Great Sioux Nation was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 17 March 2023 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Sioux. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sioux article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Great Sioux Nation page were merged into Sioux on 17 March 2023 as a result of a deletion discussion. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2019 and 10 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Moskosol.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 09:25, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
The "media" section that links to videos needs to be formatted. I don't know enough about that extensive formatting, but it's obvious something needs to be done. Billy Shears 01:18, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
I made an addition that this site is ok !!!!! to the summary at the beginning, because the three branches of the Sioux are very important distinctions among the Sioux people (I am, for example: Oglala=Lakota =Teton=Sioux). The branches or divisions are at the same time geographic, linguistic, and social, and interchangeable as to usage meaning. It is proper to use any of the three division names (Dakota, Nakota, Lakota) and mean "Sioux", or to mean those divisions among the Sioux (confusing, I know, but it's the linguistic tradition--each tribe uses its own to mean itself and all, if that explains it any better). I have used Oceti Sakowan (you will also see it written Ocheti Shakowan to demonstrate pronunciation) but that is a Lakota term. The advantage of the term Sioux (I was taught it was from the Chippewa, if that is the same as Ottawa?) is that it is an all-encompassing term for the language group as a people--a sort of a neutral term, if you will--and many Sioux prefer it because it has a positive connotation, despite its origins. Other edits I have made have attempted to logically follow or explain. Buckboard 09:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if you could clear something up for me... This article refers to seven nations of the Sioux, of which the Teton or Lakota are one, which is further divided into seven bands. The Sioux and the Lakota articles both seem to define the Oceti Sakowin or "Seven Council Fires" differently, however. Is the Oceti Sakowin made up of the seven larger Sioux nations, or is it made up of the seven branches of the Teton nation? Also, did the Oceti Sakowin have a specific meeting place (before or after white contact)? Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.172.193.50 ( talk) 04:24, May 15, 2007
If Lakota is a sub-division of Sioux, must the lead paragraph say that the Sioux are also known as Lakota? If (as I suspect) Sioux and Lakota are sometimes errorneously used interchangeably, shouldnt we refrain from perpetuating that mistake? -- Ezeu 17:20, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
I usually make an effort to replace adhoc guides with IPA when I remove them, but the one given on this page for "Oceti Sakowin" ("Oh-SHAY-tee SHAW-ko-ween") was so meaningless that I didn't know where to begin. "oh", "ko" and "shay" seem to represent dipthongs, but the page on the Lakota language doesn't say anything about dipthongs. Can anyone with a knowledge of Lakota phonetics tell me, in IPA, how "Oceti Sakowin" is actually pronounced? -- Krsont 19:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
I can't do it in IPA, but in the standard orthography it is Očhéthi Šakówiŋ.
Thiyopa (
talk) 07:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh- CHAY- tee Sha-KO-ween is basically the right way to pronounce it. The only dipthong in Lakota is Hau. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Nibelle (
talk •
contribs) 15:48, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
I am working on an entry for the Nodaway River which according to some accounts evolved from the name Nadouessioux. The explanation here of foreign tongues sounds believeable but it runs counter to almost everything out there. Please post some sort of attribution! Thank you.
Americasroof 18:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
though a bit outdated its still a decent read as it was work with actually native author
the yankton sioux by herbert t. hoover
written in the late 80's with heavy native american church its still a decent over view of how it was and is life of my people . and its still easy to locate in most public libaries
wicsa wambdi
I've been led to believe that the term Sioux was a European term for the Dakota and etc. Is this true? Disinclination 16:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Did the Sioux(and other tribes) actually take the scalps off the heads of all their victims or did they just do that to the europeans? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.67.50.189 ( talk • contribs) 16:15, 5 October 2006(UTC).
