Talk:Pinkerton (detective agency)

Pinkerton Investigations?

Removed this from the Pinkerton page because I'm suspicious it has no valid meaning: "Correction: Pinkerton Security is no longer; however, Pinkerton Investigations lives on!!" (semicolon+comma mine) There is no Wikipedia listing for "Pinkerton Investigations" and a Google search turns up nothing separate from the Pinkerton Security discussed in the body of the article. Anyone care to elaborate? -Aratuk 21:07, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Securitas Security bought Pinkerton Security HOWEVER, the article states the Pinkerton name has been retired. This is not true. I am an employee of Pinkerton Consulting and Investigations, A Securitas Company. The latter is what our business cards state. Pinkerton Security services are now entirely Securitas. Ci-pinkerton.com is the investigations website.

Specifically, Pinkerton was not begun as a ‘Security Guard’ agency and the name has has not been retired. Check your facts ‘Aratuk’. From the companies website:

In 2001 Pinkerton and Burns International merged operations to become Securitas Security Services USA, Inc. the largest security services provider in the world. This brought together the two most renowned private investigative firms in the world.

Our History

Pinkerton's history dates back to 1850 in Chicago, when Allan Pinkerton, the original "private eye", founded Pinkerton's National Detective Agency. Pinkerton achieved national renown in 1861 when he uncovered and foiled an assassination plot on the life of Abraham Lincoln. During the Civil War, Pinkerton organized America’s first secret service. His pursuits of Jesse James, the Younger, the Dalton gangs and his longstanding pursuit of the Wild Bunch brought extraordinary visibility to his agency.

Burns International also boasts a rich history. In 1909, William J. Burns founded the William J. Burns Detective Agency with headquarters in Chicago , Illinois . Burns was a man of integrity and served as a national crime watchdog. During his career, he was labeled "the greatest detective the U.S. has ever produced." In 1921, he was appointed the director of the newly formed National Bureau of Fingerprint investigation that later became the FBI.

The Legacy Continues...

Now operating as Pinkerton Consulting & Investigations, the legacy of these two great men continues to this day with a force of investigators and security specialists that retain the same reputable dedication and commitment to protecting clients and their assets worldwide.

Experience. Integrity. Trust.

Pinkerton's tradition of excellence continues with the experience you can trust, and the integrity you can rely on as a respected leader in the security consulting and investigation industry. Pinkerton offers corporations comprehensive security services, a consultative approach to identifying risks and the professional expertise to partner in effective solutions. With offices located in North America, Central America, South America, Europe, and Asia, you can depend on an organization with a rich history and a dynamic future.

Our Parent Company Securitas Group has operations in more than 30 countries, primarily in Europe and North America. We are a world leader in security, with annual sales of approximately $7 billion. Every day, more than 200,000 employees work to carry out our mission of protecting homes, work places, and community. We provide security services in close cooperation with customers. To this end, business areas have been added and the service content has been specialized and developed. Our business areas are: Guard Services, Alarm Systems, and Cash Handling. TOP—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.45.165.42 (talk • contribs)

well, it is obvious we need to watch out about those who have conflicting interests on this site.Travb 00:35, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't the article mention

Shouldn't the article mention that this company was able to murder strikers with impunity for many years? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.119.114.46 (talk • contribs)

Not that there's anything wrong with that. They were trespassers; they deserved to die. Kurt Weber 17:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Ah spoken like someone who wants to debate with people simply because he is bored, but has no debating skills, and has absolutly no understanding of the issues.Travb 00:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect on all three counts. Kurt Weber 21:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

My apologies if I am wrong. Please read the Churchill account of the history of the Pinkertons, and let me know what you think.Travb 23:26, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

• Churchill, Ward (2004). "From the Pinkertons to the PATRIOT Act: The Trajectory of Political Policing in the United States, 1870 to the Present". The New Centennial Review. 4 (1): 1–72. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

Yes, but not with such POV terms--read the excellent history of the Pinkertons by Churchill (I added yesterday to the external links) incorporate similar non-POV language to this article.Travb 17:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Thomas Woods notes that the strikers fired at the Pinkerton agents first. "The Pinkertons were to protect those workers who chose to work, including replacements for strikers, and to get a sense of what really was going on."

