Talk:Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which collaborates on Native American, First Nations, 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.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class 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.
View comments (edit) This entry (Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria) has in the past contained information that is frankly, simply not true. The version posted as of this date, August 23, 2006, by ewass is backed by fact. Keep it honest, people. Kids use this for their reports! The current entry is a decent start, certainly more than a stub. The FIGR is a new "tribe", created by an act of Congress in 2000. The Tribal Chairman apparently assembled it to receive land in trust from the federal government, in order to build an Indian gambling casino. Serious students of the California Indians will probably want to direct their energies to the entries for the Coast Miwok, Southern Pomo, and other known pre-contact linquistic and cultural groups. ````

	This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

	This article is within the scope of the San Francisco Bay Area WikiProject, a collaborative effort to build a more detailed guide on Wikipedia's coverage of San Francisco and the Bay Area. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Tribal chairman Greg Sarris is a complex man. He is a middle-aged, successful college professor and author, who associated with local Indians as a boy in suburban Sonoma County, California, and built a professional career on writing about them. He was adopted as an infant by a Santa Rosa white couple, and has written that he discovered as an adult that his paternal grandmother was a local Indian.

Sarris organized the Federated Coast Miwok in 1992, after a Pomo Indian announced plans to build an Indian casino in Sonoma or Marin County; but the Miwok never had a relationship with the U.S. government. However, the government had owned the Graton Rancheria between 1921 and 1966, and made it available to homeless Indians in the area. The Federated Coast Miwok was renamed the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, and began to lobby Washington for recognition.

A 2000 act of Congress made the FIGR a sovereign Indian nation; and under Sarris' leadership, the FIGR is in partnership with Station Casinos, Inc. of Las Vegas, Nevada, to build a resort hotel/casino complex in Rohnert Park, California, about 50 miles north of San Francisco. It is therefore difficult for a knowledgeable, unbiased, and sincere observer to edit the FIGR page without at least suggesting that Sarris organized the FIGR, and lobbied for its federal recognition as a sovereign Indian "tribe", primarily to build an Indian casino.

Some members of the FIGR may be descendants of members of Marin and Sonoma County Indian bands, and/or of the handful of known residents of the Graton Rancheria (1921--66); but that does not make the FIGR the heir of, or the natural successor to the Coast Miwok, Bodega Miwok, Southern Pomo, or any other known aboriginal or historical Indian group. Whatever status the new tribe has as a sovereign Indian nation--especially, any right to receive land in trust from the federal government, and to operate an Indian casino under California state law--was created by the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act (P.L. 106-568) passed by Congress in 2000, and signed by President Clinton.

If other editors disagree with the facts cited here, I hope they will make their case on this discussion page, before making any significant changes to the FIGR page itself. Mukrkrgsj 00:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV issues

I tagged this article a few days ago for several reasons. Mainly, the jist of the article seems to me to be very slanted, basically along the lines of opposing recognition of FIGR as a federally-recognized Indian tribe. While that's a legitimate point of view, its only one point of view and the article is very much in violation of WP:NPOV if the article takes that viewpoint to the exclusion of others. Also, the article places undue weight on the issue of recognition of this tribe, to the exclusion of discussion of any of the other activities of FIGR.

Also, I'm concerned that the article may contain original research, in violation of WP:NOR. I'm thinking specifically of all the references to National Archives documents, which are primary, unpublished sources, the meaning of which relies heavily on the article editor's interpretation.

Finally, the article contains way to many long direct quotations than is appropriate for an encyclopedia article. I gather this article is basically the work of one or two editors. I would appreciate if they're going to continue working on the article, that they address these concerns and make a concerted effort to make the article less one-sided. Peter G Werner 23:57, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for adding categories and assessments to this article, Peter. I'm glad you came back to explain your reasons for hanging three critical banners on it at the same time.

I hope you read my comments above, and have been reading about the FIGR's proposed casino project in the Bay Area papers. You may want to use the Santa Rosa Press Democrat's search feature, here: http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=SEARCH.

The fact is, the FIGR has had no significant visible activities, other than Chairman Sarris' campaign for federal recognition, followed by its casino project. If you know of any others, you can add them to the article at your convenience.

You'll also find that the facts are thoroughly documented. Someone has cited 17 References, there are many external links, and the quotations are well attributed. All the external links may not be listed in the appendix--something else you might want to check and do.

Unfortunately, Sarris and the FIGR have not been forthcoming, and their website is very small. However some organized opponents of the casino project have done a great deal of research, and it is well documented, and readily available. (FYI, I am not a member of the organization.)

I agree there are many quotations in the article, and some are lengthy. I am continuing to edit for clarity and brevity. In this case, the full quotations may be more appropriate than a pararaphrase--which might well appear even more critical of the FIGR's origins and motives.

I have commented elsewhere that anthropologists and ethnohistorians will probably prefer to contribute to the existing and new articles re the Coast Miwok, and the various Pomo groups. Sarris' new tribe will be of interest primarily to students of economics, politics, and contemporary sociology.

-- Mukrkrgsj 03:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup of this article is in order. A simple way to cut through the seemingly bickering among the contributors to this article is to do in-line citations. There is an excellent listing of citation at the end of the article. All that is needed now is to attribute each fact presented to each of those citations. Folks, this is how it is done. After the factutal statement, cite it by saying <ref>citation-name</ref> and then in the "Reference" section instead add <references /> once and the article will automatically place notes at all the citations above and footnote the citation sources. Remember: Clear citation = no doubts. Good luck to the clean up -- I look forward to seeing a stronger article. CJLippert 17:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)