Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America (Rated NA-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Aboriginal peoples, and related indigenous peoples of North America 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.
 NA  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Progress report on assessment[edit]

Anishinaabe traditional beliefs[edit]

Has a virtually empty section saying the main article is Medicine Societies - have we actually got a relevant article? Dougweller (talk) 17:42, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Yakama Indian Reservation[edit]

Apparently one of the most populous in the US, but the box give one third the population that the text does, supposedly from the same census. Needs to be updated and footnoted anyway. — kwami (talk) 23:06, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Go for it, glad you noticed that. Feel free to fix! Montanabw(talk) 04:58, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

New old images[edit]

Commons has a number of newly uploaded old images related to the subject of this project at [1]. Many are uncategorized and might find a use in various articles. Rmhermen (talk) 03:43, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Had a look through them; some of the terms used in titles are a bit embarrassing.... "Nootka belle", "Siwash woman and child" (at least it didn't say "squaw", though)..... the Cowichan Warrior one is pretty cool, but I'd hesitate to know which ethno page to put it on in case the individual in question isn't from one of the seven groups forming today's Cowichan Tribes band government, and not Halalt or Penelakut or Malahat or another Cowichan people who are not part of that band (whose name really infers "tribes in the Cowichan Valley" rather than Cowichan as a people-name). Main comment here, though, is that quite often indigenous and other editors opine that there is too much emphasis places on individuals and lifestyles of bygone times, i.e. on band government articles, instead of pictures of modern life and individuals; so all these should be used judiciously; I'm fairly familiar with the Commons category-names so will have a go at categorizing them soon.Skookum1 (talk) 07:09, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:List_of_people_of_African-American_and_Native_American_admixture#Requested_move[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List_of_people_of_African-American_and_Native_American_admixture#Requested_move. Thanks. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

New stub: American Indian creationism[edit]

Just started this after finding it as a red link. It's a pretty tiny stub but there are numerous sources and I hope we can build it into a decent article and keep it NPOV, which will need collaboration. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 09:44, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Greek article about someone who recently died[edit]

I stumbled across el:Έντουαρντ_Άντριου_Χάρτζο which is about an indigenous person of the Americas who apparently died last month, but I havent been able to determine who it is. The name translates as 'Edward Andrew Hartz'. A helpful snippet of translated text is "He was a member of the 4th Signal Battalion 4th Infantry Division of the U.S. and for the services rendered to their country decorated by the Congress in November 2013 together with a further 32 representatives of Indian tribes. For his contribution to the Allied victory was awarded two more times, and after the war he worked as a teacher." If all this is true, it seems English Wikipedia should have an article about him (and others decorated recently in November). I slapped tags on the Greek article, and did leave a note with the author el:Συζήτηση_χρήστη:ΑΝώΔυΝος#Έντουαρντ Άντριου Χάρτζο, who does also edit here on enwp occasionally so @ΑΝώΔυΝος: it would be good to have your input also. John Vandenberg (chat) 01:50, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

O.K. I'll fix it as soon as possible, kind regards, --ΑΝώΔυΝος (talk) 14:16, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
I think the article is about Edmund Harjo, the Seminole Code Talker. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:25, 28 May 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi
That's right, but I've already created an article here. Please check and correct name, if necessary. Kind regards, --ΑΝώΔυΝος (talk) 13:30, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Turns out Edmond Harjo already had a fairly decent, cited article. Have redirected. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:45, 29 May 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Cherokee Tribe of Northeast Alabama[edit]

Hello. Could knowledgeable person or persons please comment at Talk:Cherokee_Tribe_of_Northeast_Alabama, regarding how/if an article about a tribe with limited recognition should discuss that issue? Many thanks --LukeSurl t c 15:27, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Actually this one looks good because it focuses on the group itself. Typically the problems arise when a group doesn't talk about itself but instead is trying to bolster uncited, spurious connections to historical groups. -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:26, 15 May 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Thanks for the comment. The question isn't about whether the article should exist, but whether the Cherokee Nation's dismissal of the group should be mentioned in the lead alongside the State (but not Federal)-level recognition. --LukeSurl t c 14:14, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Of course it should.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 14:20, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Chickamauga Wars article title[edit]

There is a move request discussion on the title of the Chickamauga Wars (1776–94) article at Talk:Chickamauga Wars (1776–94) if you care to participate. —  AjaxSmack  03:56, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Native American religion[edit]

