Talk:Goon squad
Add topic| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
"commonly associated with either pro-union violence or anti-union violence"?
[edit]This seems to me a dubious claim. While no doubt groups have been labelled "goon squads" in the context of labour violence, the term undoubtedly has a much broader meaning. --Eldomtom2 (talk) 15:59, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- The thought expressed in your first sentence has no logical connection to the second. ♟♙ (talk) 23:28, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
The sentence traces back to the original edit, but it's not clear where the "pro-union violence" part comes from; most of the sources in the article are about anti-union violence (after all, unions do not have the power to hire people at companies; employers do). The alleged source (United States Senate Select Committee on Improper Activities in Labor and Management) is so voluminous that it should probably count as a primary source. The only other source, a 1938 article in The Nation, seems a bit dubious. Nemo 06:25, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
- And indeed it turns out the source didn't quite support the claim. Nemo 06:39, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
- unions do not have the power to hire people at companies; employers do: this is false premise. Unions absolutely have the resources to hire and/or organize goon squads and the have a long history of doing do as retaliation for strikebreakers. There's no explanation for why you think The Nation is a dubious source or why the exhaustive detail to limit Pro-Union Goon Squad activity it to one specific event is needed. - The literary leader of the age ✉ 15:41, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
- I didn't say unions don't have resources, only they have different kind of resources. After reading the 1938 article, I understood what kind of goon squad was meant there. I don't know whether that's a sufficient source for broader statements; the article itself seems to treat it as exceptional. Nemo 07:26, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
- unions do not have the power to hire people at companies; employers do: this is false premise. Unions absolutely have the resources to hire and/or organize goon squads and the have a long history of doing do as retaliation for strikebreakers. There's no explanation for why you think The Nation is a dubious source or why the exhaustive detail to limit Pro-Union Goon Squad activity it to one specific event is needed. - The literary leader of the age ✉ 15:41, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Sabotage of "pro democracy movement" doesn seem to fit the definition.
[edit]Shouldn't it be trade union related? 5.151.21.128 (talk) 15:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- Not necessarily. God squads can be employed in many different situations, the labor union association is only the most common. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 16:10, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
The latest removal was reverted. I think the entire paragraph is WP:OR, because not a single one of the sources uses the term "goon squad" to describe the events. If a source is added that characterises it as a "goon squad", the mention could be kept, but it could still need some rewriting to avoid WP:SYN. Nemo 19:39, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
- After looking again I deleted that paragraph. The sources cited don't mention the term goon squad. I didn't include it when I started this article back in 2011, I guess someone else added it later. - The literary leader of the age ✉ 15:24, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks! Nemo 07:26, 9 March 2025 (UTC)