Talk:Alice Lee Jemison

Condemned and harshly
How about a quote to document what is said in the summary at the top of this entry, but not documented below?


 * "Her work was condemned by the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration and she was described harshly in press conferences and before Congressional committees."

Some actual language would give the reader of how harsh this was and how strongly she was condemned. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 22:37, 14 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much for your comments! I agree.  About this one - I am worried if I add quotes directly from primary sources (government documents, press releases).  I could quote from the Stevens article which quotes primary sources ... here's one:


 * "She was labelled by government officials in press conferences and before Congressional committees as a "Fascist," "Silver Shirt," and "Bundist" ... .condemned by Commissioner Collier and Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes as a crook, a traitor to her race, and a spy in the pay of Nazi Germany." (Stevens, 1979, p.15)


 * I guess my question is: how to balance "not doing original research" with not quoting quotes of quotes? Sharp-shinned.hawk (talk) 11:55, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Original research doesn't mean you can't use primary sources or quote someone's words. That policy forbids your synthesis of other material in a way no one in the citations has or presenting material for which no sources exist. For example, almost every WP entry about a court decision includes a summary of the decision and quotes from it. It's almost always original effort, but the source is real and verifiable. See {{WP:OR]]. Let's get her own words--full sentences, even--and the same from Ickes or Collier.

I'll try mining the New York Times today. I also want to emphasize the timeline, i.e., the progress of her ongoing dispute with the FDR administration over the years. I'll bet her tone and language change dramatically. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 17:40, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Neutral point of view?
This entry leads the reader to believe she was a zealous advocate much abused by officials. There's another red-baiting side to Jamison documented here that needs to be added:
 * She claimed that Native Americans were controlled by a group of federal officials "who have well-known regard for radical activities and association with, or admiration for, atheists, anarchists, communists, and other 'fifth columnists'".
 * Also: "Indians are being regimented into little reservation Soviets, patterned after the Russian 'colhozes' and 'sovhozes'.... Briefly summarized, under the Roosevelt administration, the Indian wards of a Christian nation have been made the guinea pigs in a communist experiment, financed with public funds and tribal money." Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 23:30, 14 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree completely - I will work this in. Thanks! Sharp-shinned.hawk (talk) 11:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)