Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America

The template for “Anishinaabe Culture” divided into two templates: "Anishinaabe Culture" and "Anishinaabe Politics"

IMO, these are separate topics. For the former I edited the existing template including creating more groups. For the latter I just did a copy and paste onto a new template thus it needs much additional work. --Denise B-K (talk)

Was someone looking for Herb Roe?

Doug Weller talk 16:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

He’s be a help with Mardi Gras Indians but doesn’t appear to be active here anymore. Yuchitown (talk) 10:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Freedmen capitalization

I believe "Cherokee Freedmen" should be capitalized. As of now, several articles and categories related to Freedmen are uncapitalized. See: Category:Native American freedmen. The Oklahoma Historical Society says that Freedmen should be capitalized. Looking for other sources. The Cherokee Nation's website capitalizes Freedmen. Pinging @User:Stormshadows00, so we can have the discussion here. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 06:57, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good. There are enough examples in scholarly literature of Cherokee Freedmen, Muscogee Freedmen, Chickasaw Freedmen, etc. being capitalized to back it up. Yuchitown (talk) 16:27, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand why you brought it up here when the issue is already on the talk page for several days now. I made it a point to add it there immediately to get some form of general consensus among editors on moving it as this is a move done to a page that had the title for 18 years+ with no Wikipedia naming conventions being broken since. OkHistory's page is literally a recent design and does have its own glossary now for its resources, but that's not really "they said it should be capitalized". It's their own determination/preference on that as plenty others choose to or not to with only Cherokee capitalized (as freedmen is a universal term for more than just the Five Tribes related). Just like "tribal freedmen", "Cherokee freedmen" and "Cherokee Freedmen" have been used interchangeably by sources and so on. Same with other freedmen. Even participants in the controversy have done so like [Vann's letter] to Congress with no capitalization and so on. Stormshadows00 (talk) 23:28, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

CFD: Category:American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 30#Category:American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent.

This again, but at least we got a break for several weeks from the endless Wiki discussions about Native American identity. Yuchitown (talk) 16:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Categories for discussion

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_October_8#North_American_Indigenous_categories, moving categories to capitalized Indigenous. Yuchitown (talk) 23:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

43 additional categories proposed for deletion re: NA identity

Forty three additional WP:IPNA-relevant categories regarding Native American identity have been proposed for deletion. Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 15#Category:American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent. Please consider participating in these discussions. Netherzone (talk) 11:36, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Native News Online (media/news source)

There is a discussion regarding Native News Online that may be of interest to participants of this project. Discussion located here: Talk:Native News Online#Notability. Notifying IPNA members who have recently edited the article: @Yuchitown, @Bohemian Baltimore. Additional eyes and improvements to the article are welcome. – Netherzone (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this article. I wish people would just take a break from trying to erase Indigenous voices from this platform. Yuchitown (talk) 14:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

These calls for deletion right around Indigenous Peoples' Day in the U.S. is an odd coincidence. Netherzone (talk) 14:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Lots of anti-Indigenous brigading on social media that day. Yuchitown (talk) 15:08, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Native American leaders

There is a category titled Category:Native American leaders and also a category titled Category:Titles and offices of Native American leaders. I'm not clear what the distinction is here. Maybe a merger or rename might clarify things? Or perhaps the content needs to be sorted better? Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 16:35, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

It looks like "Titles and offices of Native American leaders" is for the titles and offices that were traditional or that are defined in formally organized tribes of the 20th and 21st centuries, while "Native American leaders" includes the people who have held such titles and offices. It can be a bit confusing, because we sometimes know of a Native American leader only by the name of the position held, as in Urriparacoxi. Even widely known names can be ambiguous. Osceola's name is an Anglicization of Asi-yahola, which was the title of a role he played, "sacred-drink caller", i.e., the one who went around calling summoning eligible men to participate in the ceremonial drinking of Yaupon tea. But, in many cases, we can separate the name of a leader from the title of the leadership position, and I think there is valid use for both categories. Donald Albury 18:06, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, people love categorizing everything! I don't see what purpose it serves, but it's well-populated so may as well leave as is. Yuchitown (talk) 18:19, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Okay. I moved some of the categories for chiefs into the Native American leaders category, for clarity. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 19:30, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Continued harassment

