Talk:Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


The European influence "theories" on the Mandan tribe are highly speculative and at least a little racist. Any mention of them in this article should not advance them as anything but a marginal theory. --Alexwcovington (talk) 23:02, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The European theories are highly speculative. I have rewritten this article several times to downplay them. Someone keeps changing it to give those theories more importance AND to add racism to the article, which is misleading. Why not leave the article as factual and neutral as possible?

It does not necessarily build more import into the paragraph to state the fact that racism played a role in the theories. I wouldn't call "See Kensington Runestone and Madoc" downplay... but that's my personal thought.
There are many ways to go about it. I choose an approach that attempts to be as descriptive as possible as to why the theories are incorrect and misleading. You seem to be looking from the perspective that as little page space should be dedicated to it as possible. IMO your approach might be more appropriate once a larger amount of information has been added to the article, so there is something for the paragraph to get lost in -- but right now the article is three paragraphs long, and what little information we have up there should be as inclusive as possible. I'll avoid making more changes until this has been discussed a bit more, though. --Alexwcovington (talk) 20:36, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Take a look at the change I made today. The problem I had with your wording was that it said the Mandan/Madoc theory was advanced due to racism. I can't find that anywhere in any of the readings I've done, and, in fact, the article we've been playing with was the only one mentioning racism. I have no problem saying the theory is speculative and unproven, which it is.

Hidatsa+Atsina->Gros Ventres[edit]

Just curious about Mandan/Arikara re Hidatsa; I found this page by looking up Gros Ventres, of which the Hidatsa are one part (the other are the Atsina). Also wanted to comment that at some point there's got to be a different "Hidatsa" article, as that's also the name of one of the initiatory longhouse secret societies in Pacific Northwest Coast cultures; I think the word is Kwak'wala, I'm not sure.Skookum1 05:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

The Atsina and Hidatsa are separate groups that were called by the same name in French as far as can see - not that they are related to each other. Rmhermen 22:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

subgroup of Gros Ventres, needs separation for language/people, as well as edit/formatting/wikification of existing and already lengthy text. --Skookum1 (9 May 06)
  • I'm not certain if this comment was referring to this page or not. This article is quite good, though. It just needs a bit of expansion, I think (and perhaps in-line citations or the use or <ref> tags to clarify which sources are being used for which statements). I'm going to tentatively rate it as a B class now. --Miskwito 03:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 03:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 22:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:19, 31 May 2017 (UTC)