Talk:American Civil War

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article American Civil War was one of the Warfare good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Many of these questions arise frequently on the talk page concerning the American Civil War.

Information.svg To view an explanation to the answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question.

Semi-protected edit request on 23 July 2017[edit]

I think Hiriji's edit changing Republicanism in the United States to republicanism should be reverted. From what I've read wikipedia links are meant to use transparent titles unless there is a reason for a WP:PIPE. The original version identified the correct topic being linked to, which is American republicanism and not republicanism in general. So it's a double error. It makes the link less clear, only for suggesting the wrong topic anyway. It should be changed back to the older version. 196.54.55.44 (talk) 09:35, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 17:03, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2017[edit]

Change the line "Slavery was illegal in the North, having been outlawed in the late 18th and early 19th centuries." to read as "Slavery was illegal in the North, having been outlawed in the late 17th and early 19th centuries." I don't have a source, but it makes no sense to say that slavery was outlawed on the North during a time that would have been after the civil war. Connecticut, I believe, abolished slavery in 1777, and the other northern states would have abolished prior to 1860. Bkieler (talk) 00:15, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: 18th century = 1700-1799. 19th century = 1800-1899. Early 19th century is correct. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 00:17, 20 August 2017 (UTC)


Casus belli[edit]

The lead states that "The result of a long-standing controversy over slavery, war broke out in April 1861". I think that this designation is superficial or plainly wrong, as it suggests that casus belli was the slavery controversy, rather than the secession of the Southern states. Although the abolitionist movement was gaining influence in the North, it is wrong to oversimplify the reasons for going into the war. As I have stated in my edit which was reverted without explanation, and resulted in personal attack on my talk page, four of the Union states had slaves, and you don't have to go further than wikiquote page on Abe Lincoln to find his view on the war and the Union's goals. No one is denying that slavery was an important issue in the war, and that its outcome helped end it in the South, but on the other hand, this designation is simply not objective and in accordance with historical facts. Sideshow Bob 13:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

You were provided a reliable source by RJensen when you were reverted: [1] US National Park Service: Slavery Cause and Catalyst of the American Civil War]. The sentence is not even talking about casus belli, it's talking about the result of a controversy. You seem to admit there was such a controversy, which just leaves result - the war did result did it not -- you seem to draw a distinction: slavery resulted in disunion, which resulted in war but that would still make slavery resulted in war -- you pick out four states, in which there developed active civil war, as they were on the border between slave and free - and you somehow miss Lincoln's statement that slavery was somehow the cause, and all knew it, and his many statements against slavery, and his and his government's refusal to allow it to expand to new territory, and other facts and multiple statements of governments and people - our purpose here is not to enshrine your view of history, but it is, in the lead of this article, to briefly introduce the sourced view. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
No need to discuss this again. See this page's FAQ Q1: Should slavery be presented as the most important cause of the war? (Yes.) --A D Monroe III (talk) 17:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2017[edit]

Section "Diplomacy", third paragraph, third sentence:

"Confederate spokesman, on the other hand, were much more successful by ignoring slavery and instead focusing on their struggle for liberty, their commitment to free trade, and the essential role of cotton in the European economy"

Change "spokesman" to "spokesmen" Willsonrobert (talk) 23:04, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Done72 (talk) 00:11, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

"The Civil War is the most studied and written about episode in American history."[edit]

Citation needed! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobwhiz (talkcontribs) 14:59, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

 Done Attic Salt (talk) 15:55, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
A lead section is generally supposed to summarize what follows, and I don't see that the idea behind this sentence is expanded on later in the article. It strikes me as something that's probably true but also hard to quantify. If it were changed to read "among the most studied and written-about episodes", that would be better, but it still should refer to something in the body of the article. (If the later content is sourced, this sentence wouldn't need to be.) Maybe it should just be removed. RivertorchFIREWATER 15:56, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
It's common knowledge --- and it's easily documented with a footnote that is basically just adding to the excessive number. James Lincoln Collier and Christopher Collier stated in 2012, "No event in American history has been so thoroughly studied, not merely by historians, but by tens of thousands of other Americans who have made the war their hobby. Perhaps a hundred thousand books have been published about the Civil War." [ref] James Lincoln Collier; Christopher Collier (2012). Slavery and the Coming of the Civil War: 1831 - 1861. Blackstone Publishing. p. 9.  Rjensen (talk) 16:04, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
So that probably should go somewhere in the body of the article. If I knew nothing about the topic and encountered it in the lede, I'd want to know more. RivertorchFIREWATER 14:49, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

August 20, 1866 end of the Civil war[edit]

The Civil war ended on August 20, 1866 by presidential proclamation . The May 9, 1865 date is totally wrong. Many battles on land and at sea were fought after MAY 9, 1865. A huge Confederate victory happened in Texas after your claimed end of the war date of May 9, 1865. The battle of palmetto ranch ring a bell? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:805:4201:2640:85D9:5D62:E14A:ADFD (talk) 22:37, 19 December 2017 (UTC)