Talk:List of federally recognized tribes in the contiguous United States

message: This list was compiled by the U.S. Federal Government. All I did was format it and add an intro.
Alaskan Tribal Villages, Regional Corporations, etc. are maintained separately, so I made them a separate list to reflect that.
I used a Perl program to create the links, and in some cases, I'm sure I got the wrong part of the name linked. Feel free to fix that, but please don't change the names unless you have a more recent copy of the offical list that you're working from (in which case, update the comments at the top).
Thanks! -Harmil 17:55, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: I've removed the Occaneechi entry. While they are actually a Native American tribe, they are not one of the federally-recognized tribes that the USBIA interacts with. This list is specfically the latter (as described at the top of the list). If someone wants to create a "List of Native American Tribes Seeking Recognition", then I say more power to you! Just, please, don't add entries to this list that will just be removed when the list is later updated from official sources. Thanks! -Harmil 19:27, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Occaneechi  

message: Here is how I've been fixing redlinks. Feel free to use the same technique, as more hands will get the work done sooner.
* Click on a redlink to go to the edit page.
* Click on the search link on that page.
** You may not get anything if search is being flakey. Try again later.
* Look through the pages that are found and see if any apply.
** Please don't select a town or Census Designated Place based on name.
** Avoid selecting reservations and language listings.
* If a page is found that's appropriate, go back to the edit page and change it to:
 #REDIRECTtarget page
* If no page matches, consider doing some research to create a new article. Include the fact that this is the official name by which the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs recognizes the tribe.
Please rely on creating redirects when possible, as the commonly used name and the BIA recognized name should both have entries on Wikipedia.
Thank you for your help! -Harmil 14:07, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixing redlinks 

message: The name "List of Native American Tribal Entities" is not Wikipedia's name, it is the U.S. Federal Government's. A redirect has been added for Wikipedia-friendly capitalization, but the primary name is, in fact, the correct spelling. -Harmil 18:33, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: To be more precise, the name "Native American Tribal Entities" is actually a working group. The report is "Indian Tribal Entities Within the Contiguous 48 States Recognized and Eligible To Receive Services From the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs". I kid you not, that's actually the full title. It is a section of the larger, "Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible To Receive Services From the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs" (Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 234 / Friday, December 5, 2003)  -Harmil 18:48, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caps in name 

message: Oh, by the way, that was me reverting the List of U.S. Indian Tribal Government Web sites removal. -Harmil 14:15, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of U.S. Indian Tribal Government Web sites 

message: This tribe was recognized, and then removed from the list. See http://www.petitiononline.com/STN06418/ for a  petition that attempted to reverse the situation.
Until they are federally recognized, they don't belong on a list of federally recognized tribes. That doesn't really affect their stutus on Wikipedia otherwise, just in terms of this one article. -Harmil 18:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Schaghticoke 

message: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8344449.stm
MickMacNee (talk) 17:52, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes there are, but this list is generated from the official listing published in the Federal Register, which still only lists 562. We are waiting for the new "Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible To Receive Services From the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs" to be published in the Federal Register so that our listing here could be updated. Stay tuned. CJLippert (talk) 19:38, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ah. Cool. MickMacNee (talk) 20:50, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  The two tribes currently missing from the list are the Delaware Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma, also known as the "Eastern Delaware", and the Wilton Rancheria, California, formed from the "Me-Wuk Indian Community of the Wilton Rancheria" and "Wilton Miwok Rancheria" who both lost their recognitions in 1959, and took this long for them (as a single political entity) to re-gain their recognition. CJLippert (talk) 23:31, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Aha! A new FR was out but I didn't know about it until I checked it out. Page is now updated (for now). This might change very soon if seven more from Virginia and North Carolina are recognized. CJLippert (talk) 18:26, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  564 tribes according to the BBC 

message: The 2009 Federal Register link doesn't work.  (Taivo (talk) 16:07, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. Try the GPO link to get to the Federal Register. Meanwhile, I will see why that long-standing link no longer works. CJLippert (talk) 16:09, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Aha, found the problem. The long-standing link didn't have the newest listing yet when this article was updated, so a different link was used, which is now broken because it is time-dependent (and how have expired). The old long-standing link was resorted as that site now do show the most current listing. Thanks for bringing this to our attention! CJLippert (talk) 16:26, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Federal Register Link 

