User talk:Uyvsdi/Archive 9

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10

Bizarre "warning"

That was a very odd warning, considering I didn't do the things you warned about. Perhaps you should actually check edits before reacting to them? I also do not appreciate the veiled threat, and it's ludicrous to warn people off editing wikipedia as if you own it. — kwami (talk) 20:40, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

That was completely your move [1]. You, without discussion or consensus as you have done time and time again, made a unilateral move of Yuchi to Yuchi people (), and couldn't be bothered to fix double redirects, etc. The other editor, User:RHaworth cleaned it up. The warning was absolutely appropriate. -Uyvsdi (talk) 21:09, 27 August 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

False accusations are always inappropriate. They only show you to be dishonest, and therefore there is no reason for me to bother with you. Stay off my talk page unless you have something useful to say. — kwami (talk) 22:50, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
As the link shows, you clearly made an undiscussed, unilateral move of a stable page to a nonsense namespace, Yuchi people (). I've done nothing false or dishonest. If you would kindly stop the undiscussed, unilateral moves and two dab disambiguation pages, I would not have any cause to message you. -Uyvsdi (talk) 01:44, 28 August 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi


Hey there,

My name is Jessi, I am a citizen of the Chickasaw Nation. I had a question about the Stickball(Native American) article. I was wondering why it is linked to the history of Lacrosse and if maybe there is something we could do to change that? I am actually going to be picking an article to edit for my college English class and I was thinking that Stickball (Native American) should have its own page. Although I do not currently play the game myself, my older brother actually plays for the Chickasaw team Chikasha To'li. I have been to many of these events and even traveled to Mississippi to watch the World Series that my brother played in for the Choctaw team Tvshka Homma. I just believe that this great sport that has been such a proud tradition and rite of passage in our Native American Community should indeed have its own page.jmoore19 05:39, 6 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmoore19 (talkcontribs)

Hi Jessi, yeah! I don't consider it "history" of anything, since there's more stickball matches now than ever. I'm wondering if there are very many published articles about stickball, but if not, we could probably write some for our tribal newspapers. Anyway, totally support recreating the stickball article. -Uyvsdi (talk) 06:30, 6 September 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

I've got a sister's son who plays lacrosse for a major Southern university, and their coaches make darned sure that the kids know that lacrosse is basically a Europeanized version of The Ballgame, and to respect its origins. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:36, 6 September 2013 (UTC) (Inali)
I know Haskell, Bacone, NSU, OSU, and IAIA have stickball teams. Hopefully their games get written about in local papers, so there's some source material. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:52, 6 September 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi


That gravesite finder website you used for Archie Sam is really useful. I just wrote articles on Watt Sam and Nancy Raven and according to all the published sources they died in the 1930, but finding their gravesites on that website shows that Sam lived to 1944 and Raven to 1957!User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:41, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Missing topics page

I noticed your work on my missing topics about ethnic groups. I do like to remove the blue and irrevelant links myself - and I do that when I update the page the next time - put your temporary removal of potentially dubious links (some of which I collected from other WP pages) actually helps my efforts. Keep up the good work - Skysmith (talk) 18:20, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh good—that's a relief! I was embarrassed when I realized it was your personal page not an WikiProject Ethnics groups page. But it's nice to know that there's lots of progress being made in creating articles for these diverse ethnic groups. Cheers, -Uyvsdi (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

DYK for Archie Sam

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Tireless Contributor Barnstar Hires.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
I just saw your conversation with Montanabw about all of the tribes now having articles, along with your post to the Indigenous people of NA talk page. This is absolutely amazing work, and your tireless focus on an under-represented area of WP is exactly what the wiki needs more of. I know we've never worked together before, but I wanted to let you know that your work is appreciated (and that contributors who don't create drama are rarely noticed as much as they should be...although that may be a good thing...)! Dana boomer (talk) 16:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)


The Alaskan Inuits are Inupiat people and population are 15,700. The total population of all "Inuit" "150,000" is not true. See Inuit talk page . Thanks. --Kmoksy (talk) 15:38, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks so much for clarifying. I appreciate it! -Uyvsdi (talk) 20:18, 18 October 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi
This appears a good place to discuss this. I've long questioned the usefulness of List of American Inuit. When I see the names that are on the list yet don't see Willie Hensley or Eben Hopson (to name the most obvious of many examples), it's easy to call this list yet another random collection of pseudo-celebrities. Your edit summary says "Yupik people aren't Inuit". Those of us who live in urban Alaska amongst both groups can see perceptible similarities stretching beyond the fact that both are referred to as Eskimos. You didn't go far enough in carrying out your intent with that edit, considering that half the names on the list are Yupik and not Inupiat.
A major failing of Wikipedia thus far has been the smug assumption that any given content is only being read by those unfamiliar with the subject ("by the clueless, for the clueless"?). If this really is a list of notable Inupiat, "American Inuit" may be more official-sounding, but confusing without sufficient explanation. The list could also fit just fine as a section of Inupiat people rather than as a standalone list. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 12:51, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Help needed with title of an article

