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.

They're hippies, right? So it's more a weed thing.

haha, it's not a party. and they(we)'re not all hippies. i mean, i've seen all kinds of kind people there. lots and lots of people being people in the best sense. the atmosphere kinda gets ya high even with out the green stuff. lots of children as well. you know what i'm saying? its a gathering for peace, not a gathering for smoking pot and being crazy hippies. its very spiritual, and alot of the world religions are represented there as well.

what it is supposed to be all over is about peace, not violence, or drugs or alcohol, these things are tolerated to a point, selling is also not allowed, but in the last five years this has not been the case, alcohol has moved into the gathering and is even sold in trading circle, along with powders and other things. to not know this is something i refrained myself from saying, but it happens now with more frequency, this year there was even a keg of molson beer brought to main circle. while there are alot of people who do go there for the spiritual thing, many do not, infact i would venture to say 58% go there for the party, not for the peace. plenty of good people inside the gathering , but also plenty of bad people too! miketwofeathers@sbcglobal.net twofeathers Twofeathers 12:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC) 20:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I deleted what someone had added about 43 people dying from bad water in 1989. I've attended gatherings for a number of years, and I had never heard about that. No source was cited. I've heard of some people getting sick from bad water, but not any deaths, much less 43 kids! And the water sickness that I've heard about has always been from a lack of filtration, not from bad filters. If someone's gonna add that back in, they should find a source. 43 people dying at such a high profile event would be well publicized. Blackcats 08:21, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

From the twenty-year cycle of my experiences at The Gatherings, no deaths from "bad water" have ever occurred, but such false allegations are part of the price we pay for an egalitarian website. Sometimes a few people will have gastrointestinal problems, but that is due to their not following common-sense public health practises, like boiling or filtering water from unknown sources. Rainbow Dave 11:12 am, 25 December 2005

Of course if someone did die, it was due to "not following common-sense public health practises(sic)," but that doesn't mean that no one has died. Anyway, I take your word for it. Even though Rainbow Gatherings are good, that doesn't mean that bad things don't happen during them. Wikipedia is about facts, not about whether something is good or bad. So, if you have any relevant information, you should add it to the article, even if it might make Gatherings look bad (of course, adding context will help prevent misunderstandings like that). Robotbeat 02:41, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I added content tracking the legend of a Hopi prophecy to its known origins in published literature, and its acknowledged track as it spread through environmental circles. I don't mean to impugn Vincent Brown's scholarship in publishing the legend, but a tracable legend in published literature offers more substance than does popular folklore. This encyclopedia does well to approach with due caution second-hand attributions of statements to tribal elders when a published source is available for attribution. I don't mean to convey disbelief that elder Hopis or other Native Americans found great hope in popular environmentalism and expressed that hope to nomadic environmentalists, but this might not be the best way to establish these hopes as policy declarations by "The Hopi Elders" validating "Prophecies" documented in literature published at a time when poetic license among Anglo scholars often abriged the substance and sourcing of materials they attributed to native people. SeeMoreTruth 01:24, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Separate article?

The section on the Hopi prophesy mentions Greenpeace and the Rainbow Warrior. The connection between greenpeace and the gathering (if there is one) needs clarification. As it is now, readers may assume there is an affiliation. Regardless of this issue, The Hopi prophesy is clearly not just about the rainbow gathering so maybe it needs its own article. How about moving this section to Hopi Prophesy? Dev1n

One problem is that we have no evidence that it is a Hopi prophesy. It is text from a book written by an Anglo publisher, who self-published his own account of things he might or might not have sourced from an individual Hopi, from an undefined group previously cited here as "the Hopi elders" or from his synthesis of conversations with people in the vicinity of Hopi. And as I explain below, another non-enrolled woman who claims Cherokee heritage says an unidentified Cree woman told her a story in almost exactly the same words.

Another problem is that the explanation of the origins of the myth among environmentalists was added to this article after a long period in which the article stated as fact that the Rainbow Gathering was fulfillment of a Hopi prophecy. [1] The legend of a Hopi prophecy has for decades been standard folklore among Rainbow people. That Greenpeace also applied the name to their battleship doesn't diminish the direct connection between the language included in this article of the supposed prophecy shared among Rainbow people and the known source in the Anglo text. Citations are offered from a published scholar studying Rainbow people connecting it to the Naturegraph book. [2] [3] Explanation of how the legend spread is all supported with reliable sources. I would concur with moving it, but not to an article titled anything Hopi -- maybe to Legend of a Rainbow Warrior.

"Yet another problem is that the Anglo publisher is not the only source who claims to know the origin of the allegedly native prophecy. An Oklahoma woman, Lelanie Fuller Stone, who represents herself as a non-enrolled Cherokee descendant claims an oddly similar sounding legend originates from Cree prophecies. She says a Cree woman, (her grandmother according to other sites that repeat the folklore) told her the legend:

There will come a time when the Earth grows sick and

when it does a tribe will gather from all the cultures

of the World who believe in deed and not words.

They will work to heal it...they will be known as the "Warriors of the Rainbow."

She is cited as a source of the legend on other Rainbow sites. [4]. Beyond this reference to a legend that is definately Greenpeace folklore and is definately Rainbow Tribe folklore and is definately Naturegraph folklore and might be Hopi or Cree folklore, any other discussion of ostensible Hopi prophecies would best be placed under a title naming the authors who published the supposed prophecies. The book on the topic most widely cited among mystics like the Rainbows, albeit written under standards typical of 1963, is the Book of the Hopi by Frank Waters. But Waters does not refer to a Hopi Rainbow Warrior prophecy. Though his works are widely enjoyed, history has not always reflected well on Waters' scholarly aspirations. His books have been used in college classes but he is not a peer reviewed expert on Hopi lore. Of course, I'd like to offer more scholarly critiques of Waters - here is what I found in a quick search of the Web consistent with reading I have not kept records of over the years. [5] [6] [7]. An article titled "Hopi prophecies", if ever Wikipedia deigned to know anything about that subject, would best be sourced on named Hopis from recent published literature, or on peer reviewed texts by reputable anthropologists. A start might be the Northern Arizona University Special Collections and Archives which has the papers of Oraibi Hopi White Bear Fredericks on which Waters based his book. But we will need to wait for somebody to do the research, because this isn't the place for original research, and an article sourced solely on Waters' research would best be titled as an article about Waters' research, not as about Hopi lore. SeeMoreTruth 10:05, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I've now created an article on the Legend of a Rainbow Warrior. Now that part of this article needs to be reduced to only as much as is relevent and this context, with a link to the new article. SeeMoreTruth 11:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Gathering of the Tribes. Are these rainbow gatherings? They've been inserted into the US calendars for 2004-2006 and See Also but the dates coincide with the US National ... According to this site [ [8]] they're a troll - deleting entries. Clappingsimon 09:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Lookingheart here. The "A Gathering of the Tribes" is/are bonifide Annual Rainbow Gatherings and have nothing to do with the bogus claims on Chaz' hateful boycott site you referenced.

Counsels for the A Gathering of the Tribes are held openly on the land with the invitation going out well in advance, in short these gatherings are focalized by Rainbow Family individuals who have counseled and decided to follow their own path and heartsongs. These gatherings came about in 2003 after certain individuals of responsibility within the Rainbow Family (claimed Elders / Founders) started signing permits and changing the nature of the gatherings here in the United States. These alternative to the permit gatherings are intended as an expansion of Rainbow Ideologies while trying to maintain some measure of unity and respect with the various same type gatherings. For more information on the A Gathering of the Tribes I would suggest that you review content listed on the website located at [ [9]

I think it worthy to note that in 2005, Annual Rainbow Family council gave a blessing to expanded gatherings. Many focalizers across the United States and elsewhere are well informed that this particular gathering is evolving and in its infancy. I am adding the text back to the Wiki and suggest that those dates stay in place as it is a simple truth that these gatherings are happening and are part of the Rainbow Family heritage. As cultural changes happen so does the history. Lookingheart 09:06 pm, 19 April 2006 (CST)

A bit confusing for me and other readers though. Clappingsimon 22:36, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

What can I say that would make it more understandable? Lookingheart 09:09 pm, 19 April 2006 (CST)

A gathering of the tribes is a small local rainbow gathering that has only taken place for 3 years. No other local or regional rainbow gatherings are included in this article even though most have been in existance longer than a gathering of the tribes and many have quite a bit larger attendance. If local or regional gatherings are to be included there are many others that have several times more people in attendance and that have been in existance for many more years. If someone decides to include in this article a section on local gatherings, a gathering of the tribes could be listed there, along with the larger more established regionals, as one of the smaller, newer local gatherings. I am removing the misleading reference to a gathering of the tribes until the more well known, larger attended, more estabished regionals are included.

