Talk:Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Discussion moved from VfD:

	This article is part of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which collaborates on Native American, First Nations, Inuit, Métis and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet been rated on the assessment scale.
Suggested article edit guidelines: To help us prioritise our workload, and in readiness for Wikipedia:1.0, we need to assess our articles for Quality. If this article is Unassessed, please assess it. See the Article Classification for instructions. If you disagree with a rating, you can change it or discuss it at Article Classification. Before assessing this article, be sure to check the existing Archive of assessments made under the previous system (used until July 2006), and feel free to help in migrating the existing comments besides from adding your own evaluation. After assessing this article's quality, please make sure it to add it to the Lists at Article Classification, following the grading scheme detailed there.
Please rate this article and leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Contents 1 Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee 2 Impact of the Book: Help Needed! 3 Strength of the book 4 Genocide vs. slaughter 5 Neutrality 6 Fair use rationale for Image:Bury my.JPG

[edit] Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee

• Book review, not encyclopedic -- JeLuF 07:44, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • I'm sorry. I'll try to fix it. I'll try to make more of a description rather than a review.
• Keep for now, post on cleanup. Give brand new articles time to cook. Davodd 08:57, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Enormously significant book. Agree the article needs work. Andrewa 09:59, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. - Concur with Andrewa PilotPrecise 10:06, 13 March 2004 (UTC)
• Important book, but this article does it no justice. heidimo 15:45, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

It seems we have consensus to keep and improve, and a lot of interest.

My copy is in storage, so for the moment all I will do is encourage others, especially the original creator who IMO has made a very good start. I also recommend Black Elk Speaks if you can find it. Andrewa 19:07, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

This is a great and important book, and we really need an article about it, but this is just garbage. I hope it improves. RickK | Talk 21:46, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Impact of the Book: Help Needed!

The impact of this book is what makes it notable; it literally changed the way non-Indian Americans think about Indians. I put in a short section on this topic, which needs sources! For example, what were the contemporary book reviews say about it? What did its critics say? What proof do we have that it had an impact. It's a great book both for its content and for what it did, which I remember (but for which I have few references.) rewinn 03:20, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Strength of the book

I understand an editor removed (and another promptly restored) a comment about the strength of this book, commenting "not a book review". However, this is an article about the book, which necessarily shares elements with book reviews. It would be desirable to quote authorities on the book as to why this book had so strong an impact on the United States and our perception of our first peoples; it seems clear that it is in part because of its (for its time) fresh look at history but also because of its strong documentation. I have had little luck finding links, and I urge contributors to add what they can. rewinn 04:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Genocide vs. slaughter

I reverted an edit that had replaced "displacement and slaughter" with "genocide". I don't think "slaughter" is a gentle term; I think it is more accurate than "genocide" with respect to what the book talks about. And it is less likely to mix the article up with technical and political questions of just what constitutes genocide. rewinn 04:05, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality

I'm not sure if the use of "slaughter" and "over estimate the impact" can be considered to be neutral. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srajan01 (talk • contribs) 07:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Bury my.JPG

Image:Bury my.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)