Talk:Dan Hornbuckle

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

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dan Hornbuckle. 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) 16:59, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality[edit]

Dan Hornbuckle is a citizen of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians. There are three Cherokee federally recognized tribes. They each have completely distinct governments and citizenry. Lumping them together is inaccurate. Please stop. Yuchitown (talk) 18:06, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

There are two issues here, first I want to clear-up why only listing "Cherokee" and not "Cherokee and American." Since the EBCI is a Domestic dependent nation of the United States, it is implied that a person with Cherokee nationality is also an American citizen. This is used often with British people on Wikipedia as well, where their nationality is Scottish or Welsh because those are nations within the United Kingdom, British is also implied and not necessary to repeat.
The second is regards to membership of the tribe. First and foremost, every member in the EBCI, Cherokee Nation, and United Keetoowah Band refer to themselves as Cherokee, it is their shared nationality. I think a bigger example here are people from the People's Republic of China and Republic of China, in which both nations refer to themselves as Chinese; now in Taiwan they are also Taiwanese, but that is same as a person referring to themselves at Illinoisan. That is why Cherokee is only used and tribe membership is identified in the article as detail (oh... Dan is Cherokee because he is a member of the EBCI).
That is my rational at least. --WashuOtaku (talk) 18:37, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dan Hornbuckle is, most assuredly, specifically a citizen of EBCI. This should be respected and noted. Each Nation is distinct in and of itself. Indigenous girl (talk) 19:00, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you're using the language "is a citizen of", then you have to list the exact tribe they are enrolled at. If you're saying he's Cherokee, without legal wordings like citizen, member, enrolled, then I think it would be fine to use the main listing of Cherokee.  oncamera  (talk page) 19:05, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is this Dan Hornbuckle? 100.11.141.212 (talk) 05:34, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tribal members in the United States are dual citizens. They are both citizens of their federally recognized tribe and the United States (although some people may actually belong even more nations; e.g. Gwen Westerman). Cherokee can be seen as an ethnicity, a shared linguistic group, kinship group, and/or culture; however, since the early 19th century, it has not had a unified government. Each tribe is clear about their own independent identity, and tribal IDs clearly list the specific tribe's name. In an edit summary, WashuOtaku mentioned "Scotland" as an example. If there were three different Scotlands, each with their own independent governments and citizenry, these would need to be disambiguated. Yuchitown (talk) 19:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

While the citizenship field is also available in the infobox template, I would not use it in this case because that would also imply that the EBCI is issuing passports (that are internationally recognized) and such, which they are not. "Citizenship" has a lot of legal definitions, even in Wikipedia, so I would generally avoid using that word. As for Scotland as an example, you failed to notice my example where there are two Chinas using the same "Chinese" nationality officially. I believe using "Cherokee" as nationality is sufficient and their citizenship to the United States as a given, but willing to compromise some by changing the link to the specific membership tribe instead of the general Cherokee people article. --WashuOtaku (talk) 19:33, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are articles explaining Tribe (Native American) and Tribal sovereignty in the United States. Yuchitown (talk) 20:28, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

