This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States Low‑importance 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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. African diaspora Low‑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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: North America / United States / American Civil War 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 articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  North American military history task force United States military history task force American Civil War task force

The article states:

The result was a model of what Reconstruction could have been.

I think the statement needs rewriting, or at least a citation.

It feels like a wish-fulfillment argument ("could have been").

It would be more accurate to say that Reconstruction was quite different from Port Royal, therefore the Port Royal Experiment was not a model of what it could have been, only a model of what was hoped for.

I am not a scholar of the period so I will leave this for others.

Karl gregory jones ( talk) 00:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC) reply

Earlier versions of the article stated that "many" former slave masters assisted in setting up schools and even became teachers to the freed slaves. Surprising as that claim is, it is in fact supported by the cited source. Later versions of the article revised "many" to "some" and then to "few" while keeping the citation. This makes no sense, as it contradicts what the cited source says. I've revised to change "few" back to "many," but I also added "reportedly," since we can't necessarily take one book from 1919 as gospel truth regarding events that took place two generations earlier. 72.224.241.46 ( talk) 14:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC) reply