After revisiting Aché people I thought I'd create an article about the Parakanã (see [2] for the Portuguese one). So, do I call it Parakanã or Paracana and do I add 'people' to it? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 11:15, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Dougweller! I go by whatever Instituto Socioambiental uses as the primary name, since they are such a fantastic resource for Brazilian tribes. Looks like they prefer "Parakanã." According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes), you have the right to chose any of several options in naming your article; however, of course, one editor out there doesn't see it like that. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:42, 29 October 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Thanks very much. Dougweller (talk) 21:39, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

I just really wanted express my gratitude for all you do. I don't know if a barnstar or a badge would even be appropriate to express my heart-felt gratitude, so I decided just to say "Thank you!!". CJLippert (talk) 15:14, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words and support. And thanks for the all the work on Anishinaabe and Great Lakes articles. Chi-miigwetch! -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:55, 25 November 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi


Uyvsdi, I'm not sure what is going on with Skookum, but he seems to be going on about things that you aren't even saying; something more than you seems to be making him angry, though he is targeting you. He mentioned having health problems, and I suspect there is something more going on with him than we realize here on-wiki. So, even though I know he's swearing at you, calling you names and generally being extremely difficult, I suggest that it might be best to just avoid his talk page; you dropped him a warning, and now I think it's time to back away and if he persists, let's see if I can de-escalate the situation; he's talking to me on my talk page, and I'm trying to calm him down. You know I have a lot of respect for you, and it appears to me that Skookum's work on the Canadian First Nations has been essentially solid, too. I think that makes me neutral and I want to be very fair. Feel free to drop me an email if you think there is background I should know about. (you have email disabled here, I see). But I can't see further engagement ending well here. JMO. Montanabw(talk) 06:03, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Hey Montanabw, you are soul of diplomacy! Yes, I figure something else is going on. Personally, I'm not worried about it; just left the warning 2 for personal attacks on the page, since it is wildly inappropriate for experienced editors to behave that way—but happy to leave well enough alone for the time being. I'm actually finally working on my RL work (I think I do major bouts of Wikipedia in bursts of procrastination/anxiety over actual paid, published writing). Also found a great resource for Latin American information so spent my time on a Bolivian article and will probably focus on nations-state articles. Thanks for all your efforts, and have a great evening up north! -Uyvsdi (talk) 06:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Heh, Remember that "soul of diplomacy" bit, I usually am accused of the opposite! (check out "Buzzkill") at my talk; the latest.) Glad you are on the same page. As for RL, what RL? I understand wiki-as-procrastination; do it all the time! (LOL) Yeah, it's too damn cold in Montana right now and going to just get worse ( -10 below by the weekend, single digits now). Blanketing the horses for the next few days, I've got a shelter, and the younger one has a good winter coat, is too fat and is generally good to go, but with the sudden temp change and the wind combined with rain-turning-to-snow like it just did, I thought it wise. The older mare is 21, though, so she can benefit from the extra boost, but she hates blankets and goes all "Ms. Grumpy-pants" on me when I put on her blanket, but it's mostly just drama... I still don't even have to put on her halter, after all. Montanabw(talk) 20:47, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't know how horses can handle the cold! Definitely hibernation time. I think the draw of Wikipedia is that anything you write is an improvement, as opposed to writing where you get judged for any type-O or glitch. But deadlines loom! -Uyvsdi (talk) 23:31, 3 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Well, I do hang out in some areas of wikipedia where the typos and glitches are judged rather harshly, but it's sure easy enough to find the spots where anything is an improvement! As for horses, they did evolve to their present form in steppe and prairie country, first domesticated in what today is Ukraine, and the last remnant of a true wild population is in the Gobi desert, so they are surprisingly tough and good in the cold, with proper access to shelter - one theory I've run across is that they are one of the few Ice Age-evolved animals to have NOT gone extinct at the end of the last Ice Age, and that possibly in part due to domestication - though humans also may have caused their extinction in North America. But either way, mine are glad for their barn and blankies! LOL! Montanabw(talk) 03:57, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Maybe because I make lots of new start articles on non-US, I'm safe? I've heard that horses thrived so well in North America because they were taking over the ecological niche left by left by the extinct species. I had no idea there were so many in the Americas! -Uyvsdi (talk) 04:19, 5 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi


