# Talk:Reading Railroad Massacre

Shouldn't this page actually specify the date on which the Massacre occurred? --Lokicarbis (talk) 14:48, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

I added the date. Don't forget, this is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, including you. As you already have an account, don't forget to WP:BE BOLD. Jason Quinn (talk) 16:42, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

@Eddie891: - I'm...not totally clear what this is supposed to be a reference to. Maybe there's a way to word it more clearly? GMGtalk 12:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

GreenMeansGo:Rephrased. Do you think it's ready for a GA nom? Eddie891  Talk Work  14:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I also think this page may be better located at Reading Railroad riots. Eddie891  Talk Work  15:01, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
The name don't matter to me honestly. I would hold off on the GA nom for now. I'd like a little while to really to dig into things and make sense of it in my head. GMGtalk 15:10, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Actually, looking into it more, it does like an awful lot like "Reading Railroad Massacre" became the pretty widely used name for the event, for example [1], [2], [3], [4]. From the looks of it, the question we should be asking ourselves is probably whether "massacre" should be lowercase, since all these sources seem to treat it as a proper noun. GMGtalk 16:13, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Okay. There seems to be a problem. Daucus (p. 208) and McCabe (p. 176) seem to fundamentally contradict one another. McCabe has the troops offloading the trains on account of the tracks being blocked (so good so far), and then marching northward through the cut toward the depot from Penn St. That's what got me looking into this, since they're supposed to be coming from Allentown, which is NE of Reading. So I thought it was odd that they should be arriving from the south of the depot, meaning they would have traveled a helluva long way round, going through Pottstown in order to approach Reading from the South end. But I don't see anything so far saying specifically that the track was torn up between Reading and Allentown, which would have forced them through Pottstown. And that seems like a pretty important detail to leave out.
But Dacus has them marching southward from the station toward Penn St. That's also not totally intuitive, because it seems odd that the rioters, having burned one of the three arteries into the city (the Lebanon Valley route), would then blockade the south line, but not the Reading Allentown Line in the north. 
For whatever it's worth, the New York Times (reprint) also puts them marching toward Penn St. through the cut, which would have put them marching southward. The problem is that I think Dacus is either copying the NYT piece, or they're both copying someone else, because they're nearly verbatim. 
So, on the one hand it doesn't makes sense that they would be marching northward, because they're coming from the north of the city, but it also doesn't makes sense that they would be marching from the depot, when the crowd apparently has control of the depot at this point. So yeah, I'm confused. GMGtalk 15:09, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Ooooooh. Unless they were marching to the Franklin Street Station? Which would be about two blocks south of where the shooting happened. GMGtalk 15:23, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Fillipi writes that "When the militia arrived, General Reeder conferred with the company officials. The decision was made to march to the depot and, in the process, free the stalled Philadelphia express. The railroad tracks occupied Seventh Street for a long distance through Reading. North from Penn Street the road dropped below grade for some four blocks, with a stone wall twenty-five feet high at its highest point on both sides. Viaducts crossed from wall to wall at Court and Washington Streets. The citizens of Reading had long referred to the depression as the “cut.” When Reeder, in consultation with Wooten and Baer, made his decision, he decided on a course which would lead him down the main tracks and directly into the “cut.”" This's the only modern source, so perhaps the most reliable.Eddie891  Talk Work  16:21, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
This might have something.Eddie891  Talk Work  16:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Looking. Also this might be helpful for something or other. I can't tell because I've apparently run out of NYT archive views for the month. GMGtalk 16:38, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Ooh. That's good. But this is going to take a little reading to get my head around. There's probably congressional testimony floating around somewhere too. I know Gov. Carroll had to testify before Congress about all this. I seem to remember Gov. Hartranft having to testify too. Will have to find it. GMGtalk 16:52, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
This is July 1877 New York Times. All issues from the month, just go to the day you want. It's all free (public domain). Eddie891  Talk Work  17:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
FWIW, I'm just reading and adding. I'm probably completely screwing up the organization and we'll have to rethink headers later this week I expect. GMGtalk 17:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
here's a senate committee's report. Maybe some testimony. Definitely from the police chief. Eddie891  Talk Work  17:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm busy today, so just posting sources for now. Eddie891  Talk Work  17:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
[5] For future reference. Gotta run. GMGtalk 19:01, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Alright, so they have to be marching in from the north. I'm pretty convinced the "depot" is Franklin Street Station. It's pretty visible in the map above about two blocks south of the "3" (I've been staring at maps half the day and trying to square them with the texts). It's also the only thing in the area that looks like a bona fide station. I don't think the two structures visible on the more detailed map near the junction of the Lebanon Valley and Reading & Allentown lines (the "2") are actually depots. They look like maintenance structures of some kind. Looks like it just so happened that there was a side rail at the juncture, and that was a critical point in stopping traffic, so that's where the mob hit.
It also doesn't make that Bolton would funnel the Allentown men through Pottstown, when time was sensitive and that's where he was keeping his reserves (the 16th) anyway. He would have just sent the 16th and kept the 4th as reserve. The 16th would have gotten to Reading more quickly anyway.
All in all, I think it's just a bad turn of prepositional phrase in Dacus, at the top of page 208: "the military marched in toward Penn St., through the cut, from the station". I think he means that the cut was from the station, and not that the troops were coming from the station. It wouldn't make any sense otherwise.
Anyway, just trying to sort it out in my head, and maybe put together a better map to illustrate the situation for readers once it's all worked out. GMGtalk 21:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I've just been throwing sources 'round out here until I get the time to go through it. If you can make a map, that would be great, because even I am mildly confused. Eddie891  Talk Work  00:57, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
If we need more images [6] that's the letter in which the members of the union were dismissed.
This might have more information.
Check those out. July Reading Daily Eagle issues. Don't know what's there yet. Eddie891  Talk Work  23:46, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
not sure if this is reliable, but it says that "It was not until shots were heard (old Fourth of July fireworks) from somewhere in the crowd that the soldiers opened fire into a crowd of people at the end of the cut." Eddie891  Talk Work  23:48, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
The reading daily eagle mentions the "Mysterious blowing of a horn near 7th and Penn Street" starting the riots. Eddie891  Talk Work  00:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
[7] actually goes into great detail. Eddie891  Talk Work  01:01, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


