Shirley Sherrod was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 03 July 2011 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Firing of Shirley Sherrod. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
This article was nominated for deletion on 21 July 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
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 articles
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) articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media 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.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture 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.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles
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 articles
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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.
Edits
I rephrased the first sentence to avoid it being so disjointed
I removed the first footnote about time because it made no sense
I moved the additional information contained in the second footnote ("15 seconds") into the article and removed the unnecessary footnote.5.151.178.168 (talk) 00:00, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've restored the first footnote. It made sense to me, so that explanation is not sufficient. No problem with the other changes. Grayfell (talk) 00:06, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Footnote
A footnote is being used thus:
On July 19, 2010, two different video clips [A]
A.^ Video excerpt's precise length: 02 minutes, 38 seconds.[76]
Unfortunately, this obviously doesn't make any sense. The text refers to "two different video clips", as you'll notice if you read the text, while the footnote refers in an incomplete sentence to "Video excerpt's precise length", which you'll notice is singular. And yet, someone claims that the footnote "makes sense". I find that rather astonishing. Perhaps someone else would like to give their thoughts. 5.151.178.168 (talk) 00:11, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So anytime I try and respond, you're going to start a new discussion pretending I don't exist? Okay, but it's pretty obvious what's going on.
The discrepancy between one clip and two is not such a massive problem that it couldn't be resolved. I've updated the source and adjusted the wording to make it clear the time is the total of all clips. The source says A conservative blog posts 2 minutes, 38 seconds of video clips of a black federal agriculture official saying... which seems clear enough. The formatting is unusual, but is there any other problem with the content? Grayfell (talk) 00:28, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Should be linked to "fake news"
I have yet to read the official article about "fake news" so I don't know the official title of it, but I assume that it exists.
Came upon this article and it seems to me a substantive and early instance of such fake news. So... I am suggesting a link, at the least in a "See Also" section. Jason Brown 09:11, 11 January 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angryredplanet (talk • contribs)
Requested move 5 February 2017
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: not moved.Andrewa (talk) 21:10, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Characterization as firing is supported by sources; e.g.:
Politico: Says both "fired Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod" and "Sherrod was forced to resign"
Washington Post: refers to "firing of Shirley Sherrod" in headline; notes that "the USDA hastily asked Sherrod to resign" in body of article
New York Times: refers to Sherrod as "Fired Official" in headline; says "Shirley Sherrod, the black Agriculture Department official whose firing..." in first sentence of article; later on in article refers to "Ms. Sherrod’s forced resignation..."
Given all this, "Firing" is both brief and accurate. Neutralitytalk 05:32, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - "Firing" is the sensationalist term used by media in their headlines to attract your attention, before they accurately explain what really happened. "Resignation" is even less accurate, as it implies the decision was Sherrod's. "Forced resignation" would be the accurate term if any change is to be made; otherwise we should keep it as "Firing", which sacrifices some accuracy for brevity but is close enough in a practical sense. Xenophrenic (talk) 14:22, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Firing of Shirley Sherrod. 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.
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.
.svg){kind=small}
