Talk:Black Indians in the United States

message: I am African American and writing this section with the understanding that "Black Indian" is a subject primarily of interest within the African American community; I am very open to a dialogue challenging and discussing such understanding if you so feel the need. Overall I just want this article vastly expanded and improved.--Msr69er 18:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion and improvement request

message: This article is interesting, about the fusion of two cultures. Are there similar articles that can be referenced such as descendants who overlap between ancestries other than African, such as various European cultures/countries/religions, and other stuff? Or for people of non-native ancestry adopting native worship practises? Tyciol 18:02, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Indian Overlaps

message: This has also been tagged with an WikiProject Ethnic groups tag to improve the quality of this article. Mappychris 21:44, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ethnic Group Tag

message: I had never heard of black Indians until after Wikipedia was invented.  Indians used to be called "Redskins."  GhostofSuperslum 01:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then you should do more research on Native Americans I'd say. I know a black Diné Indian actually. This is definitely a real phenomenon. Just look at all the external links. And the term redskin was more in reference to body paint used by some Native groups than to the actual color of their skin. Ungovernable ForceGot something to say? 01:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you believe that "body paint" is the reason why Indians were called "Redskins," you'll believe that the Brooklyn Bridge is on sale for 20 dollars.  GhostofSuperslum 13:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is? $20? That's pretty cheap. Where can I bid on that? I've also heard something about blood, but paint used by various N. Eastern groups is what we learned in our Native Peoples of N. America class. It was probably a bit of both in terms of coming up with the name. Or are you thinking of something completely different? Ungovernable ForceGot something to say? 20:48, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I've heard of Redskins

message: The merger is a good idea. It will make this article better. futurebird 16:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree per Futurebird. on camera 13:08, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: Earlier tonight, an IP editor disagreed with the number 90%, but went about disputing it in exactly the wrong way, by blanking the page repeatedly.  However, I did notice that 90% just seemed high, so I did some digging, and as a result have changed the number.
The number was given as 40% until earlier this evening, when it was changed by User:Zbp23, apparently with support from User:Relir.
In theory, this number was supported by references:
However, neither number, as far as I can tell, is supported by those references.  I cannot find any assertion of Native American ancestry in African Americans in the first reference, and the second reference is a broken link.
I did find a reference on the same site as the first reference (and which I included in my edit),
, which seems to indicate a much smaller percentage, of 3.3-5.1%.
Now, I understand that the average percentage of Native American ancestry in each person is not the same as the percentage of people with any trace of Native American ancestry, so I'll admit the number might be slightly different.  If someone can provide a legitimate link to a higher number, more power to you.  Indeed, if someone thinks it better to not include a percentage at all until a better source is found, I wouldn't disagree. --barneca (talk) 02:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the sentence until a legit number, backed by references, is found. --barneca (talk) 12:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Material on assertions about the high percentage of Native American ancestry among African Americans has been superseded by the FACTS of genetic research in the late 20th and 21st century - for the short version, see African American Harvard historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr.'s article on The Root.com (in External Links) about the Oct. 2009 report on European ancestry of Michelle Obama.  Also, this material was covered at greater length in his two recent TV series on genetic/genealogical ancestry of 19 prominent African Americans, and published in book form.  While some African Americans may have some small percentage of Native American ancestry, most don't.  Gates points out that many more African Americans have a significant percentage of European ancestry, and that this can produce the "straight hair", "high cheekbones" and other features people like to point to as Native American (so can the diverse heritage of African peoples.)--Parkwells (talk) 18:53, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Percentage of African Americans with Native American ancestry

message: I created an ethnic group infobox for the article. It is rather basic, but I felt that this article could use some improvement. The people in the infobox have sources indicating that they have Native American ancestry in their respective articles.
Mappychris (talk) 21:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ethnic Group Infobox

message: Ok can any one find any information on her because there seems to  be alot of dead ends. I have nothing against her at all I would just feel alot more comfortable with her heritage being referecned instead her just being acknowledged.Mcelite (talk) 02:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Chrisette Michele

