# Talk:Lakota religion

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lakota religion/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 15:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
I'll get to this in the next few days. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Ealdgyth. I look forward to reading your comments. Midnightblueowl (talk) 09:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (inline citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

I randomly googled three phrases and only turned up Wikipedia mirrors. Earwig's tool shows no sign of copyright violation.
Spotchecks:
"Holy men derive their powers of interpretation from their communing with supernatural forces." is sourced to this source p. 51 which supports the information.
"At that time, the ancestors of the Lakota were members of a broad confederation that called itself the Oceti Šakowin, usually translated as the Seven Council Fires" is sourced to the same source p. 3 which supports the information
"At the same time, tradition is a vital concept for Lakota communities, one that is regularly invoked to legitimate a link between contemporary practices and those of the past" is sourced to this source p. 14 which supports the information.
General:
 for the plural grouping of the Lakota: "the Lakota" or "the Lakotas"? Pick one.
I've gone through and standardised this as "the Lakota". Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
I'd think this would be American English, right? But I did notice a few Britishisms - "hospitalised" "revitalise" "utilize" "Christianisation" "universalisation" - suggest checking for more.
I've gone through and tried to change all of these; if I have missed any, please do let me know. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Lead
Quick explanation for "yuwípi ritual" please?
I've expanded that sentence to the following: "There are various types, the most common being the yuwípi wičháša (yuwípi man), who specializes in the yuwípi ritual, in which spirits are invoked, usually for healing."
Definition:
"including the encounter with Christianity" this reads awkwardly - perhaps "including after encountering Christianity"?
Agreed and changed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
"permeates other areas of life" perhaps "permeates all areas of life" as I suspect that the Lakota (and other Indigenous Americans) don't separate religion into a separate "sphere"
Good suggestion. Changed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Wakʽą:
I think there is a word missing between "although" and "is" in this phrase: "although is considered fundamentally incomprehensible"
I've gone with "although it is". Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Wakʽąpi:
"although there are motives often difficult to determine" I think you mean "their" instead of "there are"?
Yes. This should be "their motives are", certainly not "there are motives"! Corrected. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
"These wakʽąpi are not worshipped by Lakota religionists" which "these wakʽąpi"? Or do you mean all wakʽąpi?
I've changed "These" to "The" here. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
shouldn't the names be italicized in the following: "the sun, Wi, the sky, Škan, the Earth, Maka, and the rock, Inyan"? and for "include the moon, Hąwí (Hanwi), the wind, Tʽaté (Tate), and the falling star, Wóĥpe (Woĥpe)." and for "include the buffalo, Tatanka, the two-legged (including both bears and humans), Hununpa, the four winds, Tatetob, and the whirlwind, Yumni"?  Also in the Cosmogony section. Also - these should be linked on first occurance, not first later in the cosmogony section
I could be wrong here, but isn't the general policy at Wikipedia not to italicise names? You're quite right about the linking though, so I've sorted that. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Morality:
I think there is a missing word between "although" and "is" in the following: "although is ultimately caused by a person's own actions themselves"
Looks like someone else has already made this change in the article. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
"21st-century" you've used the non-dashed version much more ... shouldn't this also lack a dash?
Looks like someone else has already made this change in the article. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Practices:
"The place of distinct sex roles during ritual has also been an issue of increasing debate among Lakota communities since the mid-20th century" what is being debated?
I've reworded this to the following: "Since the mid-20th century there have also been debates regarding which ritual roles women should be permitted to hold." Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:50, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Sweat lodge:
"The men who meet inside the sweat lodge are typically naked" does this mean only men take part? Or that women doing the ritual remain clothed?
The ethnographic accounts of sweat lodge cited here all discuss men, but that's probably not surprising given that the ethnographers themselves were men. I'm not sure, as there will undoubtedly be variation, but the impression I'm under is that the sweat is always men-only or women-only. I'll recheck Bucko's book at some point to see if he discusses the gendered restrictions regarding the sweat. For the present, I've simply removed mention of men here, going with "Those who meet..." Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Vision quest:
"19th-century records only describe male experiences" as above, you've mainly used the non dashed version - should this also lack a dash?
Changed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:09, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Sun dance:
"A more basic form included" more basic than what?
I've reworded this sentence. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
"Some of the spectators, including women and the elderly" this implies that the elderly and women dont' take part in the sun dance?
My understanding is that adult men have historically been the only ones to take part in the sun dance, and that that may still be the case, although there may be exceptions. I'll try and re-check the sources on this. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Further rites:
 "that the habléčheya ceremony offered" isn't this what we called "hąblécʽeyapi" earlier?
Well spotted. I've standardised the spelling across the article. The problem is that there is no widely accepted Lakota orthography; different books use different spelling. I've tried in general to use the spelling in the msot up-to-date book (i.e. Posthumus'). Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:50, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Holy men:
Caption for the postcard - "20th-century" you've mainly used the non dashed version, shouldn't this not use a dash?
Changed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
"This individual is commonly called a wičháša wakhá ("holy man")," we already said this in the second paragraph of the Healing and cursing section.
I've reworded this so hopefully it doesn't seem so repetitive. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
"at which the specialist will" suggest "after which the specialist will"
Changed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Other specialists:
"capable of undoing the work of other holy men" did you mean to include an "and" at this start of this?
Added. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:16, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
"they have appeared at 21st-century sun dances" you've mainly used the non dashed version, shouldn't this not use a dash?
Someone else has beat me to it and removed the dash here. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:16, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Prehistory:
"By the start of the 16th century, they were living on the headwaters of the River Mississippi." Suggest putting this sentence first in the paragraph - it's very odd to discuss mid-17th century stuff, then bop back to the 16th, then back ot the 17th. Likewise, the last sentence, starting "Linguistic reconstruction places the homeland", should probably go before the "By the start of the 16th" sentence at the beginning
Dcdiehardfan has gone ahead and made those changes to the structure of that paragraph. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
I really appreciate you taking the time to read through this article, Ealdgyth. I know that it probably took a while, but your comments have certainly helped to improve it and thus will be of use to readers for many years to come. Wikipedia's coverage of Native American religions is generally abysmal, so it's an important area for us to work on improving. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Changes look good, passing this now. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:50, 6 March 2024 (UTC)