Talk:Cobell v. Salazar

Update needed
This article needs updating.... AnonMoos 03:29, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Also needs review for bias, re: Lamberth, fractionation. Lawsuit alleges mismanagement, fraud, record destruction, and lack of any sort of accounting system for this trust. Fractionation is beside the point, and only serves to divert attention toward the poor Dept. of Interior and its insurmountable task (of not mismanaging money siphoned from Indians in poverty). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.245.31.183 (talk) 11:47, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The proposed settlement of Dec 8, 2009 has allocated $2 billion dollars for dealing with fractionation issues. Studerby (talk) 20:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Agree with Studerby. Fractionation is at the heart of the Cobell litigation. I'm hoping to work on updating and providing citations for this article soon...KTRuppel 19:43, 12 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newedeka (talk • contribs)

There have been a number of developments in this case since the article appears to have last been updated. Potential expansions to include President Obama and Secretary Salazar's comments on the case, as well as the most recent decision handed down this past summer.--Middkdr (talk) 04:28, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Dawes Act
It seems to me that a lot of the information in this article would better go in the article Dawes Act (General Allotment Act) -- it actually gives a more detailed discussion of the implementation & problems of the Act than the stuff already in that article. Then a briefer background, with a "Main article at" wikilink to the Dawes Act, could be provided. Of course, references/citations would be really helpful too -- this article's General Allotment Act discussion is sorely lacking them.

Thoughts? --Yksin 23:00, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Empty Sections?
I noticed that "Contempt Trials" and "Historical Accounting Trial" are empty sections and were introduced. Does anybody know the purpose of these? I'm personally inclined to remove them as they have no content, but I'm unfamiliar with the playing field. Thanks Hasteur (talk) 20:59, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Removed. 67.101.6.33 (talk) 19:34, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cobell v. Salazar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080907021904/http://www.doi.gov/bia/docs/internet%20reconnect%20order.pdf to http://www.doi.gov/bia/docs/internet%20reconnect%20order.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:32, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cobell v. Salazar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080625211939/http://www.doi.gov/bia/ to http://www.doi.gov/bia/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:13, 17 January 2018 (UTC)