Adding the information for the A Gathering of the Tribes back to the Wiki and making a backup copy. Reason for inclusion is relevent as it pertains to actual history that over the years will become more important as Rainbow evolves and/or devolves whatever the case may be. As a side note: The A Gathering of the Tribes is not parse a regional or local event but rather an expansion of Rainbow energy that has been borne out of the Rainbow Gatherings. I would be more then happy to invest some time listing some of the better know local regional gatherings which will take some effort, any help you would like to provide would be appreciated. Clappingsimon, my contact information is avalible just by clicking through and I would appreciate you not deleting content based soley on your ideologies regarding what may or may not be valid. Beyond that I do appreciate your help in making sure the Wiki is content neutral and provides a full scope review of Rainbow Family values and history, thanks. Lookingheart 05:17, 27 May 2006

Lookingheart, the unsigned comment on the Rainbow Gathering talk page was not made by me. I didn't remove the A Gathering of the Tribes entries on the 27th May 2006 (though I did once before, on the 18th Apr 2006, you reverted them) as an examination of the page's history shows. I'll copy this info to your talk page. Cheers. Clappingsimon 10:53, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Removed a gathering of the tribes from the list of national rainbow gatherings. A gathering of the tribes is a small local gathering. Two gatherings of at most a couple of hundred people does not belong included in a list of national gatherings of 8,000 to 25,000. Wikipedia is not a soapbox for you to promote your small local gathering. There are at least a half dozen regionals that have been in existance far longer than a gathering of the tribes and have several times the attendance. A gathering that is only having its 3 event this year is not yet a part of the history, especially when regional gatherings that have been in existance 10, 15, or 20 years are not included. Neither you nor I can prophesy whether or not a gathering of the tribes will become relevant in the future, whether it will become more important or fade away as some regionals do. Two gatherings going into a third is certainly not enough to make any prediction.

Re-uploaded current information for gathering listings from backup documents. Unsigned hacker keeps deleting information posted to help inform and document the expansion of Rainbow Gatherings. Lookingheart 12:44 CST, June 03, 2006

Lookingheart, this has nothing to do with a gathering of the tribes. On March 30, 2006 someone added the Ocala regional to the list of National gatherings. I removed it as well. If someone from Ocala, Shawnee, Khatua, Arizona, Alabama, or any other area attempted to publicize their local event via this article I would remove it just as I have a gathering of the tribes. The ocala gathering has been in existance for about 20 years and has had attendance of 800 to 4,500. Shawnee has been in existance for at least 15 years with numbers that exceed a gathering of the tribes. Khatua has been in existance for at least 10 years with about the same number in attendance as a gathering of the tribes. These are just a few of the regional gatherings that have had annual events longer than a gathering of the tribes. A gathering of the tribes has had *two* gatherings with estimates that range from less than 75 to possibly 200. A gathering of the tribes is one of the newest and among the smaller of the local or regional gatherings. The simple and objective fact is none of these gatherings are national and none of them should be included in the national gatherings list. I would not object to a gathering of the tribes being included in a list of local and regional gatherings.

Lookingheart, I have no desire to play some back and forth game with you but I will if it is necessary. Of about a dozen gatherings held each year you are the only person who has decided to use this article to promote their small local gathering. I think the facts are clear and any rational, objective, unbiased person would agree with me. Calling me a hacker doesn't make any rational point. Most of the changes to this article are unsigned. I fail to see how it makes me any more anonymous than "Lookingheart" "Clappingsimon" "Robotbeat" "Blackcats" or any of the other people who have signed their changes. But if it will facilitate discussion I will be happy to join wikepedia so I have an identity to sign with as clear and verifiable as "Lookingheart" "Clappingsimon" and "Robotbeat" June 3, 2006

Fine, if you want to play delete games then so be it, no one can stop you. If you want to help the Wiki grow and become then write an article on the regional gatherings and be sure to inform people about the alternative Rainbow gatherings as well. The Rainbow Gatherings are starting to change to the point where several of the past years they have become permitted events. This means that they are hosted by private individuals and groups and are not in form with the true nature and Spirit of Rainbow Gatherings, (Read FREE and OPEN to EVERYONE) If you want to engage in open discussion PRIOR to deleting other peoples contributions here then that would be appreciated otherwise lets scrap the whole article and start fresh and be sure to include the historical truth, facts man, not some philisophical bullcorn that reads less then true.

first off, I would refer you to this page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes I have in every way endevoured to resolve this dispute in rational discourse. I have carefully addressed each of your points as clearly as I can. I have offered a compromise solution. I see no effort from you to address any of the points I have raised.

First, for what objective reason do you claim a gathering of the tribes is a national gathering that should be included in the national gatherings list? A gathering of the tribes has existed for meerly two years and has at the very most 200 people in attendance. The National Gathering has been in existance 33 years with approximatly 100 times as many people in attendance. Can you even claim that there was a single person from each state at what you suggest is a national gathering?

Second, as there are numerous local and regional gatherings, what objective measure do you use for the inclusion of a gathering of the tribes in a list of national gatherings as opposed to the other local or regional gatherings? Do you believe all local or regional gatherings should also be included in the national listing? What objective rational do you use to suggest that two gatherings of at most 200 people should be considered national when the gathering in Ocala of 800 to 4,500 that has had annual events for about 20 years is not considered national? As well as several other regional gatherings that have had annual events many more years with greater attendance than a gathering of the tribes.

I have no problem taking this to mediation. If you continue to refuse to discuss this issue I will have no choice.

Cool, I have updated the page and as you see there are several locations Nationally as the energy starts to unfold. The Rainbow Gatherings are starting to evolve and expand, yea Spirit! Lookingheart

Since you refuse to discuss this issue I have begun to take the necessary steps to get wikipedia to mediate this issue. june 11, 2006

Thanks, that would be much better then you just deleting whatever you dont like.

Dear Lookingheart - when you restored your "US National - A Gathering of the Tribes" entries you wiped out multiple edits by other editors, including spelling corrections, factual corrections and other changes. Please don't overwrite the page blindly, you are not the sole contributor to this article. It is now your responsibility to restore all the other edits that happened between the last time you took a copy of the page and when you restored your entries Clappingsimon 04:52, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, It was not my intent to replace any valid edits and I apologize if I have caused any undue extra work. I will pay closer attention in the future as I know several folks are working hard to insure the document is correct and punctual.

Double checked, the edit was uploaded from a current copy, no changes made and the text looks good.

Made a recent backup of the Rainbow Wiki and have edited the National listings, someone keeps striking content for the A Gathering of the Tribes. Shine!!!!!

