Talk:Mohave

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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:

Please rate this article and leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

If there is an interest in including some Pipa a'ha macave words and phrases, I could add some.

Contents

[edit] Clean Up

When I wrote this page (a long time ago) I had a dearth of time on my hands. I note that a request to "clean up" the article and "conform to a higher standard" is noted on the page. I have the time and documents to do so, but not the inclination to do so.... at least not at the moment. What I researched over the last 15 years on the subject is not easily rendered back into reference footnotes.

There are two Macave--- the Fort Mohave and the Mojave. My original entry noted this fact: where did it go? -- Desertphile, 2005May30

[edit] Requested Move

Mojave people → Mohave Mohave Is the correct term, and was where this page was originally at. --Hottentot 21:01, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
  • Support a rename to Mohave (people). That was the way things were and there is no reason provided for making the change. So unless somone knows Mohave to be incorrect, this change should be made. Also, the Mojave page will need to be corrected since that was also changed. I changed what the rename should be to since Mohave has several other uses including a place name Arizona and a brand of tires. Vegaswikian 07:20, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes, but this is definitely the most important definition, and we can just have a Mohave (disambiguation) page for all those place names. --Hottentot 17:19, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments

Moving back to Mojave and Mojave to dab page. If consensus is for Mojave and Mojave (people) you can do that yourselves too. Rich Farmbrough 00:44, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Move closed. --Hottentot 07:02, 27 November 2005 (UTC)


Please note that Mohave and Mojave are both correct; when Fort Mohave was built and the Mohave reservation created, southern Macaves followed the advice of their Head Men (such as Chooksa homar and Yara tav) and relocated to the reservation. Northern Macaves resisted the reservation and are generally referred to as the Mojaves.

I am a bit ashamed of myself for having ignored this page for an entire year (to the day) without making the changed and additions I had promissed myself I would do. It has been mere laziness on my part. --Desertphile 2006-May-30

Get to it. We're waiting looking forward to an improved article. Cheers, -Will Beback 21:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Update

Welp, jumping right in, here is a major expansion/rewrite, with much left to be done. I subheaded much of the Devereaux material from the SOUTHWEST MUSEUM LEAFLETS brochure, online at [1] (which I think is desertphile's website) and while there is some content there which could (and perhaps should) be reworked and reintegrated, I'm not for its inclusion wholesale. I am of the opinion that a link to that material would be adequate. The content is largely very dated and pretty trite, again, my opinion, especially when the page prominently displays an image of a photo of a semi-nude woman. By the way, who is young Judith, when was the photo taken, and is she (or her family) game to have her image shown in this way? Not taking a prudish standpoint, more one of respect and deference. Also, noting the prior brief discussion but protracted switch, back & forth from mojave to mohave, etc., I want to ring in on that. It should be Aha Macave, according to Aha Macave elders. What's anyone think about changing at the very least, the tribal page, to reflect the correct name as the title of the page, with perhaps redirects from various misspellings? I tried to address this matter actually, in the text of the article. Duff 02:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the impressive update. I had been waiting for a member of the Mohave tribe, or a historian of Aha macave, to do the actual writing instead of my piecing together the web page--- out of cultural respect. It has been three years since I suggested to Tribal Council that a Fort Mohave person do the write before someone else did, to avoid errors from a non-Mohave perspective.
Regarding the usage of the phrase Aha macave, as others have pointed out that is one of several names the Mojave Indians in general, and the Fort Mohave ones in particular, used: there is a much less common, but apparently more accurate, name that they called themselves by in the 1850s. I have not written that name here because in Mojave tradition, names have power and I am an enemy (i.e., I am from European invasion cultures).
I have been considering adding a paragraph in WikiPedia regarding slavery among the Mojave. It was common, before and after the Oatman captivity. --Desertphile (talk) 19:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Peace brothers. Let the dogpile begin. -Duff 02:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History vs current reality

While this is an impressively detailed article, I have to note that it seems based almost entirely on old records. Almost none of the sources are more recent than the 1960s and many are much older. So when it talks about whether they smoke or chew tobacco, this is a historical and anthropological observation many decades old, not remotely current. References to their religious beliefs are in past tense, as if none of them remain today. This is not clear in the article. The whole article reads like a historical treatise about an extinct culture. There must be more current information than these documents.

And not to put too fine a point on it, there needs to be a more WP:NPOV tone to it. The attitudes about the people embodied currently seem distinctly distilled from rather racist assumptions from the original source documents. It would also benefit from more inline citations rather than the big pile of refs at the end which make it difficult to source accurately. Cheers, Pigman☿ 05:21, 1 June 2008 (UTC)