![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I am reluctant to edit what looks to be a lot of hard work, and inasmuch that I appreciate some debate whether "Native Americans" should be racially called "Indians" it seems we are missing the point of accurately describing this person. Just one example, in the "box" it is listed that he was born on the Scioto River and in the text he was born near Xenia. (The correct answer is Xenia). Allan Eckert is the foremost expert on Tecumseh and frontier history, and his "A Sorrow In Our Heart" is the most recent comprehensive study on Tecumseh. (The amplification notes are a book in themselves.) I would like to help clean this entry up, but with folks blathering on about Native American vs Indian. (when the encyclopaedic preference is obvious), I'm a bit squeemish diving in here. Not that I care if anyone disagrees with me, but I hate typing things to have them deleted. So, anybody object to my fixing a least that one contradiction? If not, I'll tackle a few more problems.
BTW, Tecumseh's mother was a Cherokee. Even Eckert didn't acknowledge this until after 25 years of research. It's important when you realize the ease with which he communicated with this traditional foe when he attempted to build his alliance. Ismaelbobo ( talk) 14:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I've read several times that Tecumseh was commissioned as a Brigadier General by Great Britain before his death. It's not in this article, and I wonder if it's just a popular myth. Mingusboodle 16:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
treaty of fort wayne = 2.5 mil or 3 mil?
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xiaphias ( talk • contribs) 12:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC).
"Tecumseh is honored in Canada as a hero and military commander who played a major role in Canada's successful repulsion of an American invasion in the War of 1812,"
BS.. "Tecumseh is honored in Canada as a hero and military commander"....so huge a BS. He was totally ignored in favor of General Brock who did very little in 1812 war. I had a whole whole paragraph on the whole dismal affair, but it was too truthful, and was erased.
Its a very recent thing that people in Canada has taken an interest in Tecumseh, mostly started in the 60's when people in Canada became a bit more sensitive to people and ideas that weren't anglo How many people actually know who Tecumseh is? That is the Question as apposed to the others?
Please show us the list of honors by canada... a few dead villages don't cut it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starbwoy ( talk • contribs) 18:36, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Rather than simply reverting the most recent edits on the Tecumseh article as of 03:14, Dec 30, 2004, I'd like to ask for discussion here on the Talk page about these changes.
The prior opening paragraph read:
Tecumseh (c. 1768– October 5, 1813), whose given name is more accurately rendered as Tecumtha, was a famous leader of the Shawnee people. One of the most important Native Americans in history, he spent much of his life attempting to rally disparate Indian tribes in a mutual defense of Indian lands, which culminated in his death in the War of 1812.
The current version reads:
Tecumseh (c. 1768– October 5, 1813), whose given name might be more accurately rendered as Tecumtha, was a famous leader of the Shawnee people, who spent much of his life attempting to rally disparate Native American tribes in a mutual defense of Indian lands, which culminated in his death in the War of 1812. William Henry Harrison, his military opponent, called Tecumseh "one of those uncommon geniuses which spring up occasionally to produce revolutions and overturn the established order of things." [1]
Some points for discussion:
First, I'm not at all opposed to including the Harrison quote in the article, although he was AFAIK a rather unimportant and undistinguished President of the United States. One might in a similar context include a glowing tribute from a minor, later British Prime Minister about George Washington, for example, if such a quote exists.
Second, I think the inclusion of the quote in the opening paragraph of the article is not at all accurate to the subject of the article, because of what it excludes:
Third, the most recent edit removes the phrase "One of the most important Native Americans in history..." -- a phrase which I think is entirely deserved.
IMO, Tecumseh earned this deserved praise by his successful work as a diplomat and negotiator, as well as by his military genius. He played a much larger and much more important role in the many struggles of the First Nations peoples with the European colonists than, for example, Sitting Bull or Geronimo did -- yet he's far less well-known and recognized than either of them are today.
Finally, I'd very much welcome discussion about any of the points above, but if it isn't forthcoming in the next week -- say, by January 7th, 2005 -- I'll restore/reword the prior opening paragraph and move the Harrison quote down to the existing section on Tippicanoe in the article.
Seems only fair to me to give the man his due. Tecumseh was a brilliant hero for his time and for his people, and he deserves sincere and accurate praise for his real record of struggle, and for his real achievements.
Cheers, Madmagic 07:11, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)
Sunray wrote: "Let's avoid use of the term "Indians."
Kevin Myers responded: "Let's not avoid the term 'Indians.' Indians call themselves Indians. Some white folks want to impose a new name on them (again), but we don't have to play along. :-))"
Sunray responded: "Correction: Some aboriginals call themselves 'Indians' however, Indians actually live in India. Check it out."
Kevin Myers's response: Wow, so what you're saying is that some of those ignorant aborigines don't even know what to call themselves. Keep working at it, and maybe you can enlighten them. -- Kevin Myers 19:22, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)
Kevin makes the point that many, if not most, aboriginals in the U.S. call themselves “ Indians.” Mt2131 seconds this and says that he knows several people who prefer to be called “Indian.” He states that the term “ Native American” is a white term. I agree on both counts. In fact the term “Indian” has been gaining in popularity recently. Now I assume that both of you have read the lengthy discussions amongst Wikipedians on this topic (which can be found at Talk: Native American). One of the great things about Wikipedia is the tremendous potential for learning. I have learned from this discussion and the research that it has led to. Hopefully we can all learn and come up with some concepts we can agree to.
