Talk:Duncan Campbell Scott

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Interesting article, but I am struck by the lack of supporting references for some statements. While biographical information is adequately supported by the reference to the Canadian Poetry Archives, it is important for assertions made about the residential schools issue to be supported. I was struck by the unreferenced statement about mortality in the schools: "in some cases the mortality rate exceeded fifty percent due to the spread of infectious disease. With a total death toll estimated at 50,000 nearly one half of all the children who attended the schools died." Can anyone provide reliable references for this statistic? Count Vronsky 16:17, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quotation

The quote from Scott beginning, "I wanted to get rid of..." is given in two spots, in two different forms; neither is referenced. Does anyone (maybe whoever put them in) have those references, and can we reduce the two to one accurate quote? Cheers, Lindsay 19:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Query/Complaint

For those who care to wonder:

The Wikipedia note on Scott does not represent consensus...at least, not unless all honest scholars and all Indigenous people who have been colonized by Canada are excluded.

A couple of years ago I provided an edited version of this article on Scott that was carefully supported by footnotes from primary sources, largely in the possession of Canada's National Archives. It stood for a couple of months & then disappeared. I don't know who took it out or what the history of this piece has been since then.... (I note that even the historical commentary that was once there has disappeared!!) Perhaps the National Archives that would so like to ignore Scott's Civil "Service" career and make him into a significant literary figure did the dirty. Certainly I notified them a couple of years ago and asked them to give a more complete story on Scott. They did not reply and there is no evidence that they paid any heed to it.

I don't know who made this latest attempt to crash the information management that is obviously going on. I do find it interesting that the references given have been reduced to Canada's National Archives and John Lesley who, if I remember rightly, is an employee of the Department of Indian Affairs spe ding much of his time playing internet games. When I did my edit of the article I included:

E.Brian Titley,A Narrow Vision:Duncan Campbell Scott and the Administration of Indian Affairs in Canada (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1986)

It is stunning to find that such a well known and well researched book on Scott is not in the Wikipedia bibliography. I can accept that my own, as yet unpublished work was excluded, but this??? It really makes one wonder about the integrity of the Wikpipedia process.

Another analysis that is very pertinent to understanding who Scott was, what he did and the relationship between his poems and his career is:

Laura Smyth Groening, "Administering/Ministering to the Indians: Duncan Campbell Scott and the Politics of Church and State" chapter 5 on "Listening to Old Woman Speak: Natives and alterNatives in Canadian Literature" (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2004)

She cites other sources.

Based on my experience, the reason why the current version of the article includes quotes that are not supported by proper cites is that everyone in Canada who provides proper cites is either censored or ignored.

Yes, I could set out to do the documentation work obviously needed by whoever wrote this article...But why should I waste my time??? I already made a well thought out& researched contribution to Wikipedia & where is it?

I wonder how long this version will stand before it too is knocked off!!!

Cynical Canadian 14 Nov. 2007.70.81.121.254 14:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC) Preceding cut-and-pasted from top of page. Lindsay (talk) 23:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I take quite seriously the charge that 'information management' is occurring, as i read that to mean 'censorship'. I read through each variation of the history of the article, and it looks to me as though it is an incorrect charge. As far as i can tell, information was added by User:Glxwoo, originally on 17 Feb '06, then taken out, put back, and taken out again. The reason, however, for the removal is pretty clearly not censorship, but that it was not formatted at all in an encyclopædic manner, references were listed as a bibliography with no attempt to actually refer to them, and, in fact, some information was duplicated from earlier in the article. If you look here you'll see what i mean.

I don't think anyone would have any quarrel with the information being put in, so long as it stays NPOV (obviously, there is a possibility for such an inflammable subject becoming POV); i don't have access tonight to any references, but i'll be happy to look, when i can, and see what i can cull & add. Or you, 70.81..., might like to have a shot yourself? Cheers, Lindsay (talk) 23:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Lesley -

My apologies for mentioning your name in a rather sharp way. It was certainly unfair to speculate ...though the mystery still remains...concerning the the lack of references in the main text to well established works like Titley's which certainly feels like censorship to me and to my Indigenous friends...This in turn raises questions concerning the integrity of the Wikipedia process which seems to favour internet savvy over actual scholarship. (What do POV & NPOV mean??? You are writing for an in-group to which I do not belong and do not have time to investigate. Everything I wrote in my contribution to Wikipedia was documented to primary or reputable secondary sources in the references I provided and I am mystified about what is not "encyclopedic" about that.)

I am still stunned by the extent to which the controversy over Scott has been suppressed by Canadian governmental and educational institutions when a proper study of why he came to wield such inordinate power and how he came to manipulate elected representatives of the Canadian people could be of great benefit to all...especially since the civil service continues to suffer from the same defects (based on personal experience working at the Immigration and Refugee Board and attempting to get services from the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Indian Affairs). I grew up in a civil service family and I do believe in the possibility of actual service. I hold nothing against people for public service employment per se however I am personally offended and frustrated by such things as the fact that large numbers of Indigenous people no longer have access even to potable drinking water...(as former Prime Minister Paul Martin is reported to have said in the Montreal Gazette)....let alone an ability to participate in the political decisions that affect their lives.

Since you have the knowledge, the technical know-how and the time required to edit and monitor Wikipedia entries, I would greatly appreciate it if you would make the corrections that are necessary. At the very least, Titley's book & Groening's chapter should be mentioned in the bibliography as well as a book I haven't read that Groening mentioned as the "only book-length study of his poetry": Stan Dragland, Floating voice: Duncan Campbell Scott and the Literature of Treaty 9 (Concord, Ontario: Anansi, 1994).

Regardless of what has happened in the past, it is always possible to clear our eyes, open our ears and put our minds together for the benefit of future generations. Since I am unable, I hope you will be able to make the corrections required. Thank you. Grace Woo24.201.59.188 (talk) 15:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I have to confess to being a bit puzzled by the previous post. First, if Grace Woo is the same person as Cynical Canadian and Glxwoo, it's a little confusing. Please sign your posts, by simply typing four tildes at the end of the post.

Second, i think my signature is fairly clear, and my name isn't Mr. Lesley.

Third, the references may have been present and accurate, but they were not in a form acceptable here. If i were to submit a paper to one of my professors without bothering to reference my facts in a way he could easily use, the manner in other words prescribed by my university, i would expect to get it back with a poor mark, or be failed, or at least be asked to correct it and resubmit. It is up to you to present information so it can be verified and used.

As for making the edits myself, i have tried to find some of the information you quoted, but the library here did not disgorge the required references. I shall continue to try sporadically, but Wikipedia would be better served were you to rewrite what you have put here, and use the citation form needed. I link to it here for your convenience in using it. Cheers, Lindsay (talk) 10:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)