This issue is not going away and neither am I. I see you have added a gathering in VA and GA to the national gathering list. I ask you again what criterion do you use to determine whether a gathering is local or national? Is it simply your word that makes it so? There are in excess of 8000 people at the national gathering in Colorado with 20,000 expected. How many have arrived at the private land in GA? 20, 50? How many are at the undisclosed location in VA? You claim the gathering in VA is national when there are no directions to the gathering posted anywhere? These are local gatherings that do not belong on the list of national rainbow gatherings. This article is not the place for you to advertise your small local gatherings. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-07-01_national_rainbow_gatherings oceankat

Relisted historical gathering information: 01:41, 2 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 02:21, 2 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 22:17, 3 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 05:07, 4 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 22:19, 5 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 01:02, 7 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 01:39, 7 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 05:02, 7 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 23:12, 13 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 20:50, 14 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 03:50, 16 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 07:51, 16 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 16:15, 16 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 18:08, 16 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 15:23, 17 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 01:55, 18 July 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 06:54, July 18, 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 10:38, July 19, 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 17:32, July 19, 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 07:11, July 23, 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 21:43, July 25, 2006 Lookingheart

Relisted historical gathering information: 13:56, July 26, 2006 Lookingheart

Reset page to non-vandalised version Bstone 21:46, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Reset page to non-vandalised version Bstone 13:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Reset page to non-vandalised version Bstone 08:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Reset page to non-vandalised version Bstone 21:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Reset page to non-vandalised version Bstone 14:39, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Reset page to non-vandalised version Bstone 00:18, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Reset page to non-vandalised version Bstone 06:17, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Reset page to non-vandalised version Bstone 13:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Reset page to non-vandalised version Bstone 14:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Reset page to non-vandalised version Bstone 14:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_paper#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox and Wikipedia:Notability.

This was the text moved from POV-section in the article-space: 'Due to persistent hacking, this section of the Wikipedia is constantly monitored and updated by team members. If you have content you would like to added please feel free to edit though there is no guarantee that the content will remain available as there are too many irregularities at this time.' It has no place in the article space - the POV category directs readers to here, which should be sufficient until a consensus is reached Clappingsimon 04:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Now that the gatherings have reached their official end point I have a few questions about the gatherings you suggest are important enough to be included on a list with the national rainbow gathering. There were an estimated 15,000 people at the national gathering. There were dozens of newspaper articles written about this gathering as well as numerous reports from attendies on traditional rainbow websites. Can you list any newspaper citations for the gatherings you listed? I assume the gathering in GA happened since the people who hosted it live on the private land it was held on. Did anyone who was not a personal friend or aquaintance of the land owners go to this gathering? How many people showed up? As for the VA gathering can you list a single newspaper citation as evidence that this gathering actually happened? If not, is that because it was so small that it passed with out any notice or was this gathering simply a wish and a dream that never came to fruition as so often happens with gatherings that are announced? How many people, if any, were at the VA gathering? The rainbow family and gatherings are an important cultural phenomina not because an invitation was sent out in 1972, but because over 25,000 people showed up in response to the invitation. If only a few dozen had been there in 1972 and in subsequent years it would have been meaningless and there would be no wiki article. Sending out an invitation to your gatherings does not make them important if almost no one shows up. Again I ask you what is it about these small local gatherings you promote that they deserve recognition along side the national getherings attended by thousands? Again I ask why do these gatherings get this recognition when there are many other local and regional gatherings that have several times the attendance and have been held annually for many more years that are not listed? oceankat

Again I see no effort from you to dialog on this issue. In the past week I have seen no reports from your "gathering of the tribes" in any on the traditional rainbow websites. I have seen no newspaper articles even verifying that these gatherings even occured. This is not "welcomehere" your personal server where you can put up any information you desire, but is meant to be an encyclopedia. Do you have any citations from any of the local newspapers with information on the number of attandees or even to verify that they actually occured? Since you will not discuss this I have no choice but to continue this edit war. july 13, 2006 oceankat

If you want to engage in an edit war that is your business, I will not participate in any war. Further, I am not bound to be your charge and do not have to engage you in conversation if you can not be civil. I am filing a formal complaint with wikipedia since your attitude and demeaner is less then par. Good day. Lookingheart

Lookingheart, removing comments is poor form. Please stop or I will file a formal complaint against you.

___________________________________________________________________________

1. Rainbow Fallout, A-Camp violence, Lawsuit agains the Feds per

Posted by: "David Crockett Williams" xxxx@xxxx.xxx gear2001us

Date: Tue Jul 11, 2006 7:49 am (PDT)

• All the foibles of the Rainbows
• Rainbow rental returns wrecked ("A" Camp out of control this year)
• Suing the feds per Religious Freedom Restoration Act

Other reports indicate the alcohol and commensurate violence was more of a problem this year and real "not good" the reports of abuses by "A Camp" folks doing the "front gate" with recommendations that a remedy be determined to prevent this in future.

• All the foibles of the Rainbows
• Rainbow rental returns wrecked

I've removed cut-and-paste of the articles. Please don't post copyright material here. Please sign your posts if you're not logged in. Please avoid posting someone else's email address. Please wikify your text so it can be read. Thanks! Clappingsimon talk 03:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Just to balance the newspaper article above, in my experience, after the site was cleaned up/seedlings planted over the toilets/the trails aerated, the rangers have said that a month-long gathering has less impact in terms of trash/trails/destruction than a troop of boy scouts or Off-road's camping for the weekend. Cheers Clappingsimon talk 08:27, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcomehome is a notable and informative website. Please see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_paper#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox and Wikipedia:Notability. Clappingsimon 06:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

and if a body was to read the hip story on this site, it is from others reporting about one or two different people, with no validation of the facts other than a fictional story in a book, by an author or authors with no real contact with gatherings. while there is some truth in the articles, they are mainly based on one individual's memory of the facts. but no words from the dozen others who were actually there in person to uphold these facts. while i know some is true, i do see a distortion of facts, and or a glamourizing of same by the author. it is well to note that rob savoye used to keep a calender on his site till he ran into the problem of who to beleive when different states were calling in different directions for different gatherings. other than that, there is no hip story concerning changes in the family nor any updates to facts that actually happen now. again this site is the work of just one man, and reflects his desires too! miketwofeather@sbcgloabl.net 4.245.4.166 19:25, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Removed sections which are covered on Hopi prophecy page, and on the external links, on the grounds of relevance. Whether someone's father owns a pipe reputed to have belonged to a traditional person adds no weight to the legend. Cleaned up the links on the basis of relevance as they point to things not covered in the Rainbow Gathering article; they are all accessible from a link that remains Clappingsimon 10:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Removing cleanup tag. Grammar and spelling look okay. Clappingsimon 13:39, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

This section seems a little light on citations. The last paragraph, in particular. Note: I'm not trying to cause a fight here, just noting that it doesn't seem to be up to the level of citations that is the norm for Wikipedia. enordgren 06:54, 30 June 2006.

I agree, it's not cited, though there are plenty of identical newspaper articles (mostly smaller local papers). First sentence fails NPOV, as there was no actual 'violence'. The newspaper reports were written from the Forest Service POV. None of the on-the-day newspaper reports mentioned a rock being thrown. The FS NIMT has a media site for RG's [10] but the 'incident' is not covered. However yesterday the USDA FS has declared fire restrictions for the area, which is very tactical. Guess the gathering needs a solid night of rain Clappingsimon 08:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

if needed i could forward all the personal accounts to the violence to see both sides of the incidents recorded, to share a point of veiw. as far as fire danger goes , it is not the ground that needs the rain, but the dead trees killed by beatles that is the danger of fire. ground water could be 100% and a fire would still be just as devastating in that forest. miketwofeathers@sbcglobal.net 19:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I am not the official mediator but I will try to help. You may wish to appeal to a broader community for input by asking at the Village pump, posting a Wikiquette alert, or filing a Request for Comment. -- Ideogram 01:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The term in common use is Council in the mini-manual. I've reverted 65.65.225.1's changes of Counsel to Council until they can show a reason for the change. Cheers Clappingsimon talk 07:57, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Dictionary.com shows "Council" to be a governing body of elected officials who have power to administrate and impose sanctions while the spelling "Counsel" is more in the nature of egalitarian views and conotes the exchange of ideas through conversation. While the two spellings do sound similar, there are major differences in their meanings. The spelling "Counsel" is more proper for what Rainbow Gathering Counsel circles actual do when engaged in an informal conversation, which is discuss issues and work towards solutions without any authoritarin body to oversee. This is of course working from the primise that Rainbow Gatherings are non-hierarchial and that there are no leaders or vested offices to be held

