![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Despite the fact that most of the Anishinaabe range is/was in Canada, this article makes no mention of relations with the Canadian/British government, nor how they were treated [here].
Not trying to sound anti-American, I just feel it is an important aspect.
Trying to stay consistent, I changed the part that said the Anishinini were not Anishinaabe. Currently, Anishinini and Oji-Cree redirect to Nishnawbe-Aski. In the text it states:
I'm sure if you asked 100 Anishinini people if they considered themselves Anishinaabe, 95 would say "what?" or "who cares?" but I think they would be more concerned that a distinction is made with the Ojibwe. Anishinaabe being a more inclusive term would probably be okay. Of course, I am not a member of the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, and I am speculating here. Someone who knows better is welcome to revert this, but I thought with the Saulteaux using Nakawē, referring to oneself by the word Anishinaabe is not a prerequisite for being included in that group. Besides, if Nishnawbe is becoming the preferred term, there's your cognate right there. Thoughts????
( Leo1410 19:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC))
The "Nishnawbe Aski Nation" is called Anishinaabe Aski Ishkonigaanan Ogimaawin (Fully pointed: ᐊᓂᐦᔑᓈᐯ ᐊᔥᑭ ᐃᔅᑯᓂᑳᓇᓐ ᐅᑭᒫᐎᓐ/Commonly: ᐊᓂᔑᓇᐯ ᐊᔥᑭ ᐃᔅᑯᓂᑲᓇᓐ ᐅᑭᒪᐎᓐ) in Anishinaabemowin/Anishininimowin/Nehinâmowin. Take a look at Treaty 9 and NAN's website. (You will need a UCAS-ranged UniCode font to read the syllabics.) However, I am not quite convinced the article is accurate. Unfortunately, I am more familiar with Anishinaabe communities in the US and some of the Canadian Treaty 3 First Nations, so I really cannot make an input to that matter, and my resources regarding Treaty 9 Nations are limited to the internet and one 54-paged booklet. So with that said, any rewording would be fine. However, every Wikipedia article would need to be referenced to something... preferably a written document, but in case of oral history, which Wikipedia shy away, but with documentation of interviews, even oral histories are possible. See the Wikipedia's article guidelines for details. CJLippert 00:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Generally it is not in an encyclopedic tone, specifically it falls in to a rant at paragraph four and beyond. It doesn't agree with the singular/plural scheme established by the beginning of the page. It uses only one source. The sentence structure is sometimes REALLY awkward ("they will not allow those that lived in this land before them to honor their own dead and, after traveling the trail of life, to be able to lie down beside them" is a massive run-on setence. I *think* it's trying to say something like "Settlers passed legislation preventing Anishinabeg from visiting their ancestral dead. They further limited the expression of Anishinabeg culture by preventing traditional burials," but I'm *not sure*. Nor could I defend this changing of the sentence, because I don't even know if the current is historically correct as it seems to be referring to a newspaper article at http://www.saulttribe.com/index.php, which only has archives back to 2005).
I'm not well read enough to make any changes, but the relations section needs some serious editing for content, style and references. comments by 71.221.24.26
There are few articles on Native Americans/First Nations that are as poorly sourced as this one. It will be difficult to make progress without valid third-party sources, preferably academic studies, of which there have been many.-- Parkwells ( talk) 16:58, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
I dont know why anyone would put this but it is obviously not correct. The term was used historically as a regional grouping of people along the St. Lawrence but it is not used by modern Anishinaabe people in the Abitibi region of Quebec. They readily identify themselves as Anishinaabe/Anishinaabekwe. The word might be used in Kitigan zibi but these people speak a different dialect than those in Abitibi and also represent a historically distinct group of Anishinaabe people. I removed the statement since there is no evidence that the so called Algonquin distinguish themselves from other Anishinaabe people and it didn't have any citation either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.217.214.194 ( talk) 14:24, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
What is the reason this page is titled Anishinaabe? When Anishinaabek(g) is the name of the people (The original/first people) On the other hand Anishinaabe is a person (one of the people).
