Talk:Cherokee/Archive 3

message: Why is there no pre-European contact history? Theories about migration should be added if possible, as well as origins. There is some inforation available. Also, the section on Keetoowah Nighthawk Society seems to be out of place. The structure of the article could use some revamping. I am just not sure how would be best for this to be done. I would put all of the history at the beginning and then go off into social concerns such as langauge, customs, and things of that nature. Just a thought.
:There's no citable pre-contact history, only oral traditiona which would be WP:OR.  So I think we should leave that out.  There are origin stories.  Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 06:26, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think (but am not sure) that this is part of JMV's contention that academic and journalistic sources are not acceptable for this article.  For now, if you can cite information to representatives of the Cherokee Nation governing bodies, I think it is ok.  We'll see if we can expand that, based perhaps on the proposal to go through dispute resolution processes above. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:50, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can provide a number of archaeology publications on the precontact Cherokee, which I believe are reputable and so hopefully would counter any WP:V assertions.  Would that be desireable?  I don't quite feel prepared to write a section on it at the moment, and certainly not when the article has become so contentious.  TriNotch 16:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: These sources can be used.  I know our pre-contact history, but me knowing it does not circumvent the requirements of WP:OR.  So I think that's a catch 22.  I can vet the materials and tell you whether or not they are accurate.  Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 18:37, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: James Mooney's pre-contact history is very good, BTW.   The Cherokee founded the city Keetoowah after migrating there from the Great Lakes Region.  Language drift and isolates indicate this happened about 3000 years ago.  There were a lot of skirmishes with the Delaware (who were family???).  The Muskogee and the moundbuilders were to the west.  We occupied the mountainous regions for a long time -- they called us "Cha-la-kee" people of the mountains and caves.  Keetoowah is regarded as the mother city, and was the first Cherokee City.  Cherokee Clans has some good material related to precontact history.  Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 04:08, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

text: There are some excellent pre-contact history references at the Eastern Band Museum as well here.  http://www.cherokeemuseum.org/ Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 21:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pre-European contact History 

message: Smmurphy, looking for example First Nation article split the way I described, it seems to be more complex than I remembered But here are a few examples in that direction (some of the pages are stubby short). The terms are confusingly different from US usage. I think "nation" (as in First Nation) usually means a "people" not a government/polity. A "band" is, I think, closer to the US meaning of "tribe". A government (in the sense that the Cherokee Nation is a government) seems to usually be called "Tribal Council", although "Nation" seems to be used too. "Bands" seem to be listed as governments as well. I definitely don't understand it all. Seems quite complex. Examples:
The Secwepemc nation/people, the Shuswap language, and the Shuswap Nation Tribal Council, one of two "governments" of the Secwepemc. The Shuswap Indian Band is listed as one of the "member governments" of the council. That page even has a template for Secwepemc First Nation governments. Then there is the Sḵwxwú7mesh people/nation, Sḵwxwú7mesh language, and Squamish Nation (government). The St'at'imc nation, St'at'imcets language, and Lillooet Tribal Council. The Kwakwaka'wakw nation/people, Kwak'wala language, and Kwakiutl District Council. The Nuu-chah-nulth nation, Nuu-chah-nulth language, and Nuu-chah-nulth Tribal Council.  Nisga'a nation, Nisga'a language, Nisga'a Tribal Council. The Stóːlō, Halkomelem language, and Stó:lō Nation.
Some of these pages are just stubs, but are fun to browse if only for the very strange spellings! Pfly 04:16, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, some of those are impressive.  I think that Squamish people is a good model, perhaps.  I think splitting the article like that makes a lot of sense, but I hesitate to do it myself, as I think it was suggested in the recent controversy, and I don’t know how well it was supported (and don't want to make such major changes without checking on talk first).  By the way, right now the WP Cherokee universe is very unorganized (Cherokee Nation is a redirect, Cherokee Language needs some work, Cherokee Freedmen redirects but Cherokee Freedmen Controversy covers most of the material that would go there, and Cherokee Heritage Groups is at afd). Smmurphy(Talk) 06:01, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Afd has been withdrawn on Cherokee Heritage Groups.  What work do you feel is needed on Cherokee Language may I inquire. Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 17:57, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm shy to bring it up there, as I've never had any linguistics training, but by looking, I'd say that it could use more on its history, etymology, and dialects.  Also, its dominated by a language drift table, which could be transwikied to wiki-source.  Best, Smmurphy(Talk) 18:08, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to convert the drift table into wikisource.  I compiled the table from the works of Dr. Durban Feeling. I agree a lot of material should be added to the Cherokee Language article.  Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 18:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Perhaps an addition to the table on Cherokee alphabet would be appropriate? This doesn't presently shows the Otali values where they differ.Proabivouac 19:35, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now I'm triply in over my head.  I don't know Cherokee, I don't know linguistics, and I am horrible at making aesthetically pleasing things (evidence my user page).  ; ) Smmurphy(Talk) 19:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I brought up the BC First Nations' article organization thing without seriously proposing such a structure be followed here, to be clear. It was mainly a reaction to reading the ongoing discussions about federally-recognized Cherokee governments and people with provable Cherokee ancestry vs the larger, vaguer, topic of Cherokee "identity", heritage groups, etc. I probably should have taken a closer look at the already existing articles Cherokee society, Cherokee language, etc. There is already a pretty good sub-article structure. One question I have though -- my interests have always been mainly historical and I know very little about the modern Cherokee Nation and other Cherokee governments. I see there is a page on the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians and the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, but links to Cherokee Nation redirect to the main Cherokee article. Perhaps I haven't read close enough, but the info about the 3 Cherokee governments seems to be mainly on the history and misc aspects of recent events and activities. I'd like to know more about the political structure of these governments, not to mention what kind of power is held that US states and regular US citizens do not have. There's a link to Cherokee Nation Constitution, but no article. It would be useful, I think, to have something describing the structure of the 3 governments (akin to describing the US government as having 3 branches, elections by population for the House, by state for the Senate, etc etc etc). You know, something along the lines of Federal government of the United States. Perhaps its here and I missed it? Pfly 05:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Examples BC Indian articles

