Talk:Certificate of Degree of Indian Blood

Indigenous peoples of North America High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Really?[edit]

This is bizzare. I did not realize that the US government issued blood/racial cards. At the very least, all these claims need to be need verifiably sourced and cited with reliable secondary sources. I have requested such claims in the article. N2e (talk) 04:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The CDIBs exist because since the 19th century, whenever Native Americans were eligible for any land, services, payments, etc., non-natives would attempt to pose as Natives for personal gain, so a methodology (very imperfect) was created to document who was, in fact, Native American. -Uyvsdi (talk) 05:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Fascinating. I had no idea. Thanks for adding good sources to the article that back this up. And your explanation here on the Talk page makes sense as to the political economy of the issue.

If I have time, I might do a few searches in the scholarly literature to see what has been said about this 19th-century legacy system, why it was created then and why (besides inertia) it still exists today in a supposedly liberal democracy, and who benefits (as in who wins? who loses?) from such a system of "rules of the game". This all seems like it would be of relevance to improvement of the article and coverage of this institution (CDIB cards) and resultant social outcomes from their existence and the "rules" that go along with them.N2e (talk) 17:13, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(And on a more general level, it is interesting that Wikipedia has no article on the use of the term "rules of the game" in political economy, even though it is a widely discussed concept (see above Google Scholar link) institutional economics and sociology; all Wikipedia uses today seem to be about the use of the term in fiction, theatre, movies, etc.)

If you haven't read it already, the Blood quantum article goes into the reasoning and benefits of this system. Also the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 touches on the issues of legal Native identity as well. -Uyvsdi (talk) 18:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Not by adoption?[edit]

Since adoption records are sealed, and birth certificates issued in the names of the new parents, there may be an issue with phrasing here. I suspect you can't claim an open adoption, or an adult adoption, but if you have a birth certificate from a closed adoption, it's hard to see how you'd be prevented from being issued a card. KenThomas (talk) 02:22, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Certificate of Degree of Indian Blood. 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) 18:03, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]