I was surprised to see "more properly" Anishinaabeg or Anishinabek. Why is this considered more proper? Then I thought maybe this is a "qualifying sentence" stating that the "proper" name of these people wasn't used? New to Wikipedia and just wondering. - Niineta ( talk) 23:45, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Ojibway, Ottawa, and Potawatomi (Faith keepers, Traders, and Fire keepers) originated following the second stop (Niagara) of the migration, when it became necessary to hold council to deal with the aftermath of Iroquios aggression, and to determine future actions (which includes conflicts with Sauk and Fox on the Southern Michigan peninsula, as well as deal with separation from the main body after the third stop (Detroit) and rejoining at the fourth stop at Manitoulin Island). This has been estimated to have occurred between the years 900 and 1200 A.D. using records found at Madeline Island. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.235.189.48 ( talk) 03:23, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
"Warfare cost many lives on both sides."
What the fuck kind of milquetoast, unref'd whitewashing garbage is this?
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Anishinaabe/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Has some decent basic content. Needs more detail, references, population numbers. Rmhermen - 8 Apr 06 |
Last edited at 19:30, 11 July 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 07:52, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
How does the Shawnee Nation fit in it? What from I understand they consider the Lenape 'their fathers' and the Algonquin consider them their southern branch correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.170.134.154 ( talk) 07:06, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Sorry my bad, Algonquian not Algonquin that explains a lot. -- 108.170.134.154 ( talk) 04:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Anishinaabe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:36, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
A section on this page states that the "Mandwe" (I've also seen it spelled Mandaawe, or Mundua in Warren's history) who were incorporated by the Anishinaabe in oral history were originally part of the Fox/Meskwaki people. What is the source on this? I am unable to find any information linking the Mandaawe to any other group. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ValiantStag ( talk • contribs) 18:44, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
At present, the culture section focuses entirely on historical culture and specific actions (e.g., slavery and cannibalism). There is no mention of present-day culture or traditions. I've added the Teachings of the Seven Grandfathers and Storytelling, but it'd be good to still expand upon this section further. Significa liberdade ( talk) 22:54, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Despite the fact that most of the Anishinaabe range is/was in Canada, this article makes no mention of relations with the Canadian/British government, nor how they were treated [here].
Not trying to sound anti-American, I just feel it is an important aspect.
Trying to stay consistent, I changed the part that said the Anishinini were not Anishinaabe. Currently, Anishinini and Oji-Cree redirect to Nishnawbe-Aski. In the text it states:
I'm sure if you asked 100 Anishinini people if they considered themselves Anishinaabe, 95 would say "what?" or "who cares?" but I think they would be more concerned that a distinction is made with the Ojibwe. Anishinaabe being a more inclusive term would probably be okay. Of course, I am not a member of the Nishnawbe-Aski Nation, and I am speculating here. Someone who knows better is welcome to revert this, but I thought with the Saulteaux using Nakawē, referring to oneself by the word Anishinaabe is not a prerequisite for being included in that group. Besides, if Nishnawbe is becoming the preferred term, there's your cognate right there. Thoughts????
( Leo1410 19:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC))
The "Nishnawbe Aski Nation" is called Anishinaabe Aski Ishkonigaanan Ogimaawin (Fully pointed: ᐊᓂᐦᔑᓈᐯ ᐊᔥᑭ ᐃᔅᑯᓂᑳᓇᓐ ᐅᑭᒫᐎᓐ/Commonly: ᐊᓂᔑᓇᐯ ᐊᔥᑭ ᐃᔅᑯᓂᑲᓇᓐ ᐅᑭᒪᐎᓐ) in Anishinaabemowin/Anishininimowin/Nehinâmowin. Take a look at Treaty 9 and NAN's website. (You will need a UCAS-ranged UniCode font to read the syllabics.) However, I am not quite convinced the article is accurate. Unfortunately, I am more familiar with Anishinaabe communities in the US and some of the Canadian Treaty 3 First Nations, so I really cannot make an input to that matter, and my resources regarding Treaty 9 Nations are limited to the internet and one 54-paged booklet. So with that said, any rewording would be fine. However, every Wikipedia article would need to be referenced to something... preferably a written document, but in case of oral history, which Wikipedia shy away, but with documentation of interviews, even oral histories are possible. See the Wikipedia's article guidelines for details. CJLippert 00:59, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Generally it is not in an encyclopedic tone, specifically it falls in to a rant at paragraph four and beyond. It doesn't agree with the singular/plural scheme established by the beginning of the page. It uses only one source. The sentence structure is sometimes REALLY awkward ("they will not allow those that lived in this land before them to honor their own dead and, after traveling the trail of life, to be able to lie down beside them" is a massive run-on setence. I *think* it's trying to say something like "Settlers passed legislation preventing Anishinabeg from visiting their ancestral dead. They further limited the expression of Anishinabeg culture by preventing traditional burials," but I'm *not sure*. Nor could I defend this changing of the sentence, because I don't even know if the current is historically correct as it seems to be referring to a newspaper article at http://www.saulttribe.com/index.php, which only has archives back to 2005).