### AM/PM
Just a note as we go, but we need to take care to include whether times are in the morning or the evening. I know the sources often don't give these explicitly, and it has to be inferred by basically the last time they mentioned morning or night, but that just means going back and finding it once we've closed out the tab is going to be time consuming. GMGtalk 12:17, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Uhh...also...we're going to have to untangle the New York Times reference somehow. Any GA reviewer worth their salt is gonna call us on the carpet for linking to 268 pages of archived newspaper with no indication where each bit of information is coming from. GMGtalk 13:58, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
GreenMeansGo on it (tonight). Eddie891  Talk Work  17:09, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Was the testimony in the US house, or the Penn house. I was under the impression it was the latter... Eddie891  Talk Work  22:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Ah. It was actually a report to both the PA House and Senate. Good catch! GMGtalk 22:12, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Fixed NYTimes refs. Eddie891  Talk Work  22:53, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Well, I'll say that the drama of Reeder and Bolton, and the 4th and 16th was not at all what I expected to be the most engaging part of this story, but it turns out to be absolutely riveting. I can almost hear the desperation in Reeder's telegraphs. "Stir heaven and earth to forward reliable and fresh troops." And to be overridden by a Colonel on their second march through the cut must have been humiliating as a one star general. Today a one star is worshiped like the second coming. The last time I talked to a one star, he had his own captain who's only job was to drive his car a fetch his coffee.
I'm a little conflicted about whether to include more about the mayor and the sheriff. I wonder if the four we have (Reeder, Bolton, 16th, 4th) isn't a sufficient cast to keep the reader engaged without overwhelming them with characters who have no main article and they don't have a lot of time to get to know. But the sheriff was basically a complete incompetent. So I wonder if we couldn't use a less nuanced villain than the 16th, who turns out to be kindof an anti-hero in the end.
I'm also a little conflicted about whether to include some of Bolton's later testimony. The last few pages are both a pretty compelling defense of the 4th and damnation of the 16th. At the same time, he had pretty much been publicly shamed over the whole ordeal, and so he's at least a little bit probably trying to safe face for himself.  
At any rate, I have a cold beer and a box of chicken wings calling my name, so I'm probably done for the day. GMGtalk 22:54, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I'd maybe think a bit about the sheriff could be added, because a lot of the escalation was his fault. Not too much more, because it is, as you say, a lot to read about with no sub-articles. I'm not sure where Bolton's testimony would fit in, but it is certainly an interesting read. Eddie891  Talk Work  23:28, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Yeah. In all honesty we could follow the mayor through every train stop. But I don't think it's worth it. I'll look more into the sheriff tomorrow. Thanks for all your help. I see a co-nom coming. GMGtalk 23:42, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