message: I was wondering if people like Oscar Pettiford, more American Indian than black by the sounds of it, would fit on the end list? Or is it just for people who are primarily of African ancestry?--T. Anthony (talk) 11:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: In the other direction

message: This article should be deleted. Or create white/native americans, chinese/native americans, irish/native americans articles as well ... This article is of little value.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.215.118.156 (talk • contribs) 
:It is a valid article, however the problem with it remains that the definition of 'black indian' does not remain constant throughout. It is not just anyone with a mixed Black/Native ancestry. However, one cannot say that a 'Black Indian' is a black person with or without native ancestry who lives/lived with close ties to the native community, their culture and ways of life ... and then go on to give examples of anyone contemporary (or historical for that matter, but those examples seem to be spot on) who is a 'Black Indian' if their biography on this actual site mentions nothing of such close ties or ways of life. Cyrus40540057 (talk) 04:06, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Article for Deletion

message: This article appears to breach  WP:SYNTH at best and represents it seems to me original research.  For example the first reference provided  does not give the term Black Indian though does cover ethnic and racial terminology. (I have concern also that these references do not support the assertions they are tagged against but that is another issue and I have tagged accordingly)  At the very least I wish to see a reliable source cited  that uses the term. --Matilda talk 00:50, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the term Black Indian, Afro-Native American or African-Native American are tossed around. Where would be a good place to find more reliable sources is the question. I'm going to try the web of knowledge and see if i can find anything that will help. Even though African-Native American admixture is not uncommon it may be hard to find more reliable sources on it. I've tried some books but they're self published so I couldn't use them.Mcelite (talk) 00:55, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a look at Racial and ethnic demographics of the United States and the sources used in that article.  The US census Bureau should have some data if it is a significant group.  --Matilda talk 01:31, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this is off-point, but I'm curious about your contention about the bloodlines of "most" Haitians.  Although, undeniably, some have Arawak heritage, it would seem to me that most would not, given the fact that the Arawak population was fairly decimated after a time.  I figure that "most" Haitians' bloodlines are fairly undiluted and that more might have European blood than Arawak blood -- but I'd be interested in reading further information on the subject, if you'd care to provide sources.  deeceevoice (talk) 08:10, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: WP:SYNTH? or original research

message: This part of the article, especially the last sentence, is POV. Fclass (talk) 16:33, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Geneaology

message: First of all the term is Native Americans, Indians are from India, second, don't you know that native americans aren't only from the U.S., they are also indigenous peoples of the Americas. Third, what is indian hair, you make it seem as if people not of native american heritage have nappy hair. I myself, am black, have nappy, long hair and my parents are Afro- Latin American (from Haiti) which is a country in the Americas, that was inhabited by indigenous Arwark, Taino natives (which would make myself Black Native American). I also noted that you only list people of U.S. native american heritage. Who taught you this? I think this page MUST be written by someone who knows better of the Black Native American culture.Cakechild (talk) 02:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black Native Americans : Not only people from the United States

message: Several assertions in this article, even some that have been referenced, have been challenged, it would be a service if a professional scholar and/or others with advanced knowledge in this area would review and edit this article accordingly.--Msr69er (talk) 12:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for citations/references verified

message: What about them???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.164.223.22 (talk) 14:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Indians form India

message: The article is about those with both Native Indian and Black heritages within the US. The reality is there are many more of people with such mixed heritage outside the US but within the Americas, hence the title change. Thanks, SqueakBox 18:59, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Title change

