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 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 part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama articles
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 of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism 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.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism 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 University of California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to University of California, its history, accomplishments and other topics 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.University of CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject University of CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject University of CaliforniaUniversity of California articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism 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.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
She's been consistently active for decades, so it's probably best to just judge based on image quality. The Gotfryd picture is probably the best quality picture we have of her (it's a featured picture, etc). The 2014 picture is very, very snapshotty. File:Angela Davis at Oregon State University.jpg (from 2019) is much better, but cuts off the top of her head. A Flickr search with appropriate filters for licensing gets some that are at least a bit better than the existing 2014 option, like https://www.flickr.com/photos/gsapponline/15852241216/ or https://www.flickr.com/photos/gsapponline/15258397123/ but they do have certain issues with intruding podiums and microphones.
Basically, there's nothing wrong in principle with using a recent image, but one of the big goals of images in articles is providing images suitable for reuse. As such, prioritising good quality images earlier in the article is important, and having a good-quality lead will encourage people to dig further. And, of course, where possible, you want all the best quality images of the subject in the article.
Also, switching in the 2014 without keeping the one good image we have of her in the article, and also not removing the other copy of the 2014 image so that it now appears twice doesn't help our readers. It gives double emphasis to a mediocre picture of her, and, since it's been removed from the article, buries a really good quality older photo.
I think the current photo from the 70s is fine since it was perhaps the height of her significance as a figure. Would something like a side-by-side with a 70s photo and a 2020s photo work, though? Just curious. 4kbw9Df3Tw (talk) 16:53, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As a general principle, I favor high quality images that show people at the top of their game and the height of their fame as lead images. Accordingly, I support the 1970 Bernard Gotfryd photo as the lead image. I see no good reason to deviate from common practice with a side-by-side pair of images. Cullen328 (talk) 07:32, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When I first saw the new image, I thought Davis had died. It's a little unusual to use such a dated image of her when she is still alive, especially when we have a more recent and accurate image of her. GuardianH (talk) 21:29, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@GuardianH: I mean, they're both accurate, just to different periods, and, as I said, this image is similar to the (presumably unfree) one she chose for her autobiography. But the problem I have is that the more recent ones have some problems. Of them, the best is the 2019, but that's artifically black and white, and cuts off her hair. 2014 is kind of mediocre: Not terrible or anything, but very snapshotty, with questionable composition and rather blurry - shouldn't it at least have more detail than the 1974 photo given camera advances? Meanwhile, 2006 is just bad composition, especially the black shirt and black background creating a floating hand.
One purpose of Wikipedia articles is to help direct people to good-quality, free-use images of a person, so we should make the really good ones as prominent as possible, because once someone sees the first image is good, they're more likely to check the other ones out for usage. But if we start with a more amateurish image, it sets a tone, and may send people away from us to look elsewhere for images. Mind, that's all my theory of it.
So, basically, I have absolutely no objection in principle to a modern image of her, I just want it to start with a good image of her. If we can find a really good modern image of her, well, I'd like to keep the Gotfryd image in the article - I do think it's valuable - but I have no objection of it being moved to, say, Angela Davis#Later academic career just before the pro-Communist party poster, and the new image being put into the lead. Adam Cuerden(talk)Has about 8.5% of all FPs.07:32, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2024 and 2 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Shaykip, Dislac (article contribs).
There has been a recent spate of edits that appear to be trying to score POV points concerning Davis's ancestry. Some are fascinated by the idea that she may have ancestors from the Mayflower. This isn't a particular distinction.After 400 years there are hundreds of thousands of people (at least) with such ancestry. I probably have such ancestry, for instance. There have also been pointy edits about slave-owners as ancestors. A large proportion of African-Americans have such ancestry, the result of abuse of their forebears by their enslavers. Some of those can easily have ancestry from the Mayflower. Mention of such ancestry as some kind of special distinction or gotcha isn't making the point a lot of editors think they've made. Acroterion(talk)00:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.jpg){kind=small}
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2024 and 2 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Shaykip, Dislac (article contribs).