"So then what happened? According to LaFeber, 'In mid-1892 warfare erupted.' Notice the word choice. Warfare simply 'erupted.' What actually happened is that the strikers surrounded Homestead to prevent nonunion workers from gaining access to the plant. When 300 Pinkerton guards approached the plant on two barges via a river that bordered the plant, strikers opened fire on them, killing one and wounding four others. Only then did the Pinkertons return fire. Then the strikers fired cannons to sink the barges, followed by the use of dynamite and an attempt to set them on fire."

I would like this information included in the article, which it is not.

Dooglio (talk) 18:11, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't this group be identified as mercenaries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjbach (talk • contribs) 23:08, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

References

Yes, it should. Please edit the article to reflect the truth. It seems like revisionists are cleaning up the Pinkerton image by distorting facts. I updated the entry to reflect the Pinkerton agents were snuck in on the barge to the Frick's mill, that they were hired to "occupy" the mill rather than "defend" the mill as there was no assault of the mill, and that their primary duty was to aid strikebreakers. But this is the absolute minimum this article needs for proper reflection of facts. Please feel free to edit, likely some fascist will come in and alter it after you but we will just have to correct it again. 69.47.20.53 (talk) 22:31, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Founding of Pinkerton National Detective Agency

Founding of Pinkerton National Detective Agency in 1850 is dubious - a 1914 letterhead states this - but Library of Congress says circa 1852. Pinkerton was a shameless self-publicist and may have airbrushed his brother out of the history of the company. See: http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Prairie/8980/the_early_pinkertons_main.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.152.107 (talk • contribs)

SIGN YOUR POSTS using ~~~~

Signed:Travb 00:25, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't the article mention

Shouldn't the article mention how modern day Pinkerton Investigations treats it's employees? Not very well I can assure you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.119.114.46 (talk • contribs)

Shouldn't the article also mention the service of one Frederick Abberline, a former policeman of Scotland yard fame who after retiring went on to serve in the Pinker ton Agency.....Though it is not through his service to Scotland Yard that makes him worthy of a mention, it was that he WAS the officer in charge of the Jack the Ripper case that warrants that! Im pretty much betting that the pinkerton agency itself, in all its history, has no case bigger than the Jack the Ripper case, so this should in theory make Abberline its most famous member!!English n proud (talk) 23:55, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Don't write about it here, do the edits yourself

If I had a dime for every time someone suggested something on a talk page and that suggestion was ignored. If you want to make an edit. Make it yourself. No one will take up the cause and edit the page for you.Travb 00:24, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Homestead strikers

Don't you think it should be noted in the first section that the Homestead strikers were the ones who attacked the Pinkertons, and not the other way around in. It also doesn't mention that the Pinkertons took casualties themselves?

I would also suggest a "neutrality disputed" banner at the top of the page. It seems to favor the unionists. (I don't know how to perform this action myself, which is why I am not editing the page). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.21.161.229 (talk • contribs)

User:24.21.161.229 obviously never read what I wrote just above him: Don't write about it here, do the edits yourself.

I am going to rewrite this page completly in the next couple of days, not waste my time asking someone to do it for me on the talk page, but unfortunatly, not as User:24.21.161.229 wants, I am going to expand on the history of the Pinkertons supression and dirty tricks. Travb 11:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

New additions of anon

Anon (72.135.35.51) added the following text:

It consisted of murderers, scums and thugs.

This sentence is completly inappropriate.

In addition, the anon added the following:

One of the main service of the Agency was to organize judicial plots, instigations and conspiracies against the trade unions. The Agency was hired by owners of Railroads, Factories, Mines, etc. to incriminate prominent members of the trade unions for cases of murder, explosions, robberies etc.

A famous case, in which the Pinkerton Agency was involved, is the exploitation of the murder of Frank Steunenberg by Harry Orchard to accuse the leaders of the Western Federation of Miners. The plot was mainly organized by James McParland, a Pinkerton agent.

Although I agree with this users POV, the paragraphs need to be written in a NPOV manner, and the bold text needs to be changed. In addition, some of the material is already contained in the article:

During the labor unrest of the late 19th century, businessmen hired Pinkerton guards to keep strikers and suspected unionists out of their factories.

Signed:Travb (talk) 05:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Dead wood

Pinkertons are often referred to ominously or with contempt in the popular HBO series Deadwood. In season 3, originally aired during 2006, they entered the storyline, hired by the character of George Hearst.

