Talk:Dreamcatcher

Very Olde Edit-discussions
The Lakota legend in this article has been pasted, verbatim, from this website, and it is not clear if this has been done by the original author, should the article have a copyright violation boilerplate placed on it? redcountess 10:08, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

If this is an Ojibwa tradition, shouldn't that be focused on in the article, as opposed to continuing the misconception that there is a universal, "Native American" culture? --Kathryn NicDhàna 22:14, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

It appears a section of this article was taken from this site: http://www.native-languages.org/dreamcatchers.htm So, I'm going to rewrite that section so the info can be included in another way. --Kathryn NicDhàna 22:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Hii how you Rose Girl101 (talk) 18:47, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Footnote 5 has the title of the article wrong. The title should be "Ojibwa legend of the dream catcher." I found this in the ProQuest database. Clairegunnels (talk) 19:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Mandala
How is this related to a mandella? Comments by Knaggs on 11:05, 5 March 2007
 * From the most generic definition of a "mandala" or a "mandella" being a "geometric design representing a cosmic plan", a dream-catcher sort of falls into that category. There are other types of Native American "mandala" designs that also fall into this category.  (see http://www.whats-your-sign.com/Native-American-mandala.html)  However, I'm not sure how this information can be incorporated into (or even appropriate for) this article other than having a "See also" link provided at the end. CJLippert 16:30, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Article name
I'm uncomfortable with the article's current name. Partly because "Dreamcatcher (Native American)" just sounds rather silly, and partly because I don't think a disambiguation is really necessary. The Ojibwe/Native American traditional dreamcatchers are where the term originated; other uses of it (e.g., to refer to books or songs or the like) are obviously taking their name from the object. My suggestion would be to have this page be named just Dreamcatcher, and to have a link at the top to a disambiguation page, Dreamcatcher (disambiguation) (the page that's now at just Dreamcatcher). Thoughts, suggestions, or comments? --Miskwito 21:57, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I would support that change. -  Kathryn NicDhàna  ♫ ♦ ♫ 04:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That's a good idea, or maybe the article could automatically to this page, and then have a link at the top for other DreamCatcher disabamguation (sorry, I don't know how to spell it, if I remember, I'll fix it later) SOTL 16:28, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I would support the change, as well. It sounds so much more logical.  Miigwech Miskwito. CJLippert 21:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

POV statement repeatedly added and removed
We have a situation here where we have a POV statement being added by an anonymous user repeatedly and then a registered user removing the statement. It is:
 * "Further exacerbating this troubling development of cultural appropriation is when various groups or individuals poach aboriginal ideas of artistic expression, and then manufacture them by non-natives in countries such as China, for example, where copyright infringement is the norm."

and a citation of a legitimate site is given. However, the site does not quite express this, though broaches the topic. The anonymous user does make an excellent statement but needs to figure out a way to express this in a way to meet Wikipedia's WP:NPOV. CJLippert (talk) 23:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Sacred Hoops
These special items that ward away evil dreams. Not exactly evil but bad, nightmares. They were actually called Sacred Hoops because, they are the shape of a circle, only because they were the shape of, the sun, the earth, the moon,and life. The circle was sacred to Native Americans. A symbol of strengh and unity. To carry that spiritual theme forward, the dream catcher's basic shape is a circle or hoop the web is woven around.

Starting in the 1960's and 1970's, dream catchers became popular with other Native American tribes. They came to be seen by some as a symbol of unity and as a general symbol of identification with Native American or First Nations (Canadian) cultures. You are suppose to hang the dream catcher in a window, because that's where the dreams most likely come through from, and then the catcher let's good dreams go by and catches the bad dreams.

A good thing for children and babies, is to put one over the crib for babies. And for Children I would put on in every window of the room, and one over their beds. I personally would put one in every window of my house, because you can fall asleep any where in your house. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morgan99998 (talk • contribs) 00:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Origin of dreamcatcher

 * This is the first time I have attempted this. Please, if I am doing this incorrectly, let me know, and I will be happy to correct myself.

I'd like to dispute this statement: "...While dreamcatchers originated in the Sioux Nation..." I've looked through the references and in reference #2 it states..."...a great deal of people are under the impression that the Lakota/Dakota/Nakota (called Sioux by others)originated the dream catcher...", "...but the Ojibwa (called Chippewa by others) originated the dreamcatcher." In reference #3 it states: "...Dreamcatchers are an authentic American Indian tradition, from the Ojibway (Chippewa) tribe..." In the external links "The legend of the dreamcatcher" also cites the Ojibwa/Chippewa as the originators of the dreamcatcher while the other link "A story of the dreamcatcher" cites no tribal reference at all, merely stating that dreamcatchers are a 'native american' tradition.

