Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America/Archive 26

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20 ← Archive 24 Archive 25 Archive 26

Discussion about Native in the lead

There is a discussion taking place at Talk:Lily Gladstone#Request for comment on Native in the lead that this Wiki-project may be interested in. --ARoseWolf 13:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Senedo people for deletion

I nominated Senedo people for deletion, if anyone cares to weigh in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Senedo people. Yuchitown (talk) 21:02, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Yuchitown

Category renaming discussion

A discussion is taking place at CfD that this Wiki-project may be interested in. --15:52, 16 January 2024 (UTC) ARoseWolf 15:52, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Not to get in a long discussion but what would you suggest as the wording, Yuchitown? Btw, I agree the wording is odd as it is. --ARoseWolf 15:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Seeing the other's editor's link to WP:INDIGENOUS, I'll just use that link moving forward. Yuchitown (talk) 21:02, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Yuchitown
I had that in my speedy nomination. It was completely disregarded so I brought it to full discussion. --ARoseWolf 12:09, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for doing that. Yuchitown (talk) 14:55, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Yuchitown

Merge proposal/discussion of Fort Albany First Nation history section

Hoping to get some more input on the discussion at Talk:Fort Albany First Nation#Merge proposal - it began as a proposal to merge the stub Battle of Fort Albany (1693), and has led to some discussion about how Wikipedia should address shared European colonial and Indigenous history. I feel it may have implications for other articles on First Nations. James Hyett (talk) 15:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Anyone want to check the actual numbers of the Osage Nation?

Lead:The tribe has about 16,000 members. Further down In the 21st century, the federally recognized Osage Nation has approximately 20,000 enrolled members Doug Weller talk 11:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Wolastoq for deletion

Editors are welcome to give their input at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wolastoq. I commented that the article should be rewritten to include Native history and the response is that is a "land acknowledgment" and isn't allowed on Wikipedia per Talk:Coquitlam#RfC_about_First_Nations_land_acknowledgement.  oncamera  (talk page) 22:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

There's a lot of vitriol over there. So far, I have the only "keep" vote. Yuchitown (talk) 14:57, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Yuchitown
Merged to Saint John River. You know this of course, just for the record. Doug Weller talk 11:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

List of Native Americans of the United States

An editor has twice mass-removed notable entries from List of Native Americans of the United States. I attempted to restore the entries [1] but was reverted by this editor in their second mass-removal [2]. This may be of interest to this Wikiproject. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 17:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Many of the people this person has removed are notable and have many sources in their respective article. I don't know what exactly their issue is with it. They even removed highly notable figures like Deb Haaland, Tecumseh, Sequoyah, and many more notable and easily verifiably Native figures. PersusjCP (talk) 18:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
I’ve given them a warning for disruptive editing. If they continue I suggest going to ANI. Doug Weller talk 19:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
PersusjCP, my concern is not about the notability of these people but rather the verifiability of their belongingness to the group. Adding unsourced entries to such lists isn't a healthy practice. There is always a strong possibility that some editors put wrong entries. As such lists become exceedingly large with unsourced entries, it becomes more difficult to scrutinize them. I am adding unsourced section templates for now. Dympies (talk) 00:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Should definitely be sourced WP:LISTVERIFY..... but that said it shouldn't be hard to transfer over some sources from main articles over blanking. Moxy- 03:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

California Rancherias Terminated by Act of 1958

Details = 1988Mishewal-Wappo begin reorganization and apply for re-recognition under the leadership of John Trippo https://www.suscolcouncil.org/about-us/firstpeopleshistory/

In 2009, the tribe filed for federal restoration. On 25 July 2013 a hearing was held in San Jose, California in the federal court of U.S. District Court Judge Edward Davila. The claim was denied citing that the statute of limitations was exceeded. John Trippo family (talk) 03:54, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Indigenous tattooing

Hi all, I'm considering splitting History of tattooing into a separate article on indigenous and traditional tattooing practices. Given the size of the article, it doesn't feel very readable and I think having a separate page would allow people to expand on the contemporary practices of these traditions. I'm alerting some of the WikiProjects attached to the article; please let me know if you have any concerns or objections to this idea :) ForsythiaJo (talk) 03:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Puyallup people#Requested move 21 February 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Puyallup people#Requested move 21 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:27, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Official name of federally-recognized tribes?