message: That's a ridiculously high number. There certainly are many who possess some degree of Native ancestry (whether large or small) but it is much, much lower than 90%. That number however seems much more accurate for the percentage with European ancestors (genetic studies have shown the vast majority of African Americans to have some European ancestry and the reported numbers of those with Native ancestry to be highly exaggerated. The figures found in these studies are also supported by the actual intermarriage rates between Africans and Europeans/Natives throughout the history of the United States of America). ElijahTM (talk) 10:33, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, I haven't read the article in its entirety.  But, Elijah, I must say that I recall reading an article in the New Amsterdam News, I believe, that stated that the number of African-Americans with Native American ancestry was in the upper 80th percentile.  So, the 90 percent figure doesn't seem too far-fetched.  However, because this is an encyclopedia, whatever figure(s) presented must be documented.  If they're not, then others -- understandably -- may find them suspect.  This seems to be a general problem with the article, at least insofar as what little I've read:  e.g., the acceptance of the term "African-Native American" as deserving of more prominent mention than "Black American" and the assumption that every African American with Native American ancestry qualifies as a "Black Indian" as the term historically and commonly is used/understood.  The writing needs to be more precise.  deeceevoice (talk) 15:25, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm so sorry for the late reply. I've had tests and still have tests until Saturday. lol Well I am considering to go ahead and change the info box back to Black Indians even though it's behind the times. It is more commonly known than African-Native Americans. Hmmm or I'll just have to do some digging to provide a source to trump Black Indians as the most common term no different than when Black American was changed to African AMerican.Mcelite (talk) 21:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Material on assertions about the high percentage of Native American ancestry among African Americans has been superseded by the FACTS of genetic research in the late 20th and 21st century - for the short version, see African American Harvard historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr.'s article on The Root.com (in External Links) about the Oct. 2009 report on European ancestry of Michelle Obama.  He dismisses talk about high percentage of Native American ancestry as a romanticizing of the US past.  Also, this material on genetics and percentages in the population was covered at greater length in his two recent TV series on genetic/genealogical ancestry of 19 prominent African Americans, and published in book form.  Summary: While some African Americans may have  Native American ancestry, most don't.  Gates points out that many more African Americans have a significant percentage of European ancestry, and that this can produce the "straight hair", "high cheekbones" and other features people like to point to as "Native American" (so can the diverse heritage of African peoples without any European additions.)--Parkwells (talk) 18:53, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: 90% of African Americans have Native ancestry?

message: Under "Native American slave ownership":
Native Americans of mixed white blood stood at the top, "pure" Native Americans next, and people mixed with of African descent were at the bottom.
Something seems to be missing between "with" and "of", but I am not sure what.
Even among Native peoples themselves, some of these physical features have been confused with being Sub-Saharan African due to the negative influence of the one-drop rule.
This sentence needs clarification. What exactly has been confused with what exactly?
I would fix the sentences myself if I could, but the intended meaning is not quite clear to me. Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:16, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: With confusion of physical characteristics you're talking about a few traits like high cheek bones, light brown/ tan complexion and others. I'm not sure how it is confusing with the mixture sentence.Mcelite (talk) 02:43, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So what is meant is that Native American traits have been confused with Sub-Saharan African traits? Do I understand correctly now? Florian Blaschke (talk) 05:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Unclear sentences

message: Is his photo here because he lived with the Crow and acted as a chief with them?  he was of European and African descent - since one source said his mother was a mulatto slave and his father was Irish, he was more than 50% European.  He did not have Native American ancestry, nor did he grow up in a Native American culture.  He adopted some practices later as a mountain man and lived with Indians, but so did other fur traders.--Parkwells (talk) 22:44, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, that's true - I think Black Indian mostly means those who were descendants or intermarried with people from tribes.  Lots of stories for sure.--Parkwells (talk) 15:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: [[James Beckwourth]]