Please sign in or sign your posts, I can't tell who you are (see WP:SIG). On http://groups.google.com/ there are 51,000 hits for - rainbow council - and 8,000 for - rainbow counsel -. Council is the common use, though there seems to be regional differences. Counsel is not used outside the US. Most readers won't understand the term counsel the way you do. If you do a google search on - counsel defined - or - counsel definition - the definitions actually relate to one-to-one-advice-seeking or to lawyers. Please see Counsel. You won't want to wikilink to that :-) Cheers Clappingsimon talk 04:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

i would think the tradional way it was used for years is council, even tho the meanings are different. you could even find reference to this in the mini-manual. original writers were not concerned with how it was spelled but in the fact that they used it for other meanings. and the fact that it is still used today. without any thought to the exact meaning of the word. miketwofeathers@sbcglobal.net 4.245.4.166 19:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello folks. First, thanks for all your input and discussion in this mediation. I unfortunately must close the case and declare it as unsuccessful. The reason is that despite all of the conversation, we didn't really make any progress toward obtaining a consensus on the two main issues: whether the alternative gatherings belong here, and whether they are notable and verifiable. We ran into several problems, not the least of which was the edit warring during the mediation.

I leave you with two final suggestions, which I strongly urge you to follow:

• Make sure anything you add to this article is notable by community consensus, and verifiable by providing a non-trivial citation. See WP:V if you aren't sure what this means.
• Remember that this is an encyclopedia, not a battle ground for real world issues.

If there are further problems here, and I'm sure there will be, any of you can take additional steps including:

• Reporting editors that are in violation of the 3 revert rule.
• Filing a request for comment that will gain opinions from uninvolved editors.
• Filing a formal mediation case with the Mediation Committee, which is a step up from where this case was filed.

Good luck, and feel free to leave me a message on my Talk page, or send me an e-mail if any of you would like additional advice from me. -- Aguerriero ( talk) 04:16, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

• Hmmm... I see this has now been closed. I'm sorry I wasn't able to fully participate here. I will continue monitoring the page and want to warn you all once again not to edit-war. Good luck. - CrazyRussian talk/ email 04:20, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks Aguerriero, you've invested a fair amount of time in an article that most likely you would not have spent time on but for this mediation. Its unfotunate that we were unsuccessful. As I said earlier, I'm truely amazed at what wikipedia has accomplished and part of that is procedurers for the resolution of disputes. Even though we've failed to achieve compromise we have left behind a record of our thoughts and attempts that will hopefully makes the next steps in this process a little easier. I appreciate you taking the time to teach this beginning editor something of wikipedia's procedures and standards. I certainly learned a lot. I think this is one of the problems with this article. So many of the editors, myself included, are unclear as to what is appropiate for an encyclopedia article, what are the standards and why they should be maintained. I'll wait a few days to recomfirm that the dispute is on going and then begin to take the next steps in this process. Oceankat 18:32, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

• The record will indicate that there was no compromise met, but clearly there was an attempt. It was entirely clear that Lookingheart will accept nothing other than his way and none other, while the rest of us were willing to accept some manner of compromise (sometimes more, sometimes less). I fear that the edit war will continue, with Lookingheart continually publishing entirely disputed material for his tiny 75 person "gathering" under the section of the national 15,000 person Gathering. This much is clear. What is further that is that myself and maybe one or two others will take it upon ourselves to continually counteract Lookingheart's vandalism and post entirely accepted information. This will most likely result in an edit-war. It however seems to me that the person in the wrong, clearly, is Lookingheart. He has not demonstrated any non-trivial sources for his "gathering" yet continually demands and edits the historical data to reflect his own personal agenda. Perhaps at some point he will tire of it and then this will all be a thing of the archives. Bstone 22:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks Aguerriero, and much blessings to those who try and create peace in our times. I too appreciate your efforts and the good you brought to the conversation even though compromises that where offered did not reach a full maturity and consensus, that doesn't mean the seeds for future understandings aren't now germinating. OceanKat, as I have said before, I do appreciate and understand your concerns. By appreciation I mean that I trust you will continue working on the Wikipedia and that you will raise concerns that are valid, this is important if understanding is ever to be communicated. In the Spirit of family I encourage you to contact me on the side bar and lets see if we can at least find a common happy medium. I truly believe that headway was well on course even if we had one person not willing to reach any consensus other then their own. Bstone, your carrying a weight around. As a person who is walking a healing path I would think that you might understand how Spirit can operate through the unknown. I have much love for the family. It would be incredible if your heart got touched in an awesome manner that suddenly excited you to the idea that Rainbow is remanifesting. This should be a unifying birth and celebrated even if the contractions are somewhat painful. Lets remember what we are trying to convey as we dance the rainbow and become the tribe we want to be. Looking forward to seeing the future together. Shine Lookingheart 01:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)Lookingheart

• I have filed a request for formal mediation of this dispute. As instructed I have listed the information below about this request on these user's talk pages. I'm posting it here as well so that everyone is aware of the process being initiated. Hopefully I have fully understood what I need to do and haven't made too many errors. Oceankat 23:57, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

• Oceankat ( talk · contribs)
• Lookingheart ( talk · contribs)
• Bstone ( talk · contribs)
• Twofeathers ( talk · contribs)
• Dante420 ( talk · contribs)

• Due to Lookingheart's derailment of the mediation process and his continued vandalism of the list of gatherings, I have asked for that section of the page to be protected. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection Bstone 01:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

• • Asking that the page protection be lifted and the edit be reverted due to Bstones changing the text on several occasions, numerous defamations and continued vandalism of the article. Lookingheart 06:27, 15 August 2006 (UTC)Lookingheart

Actually LH I have to agree with the protection. It is a shame that this has come to this but the page needs to be protected until we can get proper mediation with you or you start to take some responsibility for your actions to derail this listing. You have refused mediation, refused to listen to the advice and guidance of the last mediator or your peers. Mediation failed twice – both because of you. Once because you would not agree with the mediator’s suggestions, the other because you refused to participate so you have no one to blame now but yourself. You have continually shown that you will accept no answer but your own – regardless of group consensus or mediator input. This is what has brought it to this. You have shown Wikipedia, AGR and the world that your ego and desire to promote your own selfish interest has run amok and interfered with anything you can throw a monkey wrench in – such as this group. Why you don’t even attend national rainbow gatherings anymore – why should you care. This page is for listing of factual information about the National/Annual gathering with reference to other gatherings. However you seem to want to fill it with a disproportionate amount of information about AGOT gatherings, which have no more weight than NERF, BARF, SCROLL, Katuah or other tribes that are not filling this listing with tons of misleading info. Furthermore you fill these pages with misleading info, and crazy and unfounded accusations that are not based in any reality other than the fantasy in your head. LH really think about this and what your motivations really are – try to look at this from the point of large established gatherings vs small regional tribes – the AGOT being perhaps the smallest and least established of the many regional tribes and think what makes sense. Then perhaps come back here with a proposal but try for once to think with logic and not your own personal ego and agenda. For now it would be nice if we could get beyond this and get back to improving and editing the entry as it needs some serious editing, but right now your actions LH – not anyone else’s are preventing that from being able to happen. Hawker-- 24.196.172.115 14:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

• Well it appears we will have at least a brief respite from the edit warring. Since Lookingheart has refused to accept formal mediation I have no choice but to request arbitration. As I understand it this will bring about a decision that all must abide by. I'm quite busy finishing up a job and figureing out the proper protocal for these requests can be a bit time consuming. I probably won't have time to get to it until Thursday. I'll notify, and I have little doubt arbitration requires that I notify, all those involved when I submit the request. Oceankat 17:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

• • I agree we proceed with arbitration. It is clear that Lookingheart has no interest in mediation or any agreement/settlement other than his own. I have read up on arbitration for wikipedia and it is the way to go. I look forward to it being submitted to the ArbCom. Bstone 18:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Greetings, as I said I have moved forward with a request for arbitration of the desputes over the additions of AGOTT. You can view the request at the link and add your thoughts useing the link below. Sorry it took so long but I was quite busy and I'm not a geek. It takes a lot of figuring out to get these requests right. Oceankat 19:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Current_requests

I have unprotected the article so we can evaluate what is happening now. Fred Bauder 09:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I brace myself for a return to the edit war. Bstone 13:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Several people are watching this article aside from the normal contributors at this point, so perhaps another edit war can be avoided. I do think that this case is misinterpreted as a content dispute, however; it is really about the behavior of an editor. -- Aguerriero ( talk) 13:57, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I added back some links for CALM and water that were removed by LH edit wars from around August 1st. I know these were LH removed since the history shows an edit to just remove these links. This makes me worried about what else may have gotten removed during this edit war.

