This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pottawatomie massacre article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
changed "murdered" to killing. As "murder" suggests wrongdoing. His actions, although illegal at the time, can be considered heroic by others & it could be considered an act of war. "Killing" is more neutral & the charges & common name will elude nough to it, IMO. -- Duemellon 18:37, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
The term "murder" reflects the charges, therefore I see it as an appropriate word even if it is loaded. Also, "shot and killed in righteous retribution" feels a bit too long to put in. Kumlekar ( talk) 03:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
You indicate that Potawatomie was merely the first time that "pro-slavery forces were doing the bleeding". Don't you mean anti-slavery forces? It was Brown that was involved in the Potawatomie massacre. Johnor 22:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
John Brown did not kill children; James P. Doyle's sons were full grown. He didn't commit infanticide. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hipjiverobot ( talk • contribs) . +thats simply a blatant lie. go read a history book. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.185.250.195 ( talk • contribs) .
Infanticide is an anthropological term for the willful killing of "infants" c.q. babies based on cultural rules. The term is not used correctly here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.240.169.85 ( talk) 16:23, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Also present at Cato's court [in April 1856] were James P. Doyle, who sat on the grand jury, and his oldest son, the twenty-two year old William, who served as bailiff. Both would be murdered, along with William's twenty-year-old brother Drury, by Brown's band at Pottawatomie.
— David S. Reynolds, John Brown, Abolitionist p. 154
In the cabin James Doyle, his wife Mahala, and their six children lay asleep. A sharp rap on the door drew Doyle out of bed. He asked the identity of the caller and was answered by a man asking directions to Allen Wilkinson's house. As soon as Doyle opened the door to explain, five armed men barged into the house. The leader, John Brown, who wore a straw hat and a black cravat, announced that they were from the Northern Army and were taking Doyle prisoner. Mahala Doyle, bursting into tears, cried to her husband, "Haven't I told you what you were going to get for the course you have been taking?" He grumbled, "Hush, mother, hush." She watched in horror as the invaders led him and her two oldest sons, William and Drury, out into the night. She begged him to spare her sixteen-year-old son, John, and they did, knowing that he was not a member of the proslavery Law and Order Party, as the others were. As terrified as she and the young children were, they could not have imagined the atrocity that was about to happen.
— David S. Reynolds, John Brown, Abolitionist pp. 171-172
I have tagged this as NPOV since reading through it, it seems a certain amount conclusionary and uncited, though I'll freely admit I haven't looked in depth, this was more because an IP user appeared to be having problems with it and I wanted to move the discussion here instead of into the realms of personal attacks, edit warring etc. -- pgk( talk) 10:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
I think there's an error in the article. In the second paragraph of the Introduction, it states that two men were killed at the Sacking of Lawrence. I'm doing some research on the event at Lawrence, and I can't find any evidence that anyone was killed there. The article doesn't site any reference for the claim.
"""" Jeff Smith
I changed prarie to prairie. Please change it back if I am incorrect. Sorry if I am doing this wrong, this is my first edit.
The article says that these events occured in 1756. The entire set of events that Bleeding Kansas consisted of happened in the mid-nineteenth century. I am changing 1756 to 1856.
The article states, "The company consisted of John Brown, four of his other sons — Frederick, Owen, Watson, and Oliver — Henry Thompson (his son-in-law), Thomas Winer, and James Townsley, whom John had induced to carry the party in his wagon to their proposed field of operations," then states, "The three men followed their captors out into the darkness, where Owen Brown and Salmon Brown killed them with broadswords," adding a name of someone who is not listed as in the compay. 24.28.165.165 17:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)Sandra
I fully expected a description of what happened after the massacre -- were Brown and his men hunted? Was there a trial?-- Jrm2007 ( talk) 17:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
This article is very poorly written. As an Australian, this article's usage of the terms (Brown) Snr and Jnr is very annoying. The authors assume that the reader knows which particular Brown is being written about. I really want to undertand this story, er, it seems like it might be important. Could some literate American english speaker please edit this article to make it comprehensible to the world down under?
