Talk:Quantrill's Raiders

message: Not that I think popular referrences are a significant part of this entry but mentioning "Quantrill's Raiders" has become something of a cliche in Westerns. The Jack Nicholson directed comic western "Goin' South", in which he also stars, has one of the characters claim "He (Nicolson) cooked for Quantrill's Raiders".    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.100.176 (talk) 19:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Pop Culture

message: 80.166.132.211 wrote the following under the Origins section. I have added an NPOV-section alert to the section and moved his text here:
:NOTE FROM READER: This article is strongly subjective, and fail to assertain a professional objective view at historical events. I would urge a member of Wikipedia to look into this article, and repair damages.
:To students or other who would use this article for professional or educational means, it would be wise to find a better source than this article. The sections of the article below this entry, seems to be objective, and can be used.
--C-squared 01:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV dispute 

message: Quantrill's men were not acting as terrorists.  There were different types of men comprising the Missouri guerrillas.  Some fought for the state of Missouri, against the yankee invasion.  Some fought specifically against federal & Kansan aggressions and personal crimes against their families (example:  Coleman & Jim Younger).  Some fought as Border Ruffians, taking advantage of the unstable times.  Some fought solely to protect their homes and lives.  There were many types of men fighting in the irregular units of western Missouri.
Quantrill's men fought with several types of peoples.  They fought Kansas regular army troops (Blount).  They fought against Kansas irregulars (jayhawkers).  They fought pro-Union whites.  They fought pro-union German soldiers and settlers (the "Dutch").  Finally, they fought U.S. regular troops (federals, yankees or blue-bellies).  Terror or terrorist is a relative term.
DOCCROW
DOCCROW (talk) 17:12, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not an expert on the topic, but I think the term "terrorist" gets applied becuase of targeting civilians. Aside from that, http://arkansasroadstories.com is not a reliable source for Wikipedia purposes because it is self-published. If the same inforamtion can be found in a better source then it'd be fine. I'm going to delete the citation, add a cite request, and if none can be found in a reasonable time then the assertions will also be deleted.   Will Beback  talk   20:44, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quantrill's Raiders "terrorists"? 

message: I have tagged this article for an unbalanced viewpoint. Both sides of the Missouri-Kansas border war did all kinds of acts that were against the law and outside of any normal military activity; however this is not reflected in this article. It would appear that Jayhawkers and Redlegs started all of the problems and that Quantrill's raids into Kansas were only retalitatory in nature.  Kansas history is replete with incidents of killings, etc. caused by border ruffians from Missouri attempting to establish Kansas  as a slave state.  I'm just as sure that there are instances where Kansas Freestaters crossed into Missouri to commit crimes in the name of anti-slavery.  All I'm asking for is a balance view of what Quantrill did and why without the subjective word retribution
being used to excuse his actions. Both sides bled too much and the Border War was the initial spark that set off Civil War. Cuprum17 (talk) 19:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made a start.  A series of edits attributed to a 1961 work but lacking page numbers recently made the situation worse.  I've replaced the movie references and replaced some of the more flagrant POV with a quote from historian Albert Castel who has written both about the war in the west and a biography of Quantrill. There is no particular need to rehash in great detail the events of Bleeding Kansas so I added a reference to that article in the section on "Origins". Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 22:30, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I made additional edits today using two standard references to the Civil War.  The idea that somehow Missourians were prevented by circumstances from joining the CSA troops and thus were forced into guerilla warfare was POV to the extreme.  More work is still necessary. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 22:48, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tag for unbalanced viewpoint: January 2010 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Quantrill's Raiders. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160103074338/http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~txfannin/aanarative3.html to http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~txfannin/aanarative3.html;
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The claims that John Noland, a slave without rights, liberty or self-determination, somehow had the desire or privilege to join a band of Confederate partisans out of his own volition are direct talking points of the Lost Cause of the Confederacy. My reading of the talk pages for this article and for John Noland itself shows that, for some 13 or 14 years, this claim has been criticized but never a reference added. My own research only shows pro-Confederate and pro-Quantrill's Raiders sources that make any claim about Noland's sympathies.
I have thus removed it. It was inappropriate to include this uncited claim at all per WP:Reliability, and it remains no less inappropriate having still been without reference a decade later. Zkidwiki (talk) 01:01, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur with this removal. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:11, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing claims under John Noland