The whole article needs major cleanup and work. I would like to do this as a group rather than one person hacking up the entry by themselves. This way we all agree. Who else is editing this page and are you interested in working together? Hawker@ashevillecommunity.org -- 24.196.172.115 00:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Yep Clappingsimon talk 01:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree that this article needs at least some cleanup. For one example the link to a few people chatting about Grandfather David on a google newsgroup. Much as I find the stories about Grandfather David interesting and pertinent, a chat on agr isn't an appropiate link in an encyclopedia article. But after the last brouhaha I've been sitting back for a while to let things calm down. I see that others with greater experience have been makeing some much welcomed changes, welcomed at least by me. But I would be open to being involved in any discussions that might take place. Oceankat 13:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I cannot understand why LH would remove the CALM link. He has publically accused me of theft of donated money, so perhaps that explains it. Thank you, Hawker, for being so diligent. Bstone 06:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

This page has quite a bit of POV ("the Gatherings reflect an incredible splendor and magical diversity of the Rainbow Tribes empowered.", "While alcohol is strongly discouraged, mind expanding sacraments such as psycedelics and marijuana are in wide used by some people."), and needs cleanup and organization to make a more focused article. I cannot copyedit the article right now. Thus the tags. -- mcpusc 01:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

It seems we are all in agreement that this needs major cleanup. I had hoped to work on this around now, with the help of others, unfortunatly my work requirements have prevented me from having time now. Perhaps I can pitch in this winter. For now I need to back off my offer - sorry. Hawker -- 24.196.172.115 14:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I've been going ahead and doing stuff. I am pretty non-attached to my edits and don't take offense at revisions and reversions; I'd rather Just Do It than spend a lot of time proposing my changes on this page. If anyone has any issues with the overall direction of my edits I'm happy to discuss. Charles T. Betz 01:59, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I have added a criticisms and difficulties section to start a little more balance in this article. My insights are based on personal attendance at national gatherings in Colorado, Missouri and Oregon. Charles T. Betz 03:23, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Probably original research. Fred Bauder 04:04, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Pretty good, but no sources cited. Also, your reason for removing this edit is not adequate. It is a fair expression of the Utopian point of view, although also unsourced. Fred Bauder 04:09, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

This article is full of weasel words and was obviously written from the POV that the government is evil and Rainbow Gatherings are good and pure. I've fixed some of the most ridiculous parts, but a lot of work still needs to be done.

Fair expression of all significant points of view is what is called for. Fred Bauder 00:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

You're absolutely right, that is exactly what is called for and exactly what is missing from this article. It reads like a brochure for your group, not like an encyclopedia article. You also have a lot of untrue, and unsourced opinions stated as fact in it, like the garbage relating alcohol and violence. I'm going to go through myself and do some pruning and modifications to bring this article in line. Urek

Be sure to cite your sources. Fred Bauder 03:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not making additions, I pruning your uncited diatribe, and asking for citation. Urek

We're in agreement on where the article needs to go, but there's plenty of evidence (now cited) for linking alcohol and violence at least in the context of A-Camp. Charles T. Betz 19:19, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

This still needs POV work. An Incident Management Team (IMT or NIMT) does not make arrests. Rather it facilitates coordination between government agencies handling and event or incident. 66.108.63.143 ( talk) 03:16, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm putting out the call to more experienced editors. I've made a first pass on the article and marked it up, and even fixed some problem areas, but what this really needs is a more experienced outsider. This article has been coopted by the group it describes and when I first found it read like a super activist brochure for the organization. The POV still needs to be shifted towards the center line some, and the language and grammar needs serious work. A lot of terms used in the article appear to be slang local to the group, and are both undefined and inappropriate for an encyclopedia. This article needs to be brought in line with other high quality articles in this project, and watched to ensure it doesn't get nudged back into POV by the group.

Example, when I found the article several sections were (and still are) highly critical of law enforcement and government laws the group doesn't agree with. The position shouldn't be that the gov't and laws are wrong, but that: A) The group has and is violating the law, B) The group is doing so in civil disobediance because they disagree with the law.

We shouldn't take the POV that the law is wrong or right, or that the Rainbow Gatherings are good or evil. The facts are all we should care about, not the opinions on them. Urek 15:19, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

The major challenge with this article is documentation. The People of the Rainbow book is an authoritative source. Other citeable sources are here: http://welcomehome.org/rainbow/nfs-regs/fsregs.html and here: http://welcomehome.org/rainbow/sites/fsreports.html. If anyone knows of any other sources please post. Charles T. Betz 23:23, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Also it would be nice to have something other than Niman to rely on for sympathetic documentation. Consider this a call for pointers to newspaper & magazine articles, etc. Oftentimes local "feature" coverage can be sympathetic. Charles T. Betz 02:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

"Sympathetic" documentation? Whatever happened to WP:NPOV? This article reads like an advertisement for the group, and should seriously be considered for deletion unless it can be brought up to standard. Raymond Arritt 22:47, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with any ascertation that this article be considered for deletion. Clearly the updating and proper editing is taking place. Let's not go rushing to conclude deletion is the thing to do. Bstone 07:32, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Let's start a new NPOV thread. Charles T. Betz 03:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

This section has a plethora of citation needed tags. I thought I would be able to clear some of them up with reference to Niman, but he does not support any of the assertions that have been tagged as needing citation. If no-one can provide documentation they will have to be moved to the Talk page. Charles T. Betz 02:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree, unsourced claims need to be removed. By the way, amazing work, the article is looking worlds better. Urek

Thanks, I just kind of wandered in after the big dramatic mediation movie and am surprised no-one is shredding my stuff. But I can see that the alternative Rainbow stuff needs to be dealt with... Charles T. Betz 23:57, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

This is a spurious link at best, alcohol isn't linked to violence any more than psychadellics. It's POV to attempt to link them even through the supposed A-Camp. I'm going to look over the A-Camp figures to see what the supposed link is... Urek

Not sure what the big deal is here. The dynamics around A-camp are well documented. It's not POV to document that according to a credible academic researcher's published ethnography, generally A-camp has reputation X based on events A, B, C, and D. The article at this point does not link alcohol as substance directly with violence. Do you have Niman? Suggest you acquire a copy so we are on the same page. Charles T. Betz 01:13, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I admit that the mention of "sympathetic" documentation appears on the surface to violate WP:NPOV. Please let me attempt to explain. If we rely entirely upon Forest Service and U.S. legal system documentation, this would not result in NPOV. I am looking for sympathetic sources as a counterweight to the generally hostile governmental sources, and through combining them hopefully arrive at some semblance of neutrality, or at least balance.

I have been stripping out the more effusive quotes and undocumented assertions so that we wind up with an article that is both neutral and fair, while giving the interested reader at least a flavor of what the Rainbow is all about. Charles T. Betz 03:18, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I thought the article was extremely NPOV originally, but you've done a wonderful job in cleaning it up, I'd even be in favor of removing the POV tags on the article. "Sympathetic" documentation is appropriate given it is from an academic source. I think you ought to be applauded for the wonderful job you've done here.