I do find it odd and contradictory that this article references the work of Frances Densmore who cites the Ojibwa as originators of the dreamcatcher while simultaneously stating 'dreamcatchers originated in the Sioux Nation.'.

It is also states later in the 'Popularization' section of the wiki article - "In the course of becoming popular outside of the Ojibwa Nation...", which is confusing, to say the least.

If the statement in dispute cannot be changed from Sioux to Ojibwa, is it at least possible to amend it to state something like 'the origin of the dreamcatcher is claimed by more than one tribe.'? It would be more correct than simply citing the Sioux as the originators, although, I still have not seen any 'references' to a possible Sioux origin of the dreamcatcher. I did not want to edit the article directly since I felt that this was something that would be better resolved through collaborative effort.

Here are some references that I found on the internet (I hope I have done this correctly):

Shawna Shananaquet (talk) 03:59, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * http://voices.yahoo.com/dream-catchers-legends-6189.html : ← From yahoo.com - "As interesting as these legends are, dream catchers, a true Native American art, are attributed to the Ojibwa Tribe based on a long tradition of oral stories and legends passed on through the generations."
 * http://www.rcentral.org/elem/dreamcatcherinfo.htm : ← This link contains a little bit more info from Frances Densmore. - "For many years, only Ojibwe people made dream catchers as each tribe made only its original crafts. In the mid 70's, dream catcher earrings became popular and many people of other tribes began to make dream catchers."
 * http://cojoweb.com/handicapped-1-DC-origin.html : ← Just a reiteration of the Ojibwa origin - "The Native peoples of the Ojibwe/Annishnabe/Chippewa tribes were the first to make dream catchers to scare away bad dreams."
 * http://www.thewolfsdencreations.com/History%20of%20the%20Dream%20Catchers.htm : ← This link contains both Ojibwa and Lakota dreamcatcher origin stories.
 * http://www.dream-catchers.org/ ← Understanding the Dreamcatcher legend.
 * http://freespiritgallery.ca/dreamcatchers.htm ← The Free Spirit Gallery.
 * http://www.real-dream-catchers.com/dream-catchers/dream-catcher_index.htm : ← Contains quite a lot of factual information on the history and origins of the dreamcatcher.


 * I totally agree with you. It would be good if the original author could clear this up. From my understanding as well Objibwe originated the dream catcher then later other tribes began to use and make them.
 * Henry123ifa (talk) 22:20, 14 March 2012 (UTC)


 * It appears series of edits were made since last October, 2011. Will look into the edit history and try to figure out which editor or anonymous contributor made the changes. CJLippert (talk) 19:56, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I've identified when the change happened (the drastic change happened in January of this year). But as good edits were made since then, I had to undo POV edits and vandalism while retaining the good edits. Also, thanks for the additional sites. I've incorporated them into the "External Links". If you see other good sites, please go ahead and edit the article yourself to improve it. miigwech! CJLippert (talk) 20:28, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Does make any sense: that the dream catcher was originally an stick shaped on aproximately circle with one or two real spiders and their respective webs and hanged it on entrances of the tents (door & windows) to catch insects that may disturb the proper sleep of the tents habitants? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.150.123.115 (talk) 00:35, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

(Misplaced commentary; "fake" claim)
I am not an authority on this subject. I am half cherokee, but raised as a white american. I was told by several Hopi and Navaho people that the dream catcher was NOT traditional for any tribe and that it was made up as a joke on the white man. IE; Something to sell them at tourists spots that they can help to sell by declaring the buyers dreams will come true.Now, mandalas are everywhere in many cultures so it makes sense that they might have used circular imagery for various ceremonies etc..., but the dream catcher, I believe to be a fake. One of the people who told me this was a 90 year old hopi grandmother. I BELIEVE whatever she says! Anyone else hear of this?
 * No. Narnia.Gate7 (talk) 20:51, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Okay, first, Anon, I have moved this lower down the page since it was incorrectly placed on the very top when standard practice is generally to place the most recent comments on the bottom of a Talk page.


