Talk:Battle of Bamber Bridge

A fact from Battle of Bamber Bridge appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 June 2017 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Battle of Bamber Bridge began when white American military police arrested a black USAAF soldier in an English village pub (pictured), and ended with a mutiny that left one dead and seven injured?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2017/June. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Bamber Bridge.

Wikipedia

Military history: British / European / North America / United States / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force

Lancashire and Cumbria Low‑importance

	North West England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lancashire and Cumbria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Lancashire and CumbriaWikipedia:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaTemplate:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaLancashire and Cumbria
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

United States: Military history Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.

African diaspora Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on June 24, 2018, June 24, 2023, and June 24, 2024.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Army Service Uniform#Class "A" ASU|class A uniform]] The anchor (#Class "A" ASU) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Aftermath?

What punishment was given to the black soldiers after they were found guilty of mutiny? We’re the MPs disciplined? What about the white officers? The black officer? Isa.Alsup (talk) 18:06, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've added info to the article, including info on this, here. There is a minor disconnect re the number of soldiers involved between the source I've cited there and another previously cited source. I have not seen that other source and I've glossed over that difference. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 07:58, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

General Eaker's actions, etc.

This edit happened to catch my eye. If this edit had been made from a registered user ID, I probably would have commented on the user talk page. However, the edit is anonymous and is the only edit made from that IP address. I don't disagree with the edit, but the edit summary bothers me.

The edit eliminates content which does have a problem, but I disagree with the perception of the problem. The problem I see with the content which the edit eliminates is in the snipped reading, "he combined the Black trucking units", and is the presence word "Black" there. That word, and the assertion it produces that the trucking units were segregated, is not supported by the sources cited in support. Page 229 here in one of those cited sources says, "Eaker combined the dispersed trucking units in England into a special command, ...", without any implication of either those units or that command being racially segregated, and the text there goes on to mention white members of that command. Simply removing the word "Black" would have addressed that problem. As I said, though, I don't disagree with the edit as it was done.

While looking at this, the sentence reading, "Although there were several more racial incidents between Black and White American troops in Britain during the war, none was on the scale of that of Bamber Bridge." caught my eye. As presented in the article, this sentence relies on the same two sources cited in support of that other content for support. That assertion seems not unreasonable but, though I have not combed the cited sources for support, I didn't see any support there. I haven't done anything in the article to address that but, having noticed it, I thought I would mention it here. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 17:32, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can try to fix

"British police officers reported aimed that". 89.8.144.217 (talk) 11:50, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The last sentence in the Aftermath section appears formulated to evoke emotion and encourage discontent rather than present information in a non-partisan manner

"This event serves as a historical marker in the ongoing struggle for civil rights and equality within the United States." LMikejl (talk) 21:17, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced

"In a confrontation on the street afterwards, a white MP shot and killed Private William Crossland after Private Crossland drunkenly attacked the MP."

Neither of the sources cited when this is covered lower down attribute blame for who intitiated the specific altercation that resulted in Pvt. Crossland being shot and killed, so I'm not sure why the article attempts to do so. In my view, this article should strike the same hands-off spin that these sources do unless someone can find a source that evidences otherwise.

Suggested edit: "Amid a confrontation on the street afterwards that turned violent, a white MP shot and killed Private William Crossland."

I'm going to make this edit to keep the article in line with cited sources, I was unable to find a source that supported what's currently there. 2A00:23C5:11E:F901:59EB:9AC4:EF9E:A769 (talk) 22:29, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]