I didn't know you weren't a "he" - I'll try to make sure that I get it right in the future, but I have a bad memory, so if I mess up, whack me with a trout, 2 by 4, or something. GregJackP Boomer! 23:32, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

It's not important. I wouldn't say anything except occasionally articles about Wikipedia will come out saying that editors are overwhelmingly male. It might be more of a matter of editors being anonymous, and folks assuming everyone on the Internet is male, so I figure I should try to represent. Cheers, Uyvsdi (talk) 01:14, 9 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Erdbeerteller01.jpg Xest xlxalt, hello Usvydi! Your patient efforts to explain policy are much appreciated. Added a box to our WikiProject page, and a note to the talk page. Your suggestions and ideas are welcome, would you like to take it from here? Djembayz (talk) 22:52, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Paraguayan Rock Art

Stars rock, rock art in Amambay, Paraguay.png Rock Art Stars
Hello! Thank you for editing the information about the indians of my home country, the Pai Tavytera Indians, and about our project to bring the rock art of Paraguay into a wider audience. I was wondering if you could help me spread more of that information here on wikipedia, as I have a hard time navigating this site. I have a lot of contribution I want to add to wikipedia.

Please send me an email so we can talk some more. FrankoWeaver at gmail .com Thank you so much! FrankOWeaver (talk) 19:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Kumeyaay populated places

I had the wrong idea of how these were used. Only used to describe places no longer inhabited in category of Former Native American populated places in California. Fixed it. Asiaticus (talk) 06:54, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Every county has a "populated places" categories, i.e. Category:Populated places in San Diego County, California. If it's unpopulated, then it would be Category:Former Kumeyaay settlements, to correspond to categories like Category:Former settlements in San Diego County, California. Looks like a bot moved all the tribal categories. You might talk this over with User:Look2See1. I can't find the discussion that led to that move, but it happened back in 2010. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:57, 23 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Please do not cross link Mogollon Culture Area page to OasisAmerica political identity movement page

The Mogollon Culture Area is about facts pertaining to matters of Mogollon archaeology. The OasisAmerica page is a fictitious history created by proponents of a political identity movement. The two are not rationally linked and any such linkage is false and misleading. OasisAmerica is not a term used by ANY archaeologist in the American west or northern Mexico. If you'd like to converse about it in the talk section of that web page feel free to do so, but do not edit the Mogollon Culture Area page without first consulting other editors of the page. Thx. Mike Diehl, PhD, 29 January 2014. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Diehl (talkcontribs) 19:38, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Whoah, slow down there. Oasisamerica is hardly fictitious; it's a cultural region, just one that you personally don't care for; however, wp:Wikipedia is not censored and yes, "Oasisamerica" and the variant "Oasis America" are used by archaeologists [3]. Please, read Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. You don't get to issue edicts about who gets to edit pages. -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:44, 29 January 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi

The term is not used in ANY summary of North American Archaeology. Not Linda Cordell's, Brian Fagan's, Greogry and Willcox Zuni Origins volume, not Herr and Young's Pithouse Communities volume, not the Handbook of North American Indians, not Mike Adler's The Prehistoric Pueblo World, not any of the articles written by Emil Haury, not by C.C.I.DiPeso, not by the State Historic Preservation Offices of the States of Arizona or New Mexico, and not by any of the people who have recently published major reports on excavations in the region (vis Harry Shafer, Anyon and LeBlanc, Nelson and LeBlanc, Diehl and LeBlanc) nor by archaeologists that work in Northern Mexico (Minnis, Whalen, Hard, Roney) or west Texas (Rocek). Since Wikipedia purports to present information that is relevant and factually accurate, it seems to me to be a disservice to the Wikipedia Community and contrary to its mission statement for you to sabotage the Mogollon Culture page. Thx. MikeDiehl 19:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)Mike Diehl