WashuOtaku I noticed that you said in an edit summary that folks from EBCI don't say they are from EBCI, they simply say they are Cherokee. This is not true. I am from a tribe with more than one reserve/nation and if somebody asks my community or my nation I will tell them where I am from specifically not that I am Blahblahblah in general. Indigenous girl (talk) 19:14, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Many tribes do not allow their members to be enrolled at more than one reservation, so they can have multiple Native ancestries but only be the citizen of one tribe. Modern tribal government enrollment laws shouldn't be used to erase their different ancestry. Again, it comes to how the sentence is worded -- things like "citizenship" or "nationality" requires a specific tribal nation, whereas simply saying "he's Cherokee" is fine without the reservation/nation being included.  oncamera  (talk page) 19:16, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Side note: Most tribes don't allow dual citizenship, but CN does. It doesn't say so on Gwen Westerman's article, but she is dually enrolled in the Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate of the Lake Traverse Reservation and the Cherokee Nation. (more) Yuchitown (talk) 19:24, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]
I get what you are saying, but that is like me saying I'm North Carolinian and not generally saying I'm American. However, Wikipedia has an international audience and saying blahblahblah tribe or what state a person is from is to granular in detail. Also, I only use this when the person has actual membership of a specific tribe and not ancestry. --WashuOtaku (talk) 19:47, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tribal nations are sovereign nations, so saying which tribe you're enrolled at is the not the same as calling yourself a resident of a state such as North Carolina. I don't think you are understanding this concept if you think that analogy is the same as tribal citizenship.  oncamera  (talk page) 19:56, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Might be a bad analogy, but what am getting is in "Nationality" we use American or British and not United States of America or United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; they are defined identities of a group of people at a high level, Cherokee is the same in that regards despite being shared by three tribal nations. Imagine being asked by a foreigner, you just met, your nationality, how would you respond? --WashuOtaku (talk) 20:10, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
People do, on a regular basis, say "Eastern Band Cherokee" as opposed to "Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians." Folks say the simplest thing to get the point across. "American" gets across the point of citizen of the United States across. Yuchitown (talk) 20:26, 29 December 2021 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]
Nationality is typically one word, sometimes two. A person can always go into detail, but typically that one word sums it up quickly. Cherokee is the nationality; the "Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians" is the name of the nation. I am not United States of America, I'm American. It is at least a good thing all three Cherokee nations get along and consider themselves Cherokee first. --WashuOtaku (talk) 21:20, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is absolutely no MOS for nationality being one or two words. You don't get to dictate MOS when the majority of other editors disagree with you. You are not listening to anyone else's viewpoints here. Here is an example of a mainstream newspaper disambiguating tribes. There is nothing to prevent someone enrolled in a US tribe from becoming a citizen of another country (Canada, UK, etc.), so listing both is commonly practiced throughout Wikipedia with Native people's biographies. Yuchitown (talk) 18:47, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]
Please give examples of Native people's biographies, of which you have not edited, that do that. --WashuOtaku (talk) 18:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Jeannette Armstrong. Yuchitown (talk) 19:29, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]
Just one example? There is a whole category of indigenous people and while I don't expect a lot of them to even have a infobox, I would at least anticipated 3-5 to at least have a sample pool on how other editors have used it. Again, I do not believe it is necessary to list both when it is obvious, but I would like to leave this discussion with a consensus that this is what editors should be doing going (best practice) forward in regards to Nationality. --WashuOtaku (talk) 20:11, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
At the risk of doxing myself, my nation is Wolinak. I live in the US as opposed to Canada. I consider myself to be a Wolinak citizen first and foremost. Does this mean I'm Abenaki? Yes, but I am not a citizen of both reserves, only one. That is where my own personal identity comes from. Not Wolinak and Odanak, not Wolinak, Odanak and a bunch of state recognized groups in the states, just Wolinak. That's it. There are differences between communities and they are each distinct political entities. Indigenous girl (talk) 21:01, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Washuotaku: What Yuchitown, Indigenous girl, and Oncamera are all telling you is correct. Citizenship in a Federally-recognized tribal Nation is in no way analagous to simply living in a State or region of the United States. There is a Nation to Nation relationship, as determined by treaty law, as upheld by the US Supreme Court as recently as this past year. The individual Nations (including the three separate Cherokee tribes) are separate governments, all with their own citizenship criteria. The EBCI standard is very different from that of the CNO and that of the Keetowah. Editing articles about Indigenous citizenship on Wikipedia takes a certain degree of specialized knowledge to get it right, and to understand what are and are not reliable sources for the topic. I realize you may not be familiar with this criteria. But as members in good standing of the Indigenous Wikiproject, these three editors are well-versed in this criteria. They know what they are talking about here and you need to respect that consensus. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 21:04, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was not trying to imply that a person that happens to live or visit a reservation was suddenly a member in the same since moving to a different state. I am also very aware that each tribe has their own rules on who has membership or citizenship, I feel as though I'm being talked down towards here though, despite it was I who initiated reaching out to others of the Indigenous Wikiproject. I still not agree with redundancy of identifying both nationalities when their will likely always be two nationalities listed, that being the tribe and the country they happen to be born in (or maybe things are different in Canada, I do not know, but in the U.S. at least every Native American has citizenship since 1924). That is why I asked if other examples already existed, to see if this was something already established by others or just something Yuchitown started. If that is going to be the standard, then it should be codified someplace on the wikiproject; a template of what is considered best practice when writing/editing a bio of an indigenous person (similar to how their are templates for politicians, service members, youtubers, etc.).
As for listing tribal government instead of the demonym is odd. When I visit the Qualla, they do not refer to themselves as Eastern Band Cherokee, just Cherokee. I don't see the need to show "Eastern Band Cherokee," "United Keetoowah Band Cherokee," or Cherokee Nation Cherokee" when just "Cherokee" will suffice (again, wikilinks can go wherever from there); I do not refer to myself in English as "United States American," just American. All three nations have a shared history, recognize each other as Cherokee, and work together in maintaining the language and culture; which is why I believe strongly that listing Cherokee is fine (again, the wikilink can list the tribe from there). It would have been simpler if each called themselves with different names like Wolinak and Abenaki, but they did not do that. On a unrelated side note, all three you say have good standing are not listed as participants in the Wikiproject. --WashuOtaku (talk) 01:20, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't see me as having talked down to you, I'm simply trying to explain. Using myself as an example once again, it would be appropriate to say I am from Wolinak and also to inform people that I'm from the United state currently because my nation is located in Canada. I know of folks that live in England who are Indigenous from the US and they need to note that. We don't always live in the occupying country of our Nations. If you go to Qualla, you are already there so it's obvious that the folks living there are Eastern Band. If, say a person from Eastern Band goes to New York City and meets another Native, they will tell them that either they are Eastern Band or from Qualla. This is, again, because there are distinct differences between the three. If they simply say oh yeah, I'm Cherokee, I could say, oh, do you know so and so (who happens to be from Tahlequah)? It's likely they wouldn't know them, right? Totally different area of the country, potentially different nation. If I say yeah, I'm Abenaki and they say oh hey do you know so and so? And the individual is from say, one of the Vermont groups, I likely won't know them. So it's not as simple as (simply put) an umbrella tribal or nation term. I'm a regular participant in the wiki project, far more than the majority of those who have their names on the list as are the others participating in this conversation. One isn't required to have their name on a list to be a participant. Those of us who have been engaging in conversation with you are all, to the best of my knowledge, tribal members. I think that's more important than having our names listed. Indigenous girl (talk) 02:21, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
However, the nationality field uses the demonym typically and for the three Cherokee nations, in this particular case, uses the same one. I understand your response, but that is similar to one American telling another American that they are North Carolinian or Texan; I'm not equating them, but it is a second-level of detail that is not typically listed in the nationality field. So using only the word "Cherokee," of which it is used as a demonym for all three nations should be fine (and we can link them to the specific nations in wikilink for the purposes of the infobox only). Also, this example may not work with other nations, as some may use different demonyms despite same umbrella nation. Yea, not everyone puts their name in the wikiproject, but CorbieVreccan made the comment and I looked on the wikiproject to validate; I have no doubt you all contribute, but as an outsider to the project I do not know that without looking at either the wikiproject or at each of you all's contribution histories. As they say, trust but verify; that is why I said it as a side comment, because I am reading you all's responses as those with authority on the subject. --WashuOtaku (talk) 03:05, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Did you look at the project's talk page? Yuchitown and oncamera are all over it. Granted I've not posted on the talk page for a while but I'm an active participant, active participants know that. Obviously that's not something you can verify and that's fine. It matters more to me that folks on the project know they can count on me. Anyway, it's clear that you have our opinions and you don't wish to listen to more experienced editors in the field. I don't know what else to say. I want to make it clear that I'm not talking down to you, I'm not upset and I'm not angry. Indigenous girl (talk) 03:16, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One more time: There is absolutely no MOS for nationality being one or two words. You don't get to dictate MOS when the majority of other editors disagree with you. You are not listening to anyone else's viewpoints here. North Carolina has one federally recognized tribe, so the need to disambiguate might not be as strong, but in conversations about multiple tribes, people disambiguate. Here is an example of a mainstream newspaper disambiguating tribes. Yuchitown (talk) 16:38, 1 January 2022 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