There is a very good discussion of the terms by Christina Berry, a Cherokee woman. She asks: “So what is it? Indian? American Indian? Native American? First Americans? First People?” She points out some of the problems with the term “Native American,” and notes that many of the people continue to call themselves “Indians” or “American Indians.” In considering why, she points to two main reasons: 1) Habit, and 2) political considerations. She describes the political aspects in the following way:
Berry concludes: “When you don't know the specific tribe simply use the term which you are most comfortable using.” [5]
All well and good. However, the issue here is what is the correct term to use in an encyclopedia. I believe we all agree that it is best to refer to aboriginals by their tribe or nation. However, sometimes it is necessary to generalize. What then? Well, first of all, we have to bear in mind that we are part of a community of Wikipedians, so it isn’t only up to us. And that community as a whole has to decide on the most reasonable term for an encyclopedia format. The terms “Indian” and “Native American” are both Eurocentric. Which is best? We know that it is preferable to let groups name themselves. Yet, these peoples didn’t give themselves either of those names and there is no consensus amongst them as to which is best. For every American Indian Movement, there is a Native American Rights Fund. For every Native American Radio, there is an American Indian Radio. The terms are used interchangeably.
We also know the following: 1) that “Indian” correctly refers to someone from the country of that name in South Asia. Using the term “American Indian” could solve this, but fewer people have adopted this term than “Native American.” 2) Anthropologists and other social scientists in the U.S. generally come down on the side of the term “Native American.” Thus it has been adopted by academia, government and by many educated aboriginals. 3) Wikipedians who have debated this in the past have generally concluded that it is best to refer to people by their tribe or nation and that “Native American” is the preferred term to use when generalizing. 4) We are a learning community and if compelling reasons for changing a usage are brought forward, surely we can adapt. Sorry to be so long-winded. I hope it is of some use. Sunray 00:41, 2005 Jan 3 (UTC)
I have to say, Sunray, I find your use of the term aboriginals extremely offensive. It sounds like a british colonial looking down their nose at the dirty "natives" who are fouling up their occupation. Furthermore, what anthropologist and academics have decided to call an enthnic group is of less significance than what that same group prefers to call themselves. At this point American Indian seems to be the prevailing term preferred among people indigenous to North America.
A 1995 Census Bureau Survey of preferences for racial and ethnic terminology (there is no more recent survey) indicated that 49% of Native people preferred being called American Indian, 37% preferred Native American, 3.6% preferred "some other term," and 5% had no preference. Watersoftheoasis 18:59 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I think that it is clearly established that Indian by itself would refer to someone from India and American Indian would refer to someone belonging to the Tribes of the Americas. I personally feel a little offened if someone were to call me a Native American and it is only WHITE people that do that. A bit of a correction, It is only WHITE ENGLISH SPEAKERS that do that. I really don't see the need to force another word onto my people and if it is going to be forced then how about some of the words we have your y'all pale faces coming from us being forced onto anglos. I could spend a lot of time at the computer making sure every article mentioned the Indian name for every race. Is Wikipedia only for "the bearded man" (white people)? That would be a very sad state of affairs if that were true. I can see that it is not just for English speakers but maybe it really is just to use terminology that makes Whites happy. Then is Wikipedia RACIST? This would be very alarming and I would have to withdraw my support. If Wikipedia really wants to be the most accurate it can be then I suggest not refering to Indians as Indians or or the newly coined and slightly offensive Native but for Wikipedia to actually take the time to be respectful of the people talked about and find out which tribe that person belonged to and post only that which really would be the most accurate and most respectful. Saying a blanket term like "Native American" makes assumptions in the language that Indians are so small and weak that we should only ever be thought of as an entire group. --
Billiot
01:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I can offer myself as a counterargument. I am of Japaneese and Chineese descent and much prefer the term "Native American" to any name with "indian" in it. Besides, it is not always feasible to use specific tribes. This can be somewhat likened to having the need to identify an American by the state they live in.It offends me that you are so opposed to caucasians as a group, and have an irrational hate and fear of them. I appreciate your intentions, but must point out that your argument is flawed. To oppose a term because you see it as belonging to a certain race is not the point and not a valid argument. Personally, I would like you to think over your comment or "withdraw your support". That being said, I admit I have nothing to contribute besides negate the above editor's comment. 76.170.202.84 03:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I am Seminole and Creek. I’m sure anyone reading this probably is educated enough to use the term they believe is the least offensive. The other 90 percent of America still know us as Indian though. People living in Oklahoma, Florida, Arizona, or near any large population of Native Americans, yes that is what I prefer to be called, would disagree. Trust me, I know this first hand. Currently residing in Mass., it takes me ten to twenty minutes to explain why I’m not Indian. Not because they’re dumb, but the stereotypes have been drilled into their head for so long, they can see past it. I might as well be telling them that the color red is actually green. When someone asks me what’s my nationality, and I say native American, they say, “Oh, you mean Indian!”. Not Native American, American Indian, Alaskan Indian, American Eskimo, or any other politically correct term. It’s “Indian”, as in cowboys and Indians, howe white man, arrow shootin, pipe smokin, “Look at me, I’m wearing a f@#*ing loin cloth!”, Indian. It’s racist word, period. PERIOD!! That being said, calling us American Indian is a slap in the face. It’s U.S. saying “We’re not going to admit we were wrong for calling you that, because that’s what we decided you are.” You don’t call black people African N@#$&%s do you? didn’t think so. It’s still calling us Indians, and in doing so ignoring years of persecution that still goes on today. Oh yes, don’t kid yourself into believing the government stopped screwing us over, they’re just better at hiding it, and anyone other than us doesn’t care. Personally, the term American Indian disgusts me. As for people saying using “Native American” is a way for the country to forget our painful and undeserving past is steaming s@#t. Your just being lazy. When people hear the phrase African American history, they don’t’ think of roses and candy. They very easily make the connection to they’re equally undeserved past. The country will be able to make the connection as long as they’re educated correctly. It is true though, that many Native Americans call themselves Indian. I call myself Indian all the time; as well as a red skin, a brown person, a feather head, and my favorite and most commonly used word, Injin. Injin is an old slurred way of saying Indian(watch some old westerns); if your gonna be racist, no better way to do that than saying it wrong!LOL I can do that though, because I AM Native American. When me and my family get together we call ourselves brown folk, and me and my siblings will joke about being “poor brown trash”, because WE are. Everyone else is not, and CANNOT. Make sense? Let’s see, I covered why ANYTHING with “Indian” is wrong; why I can say Indian and you can’t, oh, why do I prefer Native American. This is America, I am American, I was born here, I love to be American. My bloodline dates to the first settlers, the “natives”. I am native, to America, Native American. Simple. I would like to just say my tribe, but there’s so many, it is confusing to people who aren’t familiar with them all; crap, I don’t even know them all. I also agree with who ever said aboriginals was wrong. Aboriginals? Seriously? That’s just plain dumb, Slap yourself it you think that’s a good term to call us. What else was there…. The Japanese, Chinese guy. What makes you think what YOU prefer to call US matters in any way, shape, or form? I prefer to call you a moron, and since I’m not a moron, that means my opinion can be a “counterargument”, right? Idiot. By the way, any people with Native American friends who are not Native American themselves; stop posting your opinions, you don’t count. I hope I covered everything, and helped everyone see things from a Injin’s point of view of what to call us. At the end of the day though, and my friends would agree this truly is what I say; when after countless guesses at my nationality I’m finally asked, ‘So what are you?”. My response is simply, “Human”.