A) I just provided a link above of an archaeologist using the term. B) "Oasisamerica" is used in published, scholarly works, as I have demonstrated several times now, in several locations. As I've repeatedly said, the term is more commonly used in Mexico than the United States. It doesn't need to be used your select group of writers. So yes, the term is factually accurate, and no I'm not doing a disservice to the community or sabotaging anything. Congratulations on learning how to sign your posts. -Uyvsdi (talk) 20:01, 29 January 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi
And lo and behold, the term is used in Handbook of North American Indians: Southwest, page 22. Paul Kirchhoff advocated for its use. I don't recall any Wikipedia rule saying that only people whose political views you agree with may be cited. -Uyvsdi (talk) 20:05, 29 January 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi

He advocated for its used in a completely different way than it is used in your Wikipedia entry. Did you even READ what he wrote? Your vandalism of the Mogollon Culture page violates the standard of Notability. The fact that a political movement in Mexico coined a term to refer to a region about which the movement knows nothing at all does not therefore make that term relevant to the prehistory of that region. MikeDiehl 20:28, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

What's my Wikipedia entry? I didn't write the Oasisamerica article; numerous other editors did. I've cited use of the term related to Mogollon culture in a published, secondary source. Notability would only be relevant for the Oasisamerica, to establish that the concept is notable enough to merit its own article. That's been established by the references; however, you are welcome to try to get the article deleted based on lack of notability. I've provided citations; end of story. -Uyvsdi (talk) 20:35, 29 January 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi

You provided citations that use the word but not in ways that you use the word. If that does not seem problematic to you refer you to WP: RS for an overview, especially 1.3, 2.1, and the entire section on "Biased Sources" (which covers the only published article by any person anywhere that specifically refers to the Mogollon area as a part of "OasisAmerican Culture." MikeDiehl 21:45, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

All I've demonstrated is that the term is in fact in use in published works, that archaeologists have used the term, and that the term has been used in published works (a book by a prominent art historian) in connection to the Mogollon. So I haven't used the in any particular way. You have repeated made claims that prove to be false, so please, move on; work on something else. -Uyvsdi (talk) 21:51, 29 January 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi

I have made no false claims. I'll continue to edit the Mogollon page and will continue to refer to your vandalism of that page as vandalism. Again, you are referred to WR:RS 1.3, 2.1, Biased Source, and NPV entries. At some point, it should occur to you that you're arguing with one of the regional experts, and you seem to have no training in the matter. No one faults you for having "one man's opinion" but it is expected that you will not vandalize the Mogollon Culture entry. Thx.MikeDiehl 21:59, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

"The term is not used in ANY summary of North American Archaeology ... not the Handbook of North American Indians." That's false. I'd had it. Tried discussing things with you; now I'm just sticking to warnings. -Uyvsdi (talk) 22:01, 29 January 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi

It's not used in the way that you claim it is used. It has no logical relationship to the history you have cited written by a pair of Mexican *historians* neither of whom has ever published an article in any archaeological journal. Show me where they have, or show me where any major archaeological synthesis of the Mogollon area uses that term in the way that the Wikipedia OasisAmerica page uses the term. You're way off base linking a page about the scientific and archaeological study of the Mogollon to a page that has no credibility. It's like positing the theory of phlogiston in a Wikipedia page about convection. No scholar doing research on the subject uses that term in that way. Warn me all you darned well please. That Mogollon page will not be subverted by links to fringe material. If you like Wikipedia can at your behest prevent me from editing the Mogollon page, but that would HEAVILY undermine that page's credibility. Done with you here, there, or anywhere else. MikeDiehl 00:36, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

New Age Frauds & Plastic Shaman

NAFPS was removed from Yahoo Groups due to Terms of Service violations. Their site was removed by their hosting provider in 2007 for TOS violations.

Here are just a few sources citing NAFPS as a fraud: (Just because they have posts about frauds doesn't mean they aren't themselves frauds.);f=53;t=6651 (talk) 20:19, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I was looking around at some of these yesterday, and blogs/forums/self-published sites don't meet the criteria for reliable sources. is a news outlet—the piece is actually in support of the NAFPS website—however, it is a press release, so would be regarded as self-published despite appearing on a news site. is published by two individuals, Diane Merkel & Dietmar Schulte-Möhring, and the only mentions I can find for NAFPS is on the forum, which isn't a reliable source—one user is decrying the site, while other uses are supporting it. From WP:Identifying reliable sources: "For that reason self-published media—whether books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, personal pages on social networking sites, Internet forum postings, or tweets—are largely not acceptable."
Obviously, the people described as being fraudulent are going to respond unfavorably. If they get published in secondary sources, they can be quoted.
I furnished a reference from a published book mentioning NAFPS to Plastic shaman. If you can located a verifiable, published, secondary decrying NAFPS then you can add that information to the article with the reference. And thanks for bringing all of this my attention; I've now found more material on the subject. -Uyvsdi (talk) 21:24, 31 January 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Happy to share the info, You do realize NAFPS is also a self-published blog the same as all these sources. The fact that were removed twice from Yahoo due to TOS violations is a fact that can be independently verified.