Numerous individuals signed a letter to the Wikimedia Board of Trustees complaining about Wikipedia editors and making diverse accusations at linktr.ee/supportNACWA (the link is on Wikipedia's Black List, so you'll have to cut and paste). Bernard Barcena of the Lipan Apache Tribe of Texas and Melissa Ferretti of the Herring Pond Wampanoag Tribe wrote individual complaints as well. Yuchitown (talk) 17:38, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't know what happened in 2019, so can't comment on that. I can say there is no conspiracy; many editors who have edited pages of state-recognized tribes and unrecognized organizations aren't even part of WP INPA. I'm well-versed on the complexity of Native identity and the nature of Native American tribes and unrecognized organizations and back my content up with secondary, published citations.

Perhaps more experienced editors and administrators from the greater Wikipedia community can help convince these individuals that this is an encyclopedia and controversial content needs to be cited. An individual doesn't get to own an article about their organization to promote its POV. Citations from a group's own website, other self-published writing, or Facebook cannot be used to cite controversial edits.

Indigenous identity is a controversial and contested topic in real life. Like any encyclopedia, Wikipedia covers controversial topics. I'm sure acupuncturists don't appreciate it that the acupuncture article calls it "quackery" in its opening paragraph.

Everyone is welcome to edit regardless of their background; however, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest editing is problematic. The only individual prevented from editing are those who have been blocked due to egregious breaking of Wikipedia protocols, such as sockpuppetry.

In real life – not Wikipedia – Native Americans need to prove their identity constantly. We have to show our CDIB cards to access Indian Health Services. We have to show our tribal IDs to vote, to access tribal housing, to apply for Indian-preference hiring, to apply to certain tribal colleges, to apply for certain grants earmarked for Native Americans, to exhibit and sell artwork as a Native American, to prove our Native American status in the Healthcare Marketplace, to register our tribal license plates, to obtain hunting permits, etc. The idea that Native identity is accepted without question is demonstratively false.

I agree that Native topics should be treated like all others, which means reliable sources. I would like the larger Wikimedia community to learn about Native topics and place more of these state-recognized tribe and unrecognized organization articles on their watchlists.

You'll note that established tribes articles don't generate controversy. I wish this kind of time and energy could be applied to topics in Indian Country on Wikipedia. Yuchitown (talk) 17:56, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I question that you "back [your] content up with secondary, published citations" considering what you are advocating for in the in the Norby BLP Noticeboard and Self-identify categories CfD discussions, where many users have noted articles you and other IPNA members edit are full of OR and BLP violations which do not rely on RL like secondary sources, and frequently outright contradict RL. I agree I wish Wikipedians understood more about Native people, but if we are going to treat Native people equally that also means we adhere to sourcing and BLP rules, especially to avoid things like libel lawsuits against Wikipedia. And to adhere to academic integrity in general. Publishing things on Wikipedia that RL sources do not say isn't appropriate, and clearly these tribes have noticed they are treated differently on wikipedia than everyone else based on their race, ethnicity, and citizenship. Many users are not part of IPNA because it is used to promote OR and BLP violations - why would someone who cares about an accurate and quality encyclopedia that fairly and expertly covers Native topics put themselves under a banner that champions the opposite? It is also not harrassment for the tribes to contact the WMF with their concerns, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons says at the top of the page "If you have a complaint about a biography of a living person, and you wish to contact the Wikimedia Foundation, see contact us." This is standard Wikipedia process, especially if you don't want them contributing to their own pages. Pingnova (talk) 18:39, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

You'll note that everyone here complied with the consensus reached in the discussion. I do not participate in original research on Wikipedia. Yes, spreading conspiracy theories on websites is harrassment. Yuchitown (talk) 18:54, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