It looks like todays anon editor pasted a huge, mostly unformatted block from another source into the page. I also have NO idea why he added >.< to the start of the second paragraph. I have no pony in this race, being Cherokee myself, but I gotta say the page looks like crap. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 01:14, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Umm.. I am fairly new here. I have seen copyvio mentioned before, but am not sure of the accepted practice for making an edit based on it. Wikipedia, I have noticed, has many specific procedures that have developed for handling certin situations, and I am just too new to do this comfortably. -- Bill W. Smith, Jr. 03:29, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
'Sioux' is a French word, and as such it is pronounced [sju]. The article gives the pronunciation [su], which I thought was a blunder due to English's 'u' being pronounced [ju]. User Miskwito reverted my edit, saying "that is not how it is pronounced". I checked my English/French dictionary, and indeed, it gives [sju] in French and [su] in English. Now, that is so far the most weird pronounciation I have ever encountered. I could have accepted [saiuks], [siauks], but [su]?!? Just like 'sous', 'sou' or 'soûl'? You English speakers are a strange lot. Could anyone shed some light as to how the word came to have such a bizarre pronunciation?
However it may be, I for one will stick to [sju] or else [dakota]...
Pseudo account 11:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
English speakers pronounce -iu- like [u]. See the Mortal Kombat character Liu Kang, pronounced [lu] Kang.-- Manfariel ( talk) 16:14, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Could we have it in phonetic alphabet in the intro? Johncmullen1960 ( talk) 10:13, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
the article contains good content, and the references section is strong, but the article needs inline references in order to progress toward a good article rating. i added fact citations throughout the article in areas where citing a reference would be helpful. ChicagoPimp 20:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{ Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 17:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Could someone please add a map to this article? I'm thinking something similar to that seen at the top of the page of the Oji-Cree article. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atikokan ( talk • contribs) 04:07, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
The map inserted on this page is from a non-English language source (Canada is "Kanada", etc). The Lake Traverse Reservation has since been disestablished (ruled as such by the US Supreme Court 1975). Also, "traditional" locations of the Sioux and subtribes varied depending on the source and date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.177.195.201 ( talk) 18:45, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Is there any connection to the Native American (NatCanadian?) band Seventh Fire? TREKphiler hit me ♠ 22:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone know if the Sioux (by which I mean the Nakoda, Dakota, and Lakota), the Great Sioux Nation, have a single flag, crest, symbol, or insignia that represents them collectively that we could use as the lead image in this article? All I can find are flags for specific subgroups. Asarelah ( talk) 23:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
No, there is nothing like that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nibelle ( talk • contribs) 15:52, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Do some people have a problem with the term "Nakota"? It was recently deleted from the lede of both this article and Lakota people. I have reverted the change because it was not explained and the rest of the article still refers to Nakota. I think the editor(s) who want this change should explain, preferably here, so we all understand the reasoning. SpinningSpark 17:51, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
The word Nakota is a misnomer that has existed in the literature for over 150 years. Please, read the introduction to the New Lakota Dictionary (2008, Lakota Language Consortium), where the origin and history of this minomer is explained in detail. In a nutshel, the speakers of the Yankton/Yanktonai dialects call themselves Dakhóta and not Nakhóta. Thus the New Lakota Dictionary gives these divisions: 1) Lakota (seven Teton tribes), Western Dakota (Yankton, Yanktonai) and Eastern Dakota (Santee, Sisseton, Wahpeton, Wahpekute).
Many fluent speakers of Yankton and Yanktonai participated in the research for the New Lakota Dictionary and they all confirmed this. This publication gives the most authoritative analysis and descriptioin of the divisions.
The Yankton/Yanktonai are called Dakota also by DeMallie, see DeMallie, Raymond J. (2001b). Teton. In Handbook of North American Indians: Plains (Vol. 13, Part 2, pp. 794-820). Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution.
Thiyopa 13 October 2008
PUT INFO ABOUT THE FIRST ENCOUNTER OF WHITE PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.136.99.21 ( talk) 23:31, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Also re George Horse-Capture on his bio (he's from Ft Belknap) there's no indication if he's Assiniboine/Nakota or White Clay/Blackfeet and I don't see him listed here.. Skookum1 ( talk) 18:02, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Reference could be made to the film, "A Man Named Horse".