The last editor said they were in all three seasons...someone is incorrect. Travb (talk) 18:39, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, they were. Not Pinkerton "Detectives" themselves, but there was a woman who was a Pinkerton agent, and they were referenced throughout the first and second seasons. JorgeMacD 06:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed section

The following has been removed:

Due to its conflicts with labor unions, the word Pinkerton remains in the vocabulary of labor organizers and union members as a derogatory reference to authority figures who side with management (in the opinion of the union).

Travb (talk) 23:44, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

The removed information certainly describes a fact among those aware of their labor history. I worked in a factory which hired Pinkerton guards, and i thought of that bloody history every time that i saw one of them. I expect that a source could be found for the statement.

(It appears that it hasn't yet been removed, as i write this.)

Anticipating that the information will be removed, i have a couple of questions--

Was this removed because it was poorly worded and not stated in a neutral manner? (I might be persuaded of such a claim, although i'm not certain it justifies removal. A rewrite seems more reasonable.)

Or was it removed because of no source?

And if it was removed because of no source, how long was it thusly tagged?

Thanks for transferring the section to the talk page for discussion... Richard Myers 03:26, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Matewan and Pinkertons

Although it is likely there were Pinkertons involved in much of the history relating to mining in West Virginia, the movie Matewan was based upon the interactions of the miners' union, the chief of police, and the Baldwin-Felts Detective Agency, which operated in a manner similar to the Pinkertons. Richard Myers 04:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Homestead strike

An editor just attempted to make the same edit suggested by 24.21.161.229 above (diff) but I reverted (diff). The current text has good summary style now, and refers readers to the longer article on the Homestead strike which fully explains the various perspectives on the conflict. In my view it's better to keep it short & refer per SUMMARY than bloat out this article again on Homestead. --Lquilter (talk) 21:52, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Pinkerton Company in recent times

It would be great to have information on the Pinkerton Company in recent times -- or, rather, through the twentieth century. After all, the company has existed up through 2001 when it was acquired by Securitas AB. Perhaps someone who's invested in this article can tackle that challenge. ask123 (talk) 14:16, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, I made a start, with a 'Modern era' section, including from this source. You could take it further, from that article alone. Onanoff (talk) 18:49, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

In popular culture

I note that someone just anonymously deleted the entire In Popular Culture section. Not that i will miss it. However, someone might wish to use it to create a separate article, and then link to that. The information may be useful to someone, but a very long IPC section (as this one was) tends to overwhelm an article with trivial information that is best left out of a main article, IMO.

Oh, and for whoever did the deed, i think in the future such massive deletions ought to be mentioned on the TALK page when they are committed. Richard Myers (talk) 05:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

This is an interesting point I'd like to address. There seems to be some -- at a loss for a better word, snobbery where a popular culture section is concerned. Some articles have them -- and lengthy ones at that! -- while others shun and delete them entirely. Why? What is the problem with a popular culture section? If anything, it might bring the attention to a subject that might have otherwise been obscure and forgotten. I didn't even know what "Pinkerton" was before hearing it in season 2 of "Deadwood," and even then wasn't sure what it meant until reading it again in Arthur Conan Doyle's Valley of Fear. I think IPC sections are harmless if done selectively (unlike the joke IPC featured in an XKCD strip, referring to uses of "wood"), and when done right, they can also be educational, and can help cross-reference other articles to prevent orphaning. I'd really like to discuss this issue with someone, the resistance to IPC sections, which doesn't seem to be across the site or have any kind of general rule. --Magmagirl (talk) 22:08, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Dashiell Hammett (and others?)

I'm adding a link to Dashiell Hammett's page under "See also". He was a Pinkerton operative before writing The Maltese Falcon etc. Are there other famous ex-Pinkerton's I couldn't think of? Trefusius (talk) 11:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Charlie Siringo, and Tom Horn come to mind.

