Talk:Anishinaabe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Oklahoma, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Oklahoma.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject North Dakota, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of North Dakota.

This article is part of WikiProject Wisconsin, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Wisconsin.

[edit] Americentric

Despite the fact that most of the Anishinaabe range is/was in Canada, this article makes no mention of relations with the Canadian/British government, nor how they were treated [here].

Not trying to sound anti-American, I just feel it is an important aspect.

I agree. However, most of the current contributors are in the United States, which accounts partially for the "south of the boarder" slant. Unlike the Anishinaabe communities in the United States that are struggling, the communities in Canada are in better condition, yet they are not mention currently. In addition, there is no mention of the impact of the formation of the United States that lead to a mass relocation of many, many Anishinaabe groups into what now is Canada. Dealings with the British and later the Canadians are not mentioned here as well. In part, the Ojibwa article talks about some of these issues, but more can be said here, and in other Anishinaabe peoples' articles. CJLippert 15:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anishinini

Trying to stay consistent, I changed the part that said the Anishinini were not Anishinaabe. Currently, Anishinini and Oji-Cree redirect to Nishnawbe-Aski. In the text it states:

The Oji-Cree people are descended from historical intermarriage between the Ojibwe and Cree cultures, but are considered a distinct nation from either of their parent groups. They are considered one of the component groups of Anishinaabe, and reside primarily in a transitional zone between traditional Ojibwe lands to their south and traditional Cree lands to their north.

I'm sure if you asked 100 Anishinini people if they considered themselves Anishinaabe, 95 would say "what?" or "who cares?" but I think they would be more concerned that a distinction is made with the Ojibwe. Anishinaabe being a more inclusive term would probably be okay. Of course, I am not a member of the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, and I am speculating here. Someone who knows better is welcome to revert this, but I thought with the Saulteaux using Nakawē, referring to oneself by the word Anishinaabe is not a prerequisite for being included in that group. Besides, if Nishnawbe is becoming the preferred term, there's your cognate right there. Thoughts????

(Leo1410 19:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC))

The "Nishnawbe Aski Nation" is called Anishinaabe Aski Ishkonigaanan Ogimaawin (Fully pointed: ᐊᓂᐦᔑᓈᐯ ᐊᔥᑭ ᐃᔅᑯᓂᑳᓇᓐ ᐅᑭᒫᐎᓐ/Commonly: ᐊᓂᔑᓇᐯ ᐊᔥᑭ ᐃᔅᑯᓂᑲᓇᓐ ᐅᑭᒪᐎᓐ) in Anishinaabemowin/Anishininimowin/Nehinâmowin. Take a look at Treaty 9 and NAN's website. (You will need a UCAS-ranged UniCode font to read the syllabics.) However, I am not quite convinced the article is accurate. Unfortunately, I am more familiar with Anishinaabe communities in the US and some of the Canadian Treaty 3 First Nations, so I really cannot make an input to that matter, and my resources regarding Treaty 9 Nations are limited to the internet and one 54-paged booklet. So with that said, any rewording would be fine. However, every Wikipedia article would need to be referenced to something... preferably a written document, but in case of oral history, which Wikipedia shy away, but with documentation of interviews, even oral histories are possible. See the Wikipedia's article guidelines for details. CJLippert 00:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Relations section has problems

Generally it is not in an encyclopedic tone, specifically it falls in to a rant at paragraph four and beyond. It doesn't agree with the singular/plural scheme established by the beginning of the page. It uses only one source. The sentence structure is sometimes REALLY awkward ("they will not allow those that lived in this land before them to honor their own dead and, after traveling the trail of life, to be able to lie down beside them" is a massive run-on setence. I *think* it's trying to say something like "Settlers passed legislation preventing Anishinabeg from visiting their ancestral dead. They further limited the expression of Anishinabeg culture by preventing traditional burials," but I'm *not sure*. Nor could I defend this changing of the sentence, because I don't even know if the current is historically correct as it seems to be referring to a newspaper article at http://www.saulttribe.com/index.php, which only has archives back to 2005).

I'm not well read enough to make any changes, but the relations section needs some serious editing for content, style and references. comments by 71.221.24.26

Yes, I have noticed this as well. That section was a recent addition by an anonymous user, and speaks more specifically about the Ojibwa in the United States rather than the Anishinaabeg as a whole. After pondering about it for a while, we may move this awkward section into the Ojibwa article and try to write here something about the subject the user was trying to address but in a more broad Anishinaabe context, convering the collective experiences on the Anishinaabeg in both Canada and the United States. CJLippert 16:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

This section has been revamped to separate out relations with the French, British, US and Canada. Somewhere along the lines here, relations condition with other indigenous groups discussion is needed. Meanwhile, though I worked on the US portion, admittedly it still can be massaged to be in a better Neutral Point of View (there still is some bias showing through). Meanwhile, we have had contributions to the British and Canada portions, but both of them need serious clean-up to meet the NPOV guidance and to wikify key words found in those sections. CJLippert 20:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)