Portal talk:American Civil War/Intro

Welcome to the American Civil War portal intro talk page
Goals: This article intends to give the barest introduction to the subject matter while providing the maximum possible effective linking and some understanding of the depth of feeling surrounding the subject, especially the legacy and impact of the war on modern thought. Compared to most portals, this introduction is immensely long as of this writing, and I'm striving to make it even more economical, while reflecting the same basic components. While I encourage users to edit boldly, I also ask that before any edits to this highly visible introduction are made, that they be discussed on this talk page first. It's perhaps an unreasonable request, but it's a request to make sure that this very visible location doesn't devolve into a flame war better intended for this talk page. Again, welcome! BusterD 22:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Maximum wiki links. This is a portal, a guide to other places, and so I want the page to link to everything relevant. Since that's impossible, I want to take every opportunity to wikify, so long as we stay within the guidelines.
 * Most economical possible length. The American Civil War article introduction is fine and is plenty for such a vast and complex article. This portal has a different purpose: I'm suggesting ONLY the barest essentials of narrative are necessary here. The rest of the portal page will provide articles and links to tell desired narrative.
 * Focus on the war's impact, as opposed to the war's events. Since we want the important stuff where people can see it, I'm going to hold firm on a focus on the war's legacy and meaning in the second paragraph, so long as such a paragraph exists.

I added a nice pic from Wikicommons to the intro article
As far as I'm concerned, it's just a placeholder but it has the right sort of elements. BusterD 00:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * That picture has now been deleted for economy. BusterD 11:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The second paragraph is phrased in terms of the contemporary right-wing politics rather than presenting a neutral introduction. For example, while it cites "treatment of African-Americans" as an "unresolved issue" of the conflict, the link is to "Slavery in the United States". This paragraph would better follow the wikipedia guidelines if this slant were removed. It should focus on the casualty numbers, which, by the way, do not match the casualty numbers in the linked article. I suggest including the statistics given in the Results section of the American_Civil_War article to the effect that 18% and 8%, respectively, of Southern and Northern fighting-age white men died in the war.Maresuke33 (talk) 15:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Not neutral
1. "formed of eleven southern states' governments which moved to secede from the Union after the 1860 election of Abraham Lincoln". I hope you all know that Lincln’s election only led immediately to the secession of seven. As it stands the sentence is misleading.

2. The whole second paragraph is not neutral. Who is insisting it’s the War between the States? Do reputable historians support this?

”the enslavement of African Americans, the role of constitutional federal government, and the rights of states – are still not completely resolved." According to whom? Is there some reason to say that the enslavement of African Americans is an issue not resolved? If it’s postwar discrimination, civil rights and the like, that’s not what it says. I’d also like a source that supports the contention that the role of constitutional government and states' rights (which rights?) are significant issues today. Sounds too far right and “lost cause” for me. deisenbe (talk) 01:00, 11 October 2018 (UTC)