Obviously people being described a s fraudulent who are not frauds are going to respond unfavorably. Frauds accusing other people of fraud is another obvious tactic of NAFPS.

The term shaman is not even a native american one in the first place. Even if NAFPS were a "First Nations" or "Indigenous" group it still does not own he word shaman. If there were an indigenous northern European group they might have more credibility.

NAFPS is self-published by an organization, so that's why I haven't used the NAFPS website as a citation anywhere on Wikipedia. I know "shaman" isn't Native American. It's from Siberia and is only appropriately used for Arctic peoples. Every Indian person I know uses "medicine man" (or very, very rarely, "medicine woman") Usually it's only anthropologists and New Agers who use the word "shaman" when discussing traditional healers south of the Arctic. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi

If an organization publishes NAFPS, then what is the name, address, and phone number of this organization? The accusations of slander and libel against NAFPS are a matter of public record in Oklahoma court: Case # CJ-2009-10887. It is also a matter of public record that the site was removed from Yahoo and other hosting companies and currently resides on an anonymous offshore hosting company Cyber Cast International in Panama. So if this were truly a First Nations/Indigenous site which it is not, why would they care who uses the term shaman which you have stated is not Native American? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:07, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Um... you brought up "shaman" being not Native American, not me. New Agers seem to love the term. NAFPS isn't targeting Native American medicine people. Court cases against people don't eliminate their inclusion in an encyclopedia. You don't like them; I get that. That's pretty irrelevant to anything to do with this encyclopedia. -Uyvsdi (talk) 05:17, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Kiowa Five

I removed the category because the category is for categorizing individual people, not groups. Each artist is already categorized under Caddo County, anyway. There's no reason to have them essentially listed twice. Kennethaw88 (talk) 06:13, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay, sounds good. -Uyvsdi (talk) 06:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Timestamp Help - thanks!

Thanks for the heads-up about the timestamping. I was participating in the Art + Feminism Edit-a-thon and I'm obviously a newbie. Unfortunately, I'm finding the substrate of Wiki rules and etiquette overwhelming. I'm still sorting out what the link about signatures means... What I did was add the signature / timestamp where I made an edit (assuming it would be invisible in the actual Read view of the article). Then I saw that I had added all that info TO THE ARTICLE. I assume then that I am merely supposed to sign my contributions to discussions of page editing in talk posts (like this one?). I will wade through more tutorials... Thanks for this bit of oversight as I sort myself out! --Cocoafiend (talk) 03:10, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I think you've figured it out—that you add the four tildes (~ ~ ~ ~) before your user name when you post comments on talk pages but not on the actual article. I'll check some of your recent edits to see if I can offer any advice. Yes, it can be a little rough in the beginning but once you figure out basic protocols, it should (hopefully) make sense :) -Uyvsdi (talk) 03:13, 2 February 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Great - thank you! --Cocoafiend (talk) 03:55, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
No problem and thanks for your contributions to art bio articles—so much needs to be done! :) -Uyvsdi (talk) 05:13, 2 February 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi

The editor above didn't tell you, so...

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Epicgenius (talk) 00:05, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Good, hopefully some administrators can check out this craziness. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:50, 2 February 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Sorry, forgot to sign. Epicgenius (talk) 00:05, 3 February 2014 (UTC)


Hi, I want to make clear why I reported you for harassment. Quite simply, posting standard templates without good reason is harassment, and not in accordance with good faith, which is pretty crucial for making the system work. Having at least registered my complaint, I am more or less calmed down at this point, and I doubt that anything will come of the dispute or of my complaint, and I cannot say that I really expected much. However, in the interests of good will in the universe, I am willing to withdraw it under the following conditions: (1)you stop posting standard templates on my Talk page (2)you try to assume good faith in my edits, and cease and desist accusing me in any context of of edit warring and POV editing, because I am not trying to do either of those things, and do not believe that I have in the past. I believe the only remaining issue over the actual article is the Ethnologue source, and I am not sure how to resolve this, but I am willing to discuss it reasonably if your version of discussion can be more that just saying that I am wrong and somehow breaking Wikipedia rules by trying to improve the article. I have probably been oversensitive issue because it is important to me, and because I am relatively well-informed on it, but that does not really mean I am trying to cause a problem.