My one lingering problem with the article is the comment on A-Camp. Could you reproduce the figures which claim to show this increase in violence? I am wondering if they show a statistically significant increase. My concern is that this is a slight POV push from the Rainbows against alcohol. Urek 06:07, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Page 126, People of the Rainbow, concerning the Minnesota Gathering, 1990, "Violence was a regular occurrence at "A" Camp during the ensuing gathering, occasionally spilling over into Bus Village." Other examples follow, "By 1995 "A" Camp violence in New Mexico evolved to include guns and machetes, with a gunfire and a chopping at "A" Camp three weeks before the National Gathering was to officially begin." Only anecdotal evidence, of course. Fred Bauder 20:19, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Some more, "The scene at the "A" Camp is often violent and chaotic as "A" Campers battle and steal among themselves." More conclusionary. Fred Bauder 20:21, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Anecdotal evidence compiled by a qualified ethnographer is citable. Ethnography is essentially anecdotal; it is qualitative, not quantitative. Qualitative methods are widely used in the social sciences. Charles T. Betz 22:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, as a individual at the Nevada gathering where we discussed alcohol,the reasons put forth by most of the speakers at that rainbow for keeping alcohol at a-camp were precisely to avoid violence associated with people who drink to much. IT is a POV that a consensus of rainbow gatherers hold. At the Pennsylvania gathering, one alcoholic i know who was NOT in consensus about that issue, brought his flask in. And the punishment for violating this "consensus" WAS near uniform disparagement and ostracization. 98.163.209.11 ( talk) 14:00, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Almost completely unsourced original research. Please take a look at WP:RS and WP:NOR and make appropriate edits. Thanks. Morton devonshire 20:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

It is an overstatement at this point to claim that it is "almost completely unsourced." I have been working on removing the unsourced material. There are 10 internal references to Niman and 5 external links to official Forest Service documentation. I just re-reviewed WP:RS and believe Niman to be a fully acceptable secondary source in the strictest sense. The Forest Service material is primary, and the more recent material is only available as such (Niman does use Forest Service material as well).

In any event, the Rainbow gathering is a notable cultural phenomena, probably the most colorful descendant of the 1960s counterculture, and therefore "encyclopedic"; I will dispute any attempts to delete based on WP:RS and WP:NOR (if that is the implication of the term "unencyclopedic"; I don't want to overreact). The article was originally written by Rainbow folks with little or no Wikipedia experience; a few of us with more experience are slowly fixing it but there is also WP:Don't_bite_the_newbies to be taken into account. I have authored fully sourced Wikipedia articles as well as attended Rainbow gatherings.

Therefore I ask that you be much more precise and specific in your critique. There are plenty of section by section tags noting where the article needs work. Charles T. Betz 22:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Morton devonshire, I challenge your ascertation that this article is "almost completely unsourced" etc. You have not made any specific comments or stated areas which need work. Furthermore there has been a great deal of effort put into this article. Bstone 03:24, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Also - a careful review of WP:RS suggests that the use of published Rainbow websites is acceptable in describing the organization's aims and goals, if carefully identified as primary sources. I haven't done much of this but the over-reliance on Niman is starting to trouble me. Charles T. Betz 02:45, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

This section needs to go; it is unverifiable. I will delete it soon unless someone cites it. This is not saying that alternative gatherings do not exist, just that they are not notable enough for Wikipedia at this time. Charles T. Betz 12:55, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Lookingheart seems to have abandonded this section entirely and no other editors seem to desire to work on the section. It should go. Bstone 03:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

It's gone. I am not unaware of the debates between "mainstream" and "alternative" Rainbow but realistically folks, mainstream Rainbow is the alternative to the vast majority of readers, and going into alternatives to the alternative - especially when completely unsubstantiated by any citations - is simply not going to fly on Wikipedia. There are lots of other forums to pursue such agendas. Charles T. Betz 01:24, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, I am obsessive compulsive. My wife has noted it as well, specifically with respect to this article. I have edited all sections and cited as best I could, pointing primarily to the Rainbow Guide and of course Niman. The citations are in two inconsistent formats and it might be good to have them consolidated, but I think I will leave that to someone else. The controversial nature of the material leads me to recommend frequent footnoting - other articles can get by with just references at the bottom, but probably not this one. I am surprised after reading this summer's correspondence that I was able to work on this in peace, and I hope that my contributions have been acceptable; I assume that the silence has been consent. One of these days I may make it "Home" again... sigh... Charles T. Betz 04:47, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I've gotten some feedback that the situation around the Hopi legend is even more complex than stated. I also think it is somewhat non-notable and am tempted to just delete it. People can read various perspectives in Niman and at www.welcomehome.org. Anyone disagree? Charles T. Betz 02:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

The Hopi legend (myth or fact) is a basic part of Rainbow. Most experienced Rainbow know of it, tho not of the controversy of it. I feel that it should remain part of this article as it is such a fundamental part of Rainbow Family. Bstone 08:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

It occurred to me that describing Willoya and Brown's work as both an "evangelical book" and "a book with evangelical origins" (in the same sentence, no less) is redundant. Unless someone has a strong sentimental attachment to that sentence, I'd like to reword it. - Mark Dixon 14:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry to remove the material below as I believe it is submitted in good faith. However, Rainbow Hawk needs to acquaint himself with Wikipedia guidelines for admissable evidence. Can you point to any published literature, ideally written either by an authorative Native American source or qualified ethnographer or anthropologist, to substantiate your claims? Your simply saying so, is not sufficient here. If you revert again you'll be in violation of the 3-revert rule. Charles T. Betz 01:35, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Corrections by Rainbow Hawk - - As the person who directly shared the Prophecy of the Warrior of the Rainbow with the founding Councils of both the Rainbow Gatherings, many of its' related projects and Greenpeace; As a person of native extraction (Seneca) and one who has shared the Prophecy with tribes throughout this hemisphere, I can for a certainity state that the Prophecy(s) of the Warriors of the Rainbow have existed for thousands of years and are very often considered one of the oldest of all Native Peoples Prophecies. In my Grandmothers' tribe, the Seneca, it is referred to as the Whirling Rainbow Prophecy and in South American cultures it is commonly called the Brotherhood of the Seven Rays. The prophecy itself also exist in various forms in cultures throughout this hemisphere, the Pacific Islands, Africa, etc. - - The commonly acknowledged thread, in it's most simplified version, is: - - "When the Mother Earth is sick and the animals dieing there will come a tribe of peoples from - all cultures, who believe in deeds, not words, and they will restore the Mother Earth to her - former beauty. This Tribe will be called, The Warriors of the Rainbow." - - Having personally shared that with Grandfather David (in 1977), who was the Keeper of the Hopi Prochecies, he agreed that the afore mentioned wording is indeed representative of the prophecies of the Hopi and many, if not most, other tribes throughout this hemisphere, albeit leaving out each tribes individual versions and wording. Grandfather David is one of the Elders who led "The Longest Walk" of native Elders from this hemisphere to address the United Nations in regards to Native Peoples concerns. - - Warriors of the Rainbow ceremonial events have been held throughout this hemisphere, the world and its' tribal cultures. Though of course each tribe sees its' prophecy as the original/genuine one, the simplified one used by the Rainbow Gatherings of the Tribes, Greenpeace, etc. and kindred events & projects worldwide is thee most widely known and acknowledged one. It does not suppose to represent any one particular culture. It is the Prophecy that is as what it states, the Tribes' of all cultures, e.g. the Warriors of the Rainbow, which manifest throughout all lands globally and is the most representative of all cultures. - - Rainbow Hawk: Keeper of the Prophecy & Warrior of the Rainbow

You say oldest gathering was 1972, but Rainbow_family page says 1969.

