Talk:Indian Wars

	Pending tasks for [[Template:Articlespace:Indian Wars]]: (https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php?title=Talk:Indian_Wars&action=purge)	edit (https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php?title=Talk:Indian_Wars/to_do&action=edit) - watch (https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php?title=Talk:Indian_Wars/to_do&action=watch) - purge (https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php?title=Talk:Indian_Wars&action=purge)
	Talk:Indian Wars/to do

Irregular removed?

The intro used to say:

"...between the government and military (regular and irregular) of the United States and the Native..."

... and now says:

"...between the United States and Native..."

I like the terser version, but the point about American civilians often saw themselves as part of the wars is lost. The rest of the into is now devoted to how misleading the term "Indian War" is. I don't see a good place to add back the reference without making it choppy. Any ideas, anyone? A D Monroe III 20:12, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps you might make that point (that the Indian wars involved more than just soldiers) after the sentence "since noncombatants were often killed in frontier warfare." --Kevin Myers 00:18, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)

Naming

Is this an academically accepted name - ie. do authorities on the subject refer to them as the "Indian Wars". I ask because, like the term "American Indians" itself, it is not preferable and is misleading. Asside from this, the country India has been in many wars: so a further level of confusion. Perhaps something like "Native American wars" or "Aboriginal American wars"? In any case, the word "Wars" should surely be "wars" - this is not a proper noun? --Oldak Quill 18:53, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's a historical name, and, yes, is a proper noun, so capitalized, like the "Civil War". The people at the time called them the "Indian Wars", so our references do likewise, so Wikipedia does likewise. The question is, how long do we continue this, that is, when do we replace the historical name with a more accurate one? Considering the Civil War was not, in fact, a true civil war (the South was not fighting for control of the Northern government), and is slightly older than the Indian Wars, I'd guess we're not ready to fix this yet. --A D Monroe III 21:46, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

A.D. is correct. Indian Wars is a proper noun in the context of U.S. history, see also Indian Campaign Medal. Even though Native American has replaced Indian as the proper term for the ethnic group, the word Indian remains in the U.S. vernacular. We still have the Bureau of Indian Affairs, an Indian reservation, an Indian casino, an Indian summer, etc. Also, some Native Americans refer to themselves as Indians and prefer it over the PC term. However, it's worth noting that the Wikipedia category for related articles is Category:Native American wars. jengod 23:16, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. While it is indeed a proper noun in the context of US history, this is when it is told from the perspective of White historians, who are still largely ignorant of the points of view of various Native American peoples on the events. I suggest moving it to "Conflicts between Whites and Native Americans". When A D Monroe says "the people at the time called them the Indian Wars"... is he considering all people involved? If I ask somebody on the local reservation, although their people were not generally involved in the conflict, would see them as less connected events than White historians, and would be more likely to call them "The wars between Indians and Milga:n" (Milga:n is the O'odham word for "white people", from the Spanish "Americana"/"Americano").

Wikipedia uses the term "indian" often in many of its pages where some people consider this word to be offensive (to be fair, some people find it offensive when you use other terms). More importantly, however, when you use it without the qualification "American", it by default refers to India. It is important that we find all occurances of the word and replace it with less ambiguous terms, preferably "Native American", although in many places, the ethnonym of the particular peoples (ethnic group) is more appropriate. For an example, see my edits to the Wounded Knee Massacre article - which occurances of "Indian" I changed to "Native American", which I changed to "Lakota", and which I changed to "Sioux". --Node 06:26, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Node, to help make your case for renaming the article and changing terminology throughout Wikipedia, can you address the following issues that arise from your comments?:

• By the most recent poll I've seen (here (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762158.html)), American Indians prefer "American Indian" to "Native American." Indeed, browse through the popular newspaper Indian Country Today (http://www.indiancountry.com/) and you'll see that American Indian journalists regularly refer to their brethren as "Indians." Yet you say that we should not use "Indian" because "some people consider this word to be offensive." Which people?

• If most American Indians do indeed prefer "Indian" or "American Indian" to "Native American," would that make a difference in your opinion?

• You write "White historians ... are still largely ignorant of the points of view of various Native American peoples on the events." Which historians? Do you have a reference for this sweeping statement?

• In the Wounded Knee article, you've changed "white" (lower case) to "White" (upper case). What is your source for this non-standard usage?

Thanks. --Kevin Myers 13:47, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

As Kevin points out, American Indian is becoming more popular with Aboriginals in the U.S. As he also notes, many continue to use the term Indian. A comparison of the usage of the terms American Indian and Native American on the Internet shows that Native American is used more often (2,820,000) than American Indian (1,750,000). In academic use (which would include Wikipedia), both terms are acceptable, though most discussions of the matter on talk pages have tended to come down on the side of Native American (probably because it is the more common term). For the reasons Node has pointed out, Indian is not acceptable, no matter how many Aboriginals use it, since it refers to people from India. The exception is historic use and names such as "Indian Wars." Sunray 07:06, 2005 Apr 14 (UTC)

"Race war of extermination"?

The United States was once a racist democracy, a democracy that is a dictatorship because racism is legal. Did Americans want to exterminate all Native Americans? What benefits do our people get once they exterminated them? Are they committing Nazi Holocaust-style actions? The Indian Wars are a dark age of terror in which European-Americans are Nazis? --206.255.32.51 03:05, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)