Ripper657 (
talk)
16:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)Ripper657
Yes, some of us natives do prefer Indian. We too though, are also subjected to the same stereotypes as everyone else. We grew up hearing the same titles. Ask a native what he is, and he’ll say, “I’m Indian”. You see, no one ever asks him why. Ask a native why he’s Indian and he’ll most likely say something similar to “Because that’s what we’re called”. That’s what we’re called. That’s what everyone calls us. It’s just a native conforming to the country without thinking about it. You can tell him he has a choice, but the choice has already been made for him years ago. Unfortunately, It’s just as hard, if not harder, for a native to see the wrong in this, to see the wrong in his title. It’s difficult for anyone to admit that he is still controlled, especially one who doesn’t even know it. It seems fitting that this discussion is on Tecumseh’s article, he saw the wrong in this country when most others didn’t. When they conformed. That is exactly what is happening here. The country as a whole doesn’t really care about us to see “Indian” as wrong, so it won’t educate itself enough to be aware about it. People accept Indian because people don’t know any better. If ignorance is bliss, then we live in Eden.
Ripper657 (
talk)
05:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)Ripper657
I agree with Sunray. We should not call the Native Americans Indians. Indians are people from the country India. Not the United States. Plus,they were the first here so the should be called Americans or Native Americans.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.195.108.105 ( talk) 20:36, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
There is a very interesting discussion of Tecumseh on page 638 of the 5th edition of Dukemenier and Krier's property book. Tecumseh is paraphrased as saying that "...the Great Spirit had given the North American continent to the Indian [sic] people, as their common property, and that no tribe could sell the part of the commons it used without the consent of all tribes..." [again, this is a paraphrase in the textbook, not a direct quote from Tecumseh] The footnote goes on to discuss Tecumseh's denunciation of tribal chiefs who had sold 3 million acres of land to the United States for $7k." Seems like an interesting discussion of the idea of the commons as part of Tecumseh's legacy. User: Aric Bright
Commodore was a temporary title awarded to any naval officer bearing the rank of Captain (the highest permanent rank in the American Navy at that time) who commanded a flotilla instead of just one ship. It was a courtesy title, but it was one that was recognized by naval regulations and would have applied to Perry at the time in question, as he was in command of the Lake Erie fleet.
The article doesn't mention Tecumseh's mission to the Creek. Here are some possible links
For starters--post second link to See also
I recommend that we combine the "tributes" and the "Tecumseh in fiction" sections into one new section to be entitled "legacy" or, perhaps, "Tecumseh's legacy." This new section would include, hopefully, more information about said legacy, including a more detailed discussion of his importance in US history, and his appearances in fiction, etc. Any thoughts? --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 02:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Should there be a thingy at the top that says "Not to be confused with William Tecumseh Sherman" I've seen those before (example: Lynx), but am not sure what the guidelines are 88.11.150.218 ( talk) 15:13, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
I would go ahead and edit this entry, but I'm new to the process and thought I'd just post my comments here. There seems to be some dispute about the location of Tecumseh's birth. After watching with fascination the episode "Tecumseh's Vision" from the mini series "We Shall Remain" on PBS's American Experience, I contacted 2 of the historians who were on the program. They acknowledged that John Sugden, another historian on the same program, to be the foremost authority on his life. Sugden has devoted the last 30 years researching Tecumseh. On page 22 of his book, Tecumseh: A Life, Sugden gives his best shot at answering the question:
"Tecumseh was almost certainly born on the Scioto, at either Chillicothe, or Kispoko Town. Many early commentators erred in putting his birthplace farther west, at towns which did not exist at the time."
I urge anyone interested in learning about this great human being to read Sugden's book.
Allen Eckert is fun reading, but much of his work has turned out to be fiction. The Blue Jacket blunder is a sad case in point.
Joepayne6 ( talk) 01:16, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I am little concerned about the information in the article regarding Rebecca Galloway. I am quite familiar with this topic, and have access to some of the source books used in the article. None that I have make any mention of Rebecca Galloway, and most make it clear there is very very little known with certainty about Tecumseh's life before 1807. Does the source of the information about Rebecca Galloway explain their sources? How do we know this is just not a myth? And since it is not included in any of the more recent Tecumseh biographies, I think we sould be careful not present this information as fact, but attribute it to the person making the claims. — Charles Edward ( Talk | Contribs) 02:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Tecumseh's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "jones":
{{
cite web}}
: More than one of |author=
and |last=
specified (
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Can anybody add book series by Fritz Steuben? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.48.112.14 ( talk) 00:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
This section and the section called "Conflict between Native Americans and settlers", were dumped into the article on February 27, 2012.
