Misplaced Pages

Proposals by Proabivouac

Very tentatively, I propose a hard redirect from Cherokee to Cherokee Nation (currently, Cherokee Nation hard redirects to Cherokee), with Cherokee people reachable from the main article, Cherokee Nation. Cherokee heritage groups strikes me as too dismissive. We can privilege the Cherokee Nation with the hard redirect from Cherokee; I can see no need to second-guess Cherokee descendants (at least some are) with article titles which suggest a league of weekend hobbyists (though this may be accurate in some or many cases.) I might change my mind as more facts become apparent to me. How much weight to accord Southern Cherokee claims in the Cherokee Nation article? I agree that it deserves mention, but cannot see that it deserves much space. Imagine that a relatively small group (so this is, yes?) of Frenchmen were claiming to be part of France, or to rightly be a sort of second France (e.g. Quebec). How much weight would this merit on France? Not too much. On French People, it is quite relevant. This article, which again should be named Cherokee Nation, must not appear to - and shouldn't need to - argue against the Southern Cherokee (or any analogous) claims. It is not true that the United States government can make anyone a Cherokee or not a Cherokee (though the existence of these distinctions is notable, and warrant mention.) What is true is that the Cherokee Nation is more significant than a relatively small number of people claiming Cherokee ethnicity or who happen to be of Cherokee descent (of course many millions can claim at least some Cherokee blood), and we can show this through overall organization rather than in-text argument. Proabivouac 10:25, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

• Agree. I too believe that there should be separate articles on Cherokee Nation and Cherokee People.--Aaron Walden 11:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
• Agree. In response, the article can split into two: The Cherokee Nation as a federally recognized tribe, and Cherokee people as an ethnocultural entity. I proposed a new article on Cherokee-Americans, a growing self-label for Cherokee descendants who felt they became a people apart from the tribe and an ethnicity of its' own after detribalization, dispersal and relocation in the late 19th and 20th centuries. The majority of them not recognized as tribal members live in California, the Western and Midwest states, but there are fairly large concentrations in Texas and the Southeast.+ Mike D 26 13:03, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
• Agree. In my wildest dreams, I have had a similar idea. I ask myself, "Is being Cherokee like being German, or is it like being Jewish." What I mean is, should the article draw which set of parallels: Germany <-> Cherokee, or Jew <-> Cherokee, Israel <-> Cherokee Nation, Who is a Jew? <-> Cherokee identity, Ten Lost Tribes <-> Southern Cherokee Nation, History of Jews in Poland <-> History of Cherokee in Kentucky, etc. I haven't made too big of a deal about this, because both tracks are painful for someone, and because I don't know enough about the subject to know if this is really a good idea or not. But given the new French Connection, I thought I can go ahead and present my idea. Smmurphy 15:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
• Disagree. This is a bad idea. It is a violation of Federal Law for someone to misrepresent they are an indian. In answer to the previous question, Cherokee is a Political Nation, not a racial class, and not a social club. I can see no matter how much discussion there is on this topic, people just fail to get it. I will explain this one last time. 1) Indian Nations are sovereign governments, not racial clubs 2) Federal Law makes it a crime to post false information about tribes and claiming to be a member of one when you are not (like someone claiming they are Cherokee when they are not enrolled) 3) Any of these tribes through the US Attorneys Office can force Misplaced Pages to take information down if its used to violate the law 4) If these people are not listed in Indian Rolls, there is no way to verify they are Cherokee 5) Heritage Groups articles are a nice compromise, however, we do not have to allow them, I just suggested it. In fact, none of them can be verified as being Cherokee unless they are enrolled. 6) I disagree with any characterization of Cherokee identify as a racial distinction, as it is poltical and always has been. 7) Not verifiable on Indian Rolls means it does not belong on Misplaced Pages. Fails WP:V. There are some areas where editorial concensus doesn't fly. Are we allowed to post kiddie-porn in Misplaced Pages? No. Why? Because editorial concensus does not apply in that case because its illegal. Falsely accrediting groups claiming to be Indians involves similar issues. No amount of editorial concensus changes this. It has been argued that WP:V resolves this issue since non-members cannot be verified as being Indians. I agree, for the reasons stated. Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 16:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Jeffrey, Putting aside the legal questions (which anyhow are better dealt with by the Office): Since (obviously) Indians existed before the United States of America was around to recognize them, federal law cannot in theory be the basis for being an Indian. Surely you will grant me that. The question I have is whether there is any practical distinction between membership in a federal recognized nation and Indian ethnicity: Is it, in fact, the case that there are no individuals in the United States who are culturally Indian - speaking an American language, for example - who are not also members of recognized tribes?