And - following current trendy lines of fashion - "Thanks"
I added a POV tag because the section seems to be written to the standard of an encyclopedia. It rather seems to be written like an essay in that it presents arguments made by the "opponent" and then disproves them. Most of the information seems to be sourced which suggests the base of the section is alright but I feel it needs to be rewritten. 67.240.112.10 ( talk) 23:54, 31 July 2014 (UTC)67.240.112.10
The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Cúchullain t/ c 14:56, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Pottawatomie Massacre →
Pottawatomie massacre – Per
MOS:CAPS; caps are not necessary here, as it's not a proper name; sources typically use lower case.
Dicklyon (
talk)
01:55, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
See common lower-case usage in books. Dicklyon ( talk) 19:00, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
And summary book n-gram stats showing dominant lowercase even before trying to exclude counts of titles and headings: [1]. Dicklyon ( talk) 06:46, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Let's look at all book hits then. This search, all uses in first 2 pages (20 hits), some of which have zero uses in sentence-like context so do not appear:
That's 10 lower and 6 upper and 4 not found in sentence in the first 20 book hits. Without going further, it seems clear that we can conclude that "Pottawatomie massacre" is NOT consistently capitalized in sources, and that there's no reason to consider it to be a proper name. Even if the next 10 were all uppercase (which they're not), it still can't come close to any reasonable threshold for "consistently capitalized" in sources. Notice also in this search that the event is also widely referred to as the "Pottawatomie Creek massacre" (and/or "Pottawatomie Creek Massacre") in at least a hundred books. Dicklyon ( talk) 05:30, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
For downcasing, all that MOSCAPS requires is either (1) a demonstration that the capping is not consistent in sources; or (2) that capping is not necessary. Let's not even go to the second test here: Dick's link abundantly shows not just a little inconsistency, but a lot of inconsistency. Case over. Tony (talk) 02:44, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
"Large amounts of sources use the capitalisation."—you mean "Large numbers of", I guess. But the evidence indicates that they are in a minority.
" "Accepted full names..." should use capitalisation." What is a "full name", then?
"Capitalisation is certainly necessary, here, if we are to maintain our stature as an encylopaedia in line with WP:UCN."—Again, why don't we close the site down and send everyone to Encyc. Britt.? The idea that "stature" has anything to do with capitalisation is very strange. Why? Tony (talk) 07:15, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Pottawatomie Massacre → Pottawatomie massacre – Since guidelines, sources, and two-thirds of responding editors favor lowercase, it hard to see why the article was not moved after the previous RM discussion. Can we try again? See detailed data and analysis in the previous discussion. Dicklyon ( talk) 04:46, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Since the above non-admin RM close was contrary to the unaminous expressed opinion in the discussion, it is being reviewed at Wikipedia:Move_review#Pottawatomie_Massacre. Dicklyon ( talk) 04:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
I see this statement in the article- "James P. Doyle and ordered him and his two adult sons, William and Drury (all former slave catchers)." I don't find any source that describes them as "slave catchers" except for a few Wikipedia articles. Where does this come from? - BorderRuffian —Preceding undated comment added 16:46, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
"Maehala [Childress Doyle, wife of James Pleasant Doyle] never knew why John Brown had selected her husband and sons for the murder because to her knowledge in the approximately six months they had been there [Kansas]they had not expressed themselves either for or against slavery, it being a thing far from their personal interests while they were trying to claim the land and build the farm". Information from Doyle family notes on Maehala Doyle. Undated. Unpublished. Original in possession of Philip Arthur Phillips, direct descendant of James Pleasant Doyle and Maehala Childress Doyle. Portland, Oregon April 29, 2016
Mitzi Yates (
talk)
17:26, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I have possession of notes handed down to direct descendants of James Pleasant Doyle. It has Mrs. Maehala Childress Doyle's version of events. There are also notes indicating that both the Chattanooga, Tennessee newspaper and the Chicago Tribune interviewed her in the 1870s or 1880s about the Pottawatomie Massacre. I do not have access to the Chattanooga newspaper. To the best of my knowledge, it is only available on microfilm at The Public Library in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Mitzi Yates ( talk) 16:41, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