What conspiracy theory are you talking about? If it's the OR and BLP concerns editors have with you and IPNA, I included two links above about that, so it is certainly not a conspiracy theory. And a letter signed by official tribal and organization reps sent specifically to WMF per standard Wikipedia process is also not a conspiracy theory nor harrassment. Pingnova (talk) 19:06, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

We, the undersigned sovereign Native nations have been targeted by a distinct group of Wikipedia users who are enabled and protected by the administrative structure of Wikipedia. These users push a harmful fringe agenda that redefines Native people in a way that differs from both Wikipedia’s standards on ethnic identity and institutions which have authority in the area of Native identity like the United Nations, the United States federal government, and Native tribes and institutions themselves. ...

Since 2019 these agendist users have openly flaunted Wikipedia standards of verification and identity by using original research and synthesis to create a harmful litmus test for which Wikipedia subjects are considered Indigenous Americans and First Nations (Indigenous Canadian) individuals or nations. These assessments are not supported by any form of scholarship, nor by the field of Indian Law, which is the usual forum for questions of legal Native identity.

The system these users invented implements a form of digital genocide that erases Native people by falsely labeling individuals and tribes as “self-identifying,” implying that these real Native people are “pretendians” or fake Natives and treating all Native people with suspicion by default. Most of these users appear to be ideologically aligned with a fringe and extreme political group called the Tribal Alliance Against Frauds (TAAF), a self-published primary source they sometimes reference in Wikipedia articles on targeted tribes and individuals.

Yuchitown (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

This is pretty much the same stuff as in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America/Archive 26#This WikiProject has been mentioned off-wiki, isn't it? I didn't look into the details and I'm not involved in this project / subject, so please correct me if I'm mistaken. Or just ignore my comment. Or whatever. :-) — Chrisahn (talk) 00:41, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

You're correct. Same talking points, just with more fervor. Yuchitown (talk) 01:33, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Two of the named individuals resigned their sysop rights under a cloud and one additional editor marked themselves as "retired" during an ArbCom case in 2023 over suspected meatpuppetry. Combining that with the damning evidence presented in AN around topics within IPNA scope suggest that previous discussions may be subjected to interference and that some editors' voices were shut out of the very conversation which impacts their identity. And sidebar for a moment, I know that the conversation is more towards Americans, but for Indigenous Canadians, Superior Court of Canada had ruled that Non-status Indian have equal rights as those with status. Yet the essay on "Determining Native American and Indigenous Canadian identities" only mentions it in passing on the second-last sentence of this 4900+ words page. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 14:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Skimmed the Tumblr posts when they were initially released, but I don't recall them naming Mark Ironie. Indigenous Girl wasn't accused of anything specifically. No one was blocked; they were just fed up. I don't know how "damning" anything is. Seems like if you want to suggest an edit to WP:NDNID, that talk page would be better. Yuchitown (talk) 03:19, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Traditional ecological knowledge and traditional knowledge discussion at WP:FTN

There is a thread at the Fringe Theories Noticeboard about the articles traditional ecological knowledge and traditional knowledge that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Please consider joining the discussion. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 00:48, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Métis Nation of Ontario

What is the official status of the Métis Nation of Ontario within Canada? The article claims it is officially recognized by the Canadian government, but that is unclear to me. The claim that this group descends from the Red River Métis is sourced from the website of the organization itself, so not a reliable source. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 01:46, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

R v Powley https://www.canada.ca/en/crown-indigenous-relations-northern-affairs/news/2023/02/recognizing-and-implementing-metis-nation-self-government-in-ontario.html Moxy🍁 01:54, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Move proposal

Talk:List of organizations that self-identify as Native American tribes#Requested move 25 October 2024. Yuchitown (talk) 00:43, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Education project

A class will be editing some articles related to this project (see Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Linn_Benton_Community_College/Introduction_to_Indigenous_North_America_(Fall_2024)). I'm sure they will appreciate any help we can give them. Donald Albury 19:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Right on! I always wish they'd pick smaller, more neglected topics than the huge, main ones, but more eyes are always helpful. Yuchitown (talk) 20:29, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Too true! So many little articles are stubs or could badly use a rewrite! PersusjCP (talk) 23:41, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Self-identification