This isn't exactly related to editing, but I was curious: what exactly is the official name of a federally-recognized tribe? For example: I was editing Puyallup Tribe of Indians and, as I understood Puyallup Tribe of Indians to be their official name, changed it at List of federally recognized tribes in the contiguous United States and List of federally recognized tribes by state. I was informed by @Yuchitown that in fact, Puyallup Tribe of the Puyallup Reservation is the name listed on the Federal Registrar, which when I checked to confirm, was true. However, the name used in their constitution is "Puyallup Tribe of Indians," and their reservation is the "Puyallup Indian Reservation" (They also use Puyallup Tribe of the State of Washington once in the name of the constitution). This naturally brings me to the question, what exactly is the "official" name?

In regards to the Puyallup Tribe, the preamble of their constitution states: "We the Indians of the Puyallup Tribe of the Puyallup Reservation of the State of Washington, in order to establish a legal tribal organization and secure certain privileges and powers offered to us by the Indian Reorganization Act of June 18, 1934, do hereby form an authorized tribal council, and ordain and establish this constitution and bylaws as a guide to its deliberations." This is what seems like the origin of the Federal Registrar's name. However, elsewhere in the constitution, the legal entity established by the constitution is called the "Puyallup Tribe of Indians" in full and "Puyallup Tribe" for short. This naming scheme is also used on their website, official communiques, seal, and more. I noticed a similar pattern in a few other constitutions I looked at.

To me, it seems like the preamble is more of an opening clause (who would've thought) whereas the actual articles define the name of the legal entity and the reservation themselves. I'm not a treaty lawyer so I don't really have any formal knowledge about this, anyways. I'm of course not looking to argue since I understand the reason for having the list match the federal registrar, and I think that makes sense, but just for determining the "official" name of a tribe/what to use in articles in the future, I wanted to bring this up for other peoples' opinions/thoughts, and if I am correct in my understanding. Also, why might the Federal Registrar differ so significantly and with so many cases? I assume the tribes themselves submitted that name at one point? Naming like this seems to be a phenomenon in the US, I mean, look at the US Constitution where there is also not an "official" name of the country and, to this day, United States and United States of America are used fairly interchangeably. PersusjCP (talk) 06:01, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:COMMON NAME is usually used instead of the official name, if they are different. Like Minneapolis is officially "City of Minneapolis" but that's not the article title. I would say go with the common name and list out the "legal names" somewhere else in the article. (Even the article title United States isn't the more exact "United States of America").  oncamera  (talk page) 06:49, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
The list of federally recognized tribes always goes verbatim by what the current year’s Federal Registrar says, with redirects pointing to the article. Like oncamera says, articles go by common name. Yuchitown (talk) 17:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Yuchitown

Manifest Destiny

I suggest some eyes on Manifest Destiny. --David Tornheim (talk) 00:24, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

