Talk:Lakota activists declare secession from US
This article truly has some problems. It really isn't explicit enough that this is not a unanimous decision by the lakota tribe leadership. It's not clear and in fact is likely false, for example, that these activists have the authority to withdraw treaties, yet the article says that the treaties have been negated. It needs some qualifying phrases to distance the editorial voice from the opinions of the activists. --Demiquave 10:06, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've fixed what I view as several glaring issues, but the title still reflects a biased viewpoint, as it's not strictly true that *the Lakota Indian tribe* has declared anything, just that a group of lakota have done so. Thus I intend to change the title from "Lakota Indian tribe declares secession from US" to "Lakota Indian activists declare secession from US". --Demiquave 10:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- On second thought, the phrase 'Indian' should probably be left out, as it's clearly implied by 'Lakota' and I believe that current usage calls for 'Native American' or 'American Indian'. An Indian is someone from India. --Demiquave 10:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I received a letter reply in an e-mail from the State Department stating the following:
For your query, we will refer you to the Department of the Interior. This is not a State Department issue.
Kirsten Petree Director, Office of Media Affairs U.S. Department of State 202-647-0001
What does article six state? I have absolutely no idea and should be included in this article for those who don't know - like myself. The article says, "This is according to the laws of the United States, specifically article six of the constitution." --Nzgabriel | Talk 05:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Claiming to represent...
I changed it to that because of a discussion in IRC with Amigine. I don't agree with it despite the fact that everything says they represent the tribe. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 20:52, 23 December 2007 (UTC)