For those on the other side of this debate, I ask: what, if any, academic sources do we have that verify the existence of Cherokee who are not members of the Cherokee Nation? Can we list them here?Proabivouac 21:12, 8 June 2007

There is no way to verify someone is an indian unless they can be traced from ancestors on an Indian Roll. If they can be traced from these rolls, then they also qualify for membership in the Cherokee Nation. Groups cannot be verified as tribes unless they meet certain criteria (which includes have traceable ancestry to these same indian rolls). For the sake of argument, let's say I were to agree with you on Cherokee Nation and Cherokee People (which I do not, just for the sake or argument). Fine. Now how do we verify this group are indians are if they are a fake Kippendorf's Tribe. Which rolls do I go to to trace them? What historical records do we refer to? It's a slippery slope, and not one we should be on. If they are not tribal members they are not indians. We can argue, debate, and wikiality ourselves into a corner -- it does not matter. You cannot prove they are, and the Federal Government says they are not. It does not matter how many professors support the wannabee concept with books, journals, and crazy theories. Misplaced Pages has no authority to recognize groups as Cherokee or any other tribe. I am tired of debating what should be obvious here. Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 23:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

This was discussed when I brought in the "Cherokee Identity" section. The main sources were:

• Garroutte, Eva Marie. Real Indians: identity and the survival of Native America. University of California Press, 2003 - About this issue exactly
• Morello, Carol. "Native American Roots, Once Hidden, Now Embraced". Washington Post, April 7, 2001 - about people reclaiming thei roots (not academic)
• Pierpoint, Mary. Unrecognized Cherokee claims cause problems for nation. Indian Country Today. August 16, 2000 (Accessed May 16, 2007) - About the problems this has caused (not academic)
• Russell, Steve. "Review of Real Indians: Identity and the Survival of Native America" PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review. May 2004, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 147-153
• Thornton, Russell. The Cherokees: A Population History. University of Nebraska Pres, 1992 - Possibly the most controversial statement possible comes from here, "common to all Cherokees is an identity as Cherokee... identified themselves as Cherokee. So they are."

Also, Perdue, T. "Clan and Court: Another Look at the Early Cherokee Republic." American Indian Quarterly. Vol. 24, 4, 2000, p. 562 talks a little bit about the historic question of how Cherokee have identified themselves politically, and

and Christensen, P.G., Minority Interaction in John Rollin Ridge's The Life and Adventures of Joaquin Murieta MELUS, Vol. 17, No. 2, Before the Centennial. (Summer, 1991 - Summer, 1992), pp. 61-72 talks a little about historic (failed) attempts to gain federal recognition by other groups. The Southern Cherokee that Christenson talks about may not be the same as the Souther Cherokee Nation today (I have a suspicion that todays iteration has perhaps adopted Ridge, but I don't know).

The fullest form of my presentation on the issue is in the May 30th version of the article, here, much of which has since been removed or put into the Cherokee Heritage Groups article. Smmurphy 22:28, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Does Garoutte at any point state that these claimants actually are Cherokees? From this alone, there I can't see anyone stating that there are other Cherokee out there, except this Thorton's statement which appears to say that anyone who identifies themselves as a Cherokee is one. Is that really his position?

Apologies, Phaedriel, if I'm messing up this mediation process; refactor at will.Proabivouac 22:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Proposals by User:Jeffrey Vernon Merkey

A Native American Tribe is generally appropriate for inclusion in Misplaced Pages if the Tribe is recognized as a sovereign entity by the Congress of the United States or registered with the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs or the Canadian Government for those tribes from the United States or Canada. Any other group of Indigenous Native Americans outside of these jurisdictions may also have articles in compliance with this policy, however, any non-governmental recognized groups within United States or Canadian jurisdiction claiming to be a group of indigineous Native Americans may not be referred to as "Indian Tribes", "Indian Nations", or "Indian Bands" unless they meet the exemptions contained in this policy.

This guideline discusses some general criteria to help editors gauge whether a group claiming to be a Native American Tribe of American Indians may be listed as such and is worthy of inclusion. Failure to meet these policies and guidelines should be taken as a strong cautionary flag that the article needs to be submitted for deletion according to this policy.