I reject you all's rational on this, I will not use "Eastern Band Cherokee," "United Keetoowah Band Cherokee," or Cherokee Nation Cherokee" when all three accept the same demonym. I would rather blank the field going forward if this impasse persists as oppose of using an incorrect format in the field that is counter to what rest of Wikipedia uses. I was willing to compromise on the dual-nationality issue and linking to the tribes as oppose to Cherokee people article, but I cannot compromise on this. --WashuOtaku (talk) 17:43, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia doesn't work like that. All three tribes do not use the same demonym when multiple tribes are being discussed, especially in regards to nationality (check tribal IDs, tribal license plates, or signs on tribal headquarters, for instance). We are Indigenous people and informed allies extremely familiar with how Native peoples are described. I just provided a citation from a completely mainstream newspaper of disambiguated tribes. You have provided nothing except your personal opinion. Yuchitown (talk) 17:46, 1 January 2022 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]
Then we should discontinue using the nationality field and start using the citizenship field because that fits what you are insisting we should be doing. The nationality field only uses the demonym, which is standard practice across Wikipedia; the citizenship field fits more correctly as it identify country of citizenship or, in this case, membership of the tribe. We can even use plainlist format for multiple (i.e. Eastern Band Cherokee, United States). --WashuOtaku (talk) 17:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tribes are nations. "We" nothing. I have no idea why you are so dug in and attempting to dictate, considering you've never created or contributed to any Native American articles previously. Yuchitown (talk) 18:02, 1 January 2022 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]
I come up with a solution that would satisfy both your requirements and mine, but now you are discrediting me. I do have an actual history of contributing to Native American articles, mainly Eastern Band Cherokee and Catawba (please be my guest to review my contribution/edit history of those articles and others). I have even attempted in writing a bio page for a former EBCI Chief, but I'm not very good writing stories as oppose building structure and referencing facts. Now, if you are satisfied with my history, please consider my proposal. --WashuOtaku (talk) 18:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So, you've contributed to a few articles. The issue is that you are refusing to work with us. You want things your way, it is my impression that rather than listen to experienced editors we must acquiesce to your demands. You talk about going to 'the Qualla', if you listened to folks, people from that community call it either the Boundary or Qualla. No 'the' preceding Qualla. Aside from day trips to the Boundary, what is your experience with Indigenous community and topics? Please. Take a step back and listen rather that dictate. Thank you. Indigenous girl (talk) 18:56, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion is going off-topic with the character assassination. --WashuOtaku (talk) 19:03, 1 January 2022 (UTC

@Washuotaku: as I just warned you on your talk page, you have crossed a line here. You are editing against consensus and you need to stop. You are clearly lacking information and experience in the field, and edits like this indicate your willingness to flout basic Wikipedia policies like WP:CONSENSUS in favor of your own WP:POV and WP:OR. It's long past time to WP:DROPTHESTICK and respect what the experienced editors here are telling you. This is your final warning. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 19:13, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dan_Hornbuckle&oldid=1207642303"