Talk:Lumber River

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject United States / North Carolina (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Rivers  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers 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.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Inappropriate Subject Matter[edit]

Why does this article (about a river) lean so much towards whether or not there are Indian people living along it today? I hope the moderators will read the discussion on the "Lumbee Article' and recognize that this is a political issue which is under serious debate and that it does not belong in this article. The "Lumber River" page should be about the "Lumber River" and its past; not about political agendas "for or against" whether there are legitimate Native American populations living along it today.

If this is not removed; the content of this article could become highly contested and stray completely of course as to the subject matter it should be covering (which is not the highly controversial Lumbee debate.....which there is a separate page for!). Bobby Hurt (talk) 20:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the inappropriate content from the article. If anyone feels the need to restore it; please logically justify how it is relevant on this page beforehand. Thankyou.Bobby Hurt (talk) 21:29, 8 December 2010 (UTC)