Talk:Piegan Blackfeet/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Piegan Blackfeet. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Lewis 1941?

can we get some more detail/clarity on this source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.240.137 (talk) 03:06, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nettl?

What is this source? I'm dubious of its information about the origin of Siksika. As far as I know Siksika is a calque from English that means literally "black foot". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.3.202.120 (talk) 04:21, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

It said what it is before it was removed. Add more and better sources if you don't like it. It seems better than speculation. Hyacinth (talk) 16:44, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

6,500 B.C.

The claim that the Piegan Blackfeet have inhabited Montana for 8,500 years is absurd and cannot be supported - even with a source the source would have to be extreeeeemely good to be able to support such an extreme claim. 6,500 years ago there were no Piegan Blackfeet and there were no Blackfeet - at this point in time there were only the ancestors of the Proto-Algonquian community and we don't know specifically where they lived. I have removed the claim, and it shouldn't be reinserted without an extremely good source and even then it should have in text attribution because it is at odds with everything that is known about the history of Native America.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:37, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Humans may have been in the area 5000 years ago and that can be solidly sourced. However, it would have been really nice if you could have just done this research instead of tag teaming an anon IP edit, which was the first removal, and then making other people do all the work. Montanabw^(talk) 04:30, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that would have been nice. But it so happened that I was not in a situation where that was possible. So what if you mind your own goddamn business and let me remove obviously false information that is not sourced. It would also have been nice if you had been collegial both to me and the IP instead of starting right out with tedious dickery.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 14:39, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Speak for yourself. The IP was a bit terse, and you were rude (particularly when you came trotting over to my talk page) - AND you, yourself ALSO could have avoided all this if you had no time to edit by inserting a simple {{cn}} or {{dubious}} tag instead of your own, yes "tedious dickery." But it's fixed now, and 5000 years versus 6500 years when you go that far back, and "humans" generally versus a specific ethnic group was correcting something over-stated (probably by an inexperienced editor, whoever originally put it there) it was a matter of degree, not totally fringe. Yes, it was over the fog line and needed to be fixed, but it was not totally (or "obviously") in the ditch. Montanabw^(talk) 19:11, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Repurpose / Rename

This article seems to be about the history and experience of the Piegan people before they were seperated into a US-based "tribe" (S. Piegan) and a Canada-based "band" (N. Piegan). Therefore I propose renaming it Piegan (without any adjectives) and having it focus only on the time before the split. For information on times after that we can direct them to Piikani Nation (the Canadian "band") or Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Reservation (the American "tribe"). --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 23:25, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

I see your point about the culture before the split, but I would move with caution; there are also the Siksika and Bloods to consider, and really, Blackfoot Confederacy might be the place for the overview. We have Blackfeet Reservation already, so this current title seems to be most appropriate for the Blackfeet in the USA article ( Northern Peigan is pretty stubby) US Blackfeet people are primarily but I do not think exclusively Piegan, the US tribe here and the state of Montana appears to acknowledge all three branches here, though I cannot find any population breakdowns. At most, "Southern Piegan" or "Amskapi Pikuni " could be the most accurate. I guess my thinking is to maybe review the best current research on the history and culture before we go mucking around with things. Montanabw^(talk) 07:04, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Well I already made some changes here, but those could be easily undone. I will start by fleshing out Piikani Nation, and in the course of that research, the direction for this page could become more clear. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 14:54, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I see no harm in some duplicative material while we are still building things up; Piikani Nation redirects to Northern Peigan, and we might want to create Pikuni or Piikani as a dab and add Southern Piegan or something to reference the Montana Blackfeet; but it looks to me like WP tries to use whatever name the people use for themselves; so Northern Peigan might also wind up back at Piikani before we're done. Montanabw^(talk) 02:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Clovis culture

What is that bit about the Clovis culture and general information about human habitation of Montana doing in this article? It seems strangely disconnected to the topic of the article. Isn't that more like part of the general history of Native American people? Where exactly is the connection to the Blackfeet?
Well, yes, they are Native Americans, so their DNA will probably bear some resemblance to this child's DNA, just like all other Native Americans' DNA. But if that is all the connection there is, I don't see any point in having that bit of information in this article. That should better be placed in the history of Native Americans in general or possibly in the history of Montana.
Judging by the discussion above, I suspect that this bit of information is some kind of leftover from previous changes in the article which formerly may have had an (unsourced and unproven) connection to the Blackfeet. Now it is all nicely sourced and contains only well-established information, but it has lost its connection to the topic of the article. --93.212.252.179 (talk) 07:30, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Piegan Blackfeet. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After 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 {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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) 14:22, 5 December 2017 (UTC)