message: What is the problem with having footnotes when appropriate to the name of the entity?  The Death Valley Timbisha Shoshone entry is incorrect in the Federal Register ("Timbi-Sha"), but has been corrected in other Federal Acts (the California Desert Protection Act and the Timbisha Homeland Act).  While the list (right or wrong) has the title used in the Federal Register, an explanatory footnote to correct the spelling seems appropriate, especially when the corrections are made by 1) the official tribal government, and 2) the Federal government in subsequent legislation.  (Taivo (talk) 17:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Because even the web listing at the BIA webpage, if you drill down to the Central Califorinia Agency's, it too shows the name with the unwelcomed hyphen. It is not just the Timbisha that experiences this either. Try the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota entry. It say "Six component reservations: Bois Forte Band (Nett Lake), Fond du Lac Band, Grand Portage Band, Leech Lake Band, Mille Lacs Band, White Earth Band" but if really a "reservation" listing, they should be saying "Bois Forte (Nett Lake, Deer Cree, Lake Vermillion), Fond du Lac, Grand Portage, Greater Leech Lake, Mille Lacs (Mille Lacs Lake, Sandy Lake), White Earth" but they don't. If they really mean "band" then they should say so, but they don't say "Bois Forte Band of Chippewa, Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe and White Earth Band of Ojibwe." And yes, the six component bands of the Minnesota have voiced this concern to the Secretary of the Interior already. CJLippert (talk) 17:33, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Worse yet, situation. There was a recent court ruling saying a Federally recognized tribe can put land into trust only if they were already listed in a certain document associated with the original Indian Reorganization Act back in 1936. On that listing, for the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe's bands, it says "Bois Forte Reservation, Fond du Lac Reservation, Grand Portage Reservation, Leech Lake Reservation, White Earth Reservation, and the Mille Lacs Band" which then later when the reservations are listed the five bands with "Reservation" in their name are then again listed, while the Mille Lacs Band is not, yet United States v. Mille Lac Band of Chippewa Indians, 229 U.S. 498 (1913) was upheld the existence of the 61,000-acre Mille Lacs Lake reservation! So what gives?! Any way, the point is there are a lot of issues with this listing, but if we footnote every little issue, it becomes extremely difficult to wade through when it is time for the list update, so all these issues are deferred to the actual article and not here, other than the notes specifically about the Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible To Receive Services From the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs listing itself. CJLippert (talk) 17:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I guess I can live with that solution.  I can understand the problem with updating.  Happy Holidays.  (Taivo (talk) 19:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnotes 

message: the interwiki links are nearly all wrong - they are lists of nativa american tribes in general, not of the federal recognized tribes. --Plehn (talk) 07:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong interwiki links 

message: Yes? No? -  theWOLFchild 20:06, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: All three US Lenape tribes have articles: Delaware Nation, Anadarko, OK; Delaware Tribe of Indians, Bartlesville, OK; and Stockbridge-Munsee Community, Bowler, WI. Yuchitown (talk) 02:54, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Lenape]]? 

message: The Winnipesaukee tribe seems to be missing and lost. Not much is said about them or if there is any left. I am curious how many Winnipesaukee's are still with us and if they are still full blood or what most term Half breeds. Seems we have lost many tribes along this sad journey.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.211.65.64 (talk) 23:01, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: See Pennacook. Yuchitown (talk) 02:53, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lost and Forgotten Tribe 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of federally recognized tribes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131019173349/http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/xraca/documents/text/idc1-021809.pdf to http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/xraca/documents/text/idc1-021809.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of federally recognized tribes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150714185005/http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/public/documents/text/idc1-030831.pdf to http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/public/documents/text/idc1-030831.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150714185005/http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/public/documents/text/idc1-030831.pdf to http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/public/documents/text/idc1-030831.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130219054125/http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/public/documents/text/idc-020700.pdf to http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/public/documents/text/idc-020700.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:53, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Do folks here prefer "formerly XXX" or "previously listed as XXX" for the defunct tribal names? Yuchitown (talk) 03:47, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style question 

message: Are Alaska Native tribal entities federally recognized tribes?
Why is the displayed text of the wikilink "tribes" instead of "entities"?
Apokrif (talk) 20:51, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Alaska Native tribal entities are federally recognized tribes. Tribes is a far more specific term than entities. Yuchitown (talk) 23:32, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Also" in the lead 

message: The map used on this page is missing at least the Cherokee, Seminole, Muskogee, Choctaw, and Chickasaw Nations in Eastern Oklahoma. Probably missing others too. 
if there’s a reason for excluding these from the infographic, then the article should explain that somewhere. 72.107.246.64 (talk) 02:35, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infographic: Where are the Five Tribes?