The Dakota people consider "Sioux" to be offensive, because it is what the white man called them and not what they call themselves. And as the article details, it has connotations of "foreign" and "snake". Awhile time ago, Minnesota changed geographic names [1] that contained "Sioux" to "Dakota". WP:Common name says we use the common name and the English name, but gives an exception when the name is considered offensive, like "Mormon". And "Sioux". Would I have any support to move the article? -- AvatarMN ( talk) 17:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.214.123 ( talk) 00:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm still trying to figure out what the relationship of the Stoney and Assiniboine is the Sioux. This article doesn't help! -- Kevlar ( talk • contribs) 20:49, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
[undent]Note this in the Nakota article: Thus, they believed the Yankton-Yanktonai people called themselves Nakota instead of Dakota. Unfortunately, the inaccurate assumption of a Lakota-Dakota-Nakota division has been perpetuated in almost every publication since then",[8] gaining such influence that even some Lakota and Dakota people have been influenced by it. More has to be read to get that context fully, but I was struck by it considering the tone/idea here. Skookum1 ( talk) 01:43, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
References
The first description for the Lakota does not say anything about the group's location. I believe that information should be added.
The order for the three Sioux groups was never consistent through the article. I decided to create the consistency by putting them in order from easternmost to westernmost.
In the "Ethnic divisions" section, "Santee division (Dakota) (Isáŋyathi)" is now "Santee division (Eastern Dakota) (Isáŋyathi)". This is once again to create consistency within the section and the rest of the article.
Regarding the "Dakota, Nakota and Lakota historic distribution", I'm not sure how relevant the picture is since the Nakota are barely mentioned. The "Early history" section is way too short. It's probably worth to expand it by including information on the Assiniboine (Nakota), particularly explaining how they broke away from the main Sioux branch in earlier times. At that point, the picture will probably relevant to the discussion.
In the section "Wounded Knee Massacre" the sentence that starts with "By the time it was over" is vague. It is not clear what it is.
The "Republic of Lakota" section introduces a new spelling: Lakotah. Since the correct spelling for the Republic is Lakotah, you can find it at www.lakotafreedom.com, I changed Lakota to Lakotah. From what I understand from reading, it seems as if the people and the language are called Lakota whereas the land is called Lakotah.
ICE77 ( talk) 07:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
The article is almost entirely about the interaction of the Sioux with Europeans, other than the political section. What about the Sioux themselves? Really basic things like: (Rereading I am ashamed of the fact that I have written all these questions in the past tense. I would like to know about the past, present, and indeed future of the Sioux).
How many Sioux were there? What are their origins? What was their religion? What did they believe? What was their family structure? What did they eat? What did they make in the way of artifacts? Did they have technology? What where they afraid of, other than Europeans? What were their arts? Did they always, entirely, live in tents? Were they nomadic? Did they farm? Did they have writing? Did they have myths? How did they fight? What were their weapons? What did they wear?
Perhaps I am missing other articles perhaps named things like "Sioux clothing"
Bearing in mind the emphasis on their interaction with Europeans, I wonder to what extent were they influenced, or created in a sense, by their interaction with Europeans? I mean by that, that perhaps they were a smaller first American nation that used horses or other European imports to become who they became. I doubt this possibility but bearing in mind the paucity of information regarding the Sioux other than in their interaction with Europeans the unsaid insinuation is that the Sioux were a European invasion created entity. The article on the mighty Sioux is almost not about the Sioux at all. The article might be renamed, "The interactions of the Sioux with Europeans." Are there Sioux Wikipedians? Did they, you, have a history, ethnology, culture? Of course the Sioux do. Perhaps the problem is that the Sioux did not, do not, write books. Is there any chance that Wikipedia might relent upon its rules regarding sources when dealing with a culture that does not have a written (sourced) tradition? This "must be sourced" rule of Wikipedia might be argued to be continuing the destruction of the Sioux, a non-sourced culture, in what is now the main global repository for information. Sioux young people might come to Wikipedia and be able to find nothing about themselves.
