Jump to content

Talk:Michigan Civil Rights Initiative

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

Background

[edit]

The second sentence of the Background section needs revision. I would do it but I was just floating by reading Wikipedia articles and have no idea how the sentence 'should be' worded, since I am unfamiliar with the subject. I only noticed that the sentence makes no sense as written.

Opposition

[edit]

Why Sharpton or Jackson's opinions are any more important than, say, mine, is beyond me. They've nothing to do with Michigan. Also, nice move giving Jackson and Jackson's own Rainbow/PUSH Coalition different bullet points. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.172.161 (talk) 04:51, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV tag

[edit]

an anon added an NPOV tag. I've rolled it back as I see no assertion of NPOV or support for that tagging on this talk page. If there is a need for the tag please outline some of the issues you see with the article here on this talk. Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 19:31, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my revert on 04:35, 27 November 2006: Anonymous user inappropriately changed much of the information to past tense. Prop2 does not even take effect until December 22 '06 and faces court challenges, and even after it does take effect some of the things changed to past tense should actually remain in the present tense (example: "seeks to end" being changed to "ended"; when changed to past tense this actually changes the entire meaning of the statement, not just the tense). Some of the changes to past tense may have been proper, and I will reinstate any changes that were appropriate ASAP (or perhaps someone else will help with this). With regard to the election results taken from MichiganProposal2.org, the source for this information should be changed to the official numbers from the Michigan Secretary of State, although the numbers appear to match. The link to this site at the bottom of the page should not have been deleted, however, and I see no evidence of this being a copycat site. Rather, it appears to contain much original language and philosophy with regard to affirmative action and the impact of Proposal 2. The fact that the website owner(s)/author(s) chose to register the domain name privately does not mean the link to the site should be deleted from a simple list. I firmly believe it is/was one of the most popular sources of information on the proposal leading up to election day, and I was the one who added the link to it. Every time I ran a search for anything related to the proposal on Google or Yahoo up until election day, it placed at the top of the search results as a paid, sponsored link.

I added that "supporters of the MCRI" had committed fraud, since otherwise the article reads like the ballot initiative itself had done this. - Bongadorus, 11 December 2006

Question

[edit]

What was the Proposal 2 of 2004, the one to recognize marriage as the union of one man and one woman only? Michiganotaku 22:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct Michigan State Proposal – 04-2 (2004)--Redandready (talk) 14:31, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gratz picture

[edit]

Is there really a reason to have Jenny Gratz's picture up here? I recognize she was one of the driving forces behind the MCRI, but the article is the MCRI. I don't think it merits a picture. It doesn't help the reader.--Lindsay (talk) 03:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gratz was not just "one of the driving forces behind the MCRI" she was the MCRI's executive director. Furthermore the lawsuit that brought the case to a head for Michigan has one brought by her against the University of Michigan. The case was heard by the US Supreme Court. So if a picture of anyone is to appear in the article, it would be hers.

As for notability: her and Ward Connerly, were the public face of MCRI in interviews and TV commercials.

Your statement that it “doesn't help the reader” is an opinion I suppose one can make abo--Redandready (talk) 01:24, 15 July 2011 (UTC)--Redandready (talk) 01:24, 15 July 2011 (UTC)ut a picture of anyone in any article. The implied notion being that a person’s ideas and actions are noteworthy but all images are irrelevant. I think most readers would prefer a picture nonetheless.--Redandready (talk) 18:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images often help the reader (If the article is about apples or apes, a picture of an apple or ape). Or if the image of a person is associated with a movement (NAZI Germany and Hitler). But I don't think my statement of Gratz's photo as unhelpful is my opinion . . . it's just NOT helpful. It's not like someone reading about the MCRI would say, hey I wish I could see what one of the leaders of the ballot initiative looked like . . . . To me it just seems like putting up a photo of a person for the sake of doing it. My $0.02. --Lindsay (talk) 04:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This fits your own criteria: "Or if the image of a person is associated with a movement..."--Redandready (talk) 17:22, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, agree to disagree. But you really contort what I said when my example was NAZI Germany vis-a-vis a state ballot initiative. Come on.--Lindsay (talk) 00:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I only quoted what I thought was the relevant part of your comment, specifically to avoid any comparison between this topic and Nazi Germany. The pertinent portion of your comment was the association of a person with a movement, not the degree to which a movement may be good, evil, or atrocious.--Redandready (talk) 17:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is only the picture of Gratz shown, and not Connerly's? Perhaps it is to give the idea that this is a movement supported by white people, and not people of other races. Just an idea... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.196.139.12 (talk) 21:42, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A nice idea. I added the picture.--Redandready (talk) 00:14, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the MCRI, not Gratz and Connerly. Pictures of them just plain do not add any worth to the substance of the article or understanding of the topic at hand. That is, unless having a blonde European-American for and an African-American against (or the other way around IDK) helps in some neutral fashion... And of course, given this is racially/ethnically charged, I do not think it helps positively. Remove them ASAP, replace them with pictures of people signing petitions if you want pictures, at least that would be more relevant. Or people feeding squirrels, really, just not this. Int21h (talk) 22:20, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The lawsuit that ultimately lead to the Michigan Civil rights initiative included Ms. Gratz, so a picture of her is appropriate for the article. Furthermore, she was the director of the organization sponsoring the initiative. Ward Connerly was an architect of MCRI like in California, and also played a key roll. Remarks like, “unless having a blonde European-American for and an African-American against (or the other way around IDK) helps in some neutral fashion...” have no place in an encyclopedic discussion and are offensive.--Redandready (talk) 01:25, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sixth Circuit decision

[edit]

The statement that Proposal 2 was "overruled" by Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action v. Regents of the University of Michigan, 701 F.3d 466 (6th Cir. 2012), is both linguistically (courts don't "overrule" a plebiscite) and factually inaccurate. The en banc opinion was careful to limit its holding to only the public education portion of Proposal 2. The public contracting and employment portions remain good law (note Proposal 2's severability clause). I think the opinion can also be read so that the public education portion of Proposal 2 is still constitutional as applied to gender discrimination in university admissions, but that's arguable. De novo nova (talk) 05:17, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Michigan Civil Rights Initiative. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:05, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Michigan Civil Rights Initiative. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:37, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michigan Civil Rights Initiative. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:31, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michigan_Civil_Rights_Initiative&oldid=1208868040"