Talk:Kirk–Holden war

Kirk–Holden war has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 22, 2022	Good article nominee	Listed
May 9, 2022	WikiProject A-class review	Approved

Current status: Good article

African diaspora Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discrimination Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Military history: North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Additional information:
/
	This article has passed an A-Class review.

United States: North Carolina Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	North Carolina portal This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled

I found this important event on the most wanted articles page. My grandfather and grandmother grew up in North Carolina so it was great to learn some history about it. It's a little rough currently, but I'll be updating it periodically.

Any feedback is appreciated. ~~Te00539~~

I don't entirely agree that this article should have been edited to the bone without any explanation on the discussion page. As it now stands, this article is really superficial and leaves far too many questions unanswered, for example, as this is clearly a race struggle, I think it's relevant to say whether John W. Stephens is white or black. Also a little about why he may have been murdered. Was he an advocate for black rights? Was he trying to help black voters get to the polls? What was the African American community's reaction to Holden's actions? Did anybody think Holden's actions did, in fact, stop a lynching epidemic? What record of his reasoning did Holden leave on the subject of his actions? I totally agree with wikipedia's policy on neutrality, but attempts to achieve that the easy way, by just hitting the delete key and no explanation, are really counterproductive.--Georgiasouthernlynn (talk) 17:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This piece might well have mentioned that it wasn't until the Republicans retook control of the state senate in 2010 (for the first time since 1870) that the issue of Holden's impeachment was addressed by that body. Yes the vote was unanimous, but it wasn't brought up while the Democrats retained control of the state senate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.129.71.129 (talk) 18:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I added a detail previously that Holden wasn't pardoned until Republicans regained control of the state legislature for the first time since 1870. It was deleted by moderator Indy Beetle who said "cool trivia but I don't think WRAL really makes a big deal out of this one." That's not the point. The link to WRAL was just to add a source. The point is that it took 140 years until the legislature changed hands until something was done about Holden's impeachment. This is political context which explains why it took so long for the issue to be addressed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.185.1.183 (talk) 19:35, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If the sources don't point this out, then it is entirely WP:UNDUE to mention. It is also not really the "political context"; you can see from the sources that many Republicans in the Senate were actually initially skeptical of the resolution. The Democrats seemed much less hesitant, at least as far as I can tell. -Indy beetle (talk) 07:12, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then why didn't the Democrats, who you say were "much less hesitant", act on this during the 140 years they controlled the state legislature? No action to pardon Holden was taken until Republicans regained control of the state legislature-res ipsa loquitur. 74.185.1.183 (talk) 10:59, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You want to make a claim on Wikipedia, cite it to a reliable source. If your conclusion is so obvious then, very simply, find a source which bothers to mention the significance of the GOP's reclamation of the state legislature. -Indy beetle (talk) 11:06, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kirk–Holden war/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 16:19, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to review. Two points for the start, more to follow:

in the state of North Carolina in 1870 in the United States – bit confusing to have a place followed by a date followed by a place. Maybe we don't need "United States" here?
- Revised to put the date last. I'm loathe to not specify where North Carolina is, as per WP:Global we can't expect that everyone will know it's an American place.
1st North Carolina Troops and 2nd North Carolina Troops – maybe "1st and 2nd North Carolina Troops"? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 16:19, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:03, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
sending North Carolina Adjutant-General A. W. Fisher to Richmond, Virginia speak with General Edward Canby, – is a "to" missing here?
- I don't think so...seems like a filler word. I could revise the sentence, as it's a long one.
Upon arriving, Kirk learned that congressional candidates James Madison Leach and William L. Scott were holding a debate in the courthouse. – Why where these arrested, have they been on some list?
- Only Leach, the Democrat, was detained, but Scott vouched for him and had him released. The sources don't say whether Leach was on a list.
The resolution requires approval from the House in order to be put into effect. – But was it approved in the end?
- Media coverage ends there, and I don't think the House every completed this step, so this is where it stands; Holden has never been completely pardoned.
That's all, very nice work; I like the background section that places everything into context. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 16:33, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jens Lallensack: I've responded to your comments. -Indy beetle (talk) 18:38, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank's, promoting now. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:48, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

What would be the best info-box for this event?

I fell like either Military conflict or civil conflict would work the best. LuxembourgLover (talk) 20:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think either of those infoboxes really work here. This was essentially a law enforcement operation that resulted in arrests. There was not any true fighting, and statistics are vague. Framing this like a battle is misleading. -Indy beetle (talk) 09:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen exaples like Bundy standoff and Occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge they used the civil conflict infobox. LuxembourgLover (talk) 12:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've used it before too, over at Battle of Hayes Pond. But that was a confined affair which was punctuated by an armed clash. This was a several month-long law enforcement action which included court cases, poll guarding, and resulted in an impeachment. I think a conflict infobox is reductive in the wrong way. -Indy beetle (talk) 04:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]