The material provides little context, and appears to be more of an analysis of a speech ascribed to Tecumseh, allegedly delivered during the winter of 1811-1812.
The analysis appears to be largely cribbed from a language learning website called lang-8.com, titled "Analysis of Oratory (part 9)", found at http://lang-8.com/33077/journals/94590. Sources listed are Baym, Nina, Robert S. Levine, and Arnold Krupat. The Norton Anthology of American Literature. Vol. A. New York: W. W. Norton &, 2007. Print and Henretta, James A., and David Brody. America: A Concise History. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martins, 2009.Print
Other editors have attempted to clean this up; besides lacking context, it also needs to be wikified. It may be original research, and might not be valid to include in this article.
I'll attempt to isolate this material and place it chronologically. I'll leave it to editors with more subject matter knowledge than I to decide what to do with this material ultimately. -- Chaswmsday ( talk) 11:43, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Ernest Thompson Seton ascribes the poem cited in the section Film and television to some of the Wabasha chiefs without exactly saying (AFAIK) to which one. I think that, exceptionally, in this case the link to a disambiguation article listing all possible Wabasha chiefs is correct and can be helpful to the reader. -- Jeanambr ( talk) 05:41, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 19:05, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for this article which is substantively informative. Thought it might be of interest to know that Herman Melville describes one of the characters in 'Billy Budd, Sailor' as being "...beardless as Tecumseh". I confess that I expected it to be a Biblical reference (!) and it seemed an interesting illustration of the visual culture in the mid-19th century. 86.130.52.103 ( talk) 14:01, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
There is a authenticity/copyright discussion about wikisource:Tecumseh's Speech, of August 11, 1810, To Governer William Harrison happening at s:Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations#Tecumseh's Speech, of August 11, 1810, To Governer William Harrison. Please contribute any information or sources you may have access to that might enlighten the discussion there. -- John Vandenberg ( chat) 15:03, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
It's good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.91.213.150 ( talk) 18:09, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
I wonder what guidelines say about listing Tecumseh's Last Stand under both headings. I do not deem this an obvious mistake, but ... Uwe Lück ( talk) 15:04, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Over at the war of 1812 article there was a question raised whether T was really an ally of the Brits. Here is what I responded: The RS say Tecumseh was a critical ally of the British in 1812-13. 1) Paul Finkelman, James A. Percoco - 2009 says: "Tecumseh and his war band joined the British against the United States in the War of 1812." 2) Sharon Malinowski - 1998 "A British ally during the War of 1812, Tecumseh was made a brigadier general in command of all Indian forces." 3) Charles Esdaile - 2009 -"they found a powerful ally in the great Indian leader, Tecumseh. Of mixed Shawnee and Creek backgrounds, Tecumseh hated white America and believed the Indians faced a choice of either fighting or being overwhelmed"; 4) Robert Utley, Wilcomb E. Washburn - 1985 - "But Tecumseh could no longer wreak his vengeance, as he had wished, at the head of a host of unified tribes. He needed an ally. And so, reluctantly, he turned to the Canadian garrisons where the British were getting ready for their second war against the Americans." 5) Michael Lee Lanning - 2005 "In addition to losing the battle, the British lost Tecumseh, their most important Native American ally, who was mortally wounded."; 6) Leslie Monkman - 1981 - "Only after his failure to reclaim the lands of the west for his people does Tecumseh ally himself with Brock." 7) Carol Cartaino - 2010 writes: "Finding Prophetstown reduced to ashes upon his return, Tecumseh vowed to go to Canada and ally with the British. Tecumseh rallied his Indian allies to join the British forces in the siege of Detroit. Tecumseh and four hundred of his warriors..."; 8) Gordon M. Sayre - 2006 says: "But with Tecumseh, we for the first time find an Indian leader and his warriors fighting with one colonial power against another." 9) On the image of Tecumseh in Canadian thought see William H. New (1990). Native Writers and Canadian Writing. UBC Press. pp. 96+. ISBN 9780774803717. Rjensen ( talk) 13:53, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Tecumseh,_Nebraska#History
Why would the supposed killer of Tecumseh , change the name of the town , Frances , named for his wife. to Tecumseh ?
Catweasel (
talk)
11:22, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
In the Towns' and buildings' names section there are a lot of citation needed tags on the schools. Is someone insinuating that there is no proof that the schools are named for him? Question: who else would they be named for? Eric Cable ! Talk 13:59, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Tecumseh. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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) 22:44, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Numerous scholars and authors have treated the "accursed" waves speech from Tecumseh as historical. These scholars report that the speech was to the Creeks in the South. This is mentioned in Wikisource. But Wikisource also had something about the British being in Detroit, which doesn't seem to matter because the Creeks lived nowhere near there. I removed that part to avoid confusion. Display name 99 ( talk) 18:00, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tecumseh. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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) 21:35, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello:
In the article, you repeatedly say "Americans" where I believe you mean the U.S. government forces. He was the true American.
Perhaps, you could revise this.
Thanks.
The pictures shown in these Photos are very incorrect. These people You Show Are Caucasians In These Photos. Not in any way Our Complexion in those times, days and years. In Which they Should Show The Aborigines: The True and Only Truth! Our Copper Colored people. As These Colonizers changed all Our Tribal Names Later years, and Called Our People Black! The Aborigines Are Our Ancestors of This LAND! The Land is Also, Our Ancestors in which was Taken from Our Tribal Ancestors. Latiniad31 ( talk) 17:04, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
This article seems to have a lot of well researched sources. However, I noticed the article states "After a brief return to the Ohio Country in 1791, Tecumseh and his band of Shawnee warriors rejoined his brother in the Cumberland River area in Tennessee, where Chiksika was killed while leading a raid in September 1792." However, in 1792, Tennessee did not yet exist. J3nn!f3rros3 ( talk) 14:00, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I am reluctant to edit what looks to be a lot of hard work, and inasmuch that I appreciate some debate whether "Native Americans" should be racially called "Indians" it seems we are missing the point of accurately describing this person. Just one example, in the "box" it is listed that he was born on the Scioto River and in the text he was born near Xenia. (The correct answer is Xenia). Allan Eckert is the foremost expert on Tecumseh and frontier history, and his "A Sorrow In Our Heart" is the most recent comprehensive study on Tecumseh. (The amplification notes are a book in themselves.) I would like to help clean this entry up, but with folks blathering on about Native American vs Indian. (when the encyclopaedic preference is obvious), I'm a bit squeemish diving in here. Not that I care if anyone disagrees with me, but I hate typing things to have them deleted. So, anybody object to my fixing a least that one contradiction? If not, I'll tackle a few more problems.