message: This article did not accurately portray the relationships between blacks and indians in florida.  Please recall Florida did not become a state until 1832 -- just 30 years shy of emancipation.  The "Seminole Wars" are, in some places, recognized as a Slave Revolt.  An historical event, called the Massacre of the Whites By the Indians and the Blacks, recounts a revolt outside of Jacksonville that resulted in the deaths of 200+ white settlers.(although I'm sure americans would not tolerate a 're-enactment' of that--so much for 'heritage').  The article seems to emphasize a subservient, non-equal relationship between the two groups.  It is almost non-sense because I assure you a man did not 'escape' for "freedom" in order to become a slave?  Moreover, the independent African nation-state of Angola (in the vicinity of Bradenton,Florida) conducted trade with the Indigenous populations in Cuba and throughout peninsular Florida.  After General Braden sacked Angola, on the order of Andrew Jackson, some of their descendants were able to escape to the Bahamas and retain the "Seminole" identity to this day.  It should also be noted that we may be redefining terms through time.  The words "Seminole" and "marroon" have a common origin, "Cinnamaroon" (I think portugese) for runaway.  We currently describe Seminoles as the 'indian remnant' and marroons as escaped blacks. However for example in Jamaica and Suriname, they were called by the original term "Cinnamaroons".  My point being we may be drawing distinctions where there likely was not one in the past.  The word 'Seminole' and the Seminole wars may refer to both the blacks AND the indians collectively.  But really the article should include discussion of 'Angola' -- its much more significant than a really bad prison in La.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.31.105.66 (talk) 16:11, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seminole Wars / Angola 

message: It appears that someone has wholesale changed Indian or American Indian to Native American, including places where it makes no sense.
* "Native American Wars"- the quote is "Indian Wars"
* "it has always been the policy of this government to create an aversion in them Native Americans to Negroes." (1758)
* "Those who remained among the European-American communities were frequently listed as mulatto, a term applied to Native American-white, Native American-African, and African-white mixed-race people, as well as tri-racial people."
There are a lot more areas than just the quotes. --  Gadget850 talk 00:26, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is the edit that made the cahnge. Book titles, URLs, article titles, etc. This cannot be undone, and it is a mess. --  Gadget850 talk 00:57, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

text: I'll have to keep a close eye on the issue. I understand people wanting to be politically correct but we can't change "historical quotes".  I temporarily had limited internet access so I'll be able to be more active now.Mcelite (talk) 18:16, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Native American is only marginally politically correct; see Native American name controversy. --  Gadget850 talk 20:13, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian → Native American 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List_of_people_of_African-American_and_Native_American_admixture#Requested_move.  Thanks. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 22:58, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at Talk:List_of_people_of_African-American_and_Native_American_admixture#Requested_move

message: I don't have the time or resources to do this myself, but this article would benefit from the inclusion of some information about the "paper genocide" performed by Walter Plecker in the 20th century, by which the vast majority of people with Indian ancestry in the state of Virginia were classified as "colored". Plecker's work and the Racial Integrity Act of 1924 grouped all Virginia Indians and African-Americans together, and Plecker went out of his way to eradicate any records that made a distinction. There's a good summary of his work and its effects here. Similar laws were in place in other states, but in no state were they enforced as ruthlessly as they were in Virginia, thanks to Plecker. The result is that it is extremely difficult for people with Virginia Indian ancestry, whether they identify as Indian, African-American or white, to prove that ancestry via official records. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 02:38, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Walter Plecker and the paper genocide 

message: This article should be deleted or moved to mixed people in the US or similar. It keeps hopping from "African" to "African American". Terrible! 109.147.103.215 (talk) 20:42, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is confused 

message: Black Indians may have historically lived in the south but have been removed. There's the Poarch Creeks in Alabama, and Lumbee in North Carolina (although many Lumbee don't identify as Black Indians). The Mississippi Choctaw don't have many Black Indians in their tribe. Virginia isn't the South. Oklahoma Seminole have large Black Indian populations, but Florida Seminole not so much. Are there citations for Black Indians living the Southern United States today? Thanks, Yuchitown (talk) 15:21, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Locations

message: Hi everyone, I think by this weekend I'll be able to create a few more sections I just haven't had the time.  That way the colonial period will be broken up some more to include more relevant information. The article on Native American slaves has the information I just need to transfer it, and organize it.  The update is long over due.Mcelite (talk) 16:20, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Sections to be Created 