 * Second, I like how you say you're "not an authority on this", but then verge on declaring 'authoritatively' that it's "fake" - based on the word alone of someone not from the Lakota or Ojibwe people, who is not a scholar specializing in the Lakota or Ojibwe, and when you yourself were of partial Cherokee (also not Lakota or Ojibwe!) descent, and were "raised as a white American". Suffice to say your first assertion, that you are "not an authority" is a bit more accurate than the rest.


 * Narnia put it perhaps a little too succinctly but I will elaborate. That "grandmother" you mentioned likely says that, because any dreamcatchers made outside of the one or two cultures that originally made them, are generally just tourist kitsch - e.g. for the Hopi or Navajo, they might be - because most white Americans and other tourists lump all Native practices (e.g. dreamcatchers, teepees, wigwams, war bonnets, totems, etc) together as if they're practiced by every single "tribe" as if there is no difference between the cultures (and some people who sell to tourists might indeed take advantage of this fact, who knows). Additionally, because of the association with Native culture, some individuals of other Native groups have supposedly adopted it, even as others understandably reject it as an appropriation or whatnot. But! The important thing in terms of the article here, is that the so-called "dreamcatcher" does not have origins in the Hopi - or the Navajo, or the Cherokee; it's largely from the Ojibwe culture. It is originally a genuine folk practice from the Ojibwe and Lakota. Though it has definitely been appropriated by others since then, to assert that it is completely "a fake" is incorrect, even if most "dreamcatchers" purchased these days are indeed unlikely to be of Lakota or Ojibwe origin.


 * The lesson here is that before you think to edit, even on a discussion page, please do more research than "talking to a few people" of the wrong Nation(s) who would not necessarily know about the real origins of a given Native practice. For one, talking directly to people and then trying to share that as a "source" counts as Original Research, when Wikipedia is intended to be a compilation of others' research (from third-party, Reliable Sources), not an avenue to share your own "research". But additionally, when speaking to people who are neither a member of that Native group nor a scholar who has made considerable efforts to research them, obviously you're not always going to get the most accurate information! Now, I gather that you, Anon, did not know it was a Lakota and Ojibwe thing but for real - you jumped to a firm assumption, without extensive research, on what turned out to be the word of people who were ill-informed on the subject (the subject being "origin of dreamcatchers"). And it's important to note that if it had been up to you, based on this information, the article would have apparently called dreamcatchers "fake", made-up tourist pranks, resulting in editorially erasing a piece of Ojibwe and Lakota culture from the encyclopedia! THIS is why we rely on Reliable Third Party Sources, and not just "I heard from a couple people that...". Please take this lesson to heart in the future. 108.188.199.60 (talk) 17:44, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Some nice work here
Over the years, there have been many making this Article notable! I'm new to the discussion and appreciate the good work. When improving an article, it is always important to not discard that which is good. -- Narnia.Gate7 (talk) 20:56, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Categories
, Dreamcatchers do qualify as sculptures, since they are hand-made three-dimensional abstract forms. I was trying to move specific (lower-level) articles from Category:Native American art into appropriate subscategories, since "Native American art" is so vague, it should only include like broader articles like Alaska Native art or Northwest Coast art or articles that can really not go anywhere else. The religious category is debatable, since, while dreamcatchers as based on Dakota and Anishinaabe spiritual shields, those have their own names and dreamcatchers aren't inherently spiritual. They are more like Zulu love notes—popular iterations of culture created for outsiders. Ahalenia (talk) 15:31, 6 October 2015 (UTC)Ahalenia


 * I don't know... I'm not heavily attached either way on the sculpture category, but they are part of some Indigenous spiritual cultures. Yes, they have also been commercialized by outsiders, and are now made, bought and sold by outsiders, but that doesn't erase the original meaning and usage. - Co rb ie V  ☊☼ 17:58, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Possible edits to be made
So I have done some research and have been collecting it for about a month now and do plan on adding new information. But a two things before that:

1) In the origins section the last sentence "However, many other Native Americans have come to see dreamcatchers as over-commercialized, offensively misappropriated and misused by non-Natives.[3]" I personally feel that it seems like it would better in the popularization section rather than the origin section. Mainly because logically it doesn't make sense to have something related to modern day and current beliefs in a section about the origin and where it was started.