Generally speaking, groups claiming to be Indian Tribes who are not Federally Recognized by the Congress of the United States may not meet the guidelines for verifiability, as the criteria under Federal Law for determining who is or is not Indian are those groups registered with the Bureau of Indian Affairs or recognized by the Congress of the United States. Groups who are not Federally recognized as Indian Tribes, Bands, or Nations may not meet the standards of verifiabitiy for inclusion in Misplaced Pages under these classifications.

There are a large number of Groups who do not have a direct relationship with the Government of the United States as Indians, and are therefore, not eligible for the special programs and services provided by the United States to American Indians because of their status as Indians. If a Federally recognized Native Tribe or group or confederacy of Native Tribes who are Federaly recognized have an article on Misplaced Pages, non-Federally recognized groups claiming to be indians of the same general cultural or social group should not appear in the same article unless no Government-to-Government relationship exists between the United States and that particular cultural group or subgroup.

Allowing articles for groups who are not Federally recognized is not completely prohibited, however, other groups (groups not recognized as Indians by the United States who claim ancestry for a previously existing group of Native Americans with an article on Misplaced Pages) should not appear in the same articles as Federally recognized Native Groups. These groups do not meet the criteria for inclusion because they cannot be verified as being American Indians. Extinct Tribes who no longer have a direct Government-to-Government relationship with the United States may have articles, as can indigenous peoples and groups outside of the United States. This policy refers to American Indians from the North American contintent subject to United States or Canadian Jurisdiction, however, the same principles may apply to other indigenous groups in other areas of the world where direct government-to-government relationships exist between a national government and the government of an indigenous group or subgroup of people. An article may be appropriate for any indigenous groups where no governmental relationship exists, or is likely to exist, and where no other indigineous group or subgroup claiming the same cultural identity has such a relationship within the same geographical or demographic area.

State Recognized Indian Tribes

There is no such entity as a State Recognized Indian Tribe under Federal Law. The United States Constitution vests the power to establish direct government-to-government relationships with Indian Tribes solely within the Congress of the United States under Article 1, Section 8, "Congress shall have the power ... to regulate trade between the states, with foreign nations, and with the Indian Tribes."

Any group claiming to be a "State Recognized Indian Tribe" may not meet the criteria for verifiability because they are not recognized as Indians by the United States and have no direct Government-to-Government relationship with the Federal Government, and are therefore not eligible for the special programs and services afforded to Indians because of their status as Indians under United States Code 25 U.S.C.

Exemptions

The following exemptions may apply:

• Extinct tribes who no longer have a direct relationship with the United States.

• Tribes who have never had a direct relationship with the Federal Government or Government of Canada, but who have a verifiable history in other sources as existing in ancient times.

• Indigineous Peoples outside of the Jurisdiction of the United States and Canada which do not have a direct government-to-government relationship with a National Government, and for which no other group with such a relationship exists within a given group of subgroup of indigineous peoples.

• Fraternal or Religious Organizations comprised of indigineous peoples with a verifiable history, such as the Native American Church or the Ani-kutani.

• inter-tribal organizations, such as the Gourd Society, or articles about inter-tribal activities, such as articles related to the pow wow.

• Articles, when standing alone, that describe common cultural elements of Native American Customs and Culture, such as Green Corn Ceremony or Black Drink.

Why does Misplaced Pages have this Policy?

• Misplaced Pages is the encyclopedia "anyone can edit". Not the encyclopedia "anyone can represent they are something they are not".

• Misplaced Pages has had bad experiences with users and groups claiming credentials and expertise and/or misrepresenting themselves or their identity with no reliable methods to verify the accuracy of content or affiliations. This can be particularly difficult when dealing with topics related to indigineous peoples.

• Misplaced Pages has experienced a large volume of adverse public scrutiny and publicity in difficult areas of expertise, making it difficult to ascertain whether specific content is accurate or the results of "Wikiality" by well meaning and sincere, but misguided editors.

• Determining accurate cultural and historical content with indigineous groups where oral traditions may have been the only means of transfer of cultural information between members of a particular group or society is extremely difficult to verify, and in some cases, impossible, making it necessary for administrators and reviewers of content to rely on personal trust and relationships with certain editors as the only reliable method for ascertaining the accuracy or quality of materials related to indigineous peoples.

• Verifiability is key to Misplaced Pages's credibility. Groups claiming to be Native American Tribes who are not Federally recognized provide no avenues or reliable methods for verifying accuracy of content or identity, and therefore fail Misplaced Pages's standards of Verifiability.