message: I'm checking to make sure everyone is okay with me adding Kyrie Irving to the section. He's not enrolled with the Sioux Nation, but his mother was Sioux, and has been welcomed by the Standing Rocking Sioux. I was also going to suggest Mabel Fairbanks for historical her mother was Seminole but like Kyrie we have no reliable source stating that she was an enrolled member of the Seminole tribe.Mcelite (talk) 03:50, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: He's a descendant and Standing Rock honours him as a "relative", not a member. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 21:54, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Kyrie Irving to Contemporary Black Indians 

message: we've been over this. Cite the exact source and quotation you're referring to instead of just reverting. The Gates' special, which is what is currently cited, specifically focused on people whose blood myths turned out to be false. Deleting all the past discussion from your talk page doesn't mean it didn't happen. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 22:31, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not doing anything special this is the source we're using . Or is it linking weird?? It's source #65.Mcelite (talk) 23:01, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I had to open it in Internet Explorer...Mcelite (talk) 23:09, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

text: Sorry I'm replying late things are unfortunately busy on my end as of now. Okay so flash is the problem. Should we omit the sentence since it doesn't reflect the sources I think it's fine what you edited, but I could try to find the source on another legitimate website. I can check youtube and see if the video is there though I know youtube is not preferred b/c videos can be manipulated. Either way the sentence needs to reflect the sources a bit more though what's there now is better.Mcelite (talk) 01:15, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I've found a transcript in an NPR source. There are also a bunch of odd typos and other mistakes in the section that I don't recall being there before. I'm going to take a pass at it now and see if I can fix this stuff. Gates' special should also be linked; I'm not sure why it's not. Addressing all of this now. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 18:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gates special as source 

message: I added a new section that I feel is well sourced. It may be controversial which we can note, but it's not a NPOV issue, it's history.WillieP100 (talk) 21:14, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: User:CorbieVreccan claims there is controversy and concern from other editors, yet I see nothing here. This solicitation for discussion was posted before he/she reverted the edits.WillieP100 (talk) 00:44, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: User:CorbieVreccan what unsourced commentary are you referring to? What the hell are you talking about where I haven't engaged in talk while making edits? Can you point to a single example of that? To the contrary, I have solicited discussion in talk PRIOR to being reverted, and gotten crickets, 'in isolation' -- if no one responds what I am supposed to do about that? What is happening is editors are reverting, oftentimes with the typical 'take it to talk,' then not actually going to talk to discuss it with me. WillieP100 (talk) 01:00, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You also put unsourced opinion in the African Americans article. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 01:05, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

text: You still haven't answered any questions I asked on my talk page in response to your off-base warnings/accusations. What examples can you give for your claims in the second and third comments above? The African American material by user JWilliams835 is pretty much the same as that of here -- what claims there are unsourced?WillieP100 (talk) 01:21, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV accusations 

message: How does wikipedia classify people of African Indian descent? This article is confusing. The article should be renamed to African Native Americans and a new article called African Indian Americans. The terms "black" as is "white, colored, brown, etc." are not official terms of ethnicity. Terms like African American, European American, Indian American, Native Americans are official terms. Gengeros (talk) 15:52, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh? In America, and many other parts of the English-speaking world "Black" is both a racial and cultural identity. No one calls themselves or these communities "African Native American." People of this mixed heritage call themselves Black Natives if that's what they are, or Natives who also have some Black ancestry, or Black folks who also have some Indigenous heritage. While some do prefer to self-id as African-American, as long as it's said without hate or intention to harm by someone of ill-intent, "Black" is not a perjorative. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 22:51, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: There's also Afro-Indigenous, but that would include people beyond the United States. There definitely isn't a good consensus for terminology for Native Americans with African ancestry yet, and probably won't be for several years, although the subject is gaining more scholarly interest. Yuchitown (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename article to: African Native Americans and new article about African Indian Americans