This WikiProject has been mentioned off-wiki

https://moniquill.tumblr.com/post/742520175907176448/

– Chrisahn (talk) 10:32, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Tumblr isn't a reliable source per WP:BLOGS. lol,  oncamera  (talk page) 11:27, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Of course the posting isn't relevant for the main namespace. But it might be relevant for the members of this project. And WP:CANVASS or WP:LEGAL might apply to the posting. — Chrisahn (talk) 11:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Yes, it'll be easier to monitor pages and use this link as a source of their potential disruptive behavior per CANVASS/LEGAL.  oncamera  (talk page) 11:41, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
@Yuchitown, Bohemian Baltimore, and ARoseWolf: Ping, since the posting mentioned you by name. – Chrisahn (talk) 11:34, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
You should also @Pingnova: since their complaint is included in the list of "evidence" against us per the Google Doc  oncamera  (talk page) 12:06, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. I hadn't looked at the Google doc before. @Melissa Ferretti - Chairwoman and Cori Bardsley: are two more editors mentioned there, and there may be others I missed. — Chrisahn (talk) 12:21, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Just adding other usernames mentioned: @Netherzone and CorbieVreccan:  oncamera  (talk page) 13:02, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
@Oncamera, and others here, thank you for notifying me that I was mentioned in this person's Tumblr post. I don't recall ever joining something called the “Native American Articles Improvement Project”, is that even a thing? The only edit I made on Lily Gladstone was to revert a IP block evasion, and one edit on the talk page regarding overlinking. In relation to IPNA, mainly I create articles on contemporary Native American artists as well as some on historic NA arts like Pueblo pottery. I'm not mentioned at all in the Google Doc, nor do I think I should be. I'm wondering why the Tumblr author drew me into this. Netherzone (talk) 14:09, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
I don't think any of us should be mentioned in their article. If they want federal recognition, they can take it up with the government, not blaming Wikipedia articles/smearing editors for following the rules of this site.  oncamera  (talk page) 14:19, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
I agree with you. Netherzone (talk) 14:57, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Just found some discussions that may have been part of what triggered the off-wiki posting (guess I'm slow to figure this out):
Netherzone (talk) 16:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Those are both either the same person as or meatpuppets of TelGonzie, whose former account was active in this discussion. COI SPA promoting and pushing POV that they couldn't substantiate with published, secondary sources; several of their accounts were indefinitely blocked but many more weren't. They'll definitely be back. Yuchitown (talk) 17:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)Yuchitown
Link to the SPI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TelGonzie. Netherzone (talk) 18:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
I didn't link the two discussions. Good catch, @Netherzone. --ARoseWolf 19:12, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
To my knowledge there is not a “Native American Articles Improvement Project” but it sounds like a good idea for a taskforce if the community does that anymore. It doesn't bother me being mentioned. I'm more concerned with the mischaracterizations made. I've never edited most of the articles they mention beyond reversion of clear violations of content policy and calling for discussion rather than edit warring. When those discussions are had I weigh what is being said diligently and thoroughly and make my own determination. I do not automatically side with any position no matter who is involved. I've always honored consensus even if I disagreed. No one here knows how I really feel about subjects because I never push for that. I understand NPOV well enough after a few years of editing and being involved in discussions. The intent is to always collaborate civilly. We've had our disagreements at times, all of us. I don't know how @Pingnova is involved or why they would seemingly encourage canvassing off-wiki to damage the encyclopedia by forcing content that is not reliably sourced and goes against the very tenets of the project. I hope they will respond to the ping as I want to assume good faith because that's how we handle on-wiki disputes. I have never had a specific quarrel with them that I recall. --ARoseWolf 14:37, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you all here for your support. I am very aware that there are fake tribes out there. But Herring Pond is NOT one of them. The saddest part here is that these people who have chosen to violate and murder our history's have done little to no research on the actual Herring Pond (Patuxet) people. We have our genealogy complete, have retained and continue to live on our original reservation lands and have never ceased or ceded our rights to the land, nor have we been removed. I myself have lived on my homelands all my life and grew up in Plymouth - Cedarville raised by an elder of my Tribe the only child in the district with a Herring smoking shed in my back yard.
