Talk:Kituwa

Indigenous peoples of North America Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: North Carolina Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	North Carolina portal This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as Low-importance).

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ozarks[edit]

I was just thinking of making an article for Keetoowah, what with that redlink on the Cherokee page sticking out, and surprise, here's an article, great! So I added it to the Cherokee towns category.

The only part I don't understand is: ...the migration from the Great Lakes and Ozark Plateau Regions... The Great Lakes region makes sense, but the Ozark Plateau? The Cherokee ended up in the Ozark Plateau region, ie Oklahoma, but I'd never heard that they came from there. Mistake? Pfly 22:03, 31 May 2007

Fear[edit]

I actually live near this area and my family is from Bryson City. This is the first time I have ever read that the ancient Cherokee priesthood obtained power through fear - there is no citation for this and it does not fit with history. I would like to dispute the author's assumption. We don't know much about the original Keetoowah priesthood, but the mentioning of fear appears to reveal the author's perception garnered from Western Anglo traditions where the priesthood does use fear to control the church body. Thus this is a cultural inferential statement based on his/her culture.

71.90.237.42 (talk) 06:09, 30 October 2009 (UTC)John Johnson, Western North Carolina[reply]

Your question led me to the Ani-kutani page, which repeated the "fear" idea, but sourced it to James Mooney. So I dug up the source on Google Books, Myths of the Cherokee and Sacred Formulas of the Cherokees, found the page and added it as a source, explicitly mentioning it comes from Mooney. Whether Mooney got a false or distorted view of Cherokee mythology I don't know. It's certainly possible. Hmm, note that Mooney only says the Cherokee people were "in awe" of the "Nicotani" and "greatly feared" them, not that the Nicotani/Ani-kutani "obtained power through fear". Perhaps some rewording is in order. Pfly (talk) 08:05, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Controversy[edit]

I am editing this article. I am not finished and will provide references shortly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Odestiny (talk • contribs) 01:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kituwa. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724171011/http://antiquity.ac.uk/ProjGall/moore/index.html to http://antiquity.ac.uk/ProjGall/moore/index.html

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) 22:06, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kituwa. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070810225337/http://cherokeepreservationfdn.org/pr_032306a.html to http://www.cherokeepreservationfdn.org/pr_032306a.html

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) 10:44, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Present evidence when making edits[edit]

Parkwells, you are making unsubstantiated claims in the article without providing any sources to back up your claims. This may be how Wikipedia operated when it began and even as long as a few years ago but it has changed. Provide sources when you edit or do not make changes. Anyone can very easily remove your non-sourced material but if you provide inline references and present it in a neutral way within the article then it most likely will not be contested. Simply adding something because you believe it to be true does not make it true. --Tsistunagiska (talk) 14:55, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What are you referring to, specifically? The body of the article says that the Cherokee consider this their Mother Town in the Southeast, which is why I added "in the Southeast" to the Lede. You are welcome to make more additions and to cite Reliable Sources.Parkwells (talk) 22:20, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did not originate this article and am not responsible for most of its content. It would be helpful if you would take a less aggressive, lecturing tone with me. You added content and did not provide cites, for instance, taking content and a nearly direct quote from a short article in Cherokee News. In terms of future practice, it is better to paraphrase content unless you intend to quote it. In terms of improving this article, every paragraph that is not sourced could be labeled with a banner ^{[citation needed]}, and maybe other editors will help find more sources.Parkwells (talk) 22:20, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have corrected some of your additions, because you essentially quoted from the article in the Cherokee News and did not put the material in quotes, re: the Keetoowah/Kituwa defending the region from Iroquois and Algonquian peoples from the north. Since you used content from that article in other unsourced paragraphs and sentences, I added cites there, too.Parkwells (talk) 22:20, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are mistaken because I haven't quoted anything from the Cherokee News in this article. Please view the history before accusing me of something, thank you. In regards to the content of the article, it is common practice on Wikipedia to hold each individual editor responsible for their edits. So you are judged by what you add, not by what others add. --Tsistunagiska (talk) 08:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You wanted an example so here is one I didn't revert. diff that you made in which you removed the Cherokee as being the specific subject and left it ambiguous when you had no proof and added no references that justified you removing the Cherokee as the subject. That is not improving what was written. That is trying to sway the reader into believing your POV that other cultures besides the Cherokee or their ancestors were present here. That may be true but you provided no proof it is true because neither you nor science can definitively prove that those present during the Pisgah phase and the Qualla phase are not related in any way. That is why I asked you to provide in-line references when you "improve" articles. --Tsistunagiska (talk) 09:19, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We can disagree about word choice, but it is really stretching the point to say that I have to provide a cite for choosing to use "They": because "They" follows the sentence featuring the Cherokee as the subject, "They" is a pronoun that refers directly to the Cherokee. It has no purpose other than that, so please stop telling me what I intended, and accusing me of bias for using a common English pronoun in an appropriate way.Parkwells (talk) 19:49, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Secondly, I apologize for not studying the history more thoroughly; I was working too fast, and had just read the Cherokee News article, which you had used as a cite in previous discussion. So I acknowledge my error, but perhaps you could thank me for taking the initiative to create citations for unsourced material in this article. Parkwells (talk) 19:49, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest adding more history of site to Lead and article content[edit]

I have added a brief paragraph to the Lead summarizing the history of the site and the EBCI's purchase in 1996, and their archeological studies that influence their decision on current uses. American Archeology, Fall 2009 <https://www.archaeologicalconservancy.org/?wpfb_dl=64> has a very informative article about the tribe's use of archeological studies since 1997, including non-invasive techniques, that have resulted in findings that influence their decisions about uses for this site. I recommend using material from this article to add more to the article content about the Cherokee and their ancestors at this site before the colonial era. Also recommend putting material about the current state of the site together into "20th c. section", rather than in older history.Parkwells (talk) 19:19, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]