Talk:Pullman Strike

message: This article as a mess, at times ambiguous, at other times difficult to read.   No offense to everyone that has spent time working on it, but the top Google result for the page title is a britannica.com article, which is rare but in this case deserved.  I'm going to clean up a sentence or two.  Trying to help.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C50:93F:4E8A:0:0:0:1448 (talk) 05:50, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Critique

message: Hi,
I removed this whole chunk, because it is totally out of chronology and in this state the article is just embarrassing for wikipedia
Someone who knows a little bit more about the strike should put the following paragraphs back into the article, but in a logical order.
[[[User:71.14.74.110|71.14.74.110]] 19:42, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Old stuff

message: "The railroad operators appealed to the Illinois state governer, John Peter Altgeld, but he refused to call out the militia due to his sympathies for workers.  Regardless, railroad operators appealed to the federal government on the premise that the strike was interferring with the federal mail.  President Grover Cleveland responded by sending federal troops."  It also might be important to add that factory and industry owners would ask state governers for help to combat strikes and they would usually help by sending out the state militia.  In the current article it just abruptly goes to, "The strike was eventually broken up by 12,000 U.S Army troops...", however, it is important to ask: Why did the federal government send troops instead of the state militia?  Was it normal for federal troops to be sent first?
:Another thing about this, I just learned from my history class that apparently the Pullman strikers were actually letting mail cars go through, so there was something more behind all that than just "Cleveland sent in the troops for mail cars". Homestarmy 19:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  something that wasn't included... 

message: :Near the turn of the 19th century, the labor class of the United States began to stand up against the negative effects of capitalism. They fought for better wages, better working conditions, and a less taxing work schedule. Socialist agendas were put forth that cited labor as the most important means of production, and that exposed the capitalists’ exploitation of it. As evidenced by the sucess of the Pullman strike, the most effective weapon of labor unions has historically been, and remains today, the strike.
I took this paragraph out because of its mind-numbingly inaccurate phrase "As evidenced by the success of the Pullman strike . . ." The strike was lost, the ARU was destroyed and Debs ended up in prison. The rest of the paragraph is a collection of generalities that are out of place in this article (Debs was not, let us remember, a socialist at the time of the strike; nor were most of the members of the ARU or the Pullman strikers themselves as far as I am aware.) 
As I've said elsewhere, this article needs work; rating it as B-class is generous.Italo Svevo 03:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You can change the rating to start if you feel it is more appropriate.  I was going by the apparent completeness of the prose and following the rating scheme set forth by WP:1.0 as part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Assessment efforts.  I am, admittedly, not an expert on labor relations. Slambo (Speak) 03:10, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excised paragraph 

message: I read through this article looking to see if it reflected the fairly substantial research i had done on the topic, but it seemed to me as though the first several paragraphs were written squarely from the POV of someone opposed to the strike/workers. I would be happy to try and balance it out, but i may not be the best person for the job; the majority of my research revolved around the perspective of organized labour. ThePedro 06:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I'd say go ahead and be bold, including appropriate references, since you've done some research on this subject already.  We all know a little bit about many subjects and when all those little bits are combined, we get a more comprehensive result.  Slambo (Speak) 15:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: The article included the unsourced statement that Debs was found guilty of "interfering with the U.S. mail." 
My source (Lukas) indicates that charge was dropped (probably because Darrow had successfully attacked the notion of a conspiracy to do same,) and Debs was instead found guilty of violating the injunction. I have made the change. Richard Myers 08:06, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Debs charges 

message: of "Paternalism in Company Town" have no citations at all  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pukeoncops (talk • contribs) 00:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  first two paragraphs 

message: The following information was located in the "Paternalism in Company Towns" section and was removed in an edit that was obvious vandalism but got overlooked. I initially reverted with the intention of copyediting it, but on closer inspection, it needs significant work. Posting it here primarily for my own reference when I work on the article in the coming days/weeks. Recognizance (talk) 17:23, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed section 

message: I revised the article to correct a lot of sloppy/inaccurate statements and introduce better sources. (Key parts were based on Lukas' book on a different strike which had little on Pullman). Rjensen (talk) 11:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Revised

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Watts Riots which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 04:13, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: ;Pullman strike
See usage in books via  n-gram stats
Note that commonly capitalized uses such as "Pullman Strike of" are very often citations of the books The Rev. William Carwardine and the Pullman Strike of 1894: The Christian Gospel and Social Justice and The Role of Blue Island the Pullman Strike of 1894.  Of uses in text the vast majority are clearly lowercase.  The threshold of "consistently capitalized in sources" is nowhere near met.
;Homestead strike
Similar pattern as Pullman in n-grams and more n-gram stats. 
Most capitalized occurrences are with the "of", due to common citations to the book The Homestead Strike of 1892, with overall lowercase being more common.  The threshold of "consistently capitalized in sources" is nowhere near met.
;Illinois coal wars
"Illinois coal wars" is not common enough in books to show much in n-grams; see  and  and .
I find it in only this one book, in lowercase:  .  No books in uppercase.  And I find no singular in books.  And I don't find it either way in Google scholar search.  The title is good description, but clearly not an accepted proper name.  As usual, it is hard to say much from web search, since so much of what is found mirrors wikipedia.
"Illinois mine wars" is more common in books, and usually lowercase (with only one "Mine wars" and no "Mine Wars" that I can see).  And a few singular, all lowercase.  Still not enough of anything to show up in n-grams.  The threshold of "consistently capitalized in sources" is nowhere near met.
;San Diego free speech fight
Only lowercase is common enough to appear in book n-grams.
Books show uppercase hits esp in citing sources such as "History of the San Diego Free Speech Fight" and "A Crisis of Confidence: The San Diego Free Speech Fight of 1912".  Otherwise mostly lowercase.  The threshold of "consistently capitalized in sources" is nowhere near met.
Since Skookum1 notes "I see no archival newspaper citations", I looked for some of those.  I found  this one with "Free Speech fight", but all the rest I checked (more than a dozen) had it all ower case.  I don't usually bother with sources that old, as modern usage is what we mostly care about; and the n-grams, where applicable, already show the trend over time. If anyone cares, I can pull some for the other events, too.
Dicklyon (talk) 20:46, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Evidence from book usage

message: This multi-RM split off from the larger one at Talk:Watts Riots#Requested moves, which is where the list of users to ping came from.  The San Diego free speech fight was added, as being an outlier in the same category with the others: :Category:Labor disputes in the United_States.
A related policy/guideline discussion is at Wikipedia talk:Article titles#Stylization of the "common name".
Related open move discussions are at
* Talk:Pottawatomie Massacre#Requested move
Related recently closed move discussions are at
* Talk:Houston Riot (1917)#Requested move 14 December 2014
* Talk:Carnation Massacre#Requested move 13 December 2014
* Talk:Chicago race riot of 1919#Requested move 2
* Talk:Potato riots#Requested moves
* Talk:Rock Springs massacre#Requested moves
* Talk:Villatina massacre#Requested moves
Dicklyon (talk) 17:18, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Related discussions

message: I would suggest including that the strike led to the founding of labor day in the intro as it is a long lasting effect of the strike.  I would also suggest trying to integrate some kind of timeline to make the chain  of events more in different cities more clear.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcacciatore18 (talk • contribs) 06:10, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions