Talk:Border ruffian

message: This article seems redundant of the longer article entitled Bushwhacker.  If nobody objects within the next couple of weeks, I am going to merge and make this a redirect.  Let me know if anyone has thoughts. Kgwo1972 15:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so -- "Border Ruffian" really primarily refers to the pre-Civil-War bleeding Kansas times, while Bushwacker doesn't seem to... AnonMoos 05:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right.  I have amended the articles to make the distinction clear.  Kgwo1972 18:48, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with [[Bushwhacker]]

message: "Border Ruffian" sounds pejorative and inconsistent with Wikipedia neutrality. Does anyone know what these people called themselves? This term was used by the Abolitionists. If the Pro-slavery people adopted the name, that should be noted. If not, we need their name for themselves.  Stuart Strahl (talk) 17:13, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Is there a neutral term?

message: Five cites in the article are sourced to one article appearing on a web site that does not attribute authorship to the article cited.  The most controversial claim is that Border Ruffians objected to free blacks living nearby.  Ascribing racist attitudes that sound more like complaints of whites in 1960s Boston to Border Ruffians in the 1850s should have better sourcing.
http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h84.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:151:C000:540:38EE:A386:DB99:81D2 (talk) 15:42, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anonymous source material 

message: The problem with this article is not that it says that one side cheated or the other. (Both sides were trying to kill each other, which isn't legal in any state!) The problem with this article is it uses Northern pejorative terms to talk about a group of Southerners. "Ruffian" is a pejorative. If the Kansas Southerners adopted the name for themselves, it would be acceptable, but no one has claimed they did--let alone sourced their claim. We can have a page for the "No-Nothing Party," because that's what they called themselves, but it's inappropriate to have a page titled the "Moron Party," because that wasn't their name. "Border Ruffians" wasn't their name. Either this page needs to be retitled, or, if there is no known name for this group, then any usable content should be merged into the Bleeding Kansas, and this page replaced with a redirect. Stuart Strahl (talk) 23:46, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, it was the "Know-Nothing party" (not "No-Nothing"), and when they were listed on ballots, it was usually as the "American Party".  Second, many groups throughout history have been labelled by their opponents: The Quakers called themselves "Friends", and both "Whig" and "Tory" as the names of British political parties/factions were originally derogatory and insulting terms.  It's Wikipedia polcicy to use the currently most-accepted name (see WP:COMMONNAME), not to try to right historical wrongs.  Third, pages about verifiably notable entities are rarely deleted just because of disputes about the title.  Anyway, that would just transfer a dispute about using the word "ruffian" in the title of this article to a dispute about using the word "ruffian" in the section header of the other article, which hardly seems like a worthwhile goal.  And lastly, people on both sides in the "Bleeding Kansas" struggle comitted crimes -- but after the very early stages in the conflict, the free-state side had a majority of bona-fide settlers who were qualified to vote, while many of the slave-state supporters were willing to descend to almost any moral depths to try to overcome the fact that only a minority of qualified voters supported slavery... AnonMoos (talk) 16:41, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: 2021

message: A search in newspapers.com (to which I have access through the Wikipedia Library) for the term "border ruffians" (in quotes) for the period 1850-1861 reveals:
* 160 uses by Missouri newspapers - the first 20 had no capitals on either word, at which point I stopped counting. Counting backwards from the other end, there were 9 Border Ruffian, 1 Border ruffian, and 9 border ruffian.
* 452 by newspapers in England. Limiting it to 1861, there were 6 Border Ruffians, 2 Border ruffian, and 19 border ruffian.
* 1,217 uses by Kansas newspapers. In 1855, 36 border ruffians, 1 border Ruffians, 1 Border ruffians, and 13 Border Ruffians
* 11,995 in United States
The Gazette of Montreal of June 11, 1857, published "Song of the border ruffian" (all caps), 32 verses, which begins:
"Free society! We sicken at the name." —Alabama newspaper
America the land of Liberty? 
I tell you what!—I'll put a chunk of lead
Inside your brain if you say that to me....
Not only niggers, but them darn mean whites
To servitude, who stoops  themselves to lower,
Mind! or I'll drive a peephole through your lights.
Whole poem: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/83540941/song-of-the-border-ruffian/
deisenbe (talk) 12:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  It was easy to find the "Alabama newspaper": it was the Tuskegee Republican, Oct 9 1856. deisenbe (talk) 00:38, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newspapers mentioning border ruffians 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
----
:Border Ruffian →  – Not a proper name, usage at the time. See usage in newspapers just above.deisenbe (talk) 12:09, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 16 August 2021