Talk:Muscogee Nation: Difference between revisions
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
I'm not a lawyer, but the ruling seems to indicate that they're referring specifically to the Creek Nation as being within the 1866 boundaries, and further stresses that it's referring specifically to the pertinent definitions in the Major Crimes Act. [[User:MarkHB|MarkHB]] ([[User talk:MarkHB|talk]]) 17:43, 9 July 2020 (UTC) |
I'm not a lawyer, but the ruling seems to indicate that they're referring specifically to the Creek Nation as being within the 1866 boundaries, and further stresses that it's referring specifically to the pertinent definitions in the Major Crimes Act. [[User:MarkHB|MarkHB]] ([[User talk:MarkHB|talk]]) 17:43, 9 July 2020 (UTC) |
||
Agree, I think the image in [[McGirt_v._Oklahoma]] makes clear that no one sees this as an inter-tribal boundary change. There are some sloppy headlines though, saying that eastern Oklahoma is |
Agree, I think the image in [[McGirt_v._Oklahoma]] makes clear that no one sees this as an inter-tribal boundary change. There are some sloppy headlines though, saying that eastern Oklahoma is [https://wkzo.com/news/articles/2020/jul/09/us-supreme-court-deems-half-of-oklahoma-a-native-american-reservation/1037825/?refer-section=national||"a Native American reservation"] rather than "five reservations" or lands/territory.--[[User_talk:Magtei|Magtei]]<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Magtei|Contrib]]</sup> 17:49, 9 July 2020 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:49, 9 July 2020
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.![]() | Indigenous peoples of North America B‑class | |||||||||
|
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.![]() | Oklahoma: Tulsa C‑class High‑importance | ||||||||||||
|
Related tribes
The majority, if not all, of Yuchi people today are enrolled in this particular tribe, the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, as are many Natchez and Shawnee people. While they may not be linguistically related, today they are politically related through tribal enrollment and blood related through intermarriage. Since this is a contemporary tribe, the realities on the ground in the 21st century should be reflected, as opposed to origins derived through linguistic studies. Cheers, -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:24, 27 April 2010 (UTC)Uyvsdi
- I agree and apologize for deleting them; I was thinking of the historically related language families.--Parkwells (talk) 19:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- No problem and thank you for your copy editing. When I find some time, I can properly cite these tribes' inclusion. Awhile back, I wrote to the WikiProject Ethnicity group about the criteria for related groups and the response was that the "related groups" category was highly contentious and people were considering removing it from template. I think it's helpful and usually linguistic relations make the most sense. In reality, African-Americans and Scots-Irish could be regarded as related ethnic groups to the Muscogee Creek Nation due to intermarriage as well. Cheers, -Uyvsdi (talk) 00:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Removing confederate template
This template was added
, but Muscogee Creek traditionalists fought for the Union. The tribe was split. BTW "Choctow" is misspelled on that template. Ahalenia (talk) 16:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Ahalenia
Boundary
Is the boundary of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation most of eastern Oklahoma or just the approximately 8 counties south of Tulsa? File:Muscogee Creek Nation Territory.png and File:Boundaries_of_the_Five_Tribes_in_1866.jpg suggest it is just the territory south of Tulsa, but all the news stories about the Supreme Court decision suggest that it is most of eastern Oklahoma (e.g. [1]). In other words, does the Muscogee (Creek) Nation now include the territories that were once considered the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, and Seminole nations? Or are the recent news stories misinterpreting the Supreme Court decision? Kaldari (talk) 16:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not a lawyer, but the ruling seems to indicate that they're referring specifically to the Creek Nation as being within the 1866 boundaries, and further stresses that it's referring specifically to the pertinent definitions in the Major Crimes Act. MarkHB (talk) 17:43, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Agree, I think the image in McGirt_v._Oklahoma makes clear that no one sees this as an inter-tribal boundary change. There are some sloppy headlines though, saying that eastern Oklahoma is "a Native American reservation" rather than "five reservations" or lands/territory.--MagteiContrib 17:49, 9 July 2020 (UTC)