### Arbitrary break
Do you happen to have a working link to access the Foner source? I could've swore I had access to the full text when I was working on other related articles, but I can't seem to find it anywhere. GMGtalk 16:24, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I never had full access. Eddie891  Talk Work  17:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
As to a map, I kindof expected to have more to add to the one above, where we could match events to specific points in the city. That particular map it's based off of is the closest I was able to find to a map of what the city looked like in 1877, only 17 years off. I can do it up again in a way that is higher resolution, but the only think I really have to add at the moment is a brief stop off at Penn Square, but that's so incidental it's barely mentioned. Just let me know what you think.
Other than that, I still plan on doing a total scrub of the sources, to make sure our citation formatting is 100% consistent, and still need to add AM and PM to all the times, but as far as content goes, I believe I'm getting close to wrapping up. I did plan on adding when the mayor came back to town, but I can't seem to find where exactly I read it. I'm also fine with adding more info about the sheriff, but I'm just not totally sure what to add where. GMGtalk 19:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
A map is fine, and it is fine without one too. I guess right now the article is aptly illustrated, and there isn't really a need for a map. If the GA reviewer wants one, it can be added, but for now I think its fine as is. I got all the am and pm times, and will spend a good amount of time looking for anything, but I think its good. The sheriff was pretty incompetent, but I'm not seeing a need for any more information than we have. I'm looking about the mayor. Eddie891  Talk Work  22:00, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
GreenMeansGo: this pg 873, the mayor in his testimony says he arrived after the shooting had taken place. He left on the evening of the 23. Eddie891  Talk Work  00:36, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Ready for GA? Eddie891  Talk Work  23:48, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Umm. Sure. You can nom if you want and list me as a co-nom. I'm actually in the middle of a mess on Commons right now that's going to take at least another day or two to fix. But I'm still around. GMGtalk 01:39, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Reading Railroad Massacre/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 01:55, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Is it reasonably well written?
"10–16 people were killed and 20-203" - you've got a long dash in-between the first two numbers and a short one between the next lot
 Done
"too much race jealousy" - perhaps link 'race' to Race (human categorization), assuming that's what you mean here
 Done
"back pay being owed them, but they were payed" - can you reword this somehow to clarify they were paid after threatening to strike? Again, assuming that is the case. The current wording reads a bit awkwardly.
I rewrote this section pretty substantially. Reading is strange because the strikes were the backdrop and not actually central to events regarding the outbreak of violence. Whereas in other cities, strikes bled directly into violence, in Reading the violence was caused mostly by other violence in larger cities. By 23 July, there was more or less a feeling that all of Pennsylvania was burning, and similar to what happened in Baltimore, there was resentment for the soldiery themselves, being perceived as a tool of the railroad, marching to neighboring towns to crush their brethren.  
I'd remove the piping of "Roof shingles" to "shingles"; just calling it a roof shingle from the beginning will clear up any confusion about what it is.
 Done
I'd wikilink Caboose ("two cabooses, seven freight cars")
 Done
"8 short tons" - should this be 'eight short tons'?
 Done
"The damage was estimated at $150,000" - an estimation of what this is worth today adjusting for inflation would be interesting
I've tried to do this at least once before and it's damn near impossible to do accurately. As was explained to me at the time (I believe it was trying to estimate destruction on the Pittsburgh article), there is a difference between giving a modern day equivalent of the value of currency as opposed to the cost of goods. Since you're talking about goods that were destroyed, and not plain money (as you might be in comparing historic wages), the modern day cost of repairing the bridge would not be a simple WP:CALC with regard to inflation, but would be a complex calculation regarding the cost of labor, equipment, and materials, at modern day prices. Doing so would require intimate knowledge of how they arrived at the $150k figure, and not just the figure itself. But at that point of complexity in the calculations, you start to run into OR problems.
"At 6:30 pm, on July 23, the Reading Coal and Iron Police, a private force from the railroad, arrived" - this strikes me as one too many commas; I'd lose the one after 6:30pm
 Done
"and businesses shuttered" - what does this mean?
Changed to "closed".
"The Eagle has never been called" - I'd wikilink 'The Eagle' to Reading Eagle
Already linked to two sections above.
"The regulars now garrisoned in the city would never fire on it's citizens." - Should this sentence be within quote marks? If not, it seems a bit editorial.
Removed
"In a later trial, 13 out of 14 charged were acquitted." - Can you tell us what happened to the person who wasn't acquitted? What was the charge/sentence?
 Done, at least as specific as the source is.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable? 
A. Has an appropriate reference section: 
B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: 
C. No original research: 
Is it broad in its coverage? 
A. Major aspects: 
B. Focused: 
Is it neutral? 
Fair representation without bias: 
Is it stable? 
No edit wars, etc: 
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic? 
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 
Definitely not a fail point but it would be nice to get a photo of that commemorative marker.
As I learned here, this is actually a hot mess, and because a historical marker is technically a three dimensional "sculpture", you would have to get the Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation Office to certify that they release the likeness of the marker in a way that is consistent with WP licensing with regard to c:COM:FOP. Either that or you have to take a massively wide angle image and claim c:COM:DM, but to qualify the marker has to be such an insignificant part of the image so as to be nearly useless for readers. Find me a politician that will reform freedom of panorama laws in the US and you've found a politician that'll get my vote. GMGtalk 11:49, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 
Overall:
Pass or Fail: Looks really good. Placing on hold until issues are addressed. Freikorp (talk) 11:27, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
Replies are all understandable. Happy for this to pass now. Congrats. Freikorp (talk) 12:29, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

I know this event is commonly called the Reading Railroad Massacre, but is it actually a massacre? The Wikipedia article on massacre indicates that a massacre involves the killing of innocent civilians, but from the description of the events here it appears that the civilians were not innocent (being rioters) and not unarmed (some had pistols). Throwing rocks from a height of 25 feet can be deadly, depending on the size of the stones. Is there any discussion of this in the sources? Indyguy (talk) 14:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)