Link first mention of shanti sena too, inside CALM paragraph. -- Jidanni 2006-12-28

oldest "rainbow" gathering was 1972 that is spoken of, and even that is a misnomer as they were not names rainbow gatherings at the time, per original invite. the name "Gathering Of The Tribes" was used for a very large happening in golden gate park, tho "Rainbow Gatherings" later might have had the name "gathering of the tribes" in them, does not mean it was assoiated with rainbow at all. if this was the case, the "gathering of the contact tribe" would also have to be cited with rainbow to be historicaly correct.

there is no written material before 1974 that speaks of such involvement at all.People of the Rainbow; A Nomadic Utopia written in 1997 is suppsoed to be accurate, but written at such a late date would not be historically acurate, and actuaqlly has no real information per references assoiating rainbow with the gathering of the tribe in san fransisco.

i still find niman's book to be not historical on the fact he lists no reference to any other material to proove such claims either in the book on the original "Gathering of the Tribes in San Farnsisco".i would find the book, RAINBOW NATION WITHOUT BORDERS by Alberto Ruz Buenfil, more significeint in what was happening earlier.

in all actuality vortex in oregon was the real begining for rainbow, this is where the people got together to start working on the gatherings, this is documented on welcomehome.org as well as written in a book by barry "where have all the flower children gone" mike

here's the thing. Niman is a qualified ethnographer. He took down "hipstories" and published them, and so we can use them here. If there are folks with more hipstories, they need to tell these stories to some neutral person, a reporter, anthropologist, or ethnographer, who need to publish them in some sort of journal or book that is intended for an audience broader than just Rainbow folks. Then the corrections or alternate versions will be admissable into the article. Charles T. Betz 00:21, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I see the mention of C.A.L.M. here, which obviously postdates my involvement in anything of this sort. In the late 1970s / early 1980s, the medical tent (which mostly dealt with bad trips and other drug problems) was M.A.S.H., which I believe nominally stood for "Mobile Air and Sunshine Hospital" but which centered on an old army MASH tent. I lack citation other than my own memory, and there doesn't seem to be anything citable on line, but if someone has something, this should probably be mentioned.

Also, there is no mention of either the Hare Krishnas nor the Love Family, both of whom played very significant roles in the gatherings of that era.

Also, there seems to be a lot of uncited dubious material in the article: e.g. "Mainstream society is viewed as "Babylon," connoting the participants' widely held belief that modern lifestyles and systems of government are unhealthy and out of harmony with the natural systems of planet Earth." Sounds to me like someone's private opinion, uncited. - Jmabel | Talk 08:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, and with all due respect, I did a major rewrite of this article last summer and purged all uncited material. Every statement in it should be verifiable in the succeeding footnote. The entire opening paragraph can be justified with reference to Niman, footnoted at the end of the 4th paragraph.

If you are interested in participating at this level (we certainly can use the help), please get a copy of both Niman and Sentelle. I agree there should be no unsourced attributions, and (per WP:NOR) that the preferred sources are "secondary;" both Niman and Sentelle fit this requirement perfectly. Also per WP:NOR, a modicum of references to primary Rainbow Family literature are also acceptable, and present in the article. Charles T. Betz 00:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I see that an uncited reference to "alternative" Rainbow gatherings has returned. This caused major issues last year. I do not think these gatherings are notable, nor is this section cited. I have tagged it and will delete it presently, unless its presence can be justified under Wikipedia guidelines. Charles T. Betz 01:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I have deleted this. Charles T. Betz 18:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Charles, for being to diligent in this. Administrator Fred Bauder stated on my Talk page, "If he starts edit warring again I will block him." He refers to Lookingheart. I have not yet checked who made these edits, but we should be aware that if it was Lookingheart then we may been to refer him to Fred for further action. Bstone 06:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I think we probably know the real life person. I probably was too bold in my pronouncements. Bottom line, though, there is no published reliable source. Additionally, AGOTT is not billed as a Rainbow gathering. When and if it becomes notable, it can have its own entry. Fred Bauder 19:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I added a passage noting the existence of the book Judge Dave and the Rainbow People. While the existence of an ethnography like Niman is not particularly notable, the fact that a Reagan appointee wrote such a detailed and sympathetic account of his presiding over the Gathering court case, I think is notable in and of itself. It's a heck of a fun read, too. Charles T. Betz 02:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

charles may i be so bold to add other books to your study on this section, tho it might be pertinaent to to other sections as well i wil refer you to a registry of books listed on welcomehome.org that is and has been written before niman's book. if you would please take the time to atleast look through this page listed at this url to see if anything can be used to make the article acurate? http://www.welcomehome.org/rainbow/info/bibliography.txt mike

Go for it. If it has a publisher, a year, and an ISBN, it can be cited here, generally speaking. I think I have contributed what I can. Charles T. Betz 00:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Greetings, currently the article is tagged to be merged into Rainbow Gathering article and I highly disagree that that would be appropriate or an improvement. While the two are certainly intertwined I foresee a time when the gatherings might not occur but the "Family" still continues. In any case I think merging is a mistake.Benjiboi 03:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

"There are some attendees who would prefer...", see WP:Weasel Words. Urek

The section about concensus process and council is inaccurate, as it gives two false impressions: 1. The councils that gives rules to the gatherings are open for everyone, and there is no group of people that are part of the council, and others are not. 2. Counsels are held in talking circles, though talking circles can happen without a reason for a council. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moddyfire ( talk • contribs) 11:29, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

For many gatherers, the use of psychedelics is religious or spiritual in nature. This should be noted. Also, the blanket "drugs are used" implies that all drugs, such as hard drugs, such as amphetamines and opiates are just as common as marijuana and psychedelic mushrooms. This is not true. It has been my experience that drugs which are not remotely considered psychedelic, or at least visionary, are discouraged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.119.62.12 ( talk) 23:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Por favor, transmita, y después a publicar todas las personas y los sitios

SEGUNDA

GLOBAL ARCO IRIS REUNION de las TRIBUS

Noviembre 1 -30 2008

Municipio DE LA PAZ, BAJA CALIFORNIA SUR

MEXICO

Correo electrónico: rainbow_gathering@yahoo.com

(Desde la Antigüedad Native Peoples' Profecías) "Cuando la Madre Tierra está enferma y los animales que mueren allí vendrá una tribu de los Pueblos de todas las culturas que creen en hechos, no palabras, y se restaurará la Madre Tierra a su belleza antigua. Esta tribu se llamará, los guerreros del arco iris ".

Invitamos a todos los pueblos dedicados a la curación de la Madre Tierra y compartir la paz con todos los pueblos para asistir al Segundo Encuentro Mundial de Rainbow de las tribus en el Condado de La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico. Esta reunión gustaría pedir a todos aquellos que se viene, y que están involucrados en proyectos activos, para lograr crear exposiciones y talleres para compartir. Todos los proyectos de trabajo hacia los objetivos de lograr la paz mundial y la restauración de nuestro hogar planeta son más que bienvenidos a presentar sus visiones y las realidades que sus esfuerzos han logrado alcanzar.

    Para obtener más información sobre Rainbow reuniones y cómo funcionan, por favor vaya a www.welcomehere.org y siga los enlaces a los diferentes aspectos. El Rainbow sección de la Guía es particularmente informativa. Todos somos voluntarios y todos los aspectos de las necesidades de este evento necesita ayuda. Esto incluye la recopilación de todos los preparativos y el trabajo en red, así como la elaboración de todas las formas de vida las necesidades de apoyo para la comunidad que se convierte en la Reunión a medida que evoluciona. 
    Actualmente, el sitio sugerencias están siendo recopiladas de todo el Municipio (Municipio) de La Paz y el Consejo General arco iris que se forma a través de los voluntarios sobre el terreno de esta región y más allá de elegir la mejor opción. Actual direcciones serán enviadas a cabo un mes antes de la reunión. Esta región tiene una gran red de grupos ecologistas y los proyectos que serán invitados a participar en la creación del evento, sin duda, un mayor número de proyectos de desove de que, como los consejos se refieren a las necesidades de la región. 
    Póngase en contacto con nosotros con su intención de venir, proyecto esfuerzos para ser compartidos, etc y que se añade a la primaria Gathering lista de correo. 

