Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America (Rated NA-class)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 NA  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Nomination of List of honorary Native Americans for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of honorary Native Americans is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of honorary Native Americans until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

New Article Spelling[edit]

I'd like to see a stub article about this:

Wonchala - A Lakota idea that: We're thrown into a world of forces that we can't control, of powers that are much greater than us, and that we have this awareness that we're just small little humans beings, with so little influence on what's going on around us — when we start from there we then realise the it's up to us to make meaning and purpose out of this crazy world, to make something happen and create a story that is heroic, and takes the chaos into which we're throne and turns it into something beautiful, something that reduces suffering, something that crates pattern and order, something that we're proud to be apart of.

I think the spelling of "Wonchala" needs correcting? I tried searching online for the right spelling, though couldn't find anything. Does anyone know what the correct spelling is?

Cryptozoology[edit]

I'm in the process of trimming poorly-sourced content from List of cryptids. Many of these creatures, such as Cressie, are said to originate from "indigenous folklore," but searches for purported indigenous names like "Haoot Tuwedyee" tend to yield only questionable cryptid-related sources. Where can I go to verify the existence of these legends? –dlthewave 02:29, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Your best bet is older books, typically by missionaries, that describe the practices of a singular tribe. Wacape (talk) 03:50, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Rename discussion[edit]

Category talk:American people of Cherokee descent. Proposing we change the name of this cat to American people of self-identified Cherokee ancestry.
We already have cats for enrolled people. This category currently includes both those with documented ancestry and those with completely fabricated heritage. So I propose that we harmonise this category name with List of people of self-identified Cherokee ancestry. "Descent" and "heritage" still has to be proven. People can have legitimate ancestry without fully meeting enrollment criteria, and that is a different thing from non-Natives who completely fabricate a Native identity. While this will leave those with actual ancestry in a grey area, the overwhelming majority of people in this category are the proven false claimants. - CorbieV 19:25, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Use of the term "Indian"[edit]

I have gotten into a dispute with another user over the use of "Indian" in an article about a historical encounter between the Spanish and a group of indigenous people in what is now the United States. In response to my attempt to use "Native American" in place of "Indian" in the article, the other editor has stated;

Both terms were used in the article previously, and we need to be consistent. The geographical region under discussion was not called "America" at the time, so those tribes cannot be "native Americans". The term "Indian" was used at the time by English-speakers; I have no idea what term the Spanish used. So our choices are "Indians" and "Indigenous people groups". It is common practice on historical articles to use the terminology that was contemporaneous to the time period being discussed, such as "Patriot" and "Loyalist" or "Roundhead" and "Cavalier." Therefore, the best way to address this is to use the shorthand term "Indians" and explain it in a footnote. This is the way that the articles on the American Revolution handle the terms "Patriot" and "Loyalist".

This was turning into an edit war, so I won't be reverting him again, but I wanted to get some other opinions on what is appropriate phrasing for future reference. - Donald Albury 15:42, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

What's wrong with the term "Indian"? "American Indian" might be preferable, but Indian is fine. Yuchitown (talk) 15:48, 11 September 2018 (UTC)Yuchitown
I've seen "Indian" summarily replaced a number of times, including in a DYK hook where I was trying to use the term ironically (speaking of a rancher who was captured by pirates and rescued by Indians), and have gotten the general impression that the term is avoided in Wikipedia. I won't worry about such usage, in the future. - Donald Albury 16:19, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
How many tribes call themselves Indian? A huge number, see List of federally recognized tribes and the US official list.[1] Why would we avoid it when many Indians embrace it? Not all, I was once told there was a bit of a geographical split. Odd, 2 lists.List of Native American peoples in the United States. Doug Weller talk 16:30, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Well, as an Indigenous American who disagrees with the term, I would say that I'm hoping society will slowly push it out of use for several reasons. First off, Indio (Indian) was from Columbus' misconceptions about being in Asia. It is a name originating in colonialism and geographical inaccuracy. You cannot say "Indian" without remembering Columbus. Furthermore, we are not only named after an Asian people, but that word is still in use to describe these Asians. As a result, I have to specify "Indian-Indian" vs "American Indian" "vs "No, an American Indian, not an Indian-American". If I ever move to India, I guess that'll make me an Indian-Indian? If I wear a shirt from one of the popular Nepal brands here, it is suddenly "Oh, no, that shirts' the wrong kind of Indian". Lots of humor, but it's humorous because calling Indigenous Americans Indians is ridiculous in the first place. It messes with English language and, as I said, is geographically, racially, inaccurate; and stems from a colonial source. There is also the matter of the history of the word itself. Lots of negativity there. Lots of easy negative phrases such as "Indian giver" and "dirty Indian". Who wants that? I don't. We call ourselves Indians because that's what we were taught and as a form of colonial reclaiming. But it's perfectly okay to reject that and hope for a better word to describe ourselves. Wacape (talk) 04:04, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
To my understanding the use of the term is generational with much older generations tolerating or being okay with the use of Indian. While younger generations find it completely offensive because we're not Indians we do not come from the country of India. This is especially true in the United States where Native American or Native is used and by far more acceptable. In Canada I have friends that definitely prefer First Nations or Indigenous. There really is a lot of negative relation towards Indian or American Indian, and some would consider it extremely ignorant to keep using the old terms when they are very inaccurate.Mcelite (talk) 04:14, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

