Talk:Indian removal

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Indigenous peoples of North America B‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Indigenous peoples of the Americas B‑class High‑importance

	Indigenous peoples of the Americas portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indigenous peoples of the Americas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of the AmericasWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasIndigenous peoples of the Americas
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Human rights B‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Oklahoma B‑class Low‑importance

	Oklahoma portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oklahoma, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oklahoma on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OklahomaWikipedia:WikiProject OklahomaTemplate:WikiProject OklahomaOklahoma
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2018 and 13 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JackaryMcT (article contribs). Template:Archive bar

ethnic cleansing

Why is it, that in this article it is carefully avoided to name the Indian Removal what it was, an ethnic cleansing.

If one needs an article that names it ethnic cleansing, here is one: https://indiancountrymedianetwork.com/history/events/indian-killer-andrew-jacksons-indian-removal-act-display-first-time/Jochum (talk) 16:51, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you missed the Changing perspective of policy section. It mentions ethnic cleansing, albeit briefly, saying that "paternalism", ethnic cleansing, and even genocide have been ascribed by historians past and present to the motivation behind the Removals."

The infobox is prominently entitled "Genocide of indigenous peoples" and has a link to the ethnic cleansing article. It's unnecessary to use the epithet "ethnic cleansing" for every instance of "Indian removal". Besides, the article is not about ethnic cleansing, it's about the Indian removals. Carlstak (talk) 21:56, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As the Indian Removal was ethnic cleansing, full filling the definition of ethnic cleansing as it is defined today, it should be at least mentioned once in the intro, everything else is hiding it behind nice other words. It would also not be wrong to talk about genocide in the intro. The changing perspective does not either define that the removal was ethnic cleansing or genocide, just that some historians talk about it.Jochum (talk) 01:36, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to do some bold editing, with reliable sources, of course, but don't be surprised if you encounter some resistance from people who think "ethnic cleansing" is too strong a descriptor for the Indian removals. I agree that they were intended to cleanse the territories that whites coveted of their native inhabitants. My great grandfather was a Cherokee who was marched on the Trail of Tears and escaped. The rednecks think Andrew Jackson was a great man. Our ignorant president in the US thinks Andrew Jackson, who died on June 8, 1845, was a great man and "was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War." Thomas Jefferson was correct when he said that Andrew Jackson was a violent savage. Carlstak (talk) 04:21, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Globalize

The U.S. is not the only country in which Indian removal was a policy. You can find the same in colonial Brazil and colonial Spanish America. deisenbe (talk) 03:53, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to add sourced information to the article, adding a tag doesn't do much. oncamera 04:25, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Native-American (Misnomer: Indian)

Calling native-Americans as Indians is akin to saying the earth is flat and world revolves around earth! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajsharm (talk • contribs) 15:12, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

However, the event in question is called the "Indian removal". The intro does properly refer to the affected people as Native Americans. —C.Fred (talk) 15:14, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some Native Americans call themselves Indians. Here are works by historian Donald Fixico, of Shawnee, Sac and Fox, Muscogee, and Seminole descent:

American Indians in a Modern World (2008); Treaties with American Indians: An Encyclopedia of Rights, Conflicts and Sovereignty, 3 volumes, ed, (2007); Daily Life of Native Americans in the Twentieth Century (2006); The American Indian Mind in a Linear World: American Indian Studies and Traditional Knowledge (2003); The Urban Indian Experience in America (2000); The Invasion of Indian Country in the Twentieth Century: Tribal Natural Resources and American Capitalism (1998), 2nd ed., 2011; Rethinking American Indian History, ed. (1997); Urban Indians (1991); An Anthology of Western Great Lakes Indian History, ed. (1988); and Termination and Relocation: Federal Indian Policy, 1945-1960 (1986). Call for Change: The Medicine Way of American Indian History, Ethos and Reality (June 2013) and Indian Resilience and Rebuilding: Indigenous Nations in the Modern American West (October 2013). Carlstak (talk) 01:44, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Additions to the Creek section of the article

