Talk:Henry Johnson (Buffalo Soldier)

Requested move 27 October 2015

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: seems there is a general agreement that "Henry Johnson (Buffalo Soldier)", where this article has been located for the past week and a half, is the best available title. Jenks24 (talk) 01:17, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Henry Johnson (1890 Medal of Honor) Henry Johnson (Buffalo Soldier) → Henry Johnson (Indian Wars soldier) – Or Henry Johnson (9th Cavalry Regiment) or Henry Johnson (Buffalo Soldier) (current title now). The other person, William Henry Johnson, was awarded this year Medal of Honor. Therefore, there is no longer a distinction between the two. I propose three options; my least preference is "9th Cavalry Regiment". I prefer "soldier"/"Soldier". George Ho (talk) 06:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 05:35, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Just for an update, someone added "1890" after the RM was initiated. The proposal is still open. George Ho (talk) 16:44, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Relisting comment. Relisting because has again moved the article while under discussion, this time to Henry Johnson (Buffalo Soldier). Jenks24 (talk) 05:35, 4 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Whoops, sorry, I missed that there was a formal move process going on here. I just went bold on the first change and changed it again as a result of the move debate at Henry Lincoln Johnson. Carrite (talk) 08:06, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * N.B.: after the move from "Henry Lincoln Johnson" to "Henry Johnson (World War I soldier)" following that debate, the debate record is at Talk:Henry_Johnson_(World_War_I_soldier). -- do ncr  am  13:37, 4 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment - I think that "Indian Wars" is potentially problematic in the long run, being American Indian Wars at WP today and being a long series of only vaguely related conflicts sometimes more akin to genocidal strikes than proper "wars." Moreover, "Indian" is a dying descriptive for Native American peoples — not to get all PC about it, but a true fact. "Buffalo Soldier" is a historically accurate and seeming more neutral phrase. That would be my strong preference. Agreed that the old (Date+Medal of Honor) name was not the best in terms of clarity. Rather than naming the precise regiment, "(U.S. Cavalry)" might be a good alternate suffix. Carrite (talk) 08:06, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Pinging, , , , , .... Carrite (talk) 08:11, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Pinging . Carrite (talk) 08:22, 4 November 2015 (UTC)


 * !vote: I prefer "Henry Johnson (Buffalo Soldier)" as Buffalo Soldier seems to be a well-accepted term and conveys (to me at least) that he was a) black, b) riding a horse in U.S. Cavalry, and c) in American West, post-Civil War, keeping peace btwn settlers vs. American Indians (I happen to perceive peace-keeping more than actively fighting the Indians). I was/am pretty sure the Buffalo Soldiers were not much involved in active fighting vs. Indians though they did engage in some other fighting.  "Henry Johnson (Indian Wars soldier)", which was the original name of this article, would be okay too, call that my second choice.  I don't think the word "American" would be needed to clarify in any context that is likely, but am indifferent to "Henry Johnson (American Indian Wars soldier)" vs. my second choice.  "Henry Johnson (U.S. Cavalry)" or "Henry Johnson (U.S. Cavalry soldier)" are also okay by me.  I note no one so far is suggesting "Henry Johnson (1890 Medal of Honor)" any longer (which had temporarily been used to contrast this topic vs. article now settled at Henry Johnson (World War I soldier);  that or other variations mentioning "Medal of Honor" would be my last choice.  This is no biggie, any of these will be okay and redirects can come from alternatives.  Thank you to Carrite for research reported at other debate, and for participation throughout this including pinging me and others here.  If someone feels strongly about what this article name should be (I am not seeing that yet), especially if they have legitimate "ownership" or stewardship from working on this article a lot, we can afford to defer to them.  Again it doesn't matter hugely.  Thanks all. -- do  ncr  am  13:37, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Oppose move from current title which is accurate. Article has been modified a bit to clarify which Indian War engagement he received the medal for. --Mike Cline (talk) 22:54, 12 November 2015 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Buffalo Soldiers vs. American Indians extent
This Henry Johnson article does not mention who was fighting against the U.S. army in 1879 (year of action for Henry Johnson) or vice versa. I presume American Indians? Perhaps Sioux, perhaps Apache, who? Milk River is mentioned but given there is currently no Milk River engagement article, this article should give a bit of context. I see no mention of 1879 in the American Indian Wars article; i see a skip within "Black Hills" section from 1877 to 1890. Whatever happened in 1879 is one of few examples in Wikipedia in which there is implication that Buffalo Soldiers ever fought (were fired upon or used weapons against) American Indians.

In fact, there is no mention of Buffalo Soldiers at all in the main text of the American Indian Wars article, although there is a picture and its caption. This should be remedied.

The Buffalo Soldiers article mentions 1877 incident with one soldier, Private Randall, fighting Cheyenne, who seems to be the namesake for "Buffalo Solder" term for that incident. Otherwise the article dances around mention of an 1871 campaign vs. Comanche (did they fight though, or just ride around?). And there is summary mention of them serving "at a variety of posts" and during 1866-early 1890s participating "in most of the military campaigns in these areas and earn[ing] a distinguished record", but there is no mention of their being under fire or firing upon any Indians, besides the namesake 1877 incident. It is mysterious to me how nineteen Medals of Honor could have been earned. Perhaps they all relate to incidents in which Buffalo Soldiers were serving in support roles, and accidentally got involved in some action?

Also when Henry Johnson was given the Medal of Honor award in 1890 at Fort Robinson, why was there a military presence at all. I presume Fort Robinson and its troops were to keep the peace / pacify some tribe(s) of American Indians on reservations nearby? Some more context in this Henry Johnson article is needed, in addition to fixes needed at other articles, IMHO. -- do ncr  am  14:36, 4 November 2015 (UTC)