Talk:Plains Indians

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Sacred Grounds[edit]

Although, lost through some generations, there are sources of major ancient battlegrounds as far as 4,000 B.C.E. which could have been used if reliable and the aftermath of the large battles, and the way they used those battlegrounds and turned them into sacred burial sites, but also designed them to become stone navigational hot spots to other sacred sites. --All the users (talk) 17:54, 26 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by All the users (talkcontribs) 17:55, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · newspapers · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · HighBeam · JSTOR · NYT · TWL)
Or you can find sources and add them to the site for Burial rituals. --Checkmeleon (talk) 03:37, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

More sources[edit]

Nations of the Americas' religion, mythology and folklore are covered extensively at this site. Good sources from sacred texts is greatly informational for references to the article.-- (talk) 20:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Past move proposals[edit]

I just created an archive, but in case anyone wants to make another move proposal, here are the past proposals:

-Uyvsdi (talk) 19:53, 5 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

A new source[edit]

In Cities of Tipis?, Michael E. Smith states that Plains circular tipis camps weren't cities but a part of the Wide Urban World. The reasons of his analysis could be interesting for this article.

El Comandante (talk) 00:50, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 5 January 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Consensus is against the move, with valid policy reasons. (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 10:49, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Plains IndiansIndigenous peoples of the Great Plains – There is a large plain in India: Indo-Gangetic Plain, and many people live there, they can be called Plains Indians. Editor abcdef (talk) 11:06, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Plains Indians is the traditional, common, and resonant name for this group of people. A redirect from Indigenous peoples of the Great Plains works very well for those who demand consistency. Most Indians I know prefer to be called "Indians" not "Indigenous people" or "Native Americans." Smallchief (talk 12:39, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Strongly oppose ENGVAR and COMMONNAME both apply; Indian-from-India English contexts/meanings are not relevant to such a well-known topic/name in North America. This same argument crops up from time to time, as recently with someone creating "Asian Indians in Vancouver", which given Vancouver's aboriginal population has obvious complications of context. There was already a name discussion about this long ago; look in the archives, it was extended debate to establish this title. Indigenous peoples of the Great Plains is not CONCISE, and has the further complication that the Great Plains are known in Canada as the Prairies, though the term "Plains Indians" is still in general use for those tribes of people from this culture on the Canadian side of the border.Skookum1 (talk) 13:28, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose I, strongly oppose this as I am an Indian living in Gangatic plains and we are called "Indian" or "Bharatiya" or "Hindustani" but not by any other names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prymshbmg (talkcontribs) 17:04, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment if we remove all uses of "Indian" for India, then we could remove the confusion caused by "Indian", as India isn't the only place that it applies -- (talk) 05:43, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Plains Indians is the common name of the Native Americans who lived on the Great Plains and is also by far the primary meaning of the term around the world. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:28, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Cleanup - various[edit]

@Montanabw: why did you remove the thing about patrilineal tribes and marrying out? It's not like it's the only thing in here that's hard to source to WP standards. - CorbieV 22:00, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

It's an egregious overgeneralization, particularly in modern times - many halfblood children of native mothers are accepted as tribal members, certainly today and in the past as well. There was far too much cultural variation between tribes to keep that one. I felt that it was best not to tag-bomb the entire article, nor was it appropriate to blank everything that's uncited, but I made a bold call to remove the most ridiculous, stereotyped or overgeneralized comments. Anything sourced properly can certainly be reinserted, but I'd want to be sure people say things like, "tradition X was practiced by the foo people, but not the foo2 people". Just comparing tribes like the Kiowa, the Pawnee and the Sioux/Lakota, show dramatic differences in many family cultural mores. Montanabw(talk) 16:23, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
BQ-based enrollment is a separate issue from the traditional view. The former is more about the modern legal system, the latter has more to do with social and ceremonial issues in community. Maybe it's too complicated and unsourceable for WP. I can source it from two of the tribes, but maybe this just isn't the place. Especially when it's all we can do to explain that people aren't living year round in lodges and riding horses to work. - CorbieV 18:33, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, you are right that it's pretty complicated. I would agree that two tribes does not a culture group make. I know that the Blackfeet seemed to be pretty willing to do the opposite - accept white men as family members, even if not necessarily tribal ones. Johnny Grant was a case in point. Montanabw(talk) 06:12, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 19 December 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved per discussion, as a descriptive name for a topic that has a common name.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:14, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Plains Indians → Indigenous people of the Interior Plains – Conistency with other Template:Cultural areas of indigenous North Americans articles. --Samantha Ireland (talk) 23:58, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Proposal would replace a common, comprehensible, historically-resonant title with a title that is turgid, lengthy, and has no historical precedents. Smallchief (talk 09:29, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. "Plains Indians" is the common blanket term for these Native Americans. (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose the proposed title is not used within academe. Montanabw(talk) 09:14, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose WP:UCN per the aboves -- (talk) 08:33, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Plains Indians. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:13, 26 December 2017 (UTC)