2) The section titled "Dreamcatcher Parts" It sounds odd, maybe it could be renamed to "Different Parts and Their Meanings"

I understand that maybe no one will agree, especially with number 2, but I feel that number 1 is a valid topic

Twirlsie17 (talk) 17:11, 4 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Repeating my edit summary here in more detail. What you posted was clearly cut and pasted, then only very slightly tweaked, from the St. Joseph's Indian School site. If you don't know why they should not be used as a source, please do more research. Even if you had used a reliable source, at WP we take copyright violations very seriously. See the notice on your talk page. The other things you added were either unsourced or repeated content already in article. - Co rb ie V    ☊ ☼ 17:08, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I actually hadn't copied and pasted I typed everything and thought I had changed the way things were phrased and said enough, but I will definitely look into my sources more and do more research. I thought I had added my sources in, maybe I forgot to put it in a few places, sorry about that, and I will reread the article to triple check I don't repeat anything in the future. Thanks. Twirlsie17 (talk) 17:36, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Your edit:. Text comparison. - Co rb ie V    ☊ ☼ 18:13, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your help, I am still very new at editing articles. Also what is some good criteria for making sure the source is credible? Twirlsie17 (talk) 19:03, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, were you saying that what is copied and pasted was the stuff in the quotation marks? Because it was my understanding that that is a quote so I though you don't paraphrase quotes. I don't know if that makes sense. But I thought that if it is in quotation marks than it was okay. Also what was I missing/do wrong with the dreamcatcher parts section, did I not cite my source often enough? Twirlsie17 (talk) 19:06, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * When I looked at that 2nd one to see what matched, it looks like most of it came from the quote said by the spirit, so is using the same quote from the legend copyrighting, or is it not actually a quote for some reason? Twirlsie17 (talk) 19:20, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Please study WP:CITE and WP:RS. Direct quotes are permitted in articles if they are not overly-relied upon, but they must be properly credited to a reliable source. Uncredited, usually apocryphal, "Indian legends" found in various places on the web are not usable, nor are culturally problematic sites like St. Joe's. Beyond that, to evaluate sources for a particular topic you need to be familiar enough with the topic to know when a writer has no idea what they're talking about, or relied on bad sources themselves. This takes time; there are no shortcuts for that. Please talk to your course instructor and ask them to review issues around plagiarism and copyright with your class; a number of students in the wiki edu program have been making this mistake. - Co rb ie V    ☊ ☼ 21:01, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Cultural appropriation
Here in Germany, these crafted objects are also known, even though virtually no Native Americans live here. --Laber□T 14:50, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Yup. Even in America, many of the "dreamcatchers" sold are made overseas, in places like China. In those senses it is usually made and sold as a decorative object and/or a good luck charm (though some Native groups other than the original(s) that do also seem to hand-make and sell them as tourist stuff, which is at least a step up from "made by some mass-manufacturing group in China"). However, these sales do not support the cultures from which the dreamcatcher originated. Anybody who would like one but is wanting to support the original cultures, rather than people copying their folk art, should take care to check that the one they are interested in is made by a Native American group, particularly the Lakota (also called Dakota or Sioux) tribe/Nation, or most especially the Ojibwe/Ojibwa tribe (also called Chippewa and variants on that, by others). Those are the groups that seemed to practice it first, with most people I've seen who seem in the know attributing its origins directly to the Ojibwe in particular. I do recall there was at least one website I had found at some point that claimed to be selling Native art made by Natives, and I'm sure there are groups of artisans from those cultures that have Facebook pages these days, etc. It's usually just a matter of making sure you know you're buying it more or less directly from the artisan who made it. 108.188.199.60 (talk) 18:02, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

The source for "Many Native Americans have come to see these "dreamcatchers" as over-commercialized, offensively misappropriated and misused by non-Natives." doesn't look correct. This page doesn't talk about offensiveness, misappropriation, or misuse. It only talks about how most dreamcatchers online are made by non-Natives. Karanime (talk) 21:54, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Dreamcatchers, I think locally made, are fairly common in tourist areas of the Philippines. I have seen them in Alona Beach for example. Pashley (talk) 20:15, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Copyvios
A student editor tried to add content from a page that is clearly copyvio. Ironically, the copyvio goes both ways. A good bit of the unsourced text on the commercial site that was added is lifted from this WP article. Then the user copied more from that page and put it here, resulting in a blatant copyvio. Keep an eye out for this stuff, folks. - Co rb ie V    ☊ ☼ 17:23, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


