![]() | Aboriginal title in the Taney Court has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
March 30, 2011. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that during
Chief Justice
Roger B. Taney's tenure from 1836 to 1864, the
U.S. Supreme Court
heard four cases involving the
Sac and
Fox
Half-Breed Tract? |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Racepacket ( talk) 19:19, 20 March 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Thank you for nominating this article. Please disambiguate Creek. No invalid external links.
Thank you for your thorough review. I think I have remedied some of your comments with my recent edits. I will address the others here. (1) "Do you have sources independent of Providence College, particularly for the history section?" This appears to be copy-and-pasted from a different review. (2) Fraud in Chouteau. There were some vague references to fraud in the oral argument, but not in the opinion. Because it is so far removed from the reasons given in the court's opinion, particularly the portions relevant here, I have decided not to include it.
(3) Political backlash/moral authority/compensation for Dred Scott. You've said you don't want OR and I don't have any sources to cite in response to these queries. If you can suggest some, I will gladly take a look. (4) The image. It just so happens I am familiar with the source of the image:
[1]. It's from the Charles Royce book (which I have read and cited in other articles). He died in 1923, and anything published before 1923 would be in the public domain even if it were not a government publication, which this map clearly was.
Savidan 17:43, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
We are very close to finished. However, I suggest that you expand Chouteau and add a statement explaining that the Taney Court moved aboriginal title litigation from a point where American settlers expected to always win to a point that placed the emphasis on the factual record to determine the outcome. Many thanks, Racepacket ( talk) 22:31, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure what your response was to my request that you clarify Dibble. You have "to remove trespassers from Indian lands" but it may not be clear to the reader that the state law authorized the local district attorneys to defend the Indians' land claims by filing lawsuits to remove trespassers from Indian lands. (Rather than suing Indians for trespass to remove them from Indian lands.) Racepacket ( talk) 04:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations on another Good Article. Racepacket ( talk) 17:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
![]() | Aboriginal title in the Taney Court has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
March 30, 2011. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that during
Chief Justice
Roger B. Taney's tenure from 1836 to 1864, the
U.S. Supreme Court
heard four cases involving the
Sac and
Fox
Half-Breed Tract? |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Racepacket ( talk) 19:19, 20 March 2011 (UTC) GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Thank you for nominating this article. Please disambiguate Creek. No invalid external links.
Thank you for your thorough review. I think I have remedied some of your comments with my recent edits. I will address the others here. (1) "Do you have sources independent of Providence College, particularly for the history section?" This appears to be copy-and-pasted from a different review. (2) Fraud in Chouteau. There were some vague references to fraud in the oral argument, but not in the opinion. Because it is so far removed from the reasons given in the court's opinion, particularly the portions relevant here, I have decided not to include it.
(3) Political backlash/moral authority/compensation for Dred Scott. You've said you don't want OR and I don't have any sources to cite in response to these queries. If you can suggest some, I will gladly take a look. (4) The image. It just so happens I am familiar with the source of the image:
[1]. It's from the Charles Royce book (which I have read and cited in other articles). He died in 1923, and anything published before 1923 would be in the public domain even if it were not a government publication, which this map clearly was.
Savidan 17:43, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
We are very close to finished. However, I suggest that you expand Chouteau and add a statement explaining that the Taney Court moved aboriginal title litigation from a point where American settlers expected to always win to a point that placed the emphasis on the factual record to determine the outcome. Many thanks, Racepacket ( talk) 22:31, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure what your response was to my request that you clarify Dibble. You have "to remove trespassers from Indian lands" but it may not be clear to the reader that the state law authorized the local district attorneys to defend the Indians' land claims by filing lawsuits to remove trespassers from Indian lands. (Rather than suing Indians for trespass to remove them from Indian lands.) Racepacket ( talk) 04:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations on another Good Article. Racepacket ( talk) 17:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)