I don't believe I'm allowed to comment at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Discussion_concerning_Bohemian_Baltimore, but obviously there's been a concerted effort to remove any use of variations of terms relating to "self-identification" in relation to Native American identity on Wikipedia. My understanding is this term is offensive in LGBTQ+ communities in the context of gender, sex, and sexual oritentation. However, "self-identification" is widely used in published literature about Native American identity, which is fundamentally a collective identity, not an individual identity. Unfortunately, the mainstream public has a massive knowledge gap about what Native American tribes are today or what Native American identity constitutes, which is why published citations from informed sources are so necessary. The phenomenon of non-Native people mistakenly or falsely claiming Native identity is so widespread in the United States that entire books and academic journals have been written about it (and are widely cited throughout Wikipedia). Several are cited in Cherokee descent#Reasons for self-identification without citizenship or social recognition. This is just background context.

The term self-identification does not mean "fraud". It means exactly how the Merriam-Webster defines it, "identification with someone or something outside oneself" [1]. When an individual makes a statement of Indigenous identity, they have self-identified. (Sometimes people eligible to enroll as tribal citizens do not self-identify; that is possible.) I'm going to list examples of the use of the term in secondary, published literature about Native American identity below. I truly wish people who want to police Native American articles would read some of the widely available scholarly literature about Native American identity and tribes. Yuchitown (talk) 15:16, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

• "To be or not to be American: Statehood and Peoplehood in Native American Self-identification during the Self-determination era"
• "American Indian casinos and the Rise of Self-Identification"
• "An examination of self-identity, sense of connection, and membership of individuals with Native American ancestry"
• "Self-Identification in Black, Red, Brown, and White: A Clarion Call to Address Medical Racism in Native American Communities"
• "The expression 'self-identified Indian' is sometimes used to refer to anyone who does not satisfy the requirements specifically of legal definitions."[2]
• "A Native American may not self-identify as American Indian if he/she is currently not in a position to contribute to the tribe."Native Americans & HIV
• "Vizenor's, on the other hand, was published in 1988, in the midst of a Native American renewal that has seen a threefold increase in the number of self-identified Native Americans in recent decades." American Indian Persistence and Resurgence
• "The cultural significance of the current numbers, and the various social, political, and methodological reasons for the dramatic increase in self-identification as Native American will, no doubt, continue to be an object of considerable interest." Defining Native American
• "There is considerable variation and fluidity in how multiracial, Hispanic, and Native Americans self-identify, as well as how they are classified by others." Establishing the Demonimator: The Challenges of Measuring Multiracial, Hispanic, and Native American Populations
• "This has placed a substantial burden on definitions for legal purposes and tribal affiliation and on American Indians trying to self-identify within multiple cultural contexts." American Indian Identity and Blood Quantum in the 21st Century: A Critical Review. Yuchitown (talk) 15:30, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

  Oh good grief! @Yuchitown, maybe you could ask one of the Arb clerks if it's OK to post there or ask on the talk page Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement if you can provide this evidence/examples/sources and/or make a comment. Netherzone (talk) 17:11, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

  • "Self-Identification is an Exercise of Self-Determination", U.S. Department of the Interior
  • Indian Issues: Federal Funding for Non-Federally Recognized Tribes (2012), "Non-federally recognized tribes fall into two distinct categories: (1) state-recognized tribes that are not also federally recognized and (2) other groups that self-identify as Indian tribes but are neither federally nor state recognized."
  • Fresh Five: Native Plants, "Indigenous peoples in the US generally self-identify as tribes, though some groups use nation or band."
  • "In A New Borderlands World: Indigenous Rationales for Supporting Early Mission Communities", p. 235, "Despite this, many Native political organizations and communities in Massachusetts self-identify as tribes today."