We have a tendentious editor on Native American religion, who is reverting and degrading the article by using bad sourcing (blogs, unsourced webpages), re-adding bad sources that are cut, reverting other editors to re-establish bare URLs as sources, and adding heavily repetitive text. Editor is taking all improvements as "attacks" or something, and reverting, but staying under 3RR. More eyes may help stop it from going to the tendentious editor board. Problematic editor has been blocked for sockpuppeting in past. - CorbieV 23:28, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Will look. That said, one problem with Native American materials is that a lot of "scholarly" sources are hogwash and some of these blogs and informal web pages are actually accurate, just poorly done. Solid raw URLs can be quickly fixed with reflinks (see "Tools" tab off my user page). But crap editing is crap editing and socking needs to be slapped. I'll see what I think Montanabw(talk) 02:49, 19 May 2014 (UTC) Follow up:I"m OK with the version of Moxy's last edit; some of the material that other editor is trying to add has a point, but it's being put poorly, with overly emotional phrasing and bad sourcing, IMHO. Montanabw(talk) 02:55, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
That whole general area of content is fraught with "bad titles" which are OR or appropriative/misrepresentative in nature, e.g. Category:Haida gods/Category:Haida deities, Category:Kwakwaka'wakw mythology and a lot of that does come from so-called scholarly sources, which as MontanaBW often notes are bunk, and regarded as such by native peoples. Imposing European ideas of deity and "mythology" is very much {{systemic bias}} but as much as the issue does get raised for dealing with, things go on as if normal (when not really acceptable and often very OR, as in naming Sisiutl, a spirit-being, as a "god" and also writing it from the Kwakwaka'wakw context when the word itself is Skwxwu7mesh in origin. So much bunk out there, and yes, quite often COI band/people sites, which are near-invariably POV about history, are where accurate information comes from. The Wikipedia "thing" against using blogs as information sources is also a systemic bias, whether about this kind of stuff or e.g. politics or corporatism.Skookum1 (talk) 04:13, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Any suggestions how you would fix this without raising greater problems? How would we distinguish between those sites which are accurate and those which are not? Dougweller (talk) 08:20, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Maybe a whitelist/blacklist situation, and greylist for those which are POV but contain facts not seen anywhere else? The hurdle is persuading those who "run" (or presume to) WPRS and WPV or police/wikicop them at RMs/CfDs that some blogs are OK; it would be handy to have a "certified by IPNA list" or some such; one comment I have been seeing a lot of unpublished theses around lately, and not sure how to treat that....unless the thesis is web-published maybe....... the same situation re the validity of blogs vs so-called "reliable" sources i.e. the mainstream media for the most part, is the bias in the latter and often complete fabrication of facts and ongoing editorializing; this applies not just to native affairs but politics in general. In BC, the only really reliable political news is from independent reporters and independent papers, for example. Per native "blogs", this one http://www.dickshovel.com/two.html and its second page http://www.dickshovel.com/two2.html are absorbing reads, and cited....but probably not acceptable to RS-cops in all their all-too-oft severity.Skookum1 (talk) 12:10, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
the gods/deities/mythology thing I've used Transformer (spirit-being) instead of "immense shape shifting creature" as was in Camchin.Skookum1 (talk) 12:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Coyote (mythology) seems particularly "weak", and used to be maybe Coyote (trickster) or Coyote (spirit); the "mythology" dab there now is probably because of the existence of the "mythology" cats/paradigm......a wiki-compromise/equivocation that, like so many, fails in validity and context.Skookum1 (talk) 12:20, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Masters' and Doctoral theses have been used as RS in the past on other articles, I'd say they can be defended if they have good sourcing themselves, evidence of review by professorial types and such. Montanabw(talk) 17:24, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

After they have been submitted, they are regarded as being published. -Uyvsdi (talk) 18:15, 19 May 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Masters theses are sometimes relatively trivial papers. It would have to be exceptional for me to be happy with it - perhaps the sole piece of work for the degree (ie no exams, just the paper), and that's just for starters. I've seen enough of them to know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talkcontribs) 18:51, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Here, I'd say the quality of the research is what counts, particularly if they did things like interview tribal elders or spiritual leaders, that sort of thing. Montanabw(talk) 19:41, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Coast Salish defensive sites is an example of an article spawned by one paper and it seems two of the sources used for that paper; the old title of that page was identical to that of the paper; it's about one location in the lowermost Fraser Canyon; not all Coast Salish defensive sites. Salishan oral literature started similarly, with only Skwxwu7mesh and Selisch (Montana Salish) as elements; its title has also been changed from the original; "oral literature" to me is a mild oxymoron; Salish oral tradition is "safer" and more authentic; I haven't had time to add various other-tribe materials to it due to....never mind. Like the other, it's an omnibus title with particularist content. On the other hand, one of the best pieces of modern writing on the Fraser Canyon War is a master's thesis in geography from, I think, UVic, and in its preamble discusses the interesting chasm between US and Canadian sources on the shared history of the Pacific Northwest and the triple reality of the non-indigenous populations; British, American and Chinese. The author was a student of Cole Harris, whose The Resettlement of British Columbia is a population/historical geography (he's a geographer). So not all these are bad, but yes, some are trivial in nature, or have been used as the basis of articles on what should be general topics with broader and deeper refs. And yes, often without "elder content"...a similar situation in autobiographies and topics such as war history or settlement history are not generally used for history articles on non-indigenous titles/content. Authenticity of content should be paramount; not that it is just in print and might have reviews and is therefore "reliable".Skookum1 (talk) 14:48, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Montanabw wrote, "one problem with Native American materials is that a lot of 'scholarly' sources are hogwash and some of these blogs and informal web pages are actually accurate, just poorly done." I agree completely. Which is why, when editing in this topic, I'm far more prone to leaving in unsourced text if I know it to be accurate. In this particular case, though, the sources were not accurate, but were non-Native sources with bad info that didn't source the content. I have no idea why the user was so attached to them. Moxy's edit looks to be the way I left it, prior to "The Good Doctor" editorializing again. As I told "The Good Doctor," most of his points are valid, but they are already made in the article, and he doesn't need to constantly re-state them and editorialize. All that said, I agree with comments here that the article is rather a mess and needs a lot more cleanup than I've managed to do in this initial run at it. Thanks for adding it your watchlists and moving forward with it. - CorbieV 20:30, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