BTW, Tecumseh's mother was a Cherokee. Even Eckert didn't acknowledge this until after 25 years of research. It's important when you realize the ease with which he communicated with this traditional foe when he attempted to build his alliance. Ismaelbobo ( talk) 14:36, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I've read several times that Tecumseh was commissioned as a Brigadier General by Great Britain before his death. It's not in this article, and I wonder if it's just a popular myth. Mingusboodle 16:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
treaty of fort wayne = 2.5 mil or 3 mil?
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xiaphias ( talk • contribs) 12:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC).
"Tecumseh is honored in Canada as a hero and military commander who played a major role in Canada's successful repulsion of an American invasion in the War of 1812,"
BS.. "Tecumseh is honored in Canada as a hero and military commander"....so huge a BS. He was totally ignored in favor of General Brock who did very little in 1812 war. I had a whole whole paragraph on the whole dismal affair, but it was too truthful, and was erased.
Its a very recent thing that people in Canada has taken an interest in Tecumseh, mostly started in the 60's when people in Canada became a bit more sensitive to people and ideas that weren't anglo How many people actually know who Tecumseh is? That is the Question as apposed to the others?
Please show us the list of honors by canada... a few dead villages don't cut it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starbwoy ( talk • contribs) 18:36, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Rather than simply reverting the most recent edits on the Tecumseh article as of 03:14, Dec 30, 2004, I'd like to ask for discussion here on the Talk page about these changes.
The prior opening paragraph read:
Tecumseh (c. 1768– October 5, 1813), whose given name is more accurately rendered as Tecumtha, was a famous leader of the Shawnee people. One of the most important Native Americans in history, he spent much of his life attempting to rally disparate Indian tribes in a mutual defense of Indian lands, which culminated in his death in the War of 1812.
The current version reads:
Tecumseh (c. 1768– October 5, 1813), whose given name might be more accurately rendered as Tecumtha, was a famous leader of the Shawnee people, who spent much of his life attempting to rally disparate Native American tribes in a mutual defense of Indian lands, which culminated in his death in the War of 1812. William Henry Harrison, his military opponent, called Tecumseh "one of those uncommon geniuses which spring up occasionally to produce revolutions and overturn the established order of things." [1]
Some points for discussion:
First, I'm not at all opposed to including the Harrison quote in the article, although he was AFAIK a rather unimportant and undistinguished President of the United States. One might in a similar context include a glowing tribute from a minor, later British Prime Minister about George Washington, for example, if such a quote exists.
Second, I think the inclusion of the quote in the opening paragraph of the article is not at all accurate to the subject of the article, because of what it excludes:
Third, the most recent edit removes the phrase "One of the most important Native Americans in history..." -- a phrase which I think is entirely deserved.
IMO, Tecumseh earned this deserved praise by his successful work as a diplomat and negotiator, as well as by his military genius. He played a much larger and much more important role in the many struggles of the First Nations peoples with the European colonists than, for example, Sitting Bull or Geronimo did -- yet he's far less well-known and recognized than either of them are today.
Finally, I'd very much welcome discussion about any of the points above, but if it isn't forthcoming in the next week -- say, by January 7th, 2005 -- I'll restore/reword the prior opening paragraph and move the Harrison quote down to the existing section on Tippicanoe in the article.
Seems only fair to me to give the man his due. Tecumseh was a brilliant hero for his time and for his people, and he deserves sincere and accurate praise for his real record of struggle, and for his real achievements.
Cheers, Madmagic 07:11, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)
Sunray wrote: "Let's avoid use of the term "Indians."
Kevin Myers responded: "Let's not avoid the term 'Indians.' Indians call themselves Indians. Some white folks want to impose a new name on them (again), but we don't have to play along. :-))"
Sunray responded: "Correction: Some aboriginals call themselves 'Indians' however, Indians actually live in India. Check it out."
Kevin Myers's response: Wow, so what you're saying is that some of those ignorant aborigines don't even know what to call themselves. Keep working at it, and maybe you can enlighten them. -- Kevin Myers 19:22, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)
Kevin makes the point that many, if not most, aboriginals in the U.S. call themselves “ Indians.” Mt2131 seconds this and says that he knows several people who prefer to be called “Indian.” He states that the term “ Native American” is a white term. I agree on both counts. In fact the term “Indian” has been gaining in popularity recently. Now I assume that both of you have read the lengthy discussions amongst Wikipedians on this topic (which can be found at Talk: Native American). One of the great things about Wikipedia is the tremendous potential for learning. I have learned from this discussion and the research that it has led to. Hopefully we can all learn and come up with some concepts we can agree to.