  Yuchitown (talk) 22:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  Great additions, @Yuchitown to the roster of sources. Here are some others that may be useful to the project that are from the NA law draft I'm working on (sorry for any duplicates). Links are in footnotes

  Identification

  • Indigenous identity, being, and belonging
  • Native American identity in the United States
  • Warren, Trump, and the Question of Native American Identity, (Harvard Law Review)
  • Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (1978)

  Tribes are sovereign governments (nations), not racial classifications

  • Tribes are governments, not racial classification, ,
  • Morton v. Mancari [3],
  • Native American Tribal Enrollment [4]
  • Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez

  Citizenship

  • Native American Citizenship [5]
  • The Politics of Inclusion: Indigenous Peoples and U.S. Citizenship, by Rebecca Tsosie (UCLA Law Review) [6]
  • Native American identity in the United States
  • Determining Native American and Indigenous Canadian identities (WP:IPNA essay)

References

• • Netherzone (talk) 00:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Category:Seneca clans has been nominated for merging and renaming to Category:Iroquois clans

Category:Seneca clans, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for merging and renaming to Category:Iroquois clans. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. 69.159.15.16 (talk) 09:38, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Native American and First Nations law resources

I have added a new section in our IPNA main page on Native American and First Nations law resources with subsections for the U.S. and Canada. Wikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America#Native American and First Nations law resources These resources may prove helpful to participants of this project in finding and researching Indian law and legal issues regarding tribal recognition, citizenship, enrollment, repatriation, environmental justice issues and sacred places protection. This is just a start, please feel free to add to the list of resources. Netherzone (talk) 20:42, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Brilliant! Thank you so much. Yuchitown (talk) 02:28, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I went ahead and started a user page draft in preparation to create a list article: User:Netherzone/List_of_Native_American_and_First_Nations_law_resources - Feel free to contribute to it!

It would be wonderful if interested participants and members of this WikiProject help to improve it before it's moved to article space. I've just begun to scratch the surface of this vast topic, there is so much more to add. These resources are useful for research, article improvements and in seeking consensus on content disputes.

Also wondering if there should be two list articles, one for Native American, Native Hawaiian and Native Alaskan, and another for First Nations. Any feedback or thoughts are welcome. Netherzone (talk) 16:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Yamasee

Is this, used more than once, an RS?[7] Doug Weller talk 16:12, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

The page cites Hodge (1906), and I have trouble reconciling parts of the page's narrative with what I remember reading elsewhere about the Yamasee. Off hand, I would rather draw on more recent scholarly work on the Yamasee than Hodge. My impression is that "Yamasee" may have been used at different times to refer to varying groups of people, and that their origins are unclear. I am not impressed by the evidence that they originally spoke a Muskogean language. Donald Albury 17:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/US Mountain West/2024-11-12

quick-link: https://meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd

A discussion item of particular interest to this WikiProject's scope (continental, not just regional) will be about metawiki:North American Wikimedians/Hub founding. Arlo James Barnes 01:24, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Kanawha people

This article started out as a bad middle-school grade essay in 2008 [8] when the article was titled "Kanawha Valley's Prehistoric people" and hasn't changed much since. In September, the article was moved to Kanawha people. I've nominated it for deletion as I cannot find any sources discussing this as a coherent topic. Passing non-scholarly references like [9] suggest that a "Kanawha" group may have existed as a distinct people during the early colonial period, but this appears to be entirely different to the original topic of the article, and searching on scholar hasn't brought up anything significant. The input of people with expertise on Native American topics would be appreciated. Thanks. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Tribal council (United States)

I just stumbled upon Tribal council (United States) which was uncited and very precursory. I flagged it for cleanup and added two citations. Would anyone care to add anything to it? Or should it just be deleted? Yuchitown (talk) 19:54, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Overhill Cherokee

Overhill Cherokee has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 22:29, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Reservation map