There's probably more of an urban/Indian Country split than a generational split, but Native American name controversy is the best conversation on the web about the topic. As I put on the article in question and as cited many times throughout Wikipedia, American Indians in the United States prefer the term "American Indian" (Tucker, Clyde; Kojetin, Brian; Harrison, Roderick (May 1995). "A statistical analysis of the CPS supplement on race and ethnic origin" (PDF). Census.gov. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bureau of the Census. Retrieved 2013-12-13.).

Using the "American Indian" as opposed to just "Indian" helps clarify a lot. Today, simply "Native" (not "Native American", just "Native") and "Indigenous" are more and more common, but they are not precise enough to identify a group in question on from an international/Wikipedia basis. Yuchitown (talk) 01:41, 20 September 2018 (UTC)Yuchitown

Who took the census though that's what leads up to the findings and not in my opinion but just being around others that are young the term American Indian is seen as a negative because there is so much negativity involved with the terminology. Yes American Indian is different than saying Indian but it is still an offensive and outdated terminology not welcomed by many individuals.Mcelite (talk) 01:59, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Yet another unrecognized group[edit]

...trying to use Wikipedia to bolster their claims of being state-recognized: Texas Band of Yaqui Indians. Yuchitown (talk)Yuchitown 14 September 2018

"In 2015, the Texas state senate passed a congratulatory resolution, authored by Charles Perry, recognizing the organization.[1]" Are you suggesting that this source is wrong? Wacape (talk) 03:52, 19 September 2018 (UTC) EDIT: (I don't know why it's in a box, I'm sorry).
There's a difference between a congratulatory resolution (which all sorts of individuals groups receive and confers no rights) and a formal state recognition process that would involve more than just the senate (i.e. legislature and/or governor). The National Congress of State Legislatures keeps tabs on state-recognized tribes and has no listings for Texas. [2] The National Congress of American Indians lists only the Lipan Apache as being state-recognized. [3] The Indian Arts and Crafts Association lists no state-recognized tribes for Texas. [4] Most official governmental sources only focus on federally recognized tribes; other sources listing state-recognized tribes are self-published and out of date, but still don't list the Texas Band of Yaqui Indians. Yuchitown (talk) 14:57, 19 September 2018 (UTC)Yuchitown
I fixed the formatting by removing the leading space. Indyguy (talk) 13:49, 19 September 2018 (UTC)


Tribal Leader Page for Saracen[edit]

working on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ogahpah/subpage which hopefully will became a page on a historic tribal leader named Saracen.

If anyone is willing, please give a look over and provide any comments or help you can, so that it can be submitted and approved.

Thank you very much.

