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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
In keeping with the structure of Wikipedia Miwok articles I suggest we remove Bay Miwok from this article (one sentence), then call this page Valley and Sierra Miwok traditional narratives so it is cleanly associated with the location of the geography of the Valley and Sierra Miwok article. As pointed out by new editors recently, Bay Miwok seems lumped in here just to "cover" it, but it doesn't really go geographically with the Sierra culturally or geographically. Goldenrowley (talk) 05:20, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This brings up the label Valley Miwok in its own right. I am very uncomfortable with that phrase as an ethnographic unit, and have not seen it in any scholarly literature that I can remember. I would much prefer "Plains Miwok," as an ethnographic organizing principle of long standing. Related to that, I recommend we get rid of the entire concept of "Eastern Miwok" as an organizing principle for any Wikipedia article. As far as ethnographic and cultural traditions, and even post-1850 history, go, there are "Coast Miwok," "Lake Miwok [who were incredibly mixed with Wappo, culturally and geographically]", "Plains Miwok," and "Sierra Miwok." However, Miwokan speakers from Coast to Sierra were remarkably unified in myth traditions, so that I would recommend modifying the article "Eastern Miwok traditional narratives" to "Miwok Traditional Narratives" and adding the Coast references to it. This is a completely new approach I am advocating. What think you?Middle Fork (talk) 02:28, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Getting rid of entire concept of "Eastern Miwok" as an organizing principle for any Wikipedia article. - Agreed. Using "Plains Miwok," as an ethnographic organizing principle of long standing - Agreed. Mixing Coast Miwok into Miwok Traditional Narratives - not agreed...^because^ stories having to do with the Pacific Ocean and influence from Pomo, mythic literature is more obscured and mixed due to integration into the Missions, the closer the people are to the Bay Area. Sierra's are very far away... Goldenrowley (talk) 04:33, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weekend? I think I remember what those were! OK, given the various agreeds and disagreeds, it seems to me that (1) the "Eastern Miwok Narratives" section needs to be changed to "Sierra Miwok Narratives," (2) I new article called "Plains Miwok" needs to be set up; I have never initiated an article, so I am hoping that you will do an initial set-up of headers, even copy over text from "Valley and Sierra...", and I can go into it and add other Plains Miwok-specific stuff. That article would need to have its own "Mythology" section, which would reference the "Wipa" myth from Merriam (1910). (3) the "Valley and Sierra" article header would need to be changed to "Sierra Miwok," with some accompanying text modification. (4) All the various external cross-links would need to be modified, or at least, a Plains Miwok external link added to the others. I can help on everything except setting up a new article. (By the way, I had not discovered the Lake Miwok narratives article; always something more to discover.) Middle Fork (talk) 15:29, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You may be wanting another alternative, which just hit me on the head. We do not have to build a "Plains Miwok" section at all, just change "Valley and Sierra" to "Plains and Sierra." I consider the first alternative a better reflection of the strong environmental (marshes and valley riverine vs. foothill with transhumance up into Sierran Transition Zone) and historic differences (Plains were 90% absorbed into Mission San Jose (although many returned to valley to work for Sutter) vs Sierra, of which 10% absorbed by Missions (lived to be crushed during the Gold Rush).Middle Fork (talk) 16:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Just change "Valley and Sierra" to "Plains and Sierra." - Agreed! The reason I would agree to this is because it would then match the structure of the series of Miwok pages (as long we change them too). That is we have a Valley/Plains Sierra main history page, so it would be the related "narratives" page. In my research there was enough similarity between plains and Sierra to keep them together. For the record it might be called Valley Miwok because the Sacramento Valley is a velley not a plain (geographically) but I am trusting in your greater education in the field and you have some books to back up the word "Plains Miwok". Goldenrowley (talk) 21:05, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
,_early_1900s,_Central_Africa,_Democratic_Republic_of_the_Congo,_Pende_people,_wood,_fiber_-_Cleveland_Museum_of_Art_-_DSC08700.JPG){kind=small}