Talk:Uncle Tom (film)

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

Not notable[edit]

"Despite covering perspectives relevant to the political environment preceding the 2020 United States presidential election, the documentary was largely ignored by major outlets demonstrated by the lack of reviews within the first six weeks of its release."

I believe the above paragraph alone, from the article itself, makes an excellent case for why this article has no reason to exist. The non-existence of reliable secondary sources (and indeed, the general lack of sourcing, which primarily features archived primary sources and unreliable outlets like Newsweek), leads me to suspect that this article was created to promote the film. 46.97.170.112 (talk) 10:32, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you accusing me of being affiliated with the people that produced this film and creating this article to promote it? If so, your beliefs about why this article was created are wrong. This article was not created to promote the film any more than any other article about other films. I found the movie to be interesting, and Larry Elder to be a person notable to the degree it would be odd to avoid describing his work. Simply because the movie wasn't given a lot of publicity in major outlets within the first six means doesn't mean it didn't get any. And it doesn't mean it isn't notable enough now. Please to point to specific places in the article where you think sources are lacking. And please point to a source that describes Newsweek and other sources used to be too unreliable to be used on Wikipedia. Bro4 (talk) 14:22, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Binksternet edits[edit]

I reverted these changes and argued why in the comment, but Binksternet finds it appropriate to revert them all with a revert edit (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Uncle_Tom_(film)&diff=1044880776&oldid=1044874596) with the comment "American topic gets American mdy date format. Again, removing excessive quotes as political and promotional. The reader is not helped by Elder's misrepresentation of statistics."

  • The date format is now inconsistent. And please refer to source that explains one should change the original date format on articles of american topics to american date.
  • The reference list was at the bottom of the article with each source properly named. There was no reason to change this. Please refer to source that explains why one should change reference list from bottom to inline on existing articles.
  • He removed two quotes.

The first quote explains the criticism of the war on poverty legislation the film focuses on, and gives the reader insight into what the movie is about. 

 "And what the welfare state has done, in my opinion, is incentivize Black women to marry the government, and allow men to abandon their financial and moral responsibilities to their families. We’ve gone from 25% of Black kids born outside wedlock in 1965, to nearly 70% now. You cannot attribute that to Jim Crow and racism. It has to do with bad government policy."
  • The second explains the basis of the title of the movie.
"An Uncle Tom is somebody who has sold out by embracing the white man, by becoming a Republican, by rejecting the idea that you’re a victim, by supporting things like hard work, accountability, and low taxes, by refusing to think of yourself as a black person first as opposed to as an American who is black."

First he argues the quotes are promotional, and now they are excessive, political and promotional. How are the quotes excessive and promotional? It's difficult to avoid any political message about a very political movie. Shouldn't the article explain what the movie is about and the message it is trying to convey? I don't find Binksternet arguments for removing the quotes as valid. @Binksternet: Bro4 (talk) 05:04, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The film wasn't very widely seen, and it failed in its mission. Now is not the time to try and make up for that failure, by promoting the viewpoints of the film. Binksternet (talk) 05:08, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me? Is that the lever of your arguments? This is completely irrelevant to the points I present. Unless you have some substantial arguments, I suggest you revert your edits.Bro4 (talk) 17:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Your preferred quotes are a violation of WP:Neutral point of view because they give waaay more emphasis to Elder's statements than any WP:SECONDARY source. Elder is arguing his case in the film but secondary sources ignore it. And we don't need Elder explaining the concept of Uncle Tom; it's already defined in the text and there is also a wikilink for readers to click if they want more information about it. Elder's version is unclear, anyway. He is trying to make a political point, not define the term. Binksternet (talk) 18:01, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
1) Well, the first quote explains one of the main points in the movie. Maybe explaining what a documentary is about is a violation of WP:Neutral point of view? I don't see it that way. Or is the problem that it was a direct quote? Why do you require a secondary source for a quote from a primary source? Do you have sources elaborating on why explaining the points of a documentary is a violation of WP:Neutral point of view?
2) About the uncle tom quote, I disagree. The longer quote about the "uncle tom" term and how it's used in the movie is useful and I find your arguments on why it's not needed lacking. You seem to insist on not giving the reader more information than strictly necessary. A very strange position for a wikipedia editor. The quote explains the basis for how the creators of the movie understands the "uncle tom" term and is useful information to have in this article. It's not meant as a definition of the term, but to explain how Elder (the movie creators) sees the problem.
3) And because you disagree about the content you find it appropriate to remove (and later revert) the changes I made on the date format and source format in the article? Is this really an accepted behviour of experienced Wikipedia contributors? Bro4 (talk) 19:39, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
American topics get mdy date format by default except for some military articles and a very few others that are supported by a majority of sources using dmy dates. Also, the very first date format of an article is usually kept in place for topics that are not tied to a particular date format. In this case, the topic is undoubtedly American, and the first-ever date format by Pi Delport was month-first, with Template:Film_date lacking the df=y parameter to change it to day-first.[1] Even your own first contact with the article[2] used mdy date format. I don't think the date format is your main concern here, so it's not worth arguing about it.
Regarding the quotes, Elder is misinterpreting statistics for his own political gain. He attributes the high numbers of Black children born to unmarried mothers to the Democratic Party, which is ridiculous. Only the Democrats have been persistent in advocating easy access to birth control for teens and low-income people to reduce unintended pregnancies. Only the Democrats have been advocating sex education to reduce unintended pregnancies. Only the Democrats have been calling for an examination of the systemic social and government problems which end up incarcerating a much higher percentage of Black men, leaving so many Black women to raise children alone. Elder is absolutely wrong to say these problems are not linked to racism. No wonder there is very little media coverage of this documentary.
I keep harping on WP:SECONDARY sources for your quotes because otherwise you are the decision maker regarding which quotes are important. That's the job of the media—let them do their job. If you select your own quotes from primary sources, then you are violating WP:No original research. Binksternet (talk) 20:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Uncle_Tom_(film)&oldid=1205826148"