The best thing would be to write an article for a history journal and get it approved by an editor and published. Then you could cite it as a source for an alternative view of events. Without the help of an intermediate editor or journal to approve the material, it would be very hard to accept it into wikipedia as a reliable source. Dicklyon ( talk) 18:39, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Basic question about the use of secondary sources. From the published accounts, Maehala was illiterate. (She signed an 'X') The secondary sources seem to greatly embellish and insert details not found in the 'family version' of her testimony. There were distinct political agendas by these 'secondary' sources dating from the 19th century. Short of publishing in the modern era (available only to scholars or those with financial resources to do so) then the 'enhanced' version of history as quoted from those 19th century sources are what do as 'fact'? Is there any mechanism realistically available to offer 'other' viewpoints without violating the spirit of wiki? Mitzi Yates ( talk) 15:00, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
See Our Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln, John Brown, and the Civil War Era by Stephen Oates. [2]
"Rejecting a considerable body of evidence to the contrary, Malin argued that all the threats of murder and annihilation issued by proslavery forces had no impact on Brown, that enemy atrocities did not disturb him either, and that he instigated the Pottawatomie massacre largely for political reasons. According to Malin, Brown selected his victims for two reasons: because they had been associated with Cato's proslavery court when it sat in session at Pottawatomie Creek, and because they were going to testify against Brown at the Lykins County session of the court, to open on May 26, 1856, on a charge of treasonably resisting the pro-slavery territorial government. Yet Malin conceded that there was a problem with his interpretation: Brown had spared the life of James Harris, who had also been a juror on Cato's court. "If the assassination was directed at those who participated in the court, why was he permitted to go free?" Malin did not answer his own question. Nor did he address himself to other problems his thesis contained. For one thing, since neither Brown nor any of his sons had been indicted at the Pottawatomie session of Cato's court, why should Brown have been preoccupied with the personnel of the court?"
There are several pages more in the book discussing Malin.
The article is pretty superficial, but I don't have the time to fix it. Doug Weller talk 11:11, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Pottawatomie massacre. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:37, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
"Massacre", to me, and I think in general use, implies indiscriminate, mass killings. This was neither mass nor indiscriminate - the targets were a few specific men chosen for being militant pro-slavery actors. Call it executions, assassinations or extrajudicial killings, sure, but calling this event a massacre just reeks of confederate apologia to me.
I'd suggest changing them name and terminology of this article to "killings" rather than "massacre". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.179.120.195 ( talk) 13:25, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Pottawatomie massacre article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
changed "murdered" to killing. As "murder" suggests wrongdoing. His actions, although illegal at the time, can be considered heroic by others & it could be considered an act of war. "Killing" is more neutral & the charges & common name will elude nough to it, IMO. -- Duemellon 18:37, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
The term "murder" reflects the charges, therefore I see it as an appropriate word even if it is loaded. Also, "shot and killed in righteous retribution" feels a bit too long to put in. Kumlekar ( talk) 03:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
You indicate that Potawatomie was merely the first time that "pro-slavery forces were doing the bleeding". Don't you mean anti-slavery forces? It was Brown that was involved in the Potawatomie massacre. Johnor 22:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
John Brown did not kill children; James P. Doyle's sons were full grown. He didn't commit infanticide. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hipjiverobot ( talk • contribs) . +thats simply a blatant lie. go read a history book. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.185.250.195 ( talk • contribs) .
Infanticide is an anthropological term for the willful killing of "infants" c.q. babies based on cultural rules. The term is not used correctly here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.240.169.85 ( talk) 16:23, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Also present at Cato's court [in April 1856] were James P. Doyle, who sat on the grand jury, and his oldest son, the twenty-two year old William, who served as bailiff. Both would be murdered, along with William's twenty-year-old brother Drury, by Brown's band at Pottawatomie.
— David S. Reynolds, John Brown, Abolitionist p. 154
In the cabin James Doyle, his wife Mahala, and their six children lay asleep. A sharp rap on the door drew Doyle out of bed. He asked the identity of the caller and was answered by a man asking directions to Allen Wilkinson's house. As soon as Doyle opened the door to explain, five armed men barged into the house. The leader, John Brown, who wore a straw hat and a black cravat, announced that they were from the Northern Army and were taking Doyle prisoner. Mahala Doyle, bursting into tears, cried to her husband, "Haven't I told you what you were going to get for the course you have been taking?" He grumbled, "Hush, mother, hush." She watched in horror as the invaders led him and her two oldest sons, William and Drury, out into the night. She begged him to spare her sixteen-year-old son, John, and they did, knowing that he was not a member of the proslavery Law and Order Party, as the others were. As terrified as she and the young children were, they could not have imagined the atrocity that was about to happen.
