Talk:Choctaw-Apache Tribe of Ebarb

Recent changes
There is no need to put the line "They are not federally recognized as a Native American tribe" at the bottom of the lede. The first sentence already says, "The Choctaw-Apache Community of Ebarb, also known as the Choctaw-Apache Tribe of Ebarb, is a state-recognized Native American tribe and nonprofit organization in Louisiana." That it is a state-recognized tribe is clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljpernic (talk • contribs) 02:41, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 * These changes aren't particularly recent. It is absolutely important to identify this organization as not being a federally recognized tribes, because the overwhelming majority of readers don't understand the levels of tribal recognition. Wikipedia articles need to be based on reliable, secondary sources and I've provided those. Yuchitown (talk) 18:53, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Yuchitown
 * At this point you are edit warring, Ljpernic, and deleting cited information. You don't appear to have much involvement with Native topics, so curious what your axe to grind here is. Yuchitown (talk) 20:59, 29 July 2022 (UTC)Yuchitown


 * Wikipedia is written for the readers. There is nothing controversial about adding a line explaining federal vs state recognition. We do it in these articles because many readers come across these articles after a web search and are unfamiliar with the distinction. We need to keep in mind that most readers know little to nothing about these categories, and it's our goal as Wikipedians to keep these articles as user-friendly as possible. I am reiterating Yuchi's warning here about edit-warring and blanking of content. Do you have some connection with this group? -  CorbieVreccan  ☊ ☼ 17:53, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Halito--
 * The first citation that Yuchitown added for the language they included is here: [NCSL list|https://www.ncsl.org/legislators-staff/legislators/quad-caucus/list-of-federal-and-state-recognized-tribes.aspx#nc]. That cite lists the tribe as a state-recognized tribe. It is appropriate to put that citation with "...is a state-recognized Native American tribe..." since that is what the citation states.
 * The second link is here: [Folklife in Louisiana|The Choctaw-Apache were recognized as a tribe by the State of Louisiana in 1978.] Again, the text says, "The Choctaw-Apache were recognized as a tribe by the State of Louisiana in 1978." It is again appropriate to use that citation with the phrasing about it being a state-recognized tribe.
 * The [NCSL list|https://www.ncsl.org/legislators-staff/legislators/quad-caucus/list-of-federal-and-state-recognized-tribes.aspx#nc] also lists federally recognized tribes of which the Choctaw-Apache are absent. Lack of federal recognition is germane to an introduction of a group identifying itself, first and foremost, as a Native American tribe. Yuchitown (talk) 19:56, 30 July 2022 (UTC)Yuchitown
 * The third link is a book (I can send you a screenshot of the pages if you'd like, but I don't think the text is online). It specifically discusses the tribe in the context of Louisiana and, again, is appropriate to include in the phrasing about it being a state-recognized tribe.
 * I didn't have time to reply to Yuchitown with the language I was planning to add before I was somehow accused of edit warring and not leaving a valid reason in the edit summary, which I wasn't and which I did. The language I was going to suggest would be something like:
 * The Choctaw-Apache Community of Ebarb, also known as the Choctaw-Apache Tribe of Ebarb, is a state-recognized Native American tribe and nonprofit organization in Louisiana. The tribe descends from Choctaw people and Lipan Apache people and is primarily based in the town of Zwolle, Louisiana, with pow-wow grounds in Ebarb, Louisiana, both of which are in Sabine Parish, Louisiana, where the tribe has lived since the early 1700s.
 * They are not federally recognized as a Native American tribe, though they first submitted their intent to petition for recognition on July 2nd, 1978 (per this link: https://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590726.txt).
 * Relevant information:
 * Article that states the tribe has applied for federal recognition and is eligible for federal funding:
 * Article about federal funding that lists their petition # and the date of their submission|https://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590726.txt]
 * Articles that state the tribe has applied for federal recognition:
 * News article: https://www.ktbs.com/news/choctaw-apache-tribe-of-ebarb-growing-thriving/article_5649a23d-d6de-5e7e-8f78-ab769f675942.html
 * New article: https://www.leadertelegram.com/features/food/cookbook-preserves-louisiana-tribes-past/article_653acba4-e09a-5971-ad3a-eebca958fb1b.html
 * Articles about why it has been so difficult for the tribe to apply for federal recognition:
 * News article: https://www.shreveporttimes.com/story/news/2016/02/19/fight-federal-recognition/79643970/
 * News article: https://guides.lib.lsu.edu/c.php?g=1095533&p=7990161
 * Other citations to use for it being state-recognized:
 * Government site: http://legis.la.gov/legis/Law.aspx?d=1108531
 * The fact is that the article used to be more robust, but Yuchitown cut a bunch of stuff out for reasons that, as you said on my talk page, didn't have a valid reason and weren't constructive, I left most of them because I didn't have time to go through it all, but Yuchitown then added back in the line about it not being federally recognized. And before Yuchitown's edit on |December 30th, 2021, the article had a lot more information that was all well-sourced. But a series of edits followed that removed all of it, leaving only information related to its recognition status. You can the [comparison of the two version|https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Choctaw-Apache_Tribe_of_Ebarb&type=revision&diff=1074164468&oldid=1062857368] for yourself.
 * I would like to eventually add a lot of that language back in (whatever is well sourced), but I don't have a ton of time to go ten rounds over this stuff, and Yuchitown is diligent in their edits of state-recognized tribes in this way.
 * I also know I've read somewhere that it was original a petition, but the BIA converted it to an intent in 1981, but I haven't come across the source again. I know that the original petition from 1978 isn't listed in the OFA's database anymore, but they might maintain an archive of past petitions (but the goa link gives the tribe's petition number and the date of their intent to petition). Ljpernic (talk) 19:32, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

Ljpernic, you don't need to retread the sources on the non-controversial data, such as them being state-recognized, or that they've applied for federal recognition. The issue is that you seem to lack understanding of what these facts mean in the context of Native American legal issues and identity. What you do need to do is try to understand WP:RS, as you don't seem to have read, or understood, the explanations in others' edit summaries about why some of the sources and extra details were removed. To be reliable, sources need to be third-party, not just claims by members of the group itself, and not WP:OR. Some of the text you added, that has been removed, was detail not supported by the cited sources. This, along with your three times now refusal to answer direct questions about your connection to the group, is why I've given you a COI notice. I'm therefore going to mark you as a connected contributor. You are still free to make suggestions here on talk, but you still don't seem to have a handle on how to write about this group with a neutral, encyclopedic voice, or how to respect WP policy in the process. Which is what usually happens when people are too close to the subject. - CorbieVreccan  ☊ ☼ 19:51, 30 July 2022 (UTC)