Talk:Apache Wars

message: Frederick W. Turner III in his introduction to "Geronimo" says
"Let us be blunt.  Let us say with respect to the wars...we are dealing with an irreconcilable conflict between an aggressive, war-minded colonizing group which could not tolerate differences and divergences from its rule and an aggressive and war-minded group of people for whom the raid was the most important and ligitimate of tribal enterprises and for whom the war of vengeance was the inevitable consequence of the raid.  Only when we understand the natures of the opposing cultures can we begin to ask what it might mean that one destroyed the other."--Rcollman 16:15, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: *Tsoe - Peaches a Scout from Cibecue 
*Chato - surrendered to Crook 1882 then a Scout
*Mickey Free - contractor Scout
*Al Sieber - "Chief of Scouts" Contractor
*Alchise - Western Apache Chief
*Bylas- Western Apache Chief
*Nachise - left San Carlos 1882
*Chihuahua - war chief from Chihuahua band
*Diablo - war chief.
--Rcollman 22:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Names from Western Apache Raiding Book

message: While the article details the many brutal and callous acts of violence on the part of the US Army and civilians, it's suspiciously quiet about acts of violence by the Apaches. I somehow doubt that Mangas Coloradas, Cochise, Geronimo and others 'led war or raiding parties against non-Apaches', tried 'to drive all Anglo-Americans out of Apache territory', or engaged in 'two decades of guerrilla warfare' without engaging in similar atrocities, but all we're left with is one kidnapping and one very blandly described killing of a hostage.
I'm all for recognising the bad things that European Americans did to Native Americans, but let's have a little balance in reporting. To read this, you'd thing the worst thing Geronimo ever did was get drunk and run away from home--I suspect there was more to it than that for a man who vowed to kill as many Mexicans as he could and was so feared by the US Army that they sent over 5,000 men to capture him. Let's tell both sides of the story.Winterbadger (talk) 12:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV? 

message: In the first paragraph it says "Geronimo of the Bedonkohe", I thought Geronimo was a Chiricahua? Foscolo (talk) 17:02, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently the Bedonkohe are a band/clan within the Chiricahua (the German Wikipedia entry for the Bedonkohe says they are one of four groups that make up the Chiricahua). Perhaps balance is needed though in identifying who belonged to which tribe/group - Cochise is identified as being from the Chiricahua, but Geronimo from the Bedonkohe. --Dbunde (talk) 17:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geronimo 

message: * What is the correct way to wear a feather if any?
* What kind of feather would be culturally appropriate?
I heard that photographers kept feathers in their studios back then so that the Native American would look appropriate. I saw that on the PBS show History  Detectives episode clip 705 Crazy Horse. Notice other pictures of Apache outside of a studio don't have the same style feather, nor even most inside. That makes the picture culturally inappropriate. Also see photos on Apache. I'm not saying he wasn't Apache, just likely dressed wrong intentionally. No better source. I'm also posting on Talk:Apache, please excuse the double post. --Dgroseth (talk) 23:37, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are feathers on Apache man 1903 a studio prop? 

message: I realize that some editors are addicted to images such as this and view their removal as being some sort of political correctness, but it really is more about historical correctness.  This image seems to have been published as  "Modocs Scalping and Torturing Prisoners, a wood engraving published in Harper's Weekly, May 3, 1873.   This scene takes place somewhere in northern California or southern Oregon and has nothing to do the Apaches or the Apache Wars.  I am therefore removing it.  Feel free, as always, to discuss this on the discussion page.  Carptrash (talk) 20:40, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  I just removed the photo from the infobox 

message: near the beginning of the article that reads:
:""'The first conflicts between the Apache (who call themselves T`Inde, Inde, N`dee, N`ne, meaning the "people") and the American settlers of the Southwest began in 1847 during the Mexican-American War, particularly during the Taos Revolt"
I have looked hard, and with an open mind, for any references to the Apaches being involved in the Taos Revolt and have not found any.  I am inclined to remove that passage, but want to advertise that fact first.  Carptrash (talk) 19:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  I am concerned about the paragraph 