— David S. Reynolds, John Brown, Abolitionist pp. 171-172
I have tagged this as NPOV since reading through it, it seems a certain amount conclusionary and uncited, though I'll freely admit I haven't looked in depth, this was more because an IP user appeared to be having problems with it and I wanted to move the discussion here instead of into the realms of personal attacks, edit warring etc. -- pgk( talk) 10:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
I think there's an error in the article. In the second paragraph of the Introduction, it states that two men were killed at the Sacking of Lawrence. I'm doing some research on the event at Lawrence, and I can't find any evidence that anyone was killed there. The article doesn't site any reference for the claim.
"""" Jeff Smith
I changed prarie to prairie. Please change it back if I am incorrect. Sorry if I am doing this wrong, this is my first edit.
The article says that these events occured in 1756. The entire set of events that Bleeding Kansas consisted of happened in the mid-nineteenth century. I am changing 1756 to 1856.
The article states, "The company consisted of John Brown, four of his other sons — Frederick, Owen, Watson, and Oliver — Henry Thompson (his son-in-law), Thomas Winer, and James Townsley, whom John had induced to carry the party in his wagon to their proposed field of operations," then states, "The three men followed their captors out into the darkness, where Owen Brown and Salmon Brown killed them with broadswords," adding a name of someone who is not listed as in the compay. 24.28.165.165 17:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)Sandra
I fully expected a description of what happened after the massacre -- were Brown and his men hunted? Was there a trial?-- Jrm2007 ( talk) 17:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
This article is very poorly written. As an Australian, this article's usage of the terms (Brown) Snr and Jnr is very annoying. The authors assume that the reader knows which particular Brown is being written about. I really want to undertand this story, er, it seems like it might be important. Could some literate American english speaker please edit this article to make it comprehensible to the world down under?
And - following current trendy lines of fashion - "Thanks"
I added a POV tag because the section seems to be written to the standard of an encyclopedia. It rather seems to be written like an essay in that it presents arguments made by the "opponent" and then disproves them. Most of the information seems to be sourced which suggests the base of the section is alright but I feel it needs to be rewritten. 67.240.112.10 ( talk) 23:54, 31 July 2014 (UTC)67.240.112.10
The result of the move request was: No consensus to move. Cúchullain t/ c 14:56, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Pottawatomie Massacre →
Pottawatomie massacre – Per
MOS:CAPS; caps are not necessary here, as it's not a proper name; sources typically use lower case.
Dicklyon (
talk)
01:55, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
See common lower-case usage in books. Dicklyon ( talk) 19:00, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
And summary book n-gram stats showing dominant lowercase even before trying to exclude counts of titles and headings: [1]. Dicklyon ( talk) 06:46, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Let's look at all book hits then. This search, all uses in first 2 pages (20 hits), some of which have zero uses in sentence-like context so do not appear:
That's 10 lower and 6 upper and 4 not found in sentence in the first 20 book hits. Without going further, it seems clear that we can conclude that "Pottawatomie massacre" is NOT consistently capitalized in sources, and that there's no reason to consider it to be a proper name. Even if the next 10 were all uppercase (which they're not), it still can't come close to any reasonable threshold for "consistently capitalized" in sources. Notice also in this search that the event is also widely referred to as the "Pottawatomie Creek massacre" (and/or "Pottawatomie Creek Massacre") in at least a hundred books. Dicklyon ( talk) 05:30, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
For downcasing, all that MOSCAPS requires is either (1) a demonstration that the capping is not consistent in sources; or (2) that capping is not necessary. Let's not even go to the second test here: Dick's link abundantly shows not just a little inconsistency, but a lot of inconsistency. Case over. Tony (talk) 02:44, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
"Large amounts of sources use the capitalisation."—you mean "Large numbers of", I guess. But the evidence indicates that they are in a minority.
" "Accepted full names..." should use capitalisation." What is a "full name", then?