I want to know about the Sioux themselves not about the wars they were forced to fight with Europeans. I hope some informed people write about the Sioux. -- Timtak ( talk) 11:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
{{
citation}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthor=
(
help){{
citation}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthor=
(
help){{
citation}}
: Check |isbn=
value: length (
help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthor=
(
help){{
citation}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthor=
(
help){{
citation}}
: Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)Perhaps the author of this article or another user could be compelled to use a non-cropped image of Sitting Bull. The image shown (which is the one that is so ubiquitous in countless textbooks) is intentionally cropped so as to conceal the crucifix that Sitting Bull is wearing around his neck. He was a devout Catholic and we should honor this historical fact rather than perpetuating an unscrupulous agenda.
This image can be found here.
-- J smith898 ( talk) 09:13, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
I have made some attempt to categorize some of them, but there are many more and I am only very slightly familiar with this people. Please come take a look if you would be interested in either helping with that or in using some of them in this or a related article. By definition National Archives images have no copyright and can be freely used on Wikipedia. You can see a list of the image batches at Categorization page, or just do a search for Souix or another term at commons.wikimedia.org! Thanks :) Elinruby ( talk) 06:29, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
What can be done to clean-up the protest section? It doesn't look very encyclopedic. As it is now, it's size is very large compared to other clearly important Sioux events. Agassiz830 ( talk) 18:50, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
Therefore I removed the links to the redirect pages. Possibly a better solution would be to remove the redirects and create some sort of a page, but I don't know how to do the first part and can't do the second. So I am noting the situation for anyone who may want to address it. Elinruby ( talk) 13:32, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
I am not an expert in Sioux (or Lakota) history, but this article skips from the relationship with European traders to the war of 1862, were not any events in between? In the 1862 there is a reference to the federal payment, surely that would imply that they were already inside a reservation, when were they taken there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.167.185.49 ( talk) 07:49, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Sioux/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Looks really good, someone should check over history/anthro and NPOV; separate articles for Yankton, Santee etc possibly proper to do (all language articles for Yankton etc resolve to "
Sioux language" at present, and should have separated articles if possible. --
Skookum1 (12 May 06)
|
Last edited at 15:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 06:17, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
What can be done to clean-up the protest section? It doesn't look very encyclopedic. As it is now, it's size is very large compared to other clearly important Sioux events. Agassiz830 ( talk) 18:50, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
I have to agree with a previous comment, namely that this article skips over substantial periods of time, leaving out crucial elements of the Sioux history. For example, where is there a discussion of the Sioux wars fought against the Pawnee or Omaha people? (The Pawnee are mentioned, but only in passing.) And there is nothing approaching an adequate approach (or any approach) to the conflict with the Chippewa which drove the Sioux out of land contested between the two tribes. A typical reader would think that nothing--absolutely nothing--happened between the late seventeenth century and 1862. The article, as such, is deeply flawed and ought to be infused with new content to fill the gaps.
Isoruku ( talk) 04:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Spirituality, beliefs.-- Manfariel ( talk) 16:01, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Sioux. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:02, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Isn't WP:NOETHNICGALLERIES against using images of certain people to essentially represent an entire group of people? Theo ( edits) 07:44, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
I wanted to inform all that I am working on an update to this page that will talk about the roles of the men and women within the tribe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoboVolcano4 ( talk • contribs) 11:42, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
I'm redirecting Great Sioux Nation to the Sioux#Etymology section as that's where the definition for GSN exists. The rest of that article is already in this article in the Sioux#Ethnic and modern geographical divisions and Sioux#Black Hills Land claims. The Canada section of the GSN article pertains to the Assiniboine and shouldn't be in this article, since they are not considered part of the "Great Sioux Nation" or the Oceti Sakowin/Sioux tribes. oncamera (talk page) 05:28, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
This article uses the outdated term "Indian" 113 times. Many should be changed to the modern international "indigenous" or "indigenous peoples". Proper names such as Indian Peace Commission are appropriate. Since this massive task cannot be done without other editing considerations, I am simply posting the recommendation here. Humpster ( talk) 05:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)