Talk:George F. Edmunds

Request for consensus on article addition
wants to add the following passage to the Edmunds article:

"Although considering himself devoted to the principles of the Republican Party, like most congressional "Half-Breeds", Edmunds staunchly supported civil service reform that would result in a racist bloated bureaucracy favored by many Democrats."

I consider the "racist bloated bureaucracy" comment to be extraneous to the body of the Edmunds article, even if it's true and reliably sourced, which I doubt.

Does anyone else care to offer an opinion so we can build a consensus one way or the other and avoid an edit war?

Thanks,

Billmckern (talk) 22:38, 24 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Let me elaborate a little on why I think the addition proposed by TRN isn't accurate or needed: TRN says civil service reform would have resulted in "a racist bloated bureaucracy favored by many Democrats." But the dispute over civil service reform was in the REPUBLICAN Party.


 * Republican Stalwarts favored the spoils system.


 * Republican Half-Breeds favored civil service reform and a merit-based selection and promotion system.


 * Republican Mugwumps were so opposed to Gilded Age political corruption that they were willing to support Democrats if necessary to reform the government.


 * The only place Democrats factored in to this longstanding debate was with respect to how committed the Mugwumps were to changing the system.


 * Billmckern (talk) 15:20, 25 February 2022 (UTC)


 * The civil service reform debate was not limited to Republican Party factionalism. Many, if not most of the Democrats advocated civil service reform to end social advancements for blacks spearheaded by Stalwart Republicans, as highlighted in the Vox article I cited in the page. However, some Democrats at the time opposed it. My general understanding is that the intraparty Democratic rift over civil service reform would also become a class issue, attributed to the fact that raising requirements for government jobs prevented economic patronage benefits towards poorer constituencies. Also, in Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution: 1863–1877 by Eric Foner, p. 507 highlights the anti-black racism associated with civil service reform. – (debate me) (my accomplishments) 22:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Your addition, if it's true (which I'm not convinced of), might belong in an article on civil service reform. But commentary on what Democrats thought or believed or were motivated by certainly doesn't belong in an article about a Republican senator who was taking a position on an issue for reasons that were important to a faction of the Republican Party.


 * I notice that you've also been salting other articles with "white supremacist racist Democratic Senator Allen Thurman" comments -- the article on Chuck Schumer, for example. In my view, that's ridiculous and those comments should be reverted. A connection between Thurman and Schumer is tangential AT BEST, and more likely simply irrelevant. And labeling THURMAN this way in an article about SCHUMER is definitely irrelevant.


 * Billmckern (talk) 01:21, 26 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the suggestion of inserting these details into articles about civil service reform. I will do that. – (debate me) • (my accomplishments) 01:30, 26 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Your most recent reply causes me to question if you're acting in good faith. I'm prepared to submit this issue to a dispute resolution noticeboard.


 * Billmckern (talk) 20:47, 26 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Billmckern, I am simply a Wikipedia editor who seeks to expand content about American politics of the Reconstruction and Gilded Age eras. WP still lacks sufficient information about crucial aspects of the late 1800s in a number of articles. – (debate me) • (my accomplishments) 21:20, 26 February 2022 (UTC)


 * If this is true, then you might be justified in adding your comments about civil service reform to ONLY the article about civil service reform. Comments about what Democrats may have believed about Civil Service Reform have no place in articles about Republican politicians and the dispute between the Republican Stalwart, Half-Breed, and Mugwump factions. That's just shoehorning.


 * Billmckern (talk) 22:19, 26 February 2022 (UTC)