Talk:Sitting Bull

Expansion

To overcome the errors in this article and lack of information, I have put an expand tab at the beginning of the article. If anyone has any questions, please reply on my talk page. Wikipedia Stubmechanic 08:42, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Other Errors

Shouldn't this article be under the heading Tatanka Iyotake and a REDIRECT command be placed under Sitting Bull? I know that 'Tatanka Iyotake' is not the widely know denomination but the other one smells to me sort of nineteenth-centurish, not very adequate for this century. Keeping this kind of translations seems to me very picturesque but quite outlandish for the 21st century. Why was never Julio Iglesias rendered into English as July Churches, Severiano Ballesteros as Harsh-like Crossbowmen or Plácido Domingo as Placid Sunday? - Piolinfax 23:26, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) - Hephaestos 23:27, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Yes, I know that stuff, and I don't have any problem to comply with it. It is just that I still don't understand why a person's name has to be changed into something he would probably never have accepted and keep it for such a long time. I find a redirect option more fair to the individual. I, personally would like to be shown a real name of a person (unless that person decided, for any of a number of possible reasons, to change it). I agree with the benefits of conventions for such complex works as this encyclopaedia but I think that conventions sometimes should be a bit flexible to allow certain complexities of human reality to take place. In the wiki in Spanish, the same thing as here has been decided but, anyway, I just find it plainly unfair. Anyway, I acknowledge that Wikipedia's option is sensible in some sense. -Piolinfax 23:49, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I understand your concerns and share them somewhat myself, but I tend to think that guideline is the only thing stopping people from instituting articles at whatever their "favorite" name might be, which would be chaotic. I tweaked the intro to this one a bit. - Hephaestos 23:54, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Yeah. I like it (the intro) better now. Ta, Hephaestos! - Piolinfax 02:25, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I'm wondering if the term 'massacre' to describe the killing of Custer's cavalry is NPOV. It has certainly been described as a massacre historically, but doesn't seem any more of one than any number of historical battles with high casualties. Saforrest 13:12, May 11, 2005 (UTC)

Just a question, is the spelling "Tatanka Iyotaka" more correct or is it another accepted spelling? This is what the Cheyenne River Sioux's website has as Sitting Bull's Lakotan name. Could this be dialect differences?--okieman1200 07:22, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

I dont really think that statements of peoples intentions such as, "They did not mean to kill him, but when he refused to go and his warriors attempted to rescue him he was killed." , really belong in an encyclopedia. 68.71.35.93 21:55, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Proofread

Could someone go through this page and proof read it so it sounds more professional? I don't have the time... otherwise I would do so.

What the heck...?

What the heck is going on here? Why does the Sitting Bull article end with his childhood? Why does the introduction sum up his whole life and the proper article then only mention his childhood? I think the article should also say something on the historical importance of Sitting Bull and not just stake out biographical facts. There are lots of good photos of Sitting Bull - why is there only one in this article? Yours sincerely,Yeah. 4th March 2006

"Why does the introduction sum up his whole life and the proper article then only mention his childhood?" It was deleted. I restored it. Ashibaka tock 15:57, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Clergyman?

Shouldn't this be shaman? Clergy/clergyman is usually reserved for Christians. See http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/clergyman --Bodhirakshita 10:40, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Obviously it should be shaman and not clergyman - whoever put in clergyman has probably been doing some serious kitten huffing. 19 March 2006

Leader?

He was not a leader in the sense that it is generally understood. Plains Indian "chiefs" were more like ambassadors appointed to speak to the washichu (because they would come in and say "Can I speak to your chief"). The real leaders varied from day to day and project to project (religious ceremony, hunting, trading, raids on other tribes, defense, natural disasters, etc.). People would listen to whoever made the most sense to them at the time. There were highly respected honor societies and warrior societies that a person might join, but these guys were not leaders either. The book that best describes how this worked is Mari Sandoz' Crazy Horse. Like many others, Sitting Bull seems to have "led" mostly through inspiration. He was not a political or war leader in any case but a wikchasa wakan (holy person). Any band of Indians might have one or a dozen of those, and there was not a the medicine man, in the same sense that they didn't have the leader. Keep in mind that Indians giving accounts of people and events to ethnologists, historians etc. often used the language they knew their audience wanted to hear, so might say "chief" even though it wasn't exactly that. --Bluejay Young 22:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I suggest that you add this distinction to the article, and since you seem to know something about the man help get this poor article into shape. Let's do Sitting Bull a favour here and get this page fixed! So long, -62.158.108.130 16:57, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite

Clearly a rewrite is needed. The tone is incorrect, many typos exist and very little of his adult life is included. The introduction looks pretty good to me, but the rest of it needs major cleanup.

Errors

Sitting Bull was not sent to the Standing Rock reservation with the rest of his people following his surrender. He was again lied to. He was sent to Fort Randall as a prisoner of war, where he stayed for 2 years before finally returning to his people at Standing Rock.

In addition, he did take part in the Battle of Little Big Horn, though not as a war chief. He did not kill Custer, but was still present for the battle.

Please see "Sitting Bull: Champion of the Sioux" by Stanley Vestall, published 1957.

Suggestion for strip-down rewrite

This article has been tagged for a rewrite for a couple of months now, and there have been some complaints as to its accuracy. It includes some speculative, flawed, hoaxish and unencyclopedic information – and it is a frequent target of unreverted vandalism. I suggest we strip out the sections "Childhood" and "Involvement" (better stub-standard than sub-standard), then nominate it for Article Improvement Drive. I know that is radical, but the amputated parts will grow back quite quickly, but without infections. Sitting Bull is a great historical figure, and his Wikipedia entry deserves featured-article standard. Unless there are any protests, I will proceed and strip the article, then nominate it for improvement. If my suggestion is not acceptable, then lets leave it as it is, but at least it should be nominated for improvement. --Ezeu 18:54, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Please! I've been wanting to do it for a while, but I'm just not bold enough... 71.96.234.140 05:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Good idea.--62.158.73.244 01:59, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I have done what I suggested above. I may have removed some correct and/or important information. In you reckon I have, feel free to reinsert that information. And please, if you have anything you want to add or change, be bold and do so. --Ezeu 01:38, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Citecheck template removed

The citecheck template is for articles that may contain inappropriate citations, such as quotes taken out of context. I see not talk page discussion for the template on this article. Please go to Wikipedia:Cleanup resources if another template is needed and discuss the matter on the talk page. Durova 02:23, 3 September 2006 (UTC)