 * It is difficult to find a reliable and credible source on this culture because it is a prominently oral culture. With the help of a research librarian on my campus we found that the government site was the most credible source on this Lakota legend. There are several sources with the same information but the government site is the most credible source we found. I am going to try one more time to add my information and I would like it known that I am not plagiarizing, I am paraphrasing the legend, you can see this if you go to the site. Twirlsie17 (talk) 19:32, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi Twirlsie17. Which culture is a predominantly oral culture? There are many credible sources available on and off the internet regarding indigenous peoples. Indigenous girl (talk) 20:26, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


 * What you claim is "from the government site" was simply an archived pdf of someone's informal newsletter. I have no idea why it's being stored on that server but it's not a document produced by a tribal gov't. It looked to me like someone's auntie copying and pasting unsourced apocrypha from the Intarwebs. - Co rb ie V    ☊ ☼ 23:21, 21 April 2016 (UTC) P.S. - I looked at the publication data. Now that I look closer, isn't even a newsletter. It's a flyer (!). One page, printed front and back, that was handed out to USDA workers for American Indian Heritage Month, that notes that they want some Natives to come work for them at some point maybe and really they won't discriminate. But with that kind of stereotypical and inaccurate b.s., I doubt they got any takers. -  Co rb ie V    ☊ ☼ 17:02, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Origin of the name Revert by CorbieVreccan
I fail to find any reference to "dream catchers" in the sense used here prior to 1985. The 2004 book by Jenkins uses "dream catchers" of those chasing after spirituality, it does not reference the artefacts. Apparently, the artefacts were first mentioned in 1929 as apotropaic charms used by the Ojibwe. There is no reference at all, at present, to any process of popularization in the "1960s to 1970s". I assume something like this must have happened, but it is completely up in the air before we can cite a reference. We can establish, I suppose, that "dream catchers" were among the items associated with generic "Native American spirituality" by 1985. Interestingly, the term "dream catchers" in reference to people appears to be coined in 1978, in a poem "based on the lore of northwest coast and plateau Indians". By no stretch are the Ojibwe "northwest coast and plateau Indians", but it would seem that the name was somehow transferred to their spider charm at some point between 1978 and 1985. --dab (𒁳) 17:32, 25 December 2017 (UTC)


 * It was in oral usage before that. I had to revert a lot of this. There are over 500 extant Native cultures, not one. You wiped out too much detail here that is essential for distinguishing cultures from one another. You added too many inaccuracies to pick through it all piecemeal. You also repeatedly past-tensed Natives, and prioritized outdated sources by white observers over actual cultural authorities. - Co rb ie V    ☊ ☼ 23:57, 26 December 2017 (UTC)


 * No it was not. Please stop adding unreferenced content. WP:NOTABLOG.
 * The "spider web charm" was in "oral" usage for an unknown time, first(?) recorded in 1929. The English term "dream catcher" was not, it was coined around 1980. If you think it was in use before the 1970s (maybe in the 1960s?), let us see a reference.
 * Your own (questionable) source says that the "dreamcatchers" originate as the Ojibwe spider web charm, and that they became popular beyond that, "in disparate places like the Cherokee, Lakota, and Navajo", in the 1960s to 1970s. I very much agree that Native American cultures should not be treated as one giant hodge-podge, but as a large umbrella of numerous individual cultures. Before the 1960s, there were no "dreamcatchers", there was only the Ojibwe spider web charm.
 * The "dreamcatcher" thing is an artefact of Pan-Indianism and its pop culture appeal of the 1970s and 1980s. This can also be reported, but it should not be conflated with the ethnographic topic of actual folklore. We are actually missing a decent reference on the Pan-Indianism topic, all we seem to have are crappy undated websites. I am sure there is published literature on this, and you are welcome to give your help in finding and summarizing it.
 * --dab (𒁳) 09:04, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and don't give me "past tensed" and "white observer" if our earliest and best source on the Objibwe artefact is an ethnographic bulletin of 1929 saying Ojibwe women used to place these charms over infants' cradles, we are bloody well going to use this source to report that, in 1929, Ojibwe women used to place such charms over cradles, because it is information relevant to the topic regardless of the race of the person who wrote the article, and because 1929 is in the past. If you have information that Objibwe women still place similar charms over cradles, then we can report that too, in the present tense, and also without regard of the race, creed or sexual orientation of the ethnographer giving us the information. Seriously, the fact that this has to be pointed out to you should give you major pause. --dab (𒁳) 09:21, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually they're used on cradleboards historically and contemporarily. I know plentry of Ojibwe, Chippewa, Anishinabe and Oji-Cree that use them for their kids. Why are you acting like it's a thing of the past? That's ridiculous. I have two sick kids but I'll grab a bunch of sources when I can. I don't understand why you're trying to make a mockery of indigenous articles. Indigenous girl (talk) 22:29, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Again, the name
I am interested in evidence of the development of the name "dream catcher". The earliest source I have now found where the name is applied to the Ojibwe (Chippewa) artefact dates to 1977.