"Capitalisation is certainly necessary, here, if we are to maintain our stature as an encylopaedia in line with WP:UCN."—Again, why don't we close the site down and send everyone to Encyc. Britt.? The idea that "stature" has anything to do with capitalisation is very strange. Why? Tony (talk) 07:15, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Pottawatomie Massacre → Pottawatomie massacre – Since guidelines, sources, and two-thirds of responding editors favor lowercase, it hard to see why the article was not moved after the previous RM discussion. Can we try again? See detailed data and analysis in the previous discussion. Dicklyon ( talk) 04:46, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Since the above non-admin RM close was contrary to the unaminous expressed opinion in the discussion, it is being reviewed at Wikipedia:Move_review#Pottawatomie_Massacre. Dicklyon ( talk) 04:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
I see this statement in the article- "James P. Doyle and ordered him and his two adult sons, William and Drury (all former slave catchers)." I don't find any source that describes them as "slave catchers" except for a few Wikipedia articles. Where does this come from? - BorderRuffian —Preceding undated comment added 16:46, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
"Maehala [Childress Doyle, wife of James Pleasant Doyle] never knew why John Brown had selected her husband and sons for the murder because to her knowledge in the approximately six months they had been there [Kansas]they had not expressed themselves either for or against slavery, it being a thing far from their personal interests while they were trying to claim the land and build the farm". Information from Doyle family notes on Maehala Doyle. Undated. Unpublished. Original in possession of Philip Arthur Phillips, direct descendant of James Pleasant Doyle and Maehala Childress Doyle. Portland, Oregon April 29, 2016
Mitzi Yates (
talk)
17:26, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I have possession of notes handed down to direct descendants of James Pleasant Doyle. It has Mrs. Maehala Childress Doyle's version of events. There are also notes indicating that both the Chattanooga, Tennessee newspaper and the Chicago Tribune interviewed her in the 1870s or 1880s about the Pottawatomie Massacre. I do not have access to the Chattanooga newspaper. To the best of my knowledge, it is only available on microfilm at The Public Library in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Mitzi Yates ( talk) 16:41, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
The best thing would be to write an article for a history journal and get it approved by an editor and published. Then you could cite it as a source for an alternative view of events. Without the help of an intermediate editor or journal to approve the material, it would be very hard to accept it into wikipedia as a reliable source. Dicklyon ( talk) 18:39, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Basic question about the use of secondary sources. From the published accounts, Maehala was illiterate. (She signed an 'X') The secondary sources seem to greatly embellish and insert details not found in the 'family version' of her testimony. There were distinct political agendas by these 'secondary' sources dating from the 19th century. Short of publishing in the modern era (available only to scholars or those with financial resources to do so) then the 'enhanced' version of history as quoted from those 19th century sources are what do as 'fact'? Is there any mechanism realistically available to offer 'other' viewpoints without violating the spirit of wiki? Mitzi Yates ( talk) 15:00, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
See Our Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln, John Brown, and the Civil War Era by Stephen Oates. [2]
"Rejecting a considerable body of evidence to the contrary, Malin argued that all the threats of murder and annihilation issued by proslavery forces had no impact on Brown, that enemy atrocities did not disturb him either, and that he instigated the Pottawatomie massacre largely for political reasons. According to Malin, Brown selected his victims for two reasons: because they had been associated with Cato's proslavery court when it sat in session at Pottawatomie Creek, and because they were going to testify against Brown at the Lykins County session of the court, to open on May 26, 1856, on a charge of treasonably resisting the pro-slavery territorial government. Yet Malin conceded that there was a problem with his interpretation: Brown had spared the life of James Harris, who had also been a juror on Cato's court. "If the assassination was directed at those who participated in the court, why was he permitted to go free?" Malin did not answer his own question. Nor did he address himself to other problems his thesis contained. For one thing, since neither Brown nor any of his sons had been indicted at the Pottawatomie session of Cato's court, why should Brown have been preoccupied with the personnel of the court?"
There are several pages more in the book discussing Malin.
The article is pretty superficial, but I don't have the time to fix it. Doug Weller talk 11:11, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Pottawatomie massacre. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:37, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
"Massacre", to me, and I think in general use, implies indiscriminate, mass killings. This was neither mass nor indiscriminate - the targets were a few specific men chosen for being militant pro-slavery actors. Call it executions, assassinations or extrajudicial killings, sure, but calling this event a massacre just reeks of confederate apologia to me.
I'd suggest changing them name and terminology of this article to "killings" rather than "massacre". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.179.120.195 ( talk) 13:25, 15 May 2022 (UTC)