Talk:U.S. Department of Defense censorship of DEI-connected material

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

Military history: National / Middle East / North America / United States / Post-Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force
	Middle Eastern military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

Discrimination Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Freedom of speech Low‑importance

	Freedom of speech portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Freedom of speech, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freedom of speech 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.Freedom of speechWikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speechTemplate:WikiProject Freedom of speechFreedom of speech
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Human rights Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Media Low‑importance

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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Media To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite
NPOV : Content (media and publishing)
Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper
Other :
- Answer requests for comments

Philosophy: Ethics / Social and political Low‑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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics
	Social and political philosophy

Politics: American / Libertarianism Low‑importance

	Politics portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	Libertarianism portal This article is supported by WikiProject Libertarianism (assessed as Low-importance).

Title

Anti-DEI deletions by the U.S. Department of Defense could be changed to Censorship of DEI within the U.S. Department of Defense. This is a clear cut case of censorship. It better describes the topic. The "Anti-DEI deletions" has a tone problem. They are following orders from the Trump Administration, who are indeed ideologically anti-DEI, but the DoD is not ideological thus attributing "anti-DEI" to them is problematic. -- GreenC 20:04, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I asked Perplexity.ai what it thought of title, and it said it was "somewhat clear" and offered other suggestions for "better clarity and precision":

"U.S. Department of Defense's Removal of DEI-Related Content"
"Pentagon's Purge of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Materials"
"DoD's Systematic Elimination of DEI Content from Official Platforms"
"Department of Defense Initiative to Remove Diversity-Related Materials"
"U.S. Military's Widespread Deletion of DEI-Associated Content"

-- GreenC 20:10, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I kind of like the first one U.S. Department of Defense's removal of DEI-connected content (changed "related" to "connected" since not all of it is actually DEI), is precise and neutral, close to the current one. Could also put DEI up front: DEI-connected content removal by the U.S. Department of Defense, but I think the first one reads more smoothly. -- GreenC 20:17, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the correct title would be 2025 Pentagon whitewashing and masculinization of U.S. military history but...tone ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ jengod (talk) 21:15, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is that, which is indeed arrow point precise, it really goes straight to the heart of the matter. Would you accept a change to U.S. Department of Defense's removal of DEI-connected content, as more family friendly? -- GreenC 23:43, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I find I am not temperamentally well-suited to the parliamentary side of Wikipedia, so I'm going to abstain and bow out of the debate, but with certainty that the community will indeed find an appropriate title. I appreciate you and I know you guys will find a great solution. Cheers, jengod (talk) 00:36, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I made some bold changes. Feel free to revert anything you think is incorrect we can discuss. I'm not sure what executive action started this party, it should be mentioned some brief history how it came about. -- GreenC 17:54, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think something like "DEI-related content removal by the U.S. Department of Defense" is probably the best title, objectively speaking, but it is extremely long -- although the current one is too. I think that one would be good. Most of the Perplexity ones are quite bad. Isn't there a title/number of the executive order we could just use instead? jp×g 🗯️ 16:43, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Censorship of DEI-connected material" is IMO easier to parse than "DEI-related content removal". Is it only "removal"? The process of censorship also prevents new creations. Is it actually "related"? They are not simply undoing former DEI initiatives, they are actively removing anything with the word "Gay", like "Enola Gay", based on AI searches. They are making connections to DEI, to things actually unrelated to DEI programs. It's like "They are related to" vs. "The have been connected to", one is an inherit truth the other an opinion. -- GreenC GreenC 20:41, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Purported rationales

I do not think we should present the purported rationales from primary sources. I have no objection to a discussion of the purported rationales based on secondary sources, which analyse their truthfulness, but there is no way that removing the Tuskegee Airmen, for example, is about anything other than white supremacism, and to present the censorship as an act to remove supposed divisiveness, when the intent is actually the exact opposite, seems invidious.

There is, after all, absolutely no connection whatsoever between late 20th and 21st Century programmes to address under-representation of minority communities, and scrubbing the history of historically oppressed communities who have given exemplary service which is objectively meritorious in its own right (e.g. the code talkers, who were selected on the basis of esoteric language skills, a trait which is only coincidentally connected to their Native American status). Guy (help! - typo?) 19:02, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tuskegee Airmen was a mistake, caused by AI.[1] This is supported: it was quickly restored, and they apologized. Giving their side of the story, their POV, is not only allowed (from primary and secondary sources), but the way WP works. -- GreenC 02:55, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the training course suspension was not because of Tuskegee Airmen videos. The course contained other material, specifically about a DEI program, separate from the Tuskegee Airmen videos. It was unambiguously DEI and had to be removed, per the executive order. So they suspended the entire course, then went back later and re-added the videos, and un-suspended the course, after the DEI-program specific material was removed. It was a series of contingent SNAFUs. But that doesn't make a good story. -- GreenC 03:20, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicative article

We already have 2025 United States government online resource removals which seems to encompass this topic. I think it would make sense to merge them. Anne drew (talk · contribs) 18:21, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The focus there is "online resources" but the government is censoring material everywhere: online, books in government libraries, NPS pamphlets and signs, etc.. Censorship_in_the_United_States#Second_Trump_Administration barely has anything, it doesn't even link to these articles. There is a lot to be done on this topic. Maybe an article Censorship during the Second Trump Administration merge content from these two articles. -- GreenC 04:55, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]