Rainbow Hawk: Focalizer

Please forward, post & publish to all appropriate people & sites

SECOND

GLOBAL RAINBOW GATHERING OF THE TRIBES

Nov. 1st -30 2008

COUNTY OF LA PAZ, BAJA CALIFORNIA SUR

MEXICO

Email: rainbow_gathering@yahoo.com

(From Ancient Native Peoples’ Prophecies) “When the Mother Earth is sick and the animals dying there will come a Tribe of Peoples from all Cultures who believe in deeds, not words, and they will restore the Mother Earth to her former beauty. This Tribe will be called, The Warriors of the Rainbow.”

We invite all peoples dedicated toward the healing of the Mother Earth and sharing peace with all Peoples to attend the Second Global Rainbow Gathering of the Tribes in the County of La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico. This Gathering would like to request to all those who will be coming, and who are involved in active projects, to bring exhibits and create workshops to share. All projects working towards the objectives of achieving world peace and the restoration of our home planet are more than welcomed to present your visions and the realities which your efforts have managed to achieve. For more information on Rainbow Gatherings and how they work please go to www.welcomehere.org and follow the links to the various aspects. The Rainbow Guide section is particularly informative. We are all volunteers and all aspects of the needs of this event need assistance. This includes all Gathering preparations work & networking, as well as putting together all life support needs for the community which the Gathering becomes as it evolves. Currently, site suggestions are being compiled from around the Municipio (County) of La Paz and the General Rainbow Council that forms via on site volunteers from this region and beyond will choose the best option. Actual directions will be sent out one month before the Gathering. This region has a fairly large network of ecological groups and projects which will all be invited to take part in the creation of the event, with no doubt more projects spawning out of that as councils relate the needs of the region. Please contact us with your intent of coming, project efforts to be shared, etc. and to be added to the primary Gathering mailing list. Rainbow Hawk: Focalizer —Preceding unsigned comment added by RainbowHawk ( talk • contribs) 20:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Por favor, transmita, y después a publicar todas las personas y los sitios

SEGUNDA

GLOBAL ARCO IRIS REUNION de las TRIBUS

Noviembre 1 -30 2008

Municipio DE LA PAZ, BAJA CALIFORNIA SUR

MEXICO

Correo electrónico: rainbow_gathering@yahoo.com

(Desde la Antigüedad Native Peoples' Profecías) "Cuando la Madre Tierra está enferma y los animales que mueren allí vendrá una tribu de los Pueblos de todas las culturas que creen en hechos, no palabras, y se restaurará la Madre Tierra a su belleza antigua. Esta tribu se llamará, los guerreros del arco iris ".

Invitamos a todos los pueblos dedicados a la curación de la Madre Tierra y compartir la paz con todos los pueblos para asistir al Segundo Encuentro Mundial de Rainbow de las tribus en el Condado de La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico. Esta reunión gustaría pedir a todos aquellos que se viene, y que están involucrados en proyectos activos, para lograr crear exposiciones y talleres para compartir. Todos los proyectos de trabajo hacia los objetivos de lograr la paz mundial y la restauración de nuestro hogar planeta son más que bienvenidos a presentar sus visiones y las realidades que sus esfuerzos han logrado alcanzar.

    Para obtener más información sobre Rainbow reuniones y cómo funcionan, por favor vaya a www.welcomehere.org y siga los enlaces a los diferentes aspectos. El Rainbow sección de la Guía es particularmente informativa. Todos somos voluntarios y todos los aspectos de las necesidades de este evento necesita ayuda. Esto incluye la recopilación de todos los preparativos y el trabajo en red, así como la elaboración de todas las formas de vida las necesidades de apoyo para la comunidad que se convierte en la Reunión a medida que evoluciona. 
    Actualmente, el sitio sugerencias están siendo recopiladas de todo el Municipio (Municipio) de La Paz y el Consejo General arco iris que se forma a través de los voluntarios sobre el terreno de esta región y más allá de elegir la mejor opción. Actual direcciones serán enviadas a cabo un mes antes de la reunión. Esta región tiene una gran red de grupos ecologistas y los proyectos que serán invitados a participar en la creación del evento, sin duda, un mayor número de proyectos de desove de que, como los consejos se refieren a las necesidades de la región. 
    Póngase en contacto con nosotros con su intención de venir, proyecto esfuerzos para ser compartidos, etc y que se añade a la primaria Gathering lista de correo. 

Rainbow Hawk: Focalizer —Preceding unsigned comment added by RainbowHawk ( talk • contribs) 20:35, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone who puts information on this page. second time i had to correct the entries under the World Gatherings title. It seems there is a confusion to what this title is about. World Rainbow Gatherings are gatherings around the world which started by the consensus at the Haridwar (India) Kumbha Mela Gathering in 1998 and the first one was in Australia in 2000. The World Gathering traveled from there to Africa, South America, Central America, West Asia and SE Asia. Next stop will be New Zealand. So far there hasn't been World Rainbow Gatherings in Israel (1993???) or in Mexico, as was stated on the list.

We may make a separate list of all the regional and local gatherings such as Peacein the Middle East Gatherings, Africa gatherings, Black Current Gatherings (East Asia) etc. but let's not confuse one list with the other.

Much Metta

aykut —Preceding unsigned comment added by Icouldiwill ( talk • contribs) 12:39, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I propose merging Rainbow Family with Rainbow Gathering. There are no references in the Rainbow Family article that speak of it outside of the context of Gatherings. Dlabtot ( talk) 23:24, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

I would like to disagree with this. Sorry, Dlabtot! I respectfully disagree because the Family very much exists outside the Rainbow Gathering. As an example, the Rainbow Family were the primary folks behind the New Waveland Cafe & Clinic. There actually are a bunch of references there, mostly having to do with their disaster relief work, but the sources speak of both the Family and the Gathering. However the work done at the New Waveland Cafe & Clinic was not a Gathering, but was rather done by the Family. A bit confusing, sorry. Basket of Puppies 03:52, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, that's a story I enjoyed learning about.... do you know of any other similar references that could be used to improve the Rainbow Family article? Right now, there's not much there. I was gonna delete the 'Incidents' section because it just repeats what is here, and that doesn't really leave much except... Gatherings... so... Dlabtot ( talk) 04:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I am glad you liked it. I am trying to get it up to Good Article status. Needs some more expansion but I think it can happen. I will keep my eyes open for more references. Basket of Puppies 04:41, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

It is hard for me to say, as I have never been to a gathering, and don't know much on this subject. But from my understanding the " Rainbow Family of Living Light" has no membership, and can include you and me, and that it is not about the gathering itself per se, or even about a select group of people, but it is about a social/ ecological/ freeconomy/ non-politics/ spiritual ideology or way of living and being. It is a widely held and widely excepted belief system that is just dieing to be born into being widely practiced. (I would say it is similar to libertarian socialism but with spirituality included.) I think the song Colors of the Wind from the Pocahontas (soundtrack) encompasses the basics of this belief system beautifully. (Correct me if I am wrong). The Rainbow Gathering, on the other hand, is just the physical manifestation of this ideology, intended to be a living example of a better way of living, so that others can go home and duplicate this on an ongoing basis into their own community, changing the way we live our daily lives in relation with each other and with the " Great Spirit" or " Brahman." The "Rainbow Family" ideology is of equal status to the similar and opposing ideologies of Democracy, Corporatism, Libertarianism, Socialism, etc., etc. (Maybe it will come to be called Rainbowism :-D ). I don't really think that they should be merged, but if they do get merged, I think that the "Family" is more important than the "Gathering," and so the Rainbow Gathering page should redirect to the Rainbow Family page. Its all relatives ( talk) 12:22, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

I think the merges shoudl go ahead and a separate article on the family that is not so gathering focused and not so USA dominated. I think the ctiticisms i.e. about forest service and law enforcement could also be split into a seperate article to achieve balance.

I think the merger makes sense as the family and gathering are much the same, and the article is still small. The family as I know it, is Woodstock-based, and makes the Woodstock Nation Camp.-- John Bessa ( talk) 19:33, 31 July 2010 (UTC)