Talk:Bill John Baker

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"1/32 Cherokee"[edit]

I think an opinion page with this phrase "This information was unsolicited. I want the Cherokee people to have the opportunity to know how little Cherokee Mr. Baker really is. In my opinion John Baker needs to make his Certificate Degree of Indian Blood card information public." is not a reliable source, even if the information is true. Does anyone mind if I remove it or can someone replace it with a less biased source? Sorry for not signing in, thanks y'all! 207.144.25.210 (talk) 18:24, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Cherokee Phoenix webpage in question is here: [1]. Certainly, the letter to the editor that occupies most of the page is not a reliable source. Underneath that, however, is an editor's note that confirms Baker is 1/32 Cherokee (and goes on to note that this was also the case for Chief W. W. Keeler, and that "The Cherokee Nation does not have a blood quantum for citizenship or for holding office." I am inclined to think that the editor of the Cherokee Phoenix is a reliable source for this purpose—and perhaps the most authoritative one, although other sources are also available: it's been mentioned in a variety of other sources, some in connection with reportage about Elizabeth Warren. [2][3] --Arxiloxos (talk) 20:08, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I feel like you're trying to start an argument with me, I didn't say it wasn't true, and I know a good bit about how the Cherokee nation enrollment works (lineal descendant), I think the source is very biased, even if factually accurate, your attitude with me makes it seem like you wrote it. 207.144.25.210 (talk) 18:58, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the cited source is not the letter to the editor (which, as already stated above, is not a reliable source) but the editor's note at the bottom of the page, which (as far as I can see) is entirely neutral, more detailed about the issue than other sources, and of undisputed factual accuracy is undisputed. So in my opinion this seems like the best source to use. Other editors may have different opinions. I had nothing to do with the letter to the editor or the editor's response: in the future, please try to avoid personal attacks on other editors. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:10, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bill John Baker. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 10:21, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Bill John Baker. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 07:13, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]