Talk:Shelburne riots

Canada Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Canadian / North America

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Canadian military history task force
	North American military history task force

An anonymous user has been deleting references to racism and inserting unsourced assumptions that this riot was some sort of labour protest, not a violent act of segregation. Any facts should be supported by authoritative sources. The published work on this incident is clear about the key role of race in this violence.Dan Conlin (talk)

The sources are provided by yourself in the body of this page. No one was attacking anyone for the colour of their skin. To fixate on this rather than the actual causes and reasons is an expression of the author's own racism and a disservice to historical truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.52.125.81 (talk) 18:08, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Labour or Race?

Recent edits have challenged the stable version, asserting (I think) that labour issues was a more dominant factor than race in the riots. The best way forward would be for us to find reliable sources that can support the changes. Let's discuss it here. _signed,Willondon (talk) 21:35, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Attack Type

It is wrong to characterize (caricaturize?) this riot as "racist".

Marston stated that the conflict was the result of black Loyalists undermining their white peers and taking work for smaller wages. That was a labour dispute. Factually. According to the only references any of us have. That one party in it happened to be of a different skin colour is, at best, secondary, as proven by the attacks of the rioters on (white) government officials and (white and affluent) Loyalists.

Beyond that, these were all people (and officials) who had just found themselves on the losing end of a war that had cost the average Loyalist everything and landed them, essentially in exile and facing an existential crisis that would have them witnessing the death, from exposure, from starvation, of their elderly, their women and their children. As for the authorities, they also had just lost a costly war and were now faced with a logistical nightmare in what to do with all of these people.

This situation was hardly perfect. As were its outcomes. And it deserves to be shown for what it is rather than turned into a political caricature. 2604:3D08:267C:CD00:4F9:A505:7137:5492 (talk) 21:47, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]