According to historians, Harry Orchard claimed to be on the Pinkerton payroll for a time. But Orchard's not "famous", he's infamous. Richard Myers (talk) 16:43, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

There are about a dozen or so red links, or at least name mentions, of Robert Pinkerton, late head of the Pinkerton Agency, on Wikipedia. If someone wants to research him and start that article, that would be great. But proceed carefully, after quickly exploring those articles, i have the impression there may have been two Robert Pinkertons associated with the agency. Richard Myers (talk) 13:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Chicago "Special Officers" & Watchman

Can some context be added to this section? I'm sure there is more to the story than a memorial to three dead guys... which is all this is right now.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 15:06, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the section may have some place in the page, but the title is insufficient and explains nothing. If it is about Chicago special officers and watchmen killed in the course of their work, the title does not make that clear. Also, if this is the intent of the section, why single out only those from Chicago anyway? They would not be the only Pinkerton agents killed, and no context is given. If there is more important information about victims killed by Pinkerton agents, this section should be assessed for balance and any undue prominence given to agents over opponents. -Thomas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.55.87.237 (talk) 14:38, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Homestead Strike - content contradiction to Wikipedia page "Andrew Carnegie - Homestead Strike"

It says here "... resulted in a fight in which 16 men were killed (7 Pinkertons and 9 Strikers) ..." In the "Andrew Carnegie" page it says " ... in a fight in which 10 men—seven strikers and three Pinkertons—were killed ..."

Because I don't know the correct numbers I can't edit any of the two pages. 213.73.119.167 (talk) 17:52, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Hard to tell, because the Carnegie page doesn't have a citation for the number killed, but it's probably going by a report made the day of the strike and published the day after, which listed 10 men dead. At least one source, Krause, listed in the Homestead Strike page, indicates that at least one of the wounded (as far as I read) died in the hospital. This would account for a discrepancy. IMHO (talk) 00:33, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Removed reference to lawsuit against Securitas

I removed a reference to a suit brought by a Scott Cole & Associates on behalf of employees against Securitas. The complaint makes no reference to the Pinkerton agency under Securitas and thus doesn't belong here. Also, this section makes it sound like Securitas formed from the merger of Pinkerton and Burns, but the Securitas page is clear that the already existing company acquired the other two, though I'm not up for that rewrite myself. IMHO (talk) 08:58, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Frederick Abberline, Investigator of the Jack the Ripper murders and Pinkerton member later.

Shouldn't the article also mention the service of one Frederick Abberline, a former policeman of Scotland yard fame who after retiring went on to serve in the Pinker ton Agency.....Though it is not through his service to Scotland Yard that makes him worthy of a mention, it was that he WAS the officer in charge of the Jack the Ripper case that warrants that! Im pretty much betting that the pinkerton agency itself, in all its history, has no case bigger than the Jack the Ripper case, so this should in theory make Abberline its most famous member!!English n proud (talk) 00:00, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Detective Frank P Geyer

In 1895 detective Frank Geyer tracked down the three murdered Pitezel children leading to the eventual trial and execution of the United States' first known serial killer H. H. Holmes. His story is told in his self-written book, The Holmes-Pitezel Case.[12] Pinkertons had previously apprehended Holmes in 1894 in Boston on an outstanding warrant for insurance fraud perpetrated in Chicago.

Is this meant to say that he tracked down the murderer of these children? Currently it is actually saying he tracked down the children? The addition of "killer of" may rectify this. To read "tracked down the killer of the three".

Unless i've got this wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.254.249.166 (talk) 18:15, 23 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterM88 (talk • contribs)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pinkerton (detective agency). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/travbailey/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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} 12:07, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 January 2019

Please delete the words "and recruit goon squads to intimidate workers." This is editorial and factually accurate.

During the labor strikes of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, businessmen hired the Pinkerton Agency to infiltrate unions, supply guards, keep strikers and suspected unionists out of factories, and recruit goon squads to intimidate workers. Prakov-pinkerton (talk) 21:31, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done. This doesn't seem particularly editorial. Please establish a consensus on the talk page first before making this request. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 22:04, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:We Never Sleep (film) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 00:32, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Source 22

So, there's a sentence in the article called that reads > in 1892 that led to a national outcry against the Pinkerton Detective Agency.[22]

Apparently, that's "Antkowiak, Bruce (2011). "The Pinkerton Problem". heinonline.org. Retrieved April 21, 2022." but looking at that source (https://www.pennstatelawreview.org/115/3/115%20Penn%20St.%20L.%20Rev.%203.607.pdf) I can't find any mention at all of labor unions, strikes, Homestead, Carnegie, or anything else that would indicate the source is at all relevant to how it is cited here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:F6C:65E:149D:8A7D:6536:E048:40A7 (talk) 16:29, 10 June 2023 (UTC)