Talk:Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment

Name of the unit and of this article
Hello. Can you give us a source that the unit was actually called Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 23:34, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * McGhee is set up as each unit having a section. Page 131 of McGhee starts the section for this unit.  The section is titled "Slayback's Regiment".  The MOS for the MILHIST project inserts the branch and state, so this title.  Is there a reason the title is debatable? Hog Farm Bacon 23:51, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi. Thanks. I do not know who McGhee is. I looked at Manual of Style/Military history and couldn't find anything that suggests the name of an article should reflect the name of the officer who commanded that unit. Can you point me to it? Yours, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 00:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * McGhee is one of the sources, his book is considered one of the primary resources for Missouri Confederate units. He's reliable.    If you're questioning the name Slayback's being in there, the unit had no official name.  Collins, which is an online source in the article, refers to the unit as Slayback's, as do the Official Records, also an online source in the article.  It's named after the commander because historically, that was the name of the unit.  I can post this at WT:MILHIST, where it can be explained more. Hog Farm Bacon 00:18, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Terrific; I'd like to hear from others. It just seems like a terribly informal name, unless it is used as such by WP:Reliable sources. I'll wait until you make such a post. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 00:24, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * - Done Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history. Hog Farm Bacon 01:44, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * This was resolved after discussion on the Milhist talk page, no move needed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:25, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Massacre prediction
We have a sentence stating that "Slayback sent a note . . . suggesting that . . . African-American soldiers would be massacred. . ." I checked the source, "The Civil War Battlefield Guide," by Frances H. Kennedy, and could find no listing for "Slayback" at all in the entire book, including this alleged note. Can anybody find another source for this statement? I hope so; it's an interesting sidelight I would like to explore. Thanks. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:00, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, I found this in Busch's book instead. Did I read the reference wrong? Somebody please check. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:19, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * the inline citation is to Busch. Hog Farm Bacon 23:20, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Were the blacks soldiers, or were they nonmilitary workers? What does Busch say? Thanks. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 06:26, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Lieutenant colonel (United States)

 * Is it appropriate for Slayback's rank to link to Lieutenant colonel (United States)? Surely it should red link to Lieutenant colonel (CSA)? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:07, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The CSA and Union armies had very similar military structures. General was slightly different, but up to colonel was basically the same.  Essentially, both armies were developments of the early 19th-century US Army. Hog Farm Bacon 17:11, 30 November 2020 (UTC)