The best reservation map on Wikimedia Commons, File:Indian reservations in the Continental United States.png needs updating. It was created by User:Presidentman, who is still active, so I left a message on their talk page. Besides the five SE tribes, the Miami, Ottawa, Peoria, Quapaw, and Wyandotte nations had their reservations reaffirmed in court, and I updated Indian reservation to include those. (Apparently, that leaves out the Eastern Shawnee, Modoc, Seneca-Cayuga, and Shawnee Tribe.) Then courts ruled the Osage Nation's and the Cheyenne-Arapaho's reservations were disestablished. My understanding is McGirt only covers criminal jurisdiction but paves the way for other ramifications by ruling that the reservations were not disestablished. Were any other reservations ruled to not be disestablished post-McGirt? User:TulsaPoliticsFan, do you know about this? Yuchitown (talk) 16:35, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

@Yuchitown, I make a living in Oklahoma writing about the McGirt decision so I know a little bit. I think those 10 are the ones that have been recognized as never disestablished in Oklahoma so far. There are still court cases working in the state court system (where the reservations other than the Muscogee have been recognized) so that list can change (the most likely candidates to be recognized are the "Northeast Nine" as we call them in Oklahoma. A lot of them have already been recognized). The Osage reservation will likely eventually be found intact by federal courts, but that is a few years out if it does happen. As a general rule, most tribes in the former Oklahoma Territory reservations were explicitly disestablished by Congress, while most tribes in the former Indian Territory were never disestablished (But not a hard and fast rule).

Whether McGirt just applies to criminal jurisdiction is up in the air. Generally, there is no "criminal jurisdiction reservation" or "civil jurisdiction reservation" there are just the jurisdiction rules for reservations. However, Oklahoma courts are very resistant to the civil jurisdiction implications of McGirt so the state courts have been less likely to recognize civil jurisdiction. So in the short term, yes McGirt is only criminal, but long term the implications will almost certainly be civil as well unless the U.S. Supreme Court changes the federal Indian law rules. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for that detailed information! I'd like to try to update the reservation map, and perhaps the Oklahoma reservations can be just made a different color than the others. Glad that you believe the Osage Nation's reservations will like be recognized eventually. Yuchitown (talk) 16:39, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Template:Lakota people

This new template seems extremely problematic (arbitrary choices of individuals to include, representations of Lakota people and culture by non-Lakota people (like Crazy Horse Memorial), and could likely benefit from more contributors. Yuchitown (talk) 04:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

I think they probably mean the Indian University at Crazy Horse memorial, but I didn't think it's specific to just Lakota people so probably should be there anyway.  oncamera  _{(talk page)} 15:30, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

If you could look over the template, that'd be awesome. Yuchitown (talk) 15:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

You should just delete the things you want removed rather than make it a discussion. WP:BOLD  oncamera  _{(talk page)} 16:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on Lakota people. Yuchitown (talk) 18:39, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Relevant discussion at Conflict of Interest noticeboard

Hi, Just a brief note to inform members of this project about a discussion currently taking place at the conflict of interest noticeboard (here [10]). The issue discussed relates to the article for the Mount Tabor Indian Community, which has written primarily by the founder of that community (JC Thompson). Concerns have also been raised that Thompson may have been pursuing an agenda in other related articles.

Any assistance from members of this project would be greatly appreciated, whether in relation to views on the nature of the article content and conflict of interest, or participation in any subsequent clean up.

Kind regards, Axad12 (talk) 12:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Rolling Thunder (person)

New editor whitewashing (agh, maybe a bad term?) this article, see [11] see edit summaries, eg " Rolling Thunder's work in the public eye does not justify Oxford Universities sociological dissection of his character, life long work, nor his family tree and bloodline. Our traditional nations and people endorse Rolling Thunder as a respected Medicine Man and look to administer the necessary means to reinforce our elders and traditional people through holistic education. Spurce: Citizen of the" (I wonder how that last bit was meant to finish). Doug Weller talk 10:06, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

That article always has some random account trying to whitewash it. Not sure if it's the same editors or what.  oncamera  _{(talk page)} 14:39, 20 December 2024 (UTC)