In the interests of assuming good faith, I will attempt to start the discussion by summing up our arguments: you seem to believe that Ethnologue is a reliable source for this subject. I have stated that I think that is not reliable because it is a general source which states something (that "Eskimo" is by definition pejorative) which is in conflict with the dominant literature sources on the subject (which say that Eskimo might be taken as pejorative, but is not etymologically so). Assuming you are indeed engaged in good faith editing, I do not understand why you have not fully responded to these statements. Secondly, let me point out that the Ethnologue source refers to a language, not a people. "Eskimo" used as a language, is widely done throughout academia, and there is no way to subsitute that. How then, can it be pejorative? Please also realize that the particular Ethnologue article linked to is on "Inupiatun" language, which not only is a subclass of Eskimo languages, but is also the language of a people who pretty well prefer to be called "Eskimos" over "Inuit", even though they technically are Inuit. Although of course we all wish people would communicate more specifically (say, "Inupiat") when they refer to a group of people (I am an Alaskan, and I kind of prefer not to be called "American"), I think we both know that that is not always going to happen. So you see, to me it seems to be an open and shut case. Can you please comment on this?

Brevity is the soul of wit.
What you appear to not comprehend is that your actions merit the warnings. You absolutely made a personal attack against User:Kmoksy here: [4] and you have been edit warring for now multiple months. So did you read the responses to your "report"?
"Wow. Not sure why 14.x is communicating with people using edit-summaries, but they sure have posted some doozies that could lead to a block. Thanks for bringing those to our attention" DP 14:16, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
As in your actions could lead to a block, which they already have in December.
Stop pushing your pov and original research that is not backed up by published sources and stop edit warring, and everyone will be happy to leave you be. You don't magically speak on behalf of all Inuit and Yupik peoples. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi
>>>Brevity is the soul of wit.<<<

At times, yes.

>>>"Wow. Not sure why 14.x is communicating with people using edit-summaries, but they sure have posted some doozies that could lead to a block. Thanks for bringing those to our attention" DP 14:16, 2 February 2014 (UTC)<<<

I think that's pretty obviously an unreasonable, poorly considered, immaturely rendered statement, and due to the lack of balance probably ought to be escalated to the next level up. If nothing else, claims of harassment should be taken seriously, not treated with contempt. I did warn you repeatedly, in no uncertain terms, to cease your aggressive behaviors, and this is a clear case of victim blaming.

>>>:What you appear to not comprehend is that your actions merit the warnings.<<< I disagree. I feel that your "warnings" represent a power trip, and nothing more. No doubt things are different from your perspective, but since I can't see your perspective, and you don't seem to be inclined to communicate it other than by repeatedly "throwing the book" in my face, that doesn't help us much.
>>>You don't magically speak on behalf of all Inuit and Yupik peoples.<<< Of course I don't, and you guys caused me to modify my edits a bit, because I was coming at things from a bit of an extreme angle, and that's fine, it's good, and it's part of the process. But the point is, I did modify my edits, they were accepted by not only the group but by you yourself, and yet you continue to make accusations against me such as:
>>>Stop pushing your pov and original research that is not backed up by published sources and stop edit warring<<< which, again, are all things that I am not doing. So, I am willing to accept the possibility that you are not being deliberately aggressive, but I still feel you are creating quite a problem for me. What do you think of my latest statements on the Ethnologue source? Have I not justified my edits thoroughly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:17, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Dabbing ethnic groups

Like others, I did not have the slightest idea why you are going around swapping the term Eskimo with links that are not, or are likely not, mentioned by the sources. That is, until I looked into the edit history of the Eskimo article, and your dispute with the above IP. Whatever the case, with regard to additions like this, which I reverted, if it's not supported by the sources, you should not be adding them. Flyer22 (talk) 05:16, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Note for others: Uyvsdi replied on my talk page about this. Flyer22 (talk) 05:33, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
So I provided a citation explaining the two distinct ethnic groups Rolf Kjellström studied in his dissertation. I'm not indiscriminately switching out terms and have added a citation detailing the two culturally/geographically distinct Inuit ethnic groups he studied. -Uyvsdi (talk) 05:42, 4 February 2014 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10