Talk:Great Sioux War of 1876

Merger

• Support - I am in favor of the merger. CosmicPenguin (talk• WP:WYO^Help!) 02:20, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

done --Work permit (talk) 03:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Cheyenne primary?

Do you not think that undue weight is being given in the article to the theories of Dr. Liberty? AFAIK her theory that it was a war against the Cheyenne is a minority view, and while it probably deserves mentioning, it should not be prominiently in the lede. The body of the text, also, should reflect the mainstream view with Liberty's alternative being given at the end. SpinningSpark 20:53, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I am inclined to agree with you, but User:Parkwells is an experienced editor who has worked extensively on articles about indigenous peoples and I would like to hear their argument for adding the content. I have contacted them. CosmicPenguin (talk• WP:WYO^Help!) 03:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It seemed worthwhile to consider another view, especially one that takes into account more specific detail about the different tribes and their structure. For so long, historians had lumped all the tribes together (in many areas.) Have made changes to identify this as an alternate view, reduced the content in the lead and first paragraphs, and moved a summary as alternative to the end. Do you think that addresses your concerns? Did not mean to give it undue weight, but it seemed worth introducing, as an example of different views on the events, especially as Marquis had talked with participants an descendants. Reading the article again, too, makes me think Liberty and Marquis have something useful to say about the Native American perspective.--Parkwells (talk) 16:10, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree that this is worth adding to the article but I am not sure that Liberty is not out on her own on this, and if so, it should be made clear that this view is attributed to Liberty rather than vaguely "some Native Americans". I do not think it should be in the lede either, unless there are peer reviewed references that at least give her theory consideration. I also think it is undesirable to have facts taken form Liberty's article in the body of our article without specific attribution to Liberty - unless there are other sources which back her up. An example is her claim that the Cheyenne had a more organised tribal structure. I do not have the book by Marquis which she claims is the source of her theories, but I do have another of his books, Wooden Leg, which I am in the process of writing a Wikipedia article for in user space (feel free to review contribute etc) so I have just re-read it and it flatly contradicts Liberty on many points.

• Liberty says the Cheyenne had primacy in the fighting. "Sitting Bull...was recognized as the old man chief of the combined tribes". p.211.
• On the Reno fight, "More and more of our people kept coming. Almost all of them were Sioux. There were only a few Cheyenne." p.220. There are similar statements on all the major battles including the Custer fight.
• On the claim that the Cheyenne alone operated on a tribal level, Wooden Leg again and again in the book describes the similarity between Cheyenne and Sioux political and organisational structures, with differences being of a minor cosmetic nature.

SpinningSpark 17:41, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments I will work on decreasing the Liberty alternative; will look further to see if there are responses to her (and Marquis' theories).--Parkwells (talk) 18:32, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

past tense in aftermath

do not the "deep divides" continue to this day, what with Russell Means and all?