It is my suspicion that the name "dream catcher" was before used of participants in the Lakota "vision quest", i.e. it used to describe people who set out to "catch dreams". The connection to the protective charm supposed to "catch bad dreams" would be entirely secondary.

This use of the name is certainly found in David Wagoner's 1978 "Songs for the Dream-Catchers" (a title used for poetry about vision quests "based on the lore, legends, and myths of northwest coast and plateau Indians"). It also appears to be used, disparagingly, by Philip Jenkins (2004), of "mainstream America" trying to catch the "dream" of "Native Spirituality" Neither of these usages has any direct connection with the "spider web" artefact.

I am looking for better sources for this apparent transfer of the name from the "vision quest" to the "protective charm" context. Since this all happened in the 1970s, online sources are very sparse (too old to be digital, too recent to be found as out-of-copyright scans of old books). --dab (𒁳) 10:17, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * here is another source using "dream catcher" in the Ojibwe context in 1977; unfortunately, just "snippet view". From what I can gather, it gives a native name for "dream catcher", a sup e ka' she wa sup. It might be extremely useful to get a hold of a readable version of this issue of The Minnesota Archaeologist, at least in order to find more detail on the position of "dream catchers" in Ojibwe tradition. --dab (𒁳) 10:25, 27 December 2017 (UTC)


 * here is an interesting use of the term "dream catcher" outside of "Native American" context, from 1967: "a simple bedside mechanism that we understand may actually be put on the market in the near future, which is designed to activate an alarm clock after it has registered a certain number of eye movements"
 * here is a tantalising (1964!) suggestion that the term "dream catcher" has roots in 1960s hippie culture, even if it only happened to be recorded in print around a decade later: "Nancy Winterbourne, another teacher whose classroom is based on holistic philosophies in all areas of her curriculum, has gone a step further in providing a space within her classroom for children to take the time for sustained, uninterrupted thought. In one corner of her room, a dream catcher hangs. This Native American symbol is a small woven circle whose net catches the good dreams and subconscious thoughts" -- note how already in this early (if dated accurately by google books) reference the protective charm (protecting from harmful influence) has been "sanitized" to be catching "the good dreams".


 * The claim that the spider web charm is natively known as "asabikeshiinh" was inserted to this page in 2007(!). It is false, in reality this is the term for the "spider trickster" figure, but the Wikipedia entry has generated printed references via citogenesis since its introduction.
 * The nativetech.org page (2000?) has the terms asubakacin "net-like" (White Earth Band) and bwaajige ngwaagan "dream snare" (Curve Lake Band). This sounds worth pursuing; if "bwaajige ngwaagan" can be found in sources prior to the 1970s, it would be a likely candidate for the origin of the "dream catcher" name. The nativetech.org terms were introduced later in 2007, and have also polluted later printed sources via citogenesis.
 * --dab (𒁳) 10:47, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Language links in lead
In my edit that you have reverted, I removed multiple instances of the Ojibwe-language term for the language itself, as this is the English-language Wikipedia. I removed all but two links to Ojibwe language, the first one was in the first sentence occurring due to the template Lang-oj, if you have overlooked that. Please explain why we need more than two or even more than one links to the language, and to use the name for the language which is rarely understood by English speakers? Idell (talk) 05:32, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll look it over again, but the duplicated links I saw were when different forms of the word were used. On articles that use Indigenous languages, we don't generally cut terms because they're not familiar to English-only speakers; we use it as a chance to educate. - CorbieVreccan  ☊ ☼ 17:29, 24 May 2021 (UTC)


 * We don't call Mandarin Chinese "Guanhua" or Dutch language "Nederlands", just as we do not call Ojibwe "Anishinaabemowin". We should also avoid switching back and forth between the two terms. There are only 8–10 occurrences of that difficult word on Ojibwe language (an article whose very subject is the indigenous language under discussion) compared to the 238 total instances of "Ojibwe". See also Guarani language whose native name is mentioned only up to 5 times in its English-language Wikipedia article. My understanding is that duplicate links are not allowed within one paragraph (WP:DUPLINK). Idell (talk) 19:51, 24 May 2021 (UTC)