I'm not well read enough to make any changes, but the relations section needs some serious editing for content, style and references. comments by 71.221.24.26
There are few articles on Native Americans/First Nations that are as poorly sourced as this one. It will be difficult to make progress without valid third-party sources, preferably academic studies, of which there have been many.-- Parkwells ( talk) 16:58, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
I dont know why anyone would put this but it is obviously not correct. The term was used historically as a regional grouping of people along the St. Lawrence but it is not used by modern Anishinaabe people in the Abitibi region of Quebec. They readily identify themselves as Anishinaabe/Anishinaabekwe. The word might be used in Kitigan zibi but these people speak a different dialect than those in Abitibi and also represent a historically distinct group of Anishinaabe people. I removed the statement since there is no evidence that the so called Algonquin distinguish themselves from other Anishinaabe people and it didn't have any citation either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.217.214.194 ( talk) 14:24, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
What is the reason this page is titled Anishinaabe? When Anishinaabek(g) is the name of the people (The original/first people) On the other hand Anishinaabe is a person (one of the people).
I was surprised to see "more properly" Anishinaabeg or Anishinabek. Why is this considered more proper? Then I thought maybe this is a "qualifying sentence" stating that the "proper" name of these people wasn't used? New to Wikipedia and just wondering. - Niineta ( talk) 23:45, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
Ojibway, Ottawa, and Potawatomi (Faith keepers, Traders, and Fire keepers) originated following the second stop (Niagara) of the migration, when it became necessary to hold council to deal with the aftermath of Iroquios aggression, and to determine future actions (which includes conflicts with Sauk and Fox on the Southern Michigan peninsula, as well as deal with separation from the main body after the third stop (Detroit) and rejoining at the fourth stop at Manitoulin Island). This has been estimated to have occurred between the years 900 and 1200 A.D. using records found at Madeline Island. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.235.189.48 ( talk) 03:23, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
"Warfare cost many lives on both sides."
What the fuck kind of milquetoast, unref'd whitewashing garbage is this?
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Anishinaabe/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Has some decent basic content. Needs more detail, references, population numbers. Rmhermen - 8 Apr 06 |
Last edited at 19:30, 11 July 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 07:52, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
How does the Shawnee Nation fit in it? What from I understand they consider the Lenape 'their fathers' and the Algonquin consider them their southern branch correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.170.134.154 ( talk) 07:06, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Sorry my bad, Algonquian not Algonquin that explains a lot. -- 108.170.134.154 ( talk) 04:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Anishinaabe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:36, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
A section on this page states that the "Mandwe" (I've also seen it spelled Mandaawe, or Mundua in Warren's history) who were incorporated by the Anishinaabe in oral history were originally part of the Fox/Meskwaki people. What is the source on this? I am unable to find any information linking the Mandaawe to any other group. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ValiantStag ( talk • contribs) 18:44, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
At present, the culture section focuses entirely on historical culture and specific actions (e.g., slavery and cannibalism). There is no mention of present-day culture or traditions. I've added the Teachings of the Seven Grandfathers and Storytelling, but it'd be good to still expand upon this section further. Significa liberdade ( talk) 22:54, 30 January 2022 (UTC)