• Many groups claiming to be Native American Tribes do so in order to obtain the benefits granted to legitimate Native American Tribes, and may be misusing Misplaced Pages to misrepresent themselves for the purposes of violating Federal Law or State Law in for-profit schemes such as illegal casinos or for distribution of controlled substances (peyote) in a for profit CCE (Continuing Criminal Enterpise) by masquerading as American Indians (see James Mooney (Utah)), or other activities which bring Misplaced Pages and its content under scrutiny and expose the project to adverse publicity or a loss of public trust and confidence by legitimate Native American Tribes and the Federal Government.

• In some cases, impersonating an American Indian or representing a Group of Indians as Federally or State Recognized when they are not for improper purposes violates Federal Law and exposes Misplaced Pages to liability and undesirable and unnecessary public scrutiny.

• Misplaced Pages is not a "link farm" or link repository for plastic shamans (See Harley Reagan).

Misplaced Pages Conflict of Interest

Generally speaking, Native American Editors and their editing of articles related to Native American Culture and in particular their own Native Cultures do not violate WP:COI. The reasoning here is that the necessary expertise to verify various cultural elements such as the language and culture of a particular tribe may exist only within these editors due to the practice of oral traditions or familiarity within a given culture as it pertains to their ability to accurately identify and validate reliable sources. Non-native editors may have difficulty doing so due to unfamiliarity with the culture or language. Additionally, the WP:COI policy is preempted by Wikimedia Foundation Non-Discrimination Policies which bar race and national origin as prohibitive categories for determining who can or cannot edit a particular article.

General standards for Articles Pertaining to Native American Tribes

1. Material in Misplaced Pages should be properly referenced as described in the verifiability policy. Properly referencing information is a high priority, and articles which remain unreferenced for long periods of time (i.e. a few months or more) should either be improved or stand a risk of deletion. Articles related to Native American Groups claiming to be "Indian Tribes, Bands, or Nations" should be listed with the Bureau of Indian Affairs or Canadian government or recognized by these governments unless they meet the exemptions defined above. Articles or content which does not meet this criteria cannot be verified, and is subject to deletion.
2. Articles should follow Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines. Even if an article meets the criteria above, it still might fail to meet other policies such as neutral point of view or what Misplaced Pages is not. For example, an otherwise well-referenced and topical article whose subject is inherently based in a point of view, or is intended to "fork" an existing article to spotlight a single viewpoint, is likely to be unacceptable according to policy on point of view forks.

As with any rule of thumb, some articles may be kept despite not meeting the above, but there should be a practical, compelling reason for such exceptions, and the articles should be annotated to indicate these groups are not classified as "Indian Tribes, Bands, or Nations" by the United States.

Dealing with articles that do not meet this standard

Articles that do not meet the above standards are handled in a variety of ways.

• Articles or content that fail to meet this policy may be removed from the Misplaced Pages article space via deletion.

• Articles or content that fail to meet this policy may be reviewed and/or forked provided they are not identified as "Indian Tribes, Bands, or Nations".

Footnotes

The Congress of the United States, The Federal Courts, and State Courts have repeatedly upheld this sovereignty of Native Tribes and define their relationship in political rather than racial terms, and have stated such as a compelling interest of the United States. Federal prosecutors have asserted fraudulently claiming to be a member of an American Indian tribe violates Federal law.

1. http://www.nativeamericanchurch.net/stott.html
2. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20061211/ai_n16904730

See also

• Misplaced Pages:Verifiability: This policy describes the reasons and the need to attribute material to reliable published sources.
• Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources: This guideline discusses what constitutes a reliable source on Misplaced Pages and presents examples of types of sources.
• Misplaced Pages:What Misplaced Pages is not: This policy discusses examples of types of otherwise verifiable subject matter and articles that should not be included in Misplaced Pages.
• Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view: A guiding principle of Misplaced Pages - often, articles that do not meet this standard get nominated for deletion, even if they meet the standards for article inclusion.
• Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest: A guideline which deals with conflicts of interests, which may affect one's editing if there is a close relationship with the subject.

Support - complies with Federal Law, and does not expose Misplaced Pages or its editors to adverse actions for good faith edits of articles on Native Tribes. Also sets a high standard with established principles used by the United States for 200 years. Also does not expose the Wikimedia Foundation to having its non-Profit status pulled by the United States for failing to comply with the law. Additonally, it does not expose the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors/Trustees to criminal indictment and jail time for promoting a CCE (Continuing Criminal Enterprise). It also sets appropriate standards for recognition of Tribes which will be supported by the legitimate tribal entiries and governments and increase their confidence in Misplaced Pages as well as the confidence of the general public and the Federal Government in the quality of the project. Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 23:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)