0

Template:FAOL

	Martin Luther King Jr. was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 23, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed October 30, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted June 17, 2008 Peer review Reviewed September 25, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of September 10, 2006. Current status: Former good article nominee

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12

Landerman56 has repeatedly removed references to the plagiarism charges in the Early Life section. I do not understand why he thinks it is inappropriate to mention charges regarding the dissertation when the dissertation is first discussed, and so perhaps he can explain himself here. Phiwum (talk) 01:45, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. The information about plagiarism is quite appropriate in the section that discusses his doctorate. In fact, there is no other logical place to put it in the article. For readers who want more detail, there is a separate article on authorship issues that is linked in one of the citations. Ward3001 (talk) 01:50, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't the separate article on authorship issues be listed in the "See also" section? This seems more appropriate than as a citation--unless I'm mistaken, encyclopedias generally do not cite themselves as sources.208.199.244.2 (talk) 16:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the montgomery bus boycott wasnt it rosa parkes not clodette who had to give up her seat? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.77.149.217 (talk) 07:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair on history, we should dig deeper into the plagiarism allegation and thus established once and for all whether the person mentioned truly merited the doctoral degree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.190.181.230 (talk) 02:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One of Wikipedia's core policies, No original research, prohibits editors from "digging deeper" and making our own determinations of things like that. Our job is to report what other sources say. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 03:13, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the information is extremely well supported and referenced: http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/11/us/boston-u-panel-finds-plagiarism-by-dr-king.html so that's not a major concern, as such.

Whether it's appropriate information for that section is questionable. I think it may be worthy of its own section, actually. -- Otto (talk) 15:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There once was a separate section about King's plagiarism, but somebody wanted the discussion moved up to the section with his dissertation. I seem to recall that after the information was added to the "Early life" section, it also had a line directing readers to the "Plagiarism" section. I'm not sure when or why the "Plagiarism" section disappeared. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 16:40, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, someone now wants just two people -- Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama -- listed under "influences". Before that there were a handful of people; before that nothing. I really think "nothing" is the best we can do there, given that pretty much every African-American leader (if not ever African-American) has been influenced by MLK; if we start picking and choosing who we're going to put there (Al Sharpton? Colin Powell?), we're doing original research. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 22:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer more, but there's not enough room - none is just as inappropriate, when as you say, so many were influenced - I could add Jim Wallis, the UK Student Christian Movement, Trevor Huddleston, before starting on black politicians and religious leaders here in the UK. I take your point, how does one select? I didn't realise this was what you meant. Fine, remove Jesse Jackson, and leave the most influential African American people know about in there. That is well sourced as somebody he influenced, and gives a better picture of King's influence than a selective list. Mish (just an editor) (talk) 23:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really, there's no need to create such a list for a man of such universal influence. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 04:14, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree with Jpgordon here. We don't have a list anywhere of being influenced by Jesus, or George Washington, or for that matter Simon Bolivar. With people of this level of importance, broad influential impact is more or less a given. John Carter (talk) 17:46, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page is currently at 193 kB. Does anyone think the time for archiving may have been reached? John Carter (talk) 19:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps, but most of it seems to be this one argument. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 21:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 06:58, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under the influences section, I believe that there should be a section detailing the influence of Jesus, Christianity, and the Bible in the work of Dr. King. I don't know why this is neglected, but it is surely a more significant influence than Ghandi. It's probably impossible to find a speech or writing by Martin Luther King, Jr. that does not reference or allude to a biblical passage. I'd argue that the teachings of the Bible are THE most significant influence in the life and work of Dr. King.

(P.S. I'm a new wiki-editor, so I hope I did this right. Please forgive any formatting errors. Thanks!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eracer001 (talk • contribs) 23:27, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For an active Christian minister, this falls rather in the "water is wet" category, and is considered unnecessary to mention. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:29, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This huge gigantic article and not one mention of whether MLK was a republican or democrat? (or did I miss it?) I wanted to learn if MLK voted republican or democrat, so I came to Wiki. I cant find it in here. So I have to go somewhere else. Can someone please include MLK's political affiliations? Did he vote republican or democrat, or neither? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.97.239 (talk) 23:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reliable evidence that he belonged to either party, which is why the article doesn't mention it (that, plus the fact that it might be considered trivial). King may have voted Republican before the 1960s, because many Democratic politicians in the Southern U.S. were strong supporters of segregation. — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] (talk · contribs) 02:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many? Most. A Democrat could hardly get elected otherwise; and a Republican couldn't get elected nohow no way (since Lincoln was one.) Anyway, Malik's right; we just don't have any evidence of party registration at any time. I'd love to see some. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 03:37, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