message: Some of the recent edits have been a bit confusing.  First, I'm not sure I understand this summary, "I think I agree with this materials. It is the Cherokee People who decide who is or is not Cherokee" which went with this edit, removing a merge proposal.  I'm uncomfortable bringing this up, but I think you propose merges when you think material fits better elsewhere, not when you disagree with it.
More importantly, a pair of changes were made with a summary about statements lacking endorsement by the Cherokee Nation or the US .  I'm not sure if such endorsement is a necessary or sufficient condition for inclusion of material. The materials removed were, 
:"Cherokee/Choktaw author Louis Owens tells us that he is not a real Indian because he's not enrolled. "Because growing up in different times, I naively thought that Indian was something we were, not something we did or had or were required to prove on demand. Listening to my mother's stories about Oklahoma, about brutally hard lives and dreams that cut across the fabric of every experience, I thought I was Indian." Opening with this quote, Eva Marie Garroutte discusses the issue of Cherokee identity in her book, 'Real Indians: identity and the survival of Native America."
:"Cherokee demographer Russel Thornton reminds us that "common to all Cherokees is an identity as Cherokee...[all Cherokees mentioned in the 1980 census] identified themselves as Cherokee. So they are" (Thronton 1993, 175). The Deer Clan (not to be confused with the historic Deer Clan of traditional Cherokee society), whose umbrella organization the Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy was denied federal recognition, is an example of a Indian group embracing the idea of self-identification as a primal indicator of Indian identity, even more than cultural identity (Garroutte 83). Garroutte identifies some practical problems with self-identification as a policy, quoting the struggles of Indian service providers who deal with many people who had ancestors, some steps removed, who were "Cherokee Princesses." She quotes the social worker, "Hell, if all that was real, there are more Cherokees in the world than there are Chinese." " .
The first bit is stylistic, and I agree that it is superfluous.  It was there from when it was the start of the section, and comes from the influence of schoolboy essay writing where you are supposed to start everything with a "cathy quote" or something.  The second bit is more substantive, it is cited, and it provides an insight into the viewpoint of Cherokee and those with Cherokee heritage into the situation, which is appropriate for the section (although the section might not be appropriate for the article). Smmurphy(Talk) 23:25, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Deer Clan (but not the Deer Clan).  What?  Cherokee Princess?  What?  We have one reference which contradicts itself in the same breath and another with an unverifiable pov statement.  A European may have perceived some local custom was honoring a woman as a "princess" and it may have just been a wedding or other simple ceremony.  Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 23:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Deer Clan and the Southeastern Cherokee Confederacy are examples of Cherokee groups not in conflict with the Cherokee Nation (they might be called "Cherokee Heritage Groups").  They may not be very large, but they are citable to Garroutte.  I didn't find many other such groups in journals, news sources might have some, but they are less respectable. Smmurphy(Talk) 23:53, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, could we get a citation for, "...the Cherokee People viewed their self-identity as a political rather than racial distinction. Going far back into antiquity based upon existing social and historical evidence as well as oral traditions among the Cherokee themselves, the Cherokee Society was best described as an Indian Republic." Smmurphy(Talk) 23:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me look that up for you.  I think you and I have hit the crux of the real issue.  This will resolve this for you.  It's case law from Native American rights cases where non-indians tried to claim status and rights as Native Americans and were denied.  Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 23:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

text: This story about the African women who was accepted into a clan as a Cherokee wife rings true.   This African women must have been an exceptional woman to gain such acceptance.  Our women are fierce leaders and known for their unyielding viewpoints and standards.  If she was accepted, she was in charge of the household and in charge of him.    Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 23:58, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please don't lecture me.  If you don't have access to the sources I'm using, let me know, and I can send you excerpts or we can arrange something.  If you have material along those lines that you think is encyclopedic, go ahead and add it (or suggest it).  But I'd like to think that my edits (and the reading they have required) thus far here have earned me enough respect that you wouldn't think I need such lecturing.  Sorry for being defensive, but I'm not sure that some of your comments add to the article much.  Thanks, Smmurphy(Talk) 00:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if spoke too directly.  I apologize if there was any offense.  I placed those citations you requested.  I also added materials from recent case law and precedence on the matter.  Jeffrey Vernon Merkey 02:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  endorsment by CN or US