Let's not confuse our autonomy with extinction.
We've been targeted, all but removed from the Wampanoag page almost completly by people pushing their own agenda and...nowhere does Plymouth and Wampanoag history exist WITHOUT the Herring Pond Tribe! That's a FACT!
Thank you to all of those who have stepped up to fight back and help fix this mess. We'd honestly lost hope and had to just remember that WIKI is not a reliable source as it is clear that any colonized mind can edit and spread misinformation in an attempt to erase an entire community from history.
Wikipedia should be held accountable though as this is not what this site was created for. Goldendragonfly77 (talk) 12:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Where does it say Herring Pond Wampanoag Tribe is extinct or fake?  oncamera  (talk page) 12:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Well our page was created without our knowing and immediately we were named a "cultural heritage group" and a non-profit that "claims" Wampanoag descendancy. There is no claim it's a fact! Might I add nonprofit status was imposed upon Tribal nations in the 90s because we didn't have our federal recognition yet. So although they don't say it it's quite evident that that's what the editors are alluding to.
Sad really! Before they go on a crusade to destroy someone they should at least do the research... Goldendragonfly77 (talk) 13:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
The article isn't alluding to anything, it is just stating information based on sources. Instead of insulting Wikipedia editors, as the Chairwoman of your tribe, maybe go submit your evidence as part of the petition for federal acknowledgment and then the article can be updated once that is resolved.  oncamera  (talk page) 13:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
We've tried only to be ignored until recently...there has been some postive and respectful edits completed in the past few weeks...thanks to those people. We have also submitted and have a large collection of "evidence" that we've submitted that is being updated.
Unfortunately we cannot edit our own content. So we can only hope that others like those kind people trying to add the "evidence" are doing. But anyhow let's hope this bullying stops and we can support one another like our ancestors did. Have a great day Goldendragonfly77 (talk) 13:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
Just put WP:reliable sources on the talkpage and someone can update the article. However, Wikipedia does not allow WP:Original research so your collected evidence doesn't belong on this site unless it's published by a reliable source such as the Boston Globe, government source, etc.  oncamera  (talk page) 13:24, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
YES, Kutâputash we understand. We have not added anything as we were told that it is a conflict to add anything to the page.
..... Frank Speck Indian Notes and Monographs - Territorial Subdivision of Wampanoag...strong evidence there...
1910 Census is pretty clear as well.
Thank you for your message.
With Respect Melissa Goldendragonfly77 (talk) 13:33, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
This conversation should probably take place on Talk:Herring Pond Wampanoag Tribe but if anything there is genuinely factually incorrect, point it out on the talk page. And if there are secondary, published sources (unlike the census, a self-reported primary source) you want to recommend, you can always post those there as well. Yuchitown (talk) 16:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)Yuchitown
Goldendragonfly77, we have been attacked, threatened with legal action, and had misinformation/false claims spread against us for following Wikipedia policy so you'll have to forgive me but what support for your plight I might have given is somewhat diminished. I certainly am not a part of any conspiracy against any tribe or organization. I have been here long enough to know that none of the editors mentioned are part of a conspiracy or plot against any tribe. The only bullying that is happening right now on Wikipedia is coming from outside this community.
I understand the motive but the means to get ones way is misguided. Off-wiki blog's can be written on anything. Off-wiki opinion pieces can be published attacking anyone. But that won't work on the encyclopedia. Activism has no place here when its means is to hurt people who are simply volunteering their time. It is very sad. Sad that people outside Wikipedia have resorted to making false statements about volunteers who are paid nothing and have followed all policies and guidelines to improve the encyclopedia. We can not control the fact that the federal government has only given certain tribes recognition. Likewise, we have no control over what reliable sources say or do not say about any tribe. We are bound by rules of inclusion that could lead to sanctions against us if not followed. This encyclopedia works off collaborative editing and consensus. We can not go against community consensus. --ARoseWolf 15:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for looping me into this conversation. I don't have access to the Google Doc and haven't requested access, so I'm not entirely sure the scope of how I'm involved. Are my edits being criticized by this individual? If so, I'd more than happy to review anything I've written for clarity and accuracy. There were a few editing conflicts between me and @Yuchitown sometime last year, however, I believe we ultimately came to a middle ground in wording. Cori Bardsley (talk) 03:59, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