Ogahpah (talk) 14:17, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Citations needed[edit]

See [5].Citation bombing but most are legitimate. He put one fact tag on clearly sourced material and reverted sourced material with sn edit summary about edits being unverifiable although the sources were obviously verifiable. Doug Weller talk 06:04, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Terminology[edit]

It would be awesome if this project could provide a guideline or recommendation as to terms, both general ("Native American" or "American Indian") and specific ("Blackfeet", not "Blackfoot"). Presumably it could be supported by citations and quotations. Hyacinth (talk) 19:00, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Usage is generational and regional. When possible, we state the person's Nation. When talking in more general terms, we use what is in the sources. Older Natives and those from the Plains tend to say "Indian." Younger folks and those from the PNW and East Coast tend to say, "Native." Younger than that often prefer, "Indigenous," but Indigenous is a worldwide term and not specific to one continent. Many people don't like terms that include "American." There is no universal consensus, but this is not a reason to change established usage unless there is consensus. Recent attempts, including the IP edits, were not improvements and tended to break links and just create unnecessary work for those of us who maintain these articles. Reverting established usage of "Native American" to "American Indian" (As Hyacinth has been doing) is generally perceived as regressive, rather than an improvement. As to members of the Blackfoot Confederacy, et al, again, stick with Nation and WP:RS sources, which for Indigenous topics are primarily those from community leaders within the culture. These guidelines, and this chart from the Native American Journalists Association may help. - CorbieV 21:45, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
P.S. As Wikipedians, our job is not to set policy on terminology. We can only document what is in the sources. - CorbieV 22:16, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
I believe the term Indian or American Indian is fine when the sentence is a quote from the past like from Fredrick Douglas or whoever vs. using the term passively because again yes I strongly agree that it is generational, but the younger you go the more the term Indian or American Indian is seen as a form of racism or disrespect no different than more African Americans would be insulted if they were called Negro. Also to that the term "native", "Native American", and "Indigenous" seems to really be accepted on an individual level just like some are okay with the interchange of Black or African American. You will find some that either term is fine, others prefer black while other prefer African American. Indigenous usually from my experience is used to describe all of the New World, but seems to be way more commonly used in Canada when they prefer that over First Nations.Mcelite (talk) 22:04, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
I'd agree with CorbieV on this. Wikipedia is primarily descriptive rather than prescriptive. That is, it summarizes information from reliable sources and doesn't (and shouldn't) attempt to create standardization where there is none among reliable sources used in the citations for articles. This follows the no original research policy. Prescriptive policies would suggest editors dictate and enforce standard based on personal opinion. That would create friction between editors and result in more edit wars. I think the Native American Journalists Assoc. guidelines are good. Cheers, Mark Ironie (talk) 22:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for weighing in, folks. I'd appreciate more eyes on one of the incidents that set this in motion: Template talk:Native American dances#Why was this moved? Thanks. - CorbieV 19:33, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

I agree that it would be helpful to develop such a guideline. As Wikipedians, it certainly is our job to set guidelines on how terminology is used on Wikipedia. See for example MOS:MORMON and MOS:HAWAII § Hawaiian and Hawaii. Those guidelines should be informed primarily by how terminology is used in reliable sources. The NAJA style guide and other journalistic style guides may be a good starting point. Toohool (talk) 19:39, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Native American use of fire#Article needs to be renamed/moved[edit]

Could use some input. Reasons on talk page. Not thrilled with the names I've thought of so far. There's got to be something pithier and more apt. And yes, what was there was pretty dreadful. It still needs more cleanup. Please go for it. - CorbieV 21:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Featured quality source review RFC[edit]

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:48, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Sterilization of Native American women#Rename / Page Move[edit]

Very few articles link to it. I've done some cleanup and want to rename before adding it to templates. Could use some input. Have added First Nations sourcing and brought it into the present. Previous version had past-tensing and title didn't conform with sourcing that this is forced/coerced sterilization that is still going on. If no objections will probably move to Forced sterilization of Indigenous women in North America, just because it's shorter than, "In the United States and Canada". - CorbieV 21:24, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Show Indians[edit]

Needs serious help. Did a bit of cleanup on Wild West shows, but that's not great, either. - CorbieV 23:53, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Red Haircrow[edit]

This article is being considered for deletion due to a potential lack of notability. The individual is a German-born writer who claims to be Chiricahua Apache, Cherokee, and African-American. Most links were recently removed for being self-promotional. Yuchitown (talk) 16:46, 7 December 2018 (UTC)Yuchitown