There is a very good discussion of the terms by Christina Berry, a Cherokee woman. She asks: “So what is it? Indian? American Indian? Native American? First Americans? First People?” She points out some of the problems with the term “Native American,” and notes that many of the people continue to call themselves “Indians” or “American Indians.” In considering why, she points to two main reasons: 1) Habit, and 2) political considerations. She describes the political aspects in the following way:
Berry concludes: “When you don't know the specific tribe simply use the term which you are most comfortable using.” [5]
All well and good. However, the issue here is what is the correct term to use in an encyclopedia. I believe we all agree that it is best to refer to aboriginals by their tribe or nation. However, sometimes it is necessary to generalize. What then? Well, first of all, we have to bear in mind that we are part of a community of Wikipedians, so it isn’t only up to us. And that community as a whole has to decide on the most reasonable term for an encyclopedia format. The terms “Indian” and “Native American” are both Eurocentric. Which is best? We know that it is preferable to let groups name themselves. Yet, these peoples didn’t give themselves either of those names and there is no consensus amongst them as to which is best. For every American Indian Movement, there is a Native American Rights Fund. For every Native American Radio, there is an American Indian Radio. The terms are used interchangeably.
We also know the following: 1) that “Indian” correctly refers to someone from the country of that name in South Asia. Using the term “American Indian” could solve this, but fewer people have adopted this term than “Native American.” 2) Anthropologists and other social scientists in the U.S. generally come down on the side of the term “Native American.” Thus it has been adopted by academia, government and by many educated aboriginals. 3) Wikipedians who have debated this in the past have generally concluded that it is best to refer to people by their tribe or nation and that “Native American” is the preferred term to use when generalizing. 4) We are a learning community and if compelling reasons for changing a usage are brought forward, surely we can adapt. Sorry to be so long-winded. I hope it is of some use. Sunray 00:41, 2005 Jan 3 (UTC)
I have to say, Sunray, I find your use of the term aboriginals extremely offensive. It sounds like a british colonial looking down their nose at the dirty "natives" who are fouling up their occupation. Furthermore, what anthropologist and academics have decided to call an enthnic group is of less significance than what that same group prefers to call themselves. At this point American Indian seems to be the prevailing term preferred among people indigenous to North America.
A 1995 Census Bureau Survey of preferences for racial and ethnic terminology (there is no more recent survey) indicated that 49% of Native people preferred being called American Indian, 37% preferred Native American, 3.6% preferred "some other term," and 5% had no preference. Watersoftheoasis 18:59 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I think that it is clearly established that Indian by itself would refer to someone from India and American Indian would refer to someone belonging to the Tribes of the Americas. I personally feel a little offened if someone were to call me a Native American and it is only WHITE people that do that. A bit of a correction, It is only WHITE ENGLISH SPEAKERS that do that. I really don't see the need to force another word onto my people and if it is going to be forced then how about some of the words we have your y'all pale faces coming from us being forced onto anglos. I could spend a lot of time at the computer making sure every article mentioned the Indian name for every race. Is Wikipedia only for "the bearded man" (white people)? That would be a very sad state of affairs if that were true. I can see that it is not just for English speakers but maybe it really is just to use terminology that makes Whites happy. Then is Wikipedia RACIST? This would be very alarming and I would have to withdraw my support. If Wikipedia really wants to be the most accurate it can be then I suggest not refering to Indians as Indians or or the newly coined and slightly offensive Native but for Wikipedia to actually take the time to be respectful of the people talked about and find out which tribe that person belonged to and post only that which really would be the most accurate and most respectful. Saying a blanket term like "Native American" makes assumptions in the language that Indians are so small and weak that we should only ever be thought of as an entire group. --
Billiot
01:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I can offer myself as a counterargument. I am of Japaneese and Chineese descent and much prefer the term "Native American" to any name with "indian" in it. Besides, it is not always feasible to use specific tribes. This can be somewhat likened to having the need to identify an American by the state they live in.It offends me that you are so opposed to caucasians as a group, and have an irrational hate and fear of them. I appreciate your intentions, but must point out that your argument is flawed. To oppose a term because you see it as belonging to a certain race is not the point and not a valid argument. Personally, I would like you to think over your comment or "withdraw your support". That being said, I admit I have nothing to contribute besides negate the above editor's comment. 76.170.202.84 03:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I am Seminole and Creek. I’m sure anyone reading this probably is educated enough to use the term they believe is the least offensive. The other 90 percent of America still know us as Indian though. People living in Oklahoma, Florida, Arizona, or near any large population of Native Americans, yes that is what I prefer to be called, would disagree. Trust me, I know this first hand. Currently residing in Mass., it takes me ten to twenty minutes to explain why I’m not Indian. Not because they’re dumb, but the stereotypes have been drilled into their head for so long, they can see past it. I might as well be telling them that the color red is actually green. When someone asks me what’s my nationality, and I say native American, they say, “Oh, you mean Indian!”. Not Native American, American Indian, Alaskan Indian, American Eskimo, or any other politically correct term. It’s “Indian”, as in cowboys and Indians, howe white man, arrow shootin, pipe smokin, “Look at me, I’m wearing a f@#*ing loin cloth!”, Indian. It’s racist word, period. PERIOD!! That being said, calling us American Indian is a slap in the face. It’s U.S. saying “We’re not going to admit we were wrong for calling you that, because that’s what we decided you are.” You don’t call black people African N@#$&%s do you? didn’t think so. It’s still calling us Indians, and in doing so ignoring years of persecution that still goes on today. Oh yes, don’t kid yourself into believing the government stopped screwing us over, they’re just better at hiding it, and anyone other than us doesn’t care. Personally, the term American Indian disgusts me. As for people saying using “Native American” is a way for the country to forget our painful and undeserving past is steaming s@#t. Your just being lazy. When people hear the phrase African American history, they don’t’ think of roses and candy. They very easily make the connection to they’re equally undeserved past. The country will be able to make the connection as long as they’re educated correctly. It is true though, that many Native Americans call themselves Indian. I call myself Indian all the time; as well as a red skin, a brown person, a feather head, and my favorite and most commonly used word, Injin. Injin is an old slurred way of saying Indian(watch some old westerns); if your gonna be racist, no better way to do that than saying it wrong!LOL I can do that though, because I AM Native American. When me and my family get together we call ourselves brown folk, and me and my siblings will joke about being “poor brown trash”, because WE are. Everyone else is not, and CANNOT. Make sense? Let’s see, I covered why ANYTHING with “Indian” is wrong; why I can say Indian and you can’t, oh, why do I prefer Native American. This is America, I am American, I was born here, I love to be American. My bloodline dates to the first settlers, the “natives”. I am native, to America, Native American. Simple. I would like to just say my tribe, but there’s so many, it is confusing to people who aren’t familiar with them all; crap, I don’t even know them all. I also agree with who ever said aboriginals was wrong. Aboriginals? Seriously? That’s just plain dumb, Slap yourself it you think that’s a good term to call us. What else was there…. The Japanese, Chinese guy. What makes you think what YOU prefer to call US matters in any way, shape, or form? I prefer to call you a moron, and since I’m not a moron, that means my opinion can be a “counterargument”, right? Idiot. By the way, any people with Native American friends who are not Native American themselves; stop posting your opinions, you don’t count. I hope I covered everything, and helped everyone see things from a Injin’s point of view of what to call us. At the end of the day though, and my friends would agree this truly is what I say; when after countless guesses at my nationality I’m finally asked, ‘So what are you?”. My response is simply, “Human”.
