[WikiEN-l] [repost] Native American Tribes Policy
Philippe Beaudette
philippebeaudette at gmail.com
Tue May 15 20:49:48 UTC 2007
I agree with Joe. I'm reposting below what I wrote on the Foundation-list.
Direct repost, except I added the parenthetical statement in the first sentence for this list, because I didn't think to put it in the post to foundation-l.
________________________
I have to tell you, as a former employee of an organization that dealt with Indian Sovereignty on a daily basis (and, incidentally, someone who's spent more time in Chief Smith's office than I care to admit - phb), I'm loathe to recommend that Wikipedia get involved in the recognized/non-recognized battle. Particularly given that tripes are having recognition stripped and given even today - just google "Tribe Sovereignty stripped" for some interesting reading.
There are too many uncertainties in this area, and frankly, I don't want to be the one (or suggest that anyone else is) to involve us in tribal policies. I don't want to call the Chief/Chairman/Chief Executive of any of these tribes and say we're going to alter their article and this is why, and I think it's not good policy for us to get in the middle of this one.
Federal recognition does not equal validity. Until the BIA is straightened out, and the Department of the Interior, and ancient treaties, this is a field full of landmines, and I think we're best to stay the heck off of it.
Philippe
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Szilagyi
To: wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] [repost] Native American Tribes Policy
Reposting this mail from Jeffrey to the Foundation list, since it seems
specifically relevant to the english Wikipedia. This was a rejected policy
that would have given more weight and authority apparently to people/editors
'from' Federally recognized tribes, giving additional weight to the US
Government as a source on these matters. Reposting after I noticed the edit
war on the [[Cherokee]] article, where Jeffrey and another editor both
apparently violated 3rr over related things.
I'm not sure why any matter beyond BLP issues should be treated any
differently, content wise. The United States government has no authority as
far as I know over content in articles, so long as it's not illegal (i.e.,
child pornography and so forth). As I mentioned to Jeff on the other list,
it's not a United States encyclopedia, and the "support" of the tribal
nations is no more important than the support of, say, the Jews, Muslims,
Hungarians, Somalis, or the Tamil. In other words, whether the leaders or
representatives of the Cherokee nation (or whomever) have a problem with the
existence of the Southern Cherokee Nation, it has no relevance on the
existance of an article on Wikipedia about them.
Regards,
Joe
http://www.joeszilagyi.com
On 5/15/07, Jeffrey V. Merkey <jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>
>
> I started a policy which was subsequently rejected by Wikiality based
> concensus.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Native_American_Tribes
>
> The basic problem here is that non-Federally recognized groups claiming
> to be Indian Tribes can expose the Foundation and Wikipedia to
> considerable liability and negative publicity. By way of example, when
> James Mooney was indicted in Utah for impersonating an Indian not only
> was he charged, so was the person running his websites and posting the
> false information. Mooney was indicted for 19 first degree felony
> counts for operating a CEE (Continuing Criminal Enterprise) for the
> purposes of distributing peyote. The Southern Cherokee Nation (which is
> not a real tribe) under currently operating illegal riverboat casinos
> and using their claims of being a Federally recognized tribe to justify
> their activities.
>
> Wikipedia needs to exclude these fake tribe from the project. Any of
> these tribes can bring legal action against the Foundation, as can the
> Federal Government if fake groups are allowed to claim they are indian
> tribes, then use Wikipedia as a basis to claim credibility and break the
> law. This can have two possible outcomes. The genuine tribes (who
> have Federal support and Federal funding) can withdraw financial support
> from the project and/or Wikipedia can be exposed to negative publicity
> and loss of public trust by the legitimate tribes, as well as being
> exposed to Federal Prosecution if these groups use the project to
> violate US laws.
>
> I am of Cherokee, German, and English ancestry, but I do not claim I am
> a citizen of Germany or the UK., even though I am of these bloodlines as
> well as Cherokee. The same applies to Native Tribes recognized by the
> US Government. These tribes are sovereign governments, and members are
> citizens. For someone who claims Indian ancestry to set themselves up
> as a tribe purports claims they are citizens of a non-recgnized
> sovereign. It would be the same as for me to claim I am a German or UK
> citizen just because I have ancestry from these groups, which would be a
> false claim. The same applies to Indian Nations.
>
> I will be unable to garner support from the tribes to publicly support
> Wikipedia from other tribes if such a policy does not exist, since any
> fake group can claim they are an indian tribe when they are not. Please
> read the text of the policy, and the Foundation needs to make a decision
> about this matter. Tribes which are not Federally recognized in the US
> are NOT indian tribes, and numerous legal liabilities are created if we
> allow these groups to post false information into the project.
>
> Jeff
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
More information about the WikiEN-l
mailing list