A link to the tumblr post was shared on Bluesky and got a few hundred likes and reposts. — Chrisahn (talk) 12:25, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
I guess they don't want WP:RS, WP:V to matter. According to their position we should just let any subject of an article on Wikipedia, whether person or organization, claim to be Native American with no evidence because the US federal government says it's too difficult to determine. If there is irrefutable and undeniable proof one would think with today's technology someone would have published it and we could easily link to that as a reliable source. State resolutions are not a binding agreement. They are more than welcome to try and get me blocked from editing these pages for simply holding every subject to the same basic Wikipedia policy in good faith and without edit warring. IAR can not apply to everything. --ARoseWolf 12:51, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
The writer Darcie Little Badger (a member of an unrecognized "Lipan Apache" group) has also posted about this on Instagram. Does anybody have the link? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Probably just in her stories which disappear after 24 hours.  oncamera  (talk page) 20:04, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Maybe I should add that I have no opinion on the subject itself (ethnicity). I started this section to notify editors of the tumblr posting. I don't agree with the posting. Its tone is rather aggressive and accusatory, and if it had been posted on-wiki, it would clearly violate WP:AGF, WP:NPA, WP:LEGAL, and other policies and guidelines. In general, I think such campaigns do more harm than good. – Chrisahn (talk) 13:36, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Do you have thoughts on in-wiki responses? If anyone were actually paying attention, they would see that we all have our own diverse perspectives on subjects but are primarily trying to get POV/SPA users to comply with Wikipedia policy—mainly using secondary, published sources. Yuchitown (talk) 15:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)Yuchitown
IIRC, isn't the whole reason Lily Gladstone's lede didn't say she was Blackfeet because there were no reliable sources to say she was an enrolled member of any tribe, just that she was of Blackfeet/Nez Perce descent? I don't think anyone here thinks she's not Blackfeet ethnically/culturally, even if she isn't a citizen, right? It's just per MOS:CITIZEN, right? Which is why it was put in literally the next sentence? Also, I can't see the google doc for some reason so I don't know what else they are using as evidence. PersusjCP (talk) 19:30, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
They must have made it private for whatever reason. I downloaded a copy earlier and I can reupload or paste in my sandbox.  oncamera  (talk page) 20:08, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
I would love that PersusjCP (talk) 21:55, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Here is the uploaded PDF on tiiny site (version downloaded at 6am on 2/23/2024). They demand Wikipedia ban us all for asking for reliable sources and questioning IP editors on their COI. Basically, we should be banned for following the rules of this site.  oncamera  (talk page) 10:12, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
This is a pretty good conspiracy theory, with zero foundation in reality. The vagueness on which groups are actually state-recognized tribes, when they are affected by federal law (IACA), is a real-world problem facing agencies like IACB, HUD, etc. I can attest that I'm not a member of NCAI. Just because we independently pay attention to what's happening in Indian Country doesn't mean we are collectively orchestrating anything. In the early days of Wikipedia, many users got away with writing whatever they wanted on less trafficked articles, (prime example), but requiring citations has now become standard across the board. Yuchitown (talk) 16:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)Yuchitown

Misinformation on Hill Agency (game) page

Hey, I'm one of the devs for the game Hill Agency and there's a bit of misinformation on it's page.(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_Agency%3A_PURITYdecay)

  • Tara Miller is not a director and left the project before development started in 2019. They were the original artist on the original 2D protype PURITYdecay, but had no part in the development of the game that launched in 2023.
  • Meagan is the only director of the studio.
  • Kanienʼkehá꞉ka (Mohawk) artist Sa'dekaronhes Esquivel has been Lead Artist and Co-Creative Lead on the game from the start of 3D pre-development in 2020 until it's completion and launch in 2023.

Sorry for asking this way, no one on the team uses/edits Wiki. Thanks for your help on this! The team is really stoked for Hill Agency to have it's own wiki page! 135.23.42.71 (talk) 22:26, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

I believe I corrected it! It looks like it was citing an older source (a 2017 article) for that information. Dr.was (talk) 13:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Indigenous_peoples_of_North_America/Archive_26&oldid=1226104239"