Talk:Black Star Line/Archive 1

Archive 1

Citations requested

There are no citations for the claims of this piece. For instance, I would want to see a citation for the claim that the Bureau of Investigation perpetrated sabotage - sounds conspiratorial

---

I think the neutrality of this article is in serious question. I have never heard of a Hoover conspiracy that infiltrated the Garvey organization. Garvey was eventually convicted of mail fraud. This subject seems to be a subject employing revisionist history in which Garvey was the victim of white conspiracy. The facts and criminal convictions more support the objective opinion that Garvey was a thief and committed fraud to steal and squander a million dollars from unwitting African Americans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.50.154.23 (talk) 01:23, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

This page is into its 6th paragraph before the first reference is cited. There needs to be far more references in this page. And with regards to the preceding statement that this subject is supporting revisionist history, all history books, (not books about the past but actual history books), are revisionist in some form or another, or are counter-revisionist, otherwise they wouldn't be written in the first place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by--OffiMcSpin (talk) 15:34, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Not to get into a debate on revisionism, but proven facts are much more important. We just need to focus on proven aspects of this story and scrap the rest. I am certian that there have been plenty of books written, not just on Garvey, but on the history of this company, and would be easily resolved using these books as a citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.109.61.241 (talk) 01:08, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Black Star Line. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090304175333/http://www.reggaehead.com:80/song-blackstarliner.htm to http://www.reggaehead.com/song-blackstarliner.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:31, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Logo / Emblem of the Black Star Line ?

Anybody found a logo ? --SvenAERTS (talk) 16:15, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Sabotage

I've been trying to find a better source for the assertion that Hoover's agents "sabotaged it by throwing foreign matter into the fuel, damaging the engines". The assertion is repeated across the Web, but it's always as a bald assertion, with no references or citations; I've not seen anything yet resembling a scholarly reference to this. I have, on the other hand, also found lots of assertions that Garvey was accusing different people of sabotage (for example, W. E. B. Dubois was said to have sent saboteurs). I'm not happy with the current statement, though; Winston James appears to be a good historian to use for this -- I wonder if any of his books back up the assertion? I have dropped him a line to see if he might help us out here with a more scholarly reference. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 18:08, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

I tend to agree partially. This is further exacerbated by what appears to be a dynamic IP editor with a piss-poor attitude edit warring to keep this info. I've done some looking myself, and not found anything reliable beyond the given source that supports it. The given source is a generally good one (PBS hosted interview with historians), but on the one hand, I'm constantly reminded of Sagan's motto: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I'm not sure that a single historian mentioning it in an interview qualifies as "extraordinary evidence". On the other hand however, it's arguable that this is an extraordinary claim at all. Given the time period, the racial views at the time, and the actors involved, I'm not so sure this is that unlikely. All in all, I'm on the fence as to whether the sabotage actually happened as described in the article. One thing I'm sure of, however, is that if this IP doesn't get with the program, we're going to need to seek either a rangeblock or article protection. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 16:23, 14 November 2016 (UTC)