Ripper657 (
talk)
16:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)Ripper657
Yes, some of us natives do prefer Indian. We too though, are also subjected to the same stereotypes as everyone else. We grew up hearing the same titles. Ask a native what he is, and he’ll say, “I’m Indian”. You see, no one ever asks him why. Ask a native why he’s Indian and he’ll most likely say something similar to “Because that’s what we’re called”. That’s what we’re called. That’s what everyone calls us. It’s just a native conforming to the country without thinking about it. You can tell him he has a choice, but the choice has already been made for him years ago. Unfortunately, It’s just as hard, if not harder, for a native to see the wrong in this, to see the wrong in his title. It’s difficult for anyone to admit that he is still controlled, especially one who doesn’t even know it. It seems fitting that this discussion is on Tecumseh’s article, he saw the wrong in this country when most others didn’t. When they conformed. That is exactly what is happening here. The country as a whole doesn’t really care about us to see “Indian” as wrong, so it won’t educate itself enough to be aware about it. People accept Indian because people don’t know any better. If ignorance is bliss, then we live in Eden.
Ripper657 (
talk)
05:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)Ripper657
I agree with Sunray. We should not call the Native Americans Indians. Indians are people from the country India. Not the United States. Plus,they were the first here so the should be called Americans or Native Americans.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.195.108.105 ( talk) 20:36, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
There is a very interesting discussion of Tecumseh on page 638 of the 5th edition of Dukemenier and Krier's property book. Tecumseh is paraphrased as saying that "...the Great Spirit had given the North American continent to the Indian [sic] people, as their common property, and that no tribe could sell the part of the commons it used without the consent of all tribes..." [again, this is a paraphrase in the textbook, not a direct quote from Tecumseh] The footnote goes on to discuss Tecumseh's denunciation of tribal chiefs who had sold 3 million acres of land to the United States for $7k." Seems like an interesting discussion of the idea of the commons as part of Tecumseh's legacy. User: Aric Bright
Commodore was a temporary title awarded to any naval officer bearing the rank of Captain (the highest permanent rank in the American Navy at that time) who commanded a flotilla instead of just one ship. It was a courtesy title, but it was one that was recognized by naval regulations and would have applied to Perry at the time in question, as he was in command of the Lake Erie fleet.
The article doesn't mention Tecumseh's mission to the Creek. Here are some possible links
For starters--post second link to See also
I recommend that we combine the "tributes" and the "Tecumseh in fiction" sections into one new section to be entitled "legacy" or, perhaps, "Tecumseh's legacy." This new section would include, hopefully, more information about said legacy, including a more detailed discussion of his importance in US history, and his appearances in fiction, etc. Any thoughts? --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 02:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Should there be a thingy at the top that says "Not to be confused with William Tecumseh Sherman" I've seen those before (example: Lynx), but am not sure what the guidelines are 88.11.150.218 ( talk) 15:13, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
I would go ahead and edit this entry, but I'm new to the process and thought I'd just post my comments here. There seems to be some dispute about the location of Tecumseh's birth. After watching with fascination the episode "Tecumseh's Vision" from the mini series "We Shall Remain" on PBS's American Experience, I contacted 2 of the historians who were on the program. They acknowledged that John Sugden, another historian on the same program, to be the foremost authority on his life. Sugden has devoted the last 30 years researching Tecumseh. On page 22 of his book, Tecumseh: A Life, Sugden gives his best shot at answering the question:
"Tecumseh was almost certainly born on the Scioto, at either Chillicothe, or Kispoko Town. Many early commentators erred in putting his birthplace farther west, at towns which did not exist at the time."
I urge anyone interested in learning about this great human being to read Sugden's book.
Allen Eckert is fun reading, but much of his work has turned out to be fiction. The Blue Jacket blunder is a sad case in point.
Joepayne6 ( talk) 01:16, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I am little concerned about the information in the article regarding Rebecca Galloway. I am quite familiar with this topic, and have access to some of the source books used in the article. None that I have make any mention of Rebecca Galloway, and most make it clear there is very very little known with certainty about Tecumseh's life before 1807. Does the source of the information about Rebecca Galloway explain their sources? How do we know this is just not a myth? And since it is not included in any of the more recent Tecumseh biographies, I think we sould be careful not present this information as fact, but attribute it to the person making the claims. — Charles Edward ( Talk | Contribs) 02:04, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Tecumseh's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "jones":
{{
cite web}}
: More than one of |author=
and |last=
specified (
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 09:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Can anybody add book series by Fritz Steuben? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.48.112.14 ( talk) 00:55, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
This section and the section called "Conflict between Native Americans and settlers", were dumped into the article on February 27, 2012.