This article does a good job of outlining the basics of the Native American Diaspora but could use some more detail in the section on the Creek. I would like to add more detail to this section as there are many important events that happened after the initial diaspora. I want to mention things like the second Creek war where those that stayed behind rose up in opposition to settlers and the government. This uprising was not successful and resulted in a second diaspora situation. The uprising was used as justification for the government to step in more forcefully. The remaining creeks were placed in camps and slowly escorted west. I want to add all this information along with statistics regarding the number of people in each of the five detachments sent west as well as the number of deaths. I also want to add primary source descriptions of the conditions they faced. The source I will be the book Rivers of Sand: Creek Indian Emigration, Relocation, and Ethnic cleansing in the American South.^[1] Christopher D. Haveman holds a Ph.D. in History from Auburn University and specializes in the Creek Native American group. The source is peer-reviewed as it is from a university publisher. All together I plan to add 200 to 300 words. If anyone wants to comment on these changes please let me know on this talk page or mine. Tristan089786 (talk) 19:58, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tristan089786. Hello. You can do this here or at any other article on Wikipedia: The Encyclopedia that Anyone Can Edit. Just be sure to use and insert citations to reliable, secondary sources (preferred) for any outright statements made to the narrative. It appears that your source mentioned above should qualify for that (include the isbn and page #s). Feel free to edit to your hearts content. Welcome to the project! Questions? Use this talk page and someone will answer you. Also, there's The Teahouse for a usually quick response. Regards, GenQuest ^"scribble" 23:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Haveman, Christopher D. Rivers of sand : Creek Indian emigration, relocation, and ethnic cleansing in the American South. Removal of the Creek Indians from the Southeast,: University of Nebraska. ISBN 9780803273924.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)

General Question on Article Topic

What is the actual scope of this article? For non-historians like myself (i.e., the typical reader you are trying to reach) “Indian removal” is a fairly broad title, and my mind jumps to the many Indian removals across North America over 3 centuries. The article's focus, however, appears to be primarily on the forced migration of eastern Native Americans during the first half of the 19th century. If this is correct, it would help if this was reflected in the title, or at a minimum defined a little clearer in the first paragraph. Maybe something as simple as “For this article, Indian removal refers to the forced migration in the 19th century whereby Native Americans were forced by the United States government...”. Looking for feedback on this.Howbeit (talk) 14:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Initially I suggest reading Wikipedia policy/guideline on articles titles, article lead sections and if you feel it's appropriate consider moving (renaming) the page; being bold lies at the very core of Wikipedia. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 15:12, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These are a number of articles that cover the different ways the government forced Native Americans off their homelands, including the 12 listed at Dawes Act#See also:

Perhaps there should be an article that summarized all these articles so people can access them in a single go like you suggested. oncamera _{(talk page)} 19:31, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Howbeit: I noticed that too, especially since the focus seems to be a little muddied; not entirely clear if it's just the Southern US or other tribes as well. Fredlesaltique (talk) 05:06, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a 'Genocide of indigenous peoples in the United States' article, or something similar, would greatly help in my opinion. There are a lot of articles that should be more clearly connected to each other and easily accessed. Personally I'd argue that the Native American Genocide category could use its own series template. TheFallenMoon (talk)

Genocide in the infobox

This shouldn't be in the infobox because most reliable historians don't call it genocide. Mention that it has been described as genocide is already in the lede. More text could be added describing the debate about whether or not its genocide in Changed Perspective section. Nettless (talk) 19:23, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If it's in lead, it should be in the infobox. No need to hide it away. oncamera _{(talk page)} 20:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't be in the infobox if it's disputed. The lede says it has been described as genocide because scholars disagree on it. The source for genocide is Lewy who actually rejects this label. That source also doesn't explicitly reference anyone calling Indian removal genocide because it's about whole history of American colonialism and Native Americans, so a better source is probably needed. Putting it in the infobox is ignoring how most historians characterize it. I think it can be mentioned in the infobox if it's clear that it's disputed. Nettless (talk) 20:33, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Haveman, Christopher D. Rivers of sand : Creek Indian emigration, relocation, and ethnic cleansing in the American South. Removal of the Creek Indians from the Southeast,: University of Nebraska. ISBN 9780803273924.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)

[1]