His niece claims that he was a Republican. However, she's a tad biased. Article here: http://www.trustedpartner.com/docs/library/000143/Alveda%20King%20article.pdf . Read Page 2 (marked as page 17 in the PDF). It's a really good read, but the bias comes more than shining through towards the end. -- Otto 19:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a reliable source, though; we've got assertion (from someone who was a child at the time), without any way to back it up. Even if it is true, which it probably is. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 18:18, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i think his daughte would know better htan we would, even if the dems would rather not think about that. Smith-JOnes 20:20, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Of course she would. But we're not talking about a daughter, we're talking about a younger brother's daughter. And the "dems" are quite aware that, until 1968, Southern Democrats as a group were segregationists, old-guard Jim Crow-supporting Democrats still resentful of Lincoln. That's until 1968. That's when they finally realized the Republican Party was a more comfortable home, and that's where they all went. Southern Democrats are now a completely new breed, and the Democratic Party is far better off without the old-style ones (even if it did cost the 1968 election.) --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 23:03, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

fair enough, but as you can imagine any political pary would be eager to align itself with a fiure as popular and wellrespected as Dr King. while democrats and republicans are undoubtedl different as they were hundreds of years ago, it does seem as if there is some level of political corruption in trtying to hijack dr. kings legacy for one party or another, his niece is one of the few trustwrothy sources we have of kings political beliefs at the time that you specified Smith-JOnes 01:42, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

But that's really too weak a source, by Wikipedia's standards. I could be persuaded otherwise, though. What was her involvement with her uncle, for example? On what basis is she asserting his Republicanism? And at what period? --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 06:27, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i dont not agree with you that the source is curently too weak for inclusion under WP:NOT or i feel that given time the full story might emerge and reveal itself under the proper circumstances if you and we all choose to permit it with out presentful? Smith-JOnes 17:09, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I understand -- "permit it with out presentful"? Anyway, it is indeed too weak for inclusion, and given time, if the full story emerges, then we'll have adequate documentation. By the way, please fix your signature; they're supposed to have links in them to your user and talk pages. If you're having trouble, put a {{helpme}} about it on your talk page. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 19:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

indeed, it does mean what i have indicative forth to mean, with regards to being took weak to be inclorpated into the main article. And my signature appears to be perfectly fine -- my talk page is easy to find, seeing how many people come to visit me and edit things on it nearly everyday LOL! Anywa, thanks for your advice and your help with this thorny issue User:Smith Jones 00:40, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems he may not have had any party-affiliation - and as voting is by secret ballot, we may never know what he voted. [1]. Mish (talk) 09:10, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks for that article. I like: Martin Luther King Jr. was not a Republican or Democrat,” said Alveda King, who was previously elected to the Georgia House as a Democrat, but later appointed to state and federal commissions by Republicans. “But everybody uses Martin Luther King Jr.’s name for their own benefit.” . --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 02:35, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i dont feel the need to mentron that. we can just say that it is unclear which party that he wasn't not affiliate with, or that he did not publicaly state his allegiance to one party or a other User:Smith Jones 02:40, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating. In the source I presented, Alveda King states "My grandfather, Dr. Martin Luther King, Sr., or “Daddy King”, was a Republican and father of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. who was a Republican.". Then, in this article on ajc.com, she says “I have not talked to Kimau-Imani. I don’t even know who he is,” she said. “I have never said Martin Luther King Jr. was a Republican. I never saw his registration card.”.

So at this point, I can't say that using Alveda King's words can possibly be a reliable source. -- Otto (talk) 17:02, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thats interesting, but the ajc.com could easil be fabricated. many sources use partisan politics to jusify their portrayals of instorical figures and Dr King has been the victim of this posturing by ajc.com a lot more often than many other major historical figures who have also been the victimized of this political posturing by leftwing blogs and other biased sources like ajc.com. I dont think that it can be included for this particule issue because of its known history of bias which has been demonstrated in discusions prior to this on other discussions related to this sujet. User:Smith Jones 16:43, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So any assertion on this matter would fail verifiability, even if we accept your rather unusual assertion that one of the most respected newspapers in the South is a "biased source." --Orange Mike | Talk 17:13, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it allays any concerns about the Atlanta Journal-Constitution quote possibly being a fabrication for political purposes, one can note in Alveda King's own blog that she acknowledges previously stating that Martin Luther King, Jr., was a Republican, but now says that she misspoke with that statement. She says that she should have said that while she never saw his registration card, she believes he probably voted Republican. So we're definitely back to not having any reliable documentation of his party affiliation. Mwelch (talk) 23:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute at Stanford University has just released the "Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Global Freedom Struggle" online encyclopedia, chronology and document library. This resource includes cross-linked entries on over 1000 civil rights movement figures, events and organizations. It also includes hundreds of historical primary documents, as well as the complete transcripts and streaming audio for King's major sermons and speeches. The URL for the site is: http://mlk-kpp01.stanford.edu/index.php/encyclopedia/encyclopedia_contents

It would be much appreciated if someone could add this information to the "external links" section of this wikipedia entry, as well as to the "video and audio" section.

Also, the URL listed in external links for the King Papers Project is no longer correct. The correct URL is: http://www.kinginstitute.info —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rgb700 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody has answered my post from August 12 (including the link to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Refusal to engage arguments). Malik Shabazz has archieved all discussion without further comments. If somebody has objections to my version, I expect them to answer my arguments, otherwise I go ahead and restore the text. --Jonund (talk) 23:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]