The material provides little context, and appears to be more of an analysis of a speech ascribed to Tecumseh, allegedly delivered during the winter of 1811-1812.
The analysis appears to be largely cribbed from a language learning website called lang-8.com, titled "Analysis of Oratory (part 9)", found at http://lang-8.com/33077/journals/94590. Sources listed are Baym, Nina, Robert S. Levine, and Arnold Krupat. The Norton Anthology of American Literature. Vol. A. New York: W. W. Norton &, 2007. Print and Henretta, James A., and David Brody. America: A Concise History. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martins, 2009.Print
Other editors have attempted to clean this up; besides lacking context, it also needs to be wikified. It may be original research, and might not be valid to include in this article.
I'll attempt to isolate this material and place it chronologically. I'll leave it to editors with more subject matter knowledge than I to decide what to do with this material ultimately. -- Chaswmsday ( talk) 11:43, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Ernest Thompson Seton ascribes the poem cited in the section Film and television to some of the Wabasha chiefs without exactly saying (AFAIK) to which one. I think that, exceptionally, in this case the link to a disambiguation article listing all possible Wabasha chiefs is correct and can be helpful to the reader. -- Jeanambr ( talk) 05:41, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 19:05, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for this article which is substantively informative. Thought it might be of interest to know that Herman Melville describes one of the characters in 'Billy Budd, Sailor' as being "...beardless as Tecumseh". I confess that I expected it to be a Biblical reference (!) and it seemed an interesting illustration of the visual culture in the mid-19th century. 86.130.52.103 ( talk) 14:01, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
There is a authenticity/copyright discussion about wikisource:Tecumseh's Speech, of August 11, 1810, To Governer William Harrison happening at s:Wikisource:Possible_copyright_violations#Tecumseh's Speech, of August 11, 1810, To Governer William Harrison. Please contribute any information or sources you may have access to that might enlighten the discussion there. -- John Vandenberg ( chat) 15:03, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
It's good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.91.213.150 ( talk) 18:09, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
I wonder what guidelines say about listing Tecumseh's Last Stand under both headings. I do not deem this an obvious mistake, but ... Uwe Lück ( talk) 15:04, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Over at the war of 1812 article there was a question raised whether T was really an ally of the Brits. Here is what I responded: The RS say Tecumseh was a critical ally of the British in 1812-13. 1) Paul Finkelman, James A. Percoco - 2009 says: "Tecumseh and his war band joined the British against the United States in the War of 1812." 2) Sharon Malinowski - 1998 "A British ally during the War of 1812, Tecumseh was made a brigadier general in command of all Indian forces." 3) Charles Esdaile - 2009 -"they found a powerful ally in the great Indian leader, Tecumseh. Of mixed Shawnee and Creek backgrounds, Tecumseh hated white America and believed the Indians faced a choice of either fighting or being overwhelmed"; 4) Robert Utley, Wilcomb E. Washburn - 1985 - "But Tecumseh could no longer wreak his vengeance, as he had wished, at the head of a host of unified tribes. He needed an ally. And so, reluctantly, he turned to the Canadian garrisons where the British were getting ready for their second war against the Americans." 5) Michael Lee Lanning - 2005 "In addition to losing the battle, the British lost Tecumseh, their most important Native American ally, who was mortally wounded."; 6) Leslie Monkman - 1981 - "Only after his failure to reclaim the lands of the west for his people does Tecumseh ally himself with Brock." 7) Carol Cartaino - 2010 writes: "Finding Prophetstown reduced to ashes upon his return, Tecumseh vowed to go to Canada and ally with the British. Tecumseh rallied his Indian allies to join the British forces in the siege of Detroit. Tecumseh and four hundred of his warriors..."; 8) Gordon M. Sayre - 2006 says: "But with Tecumseh, we for the first time find an Indian leader and his warriors fighting with one colonial power against another." 9) On the image of Tecumseh in Canadian thought see William H. New (1990). Native Writers and Canadian Writing. UBC Press. pp. 96+. ISBN 9780774803717. Rjensen ( talk) 13:53, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Tecumseh,_Nebraska#History
Why would the supposed killer of Tecumseh , change the name of the town , Frances , named for his wife. to Tecumseh ?
Catweasel (
talk)
11:22, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
In the Towns' and buildings' names section there are a lot of citation needed tags on the schools. Is someone insinuating that there is no proof that the schools are named for him? Question: who else would they be named for? Eric Cable ! Talk 13:59, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Tecumseh. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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) 22:44, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Numerous scholars and authors have treated the "accursed" waves speech from Tecumseh as historical. These scholars report that the speech was to the Creeks in the South. This is mentioned in Wikisource. But Wikisource also had something about the British being in Detroit, which doesn't seem to matter because the Creeks lived nowhere near there. I removed that part to avoid confusion. Display name 99 ( talk) 18:00, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tecumseh. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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) 21:35, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello:
In the article, you repeatedly say "Americans" where I believe you mean the U.S. government forces. He was the true American.
Perhaps, you could revise this.
Thanks.
The pictures shown in these Photos are very incorrect. These people You Show Are Caucasians In These Photos. Not in any way Our Complexion in those times, days and years. In Which they Should Show The Aborigines: The True and Only Truth! Our Copper Colored people. As These Colonizers changed all Our Tribal Names Later years, and Called Our People Black! The Aborigines Are Our Ancestors of This LAND! The Land is Also, Our Ancestors in which was Taken from Our Tribal Ancestors. Latiniad31 ( talk) 17:04, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
This article seems to have a lot of well researched sources. However, I noticed the article states "After a brief return to the Ohio Country in 1791, Tecumseh and his band of Shawnee warriors rejoined his brother in the Cumberland River area in Tennessee, where Chiksika was killed while leading a raid in September 1792." However, in 1792, Tennessee did not yet exist. J3nn!f3rros3 ( talk) 14:00, 14 September 2020 (UTC)