The very huge problem with this argument is that it leads to a subversion of wikipedias criteria for reliable sources, which in turn leads to original research. Who decides which academic books are "hogwash" and which personal websites are "pretty accurate"? I personally dont trust either Skookum1 or Montanabw to make that judgment. I wouldnt even trust myself to make that judgment most of the time. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 21:28, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
I am glad you also don't trust your own judgement any more than ours, lest we have a serious discussion about how On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog.  ;-) That said, it is pretty easy to spot the "hogwash" in academe by their evidence of either race bias or over-romanticization of Native people or culture. It's also not that difficult to assess quality native sources by looking at issues of authorship, support by the tribe or tribal elders, and so on. A solid group of three or four knowledgable editors can suss it out. I remember back a few years ago when we were trying to bust the ItsLassieTime sock (and then clean up the hundreds of copyvios that user created) I had the worst time trying to remove a bit in a rodeo article that user inserted that they doggedly clung to because it was sourced to some scholarly work by some individual who clearly knew squat about rodeo but somehow managed to get her article past some peer reviewers- it contained a claim that EVERY rodeo began with a parade down the main street of the host town, which is utter nonsense (yes, many do, but far from all). That's an example of academic "hogwash." One has to remember that occasionally WP:IAR applies. Montanabw(talk) 03:22, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

New discussion at AfD[edit]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inu-Yupiaq. Montanabw(talk) 17:48, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Google map added as EL to List of Alaska Native tribal entities[edit]

Is this acceptable as an EL for this article?[2] - see also WP:ELN#Editor adding Google maps he/she created using Wikipedia sources. Dougweller (talk) 11:59, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

I tossed it as not WP:RS. Montanabw(talk) 21:19, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2014[edit]

You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and its sister projects. The campaign will take place throughout the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. Meetups are being held in some cities, or you can participate remotely. All constructive edits are welcome in order to contribute to Wikipedia's mission of providing quality, accurate information. Articles within Category:LGBT in the Americas may be of particular interest. You can also upload LGBT-related images by participating in Wikimedia Commons' LGBT-related photo challenge. You are encouraged to share the results of your work here. Happy editing! --Another Believer (Talk) 20:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikiproject Indigenous peoples of North America At Wikimania 2014[edit]

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to: Project leaflets Adikhajuria (talk) 16:29, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Will anyone be at Wikimania? I will be there and would enjoy meeting anyone interested in this project. I've recently been trying to get more involved! Kaitymh (talk) 21:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sioux Lawsuits[edit]

Dear indigenous peoples experts: This old AfC submission will soon be deleted as a stale draft unless someone takes an interest in it and begins improving it. Any takers? —Anne Delong (talk) 18:33, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I have no time to work on this, but I userfied it into my own sandbox, so if no one else steps up, it will be in long term storage for later. Montanabw(talk) 21:10, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello, Montanabw. You moved it, but it still has the notification that it may be deleted under dg-g13. Just make any improvement and save, and that will delay deletion for six months. —Anne Delong (talk) 00:02, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

WP Indigenous Peoples of North America in the Signpost[edit]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Indigenous Peoples of North America for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 22:11, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

American Indian or Native American?[edit]

There's currently a discussion on Washington Re****ns page about whether "American Indian" or "Native American" would be better to use in the body of the article. I am under the impression "Native American" is preferred, but honestly am not well read on the subject. Would informed folks mind commenting on the talk page and voice their opinion and reasoning? Thank you! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:26, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

CfD on Category:Chinook Jargon place names[edit]

Category:Chinook Jargon place names has been nominated for deletion/upmerging, with a suggestion that List of Chinook Jargon place names be upmerged. Please add any comments to the CfD.Skookum1 (talk) 15:20, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Indigenous Knowledge Experiment presentation at WikiIndaba 2014 is now online[edit]

The WikiIndaba 2014 sessions are now online at YouTube. This includes a presentation on an Indigenous Knowledge Experiment in Namibia. Informative and recommended. -- Djembayz (talk) 18:29, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Native American tribes in Maryland[edit]

Article request: Would anyone be willing to create an article on Native American tribes in Maryland, along the lines of Native American tribes in Virginia? Thanks. Solar-Wind (talk) 15:29, 20 July 2014 (UTC)