message: The Apache had fought against colonial encroachment by the Spanish and Mexicans for decades before the conflict began with United States settlers
I've come to this article by chance, so there may be terms I'm not understanding correctly, but this sentence either implies some sort of qualitative difference between "colonial encroachment" and the actions of "settlers", which could possibly do with some explanatation, or it's a bit POV? Jasonisme (talk) 15:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable sentence? 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:35, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Pinos altos.gif Nominated for Deletion

message: I had to clean up the POV terminology used, but this entire section might need rewriting or better yet, a citation. 
"Part of the success of the Apache was the overwhelming fear they created in Americans except for the most adventurous and hardy, or those American communities with historical experience in living in hostile Indian frontier environments. Additionally, the high casualty rates of Americans in contrast to the Apache was because while the Americans distinguished between civilian and combatants, the Apache did not. The Apache way of warfare, like most hostile American Indians, did not distinguish between gender, age, or class in their hostilities. Furthermore, the Apache had developed this ruthlessness to the extreme, in which torture was made part of their own spiritual belief. While such methods were less applied to women and children, it reached psychotic levels in application to persons considered enemy warriors. Thus, it was long running tradition by settler posse groups such as their Ranger units and US Army soldiers to rather die even by their own hands than fall into the hands of the Apache. In turn, the bitterness of the struggle led to a generous application of retribution warfare in which US Army forces would attack Apache warrior bands and attempt to destroy all its components including their families and camp followers."
The entire section is uncited and due to the provocative claims it makes, it really needs one. 
"While most of the warfare was the result of Apache imperial objectives and racial hatred of non-Apaches especially Americans, sometimes the Apache were provoked by American and Mexican settlers, and traders who speculated on the supplies that were promised to the reservations. Nonetheless, the overwhelming number of skirmishes, raids, and full scale campaigns of the Apache wars were initiated by unprovoked attacks of Apaches upon Americans. Because these raids were often by surprise and stealth and were focused on American civilians, especially on isolated rural communities the Apaches left an enduring image as a hated and murderous foe, responsible for the deaths of upwards of 10,000 civilian men, women, and children from 1847-1906."
This too. ScienceApe (talk) 05:34, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Highly questionable passage 

message: I am suggesting a complete rewrite of this section. The statement that "other tribes fought in defense of Mexico" has absolutely nothing to do with the Jicarillas and is therefore confusing. I also do not believe that Mangus Colorado signing a peace treaty had anything to do with the Jicarillas, who lived hundreds of miles away. Finally, I do not believe that the events at the Santa Rita mines, again hundreds of miles away, had any impact whatsoever on the Jicarillas.
In the second paragraph to say that the Army did not become involved until 1853 is just plain wrong. It was the US Army who went after Mrs White (who was one the settlers) in 1849. Also to say that this attack was on "settlers" is somewhat misleading, since this group was merely just "passing through" to another location and perhaps should be more appropriately called "travelers".
Finally, no mention is made of the fight near Fishers Peak, nor the 4 month campaign against the Jicarillas that began in March of 1855.
This is a preliminary notification and/or discussion prior to making changers.
Gordontaos (talk) 16:18, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jicarilla War Section 

message: The main part of the 'Cochise' section mentions the Bascom affair of 1861 as the initiation of the conflict and is logical in itself.
Then out of nowhere follows the single sentence 'The first U.S. Army campaigns specifically against the Apache began in 1849.' with no further explanation how this relates to Cochise. This sentence either needs to be removed/moved to a section where it relates to, or more detail must be added how it relates to Cochise. 
Another option is to move all the Cochise information into the Chiricahua wars section where is really belongs to. After reading the article it's not clear to my what is so special about Cochise that it needs to be mentioned separately from the 'Conflicts' section and it is an outlier to overall article structure.
Lyxya (talk) 03:44, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cochise / Article Structure