Talk:Larry Echo Hawk

Surname
Check spelling of his last name - DOI / BOA webpage lists as two words, with a space. See http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/AS-IA/index.htm

108.18.179.30 (talk) 17:38, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Surname spelling? Why not "Echo Hawk"?
Every other source I've seen so far spells the subject's surname "Echo Hawk." So what's with the CamelCase "EchoHawk" in this article? Some paragraphs also spell the name "Echohawk" for some reason. If no one objects with good grounds, I'm going to move the article to Larry Echo Hawk and correct the spelling throughout.—ℜob C. alias ᴀʟᴀʀoʙ 04:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * "I object" (what is this, a trial?). His law firm uses "EchoHawk". The federal government might simply separate the name for simpler writing. When you check the Google Archives there are reliable sources from 1994 until today that use "EchoHawk" and some others that don't. I see no need for a move in that case. Hekerui (talk) 09:17, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

It's not a trial, it's a request for comment. Thank you for weighing in. I looked up his law firm site and verified that his name is spelled "EchoHawk" there. But the BIA has "Echo Hawk." Pages at Brigham Young University, including this speech, have "EchoHawk," but the first line of the speech explains the derivation of "Echo Hawk" (sic). Most journalists seem to go with "Echo Hawk," but I haven’t done a systematic survey. The simplest way to settle this is to ask the man himself. I sent an email to BIA Public Affairs this morning asking which spelling he prefers.—ℜob C. alias ᴀʟᴀʀoʙ 14:18, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I moved the file - although it is spelled both ways in reliable sources, the latest sources are pretty consistent with two words and the BIA has always had two words. I think they'd be the most reliable on the proper spelling of names of Native Americans. -- Trödel 17:55, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Should we mention the exact date he was called in the general article text?
For what it is worth, currently even the article on Thomas S. Monson does not specificy what date he was called as a general authority. I actually would say we probably should include that in Monson's biography.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:28, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I think we should leave it as is for now and have the exact date of his call in the article text, but not in the introductory paragraph. It needs to be in the text because his date of resignation as head of the BIA is in the text.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:30, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I Have changed the article on Monson so it now has a whole paragraph on when he was called to the apostleship, but due to his different level of assignemtn in the Churchof Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I think that is warrented. I wish we could say a little more about Echo Hawk's service as a Seventy than we do now.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:42, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * For many/most of the LDS Church general authorities, the info box usually includes dates of appointments and releases from various, as did the box with Monson's article. Similar information could be added to this article.  It also seems generally that specific dates are used particularly in the year that individuals become general authorities, then often more generalized later by editors to just reflect the year.  There isn't really much to be said of Echo Hawk's time as a general authority yet because he is still relatively new.  He would have just been receiving training and going about regular assignments.  More will come in time as he receives assignments or noteworthy events take place. ChristensenMJ (talk) 02:45, 30 March 2013 (UTC)