Talk:Nakota

Copy-editing and integrations
Following a long debate on the discussione page of the article Sioux language, since I had found another article (or an article’s title) Nakota which was nothing else but a wrong redirection to Sioux, I created the article itself translating the contents of the corresponding Italian one (it:Nakota), and inserted just a very brief reference to it and to the matter of the Yankton-Yanktonai misnomer in the aforesaid article Sioux language.

As the new article shows disagreeable traces of its Italian origins, apart from the want of a general grammar, style, and spelling copy-editing, and save for anybody’s chance to modify it as one likes, I think it would be necessary that some willing one would:

1. substitute at least an English language source for the Italian work I have cited in the note no. 3 as an example of support for the traditional wrong partition of the Sioux nation;

2. add at least an English language source to the note no. 4 (besides Ella Deloria), as an example of previous objections to the same traditional partition.

Thank-you very much.--Jeanambr (talk) 13:13, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I have modified the sources, basing myself on Parks, Douglas R. & Rankin, Robert L., “The Siouan languages”, in Raymond J. DeMallie (ed.), Handbook of North American Indians: Plains (Vol. 13, Part 1, p. 94–114), William C. Sturtevant (gen. ed.), Smithsonian Institution, Washington, 2001.--Jeanambr (talk) 11:57, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Copy editing
I've worked on sections up to "Present Trends", to make more concise and clear, and consistent with good English. Will continue to work on this.--Parkwells (talk) 20:23, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for copy editing. I have corrected again some minor details and especially a wrong reference to Ullrich’s writing: as far as I can remember, he does not say that this was not a subsequent terminological regression caused by the Yankton-Yanktonai people’s living together with the Santee ...(James H. Howard writes it was), but he just states the absence of references to the term “Nakota” in the oldest texts that document the Sioux dialects. You would greatly oblige me  if you could copy-edit again. Best.Jeanambr (talk) 18:17, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * One more remark: Ullrich does not say that “the major Lakota dialects and Nakoda have not been mutually intelligible for centuries”, he simply writes that, at present, the Assiniboine language “is not intelligible to Lakota and Dakota speakers, unless they have been exposed to it extensively. The Stoney form of the Nakoda language is completely unintelligible to Lakota and Dakota speakers” and, if I can add anything, to Assiniboine, too.Jeanambr (talk) 18:42, 12 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your additions - I did not write the original work on Ullrich and am not familiar with his writing.Parkwells (talk) 17:00, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Nakota. 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/20110927052234/http://www.sicc.sk.ca/heritage/sils/ourlanguages/hohenakota/history/name_game.html to http://www.sicc.sk.ca/heritage/sils/ourlanguages/hohenakota/history/name_game.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090813133018/http://www.tuswecatiospaye.org/summit to http://www.tuswecatiospaye.org/summit
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091211200532/http://www.tuswecatiospaye.org/2009-summit to http://www.tuswecatiospaye.org/2009-summit

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) 03:12, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nakota. 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/20171016013802/http://www.treaty7.org.ws011.alentus.com/BearspawChinikiWesleyNakodaNations.aspx to http://www.treaty7.org.ws011.alentus.com/BearspawChinikiWesleyNakodaNations.aspx

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) 15:55, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Nakota/Nakoda/Assiniboine
In Canada, Nakota refers to Dakota people (https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/assiniboine) and to the Assiniboine (https://teaching.usask.ca/indigenoussk/import/nakota_assiniboine.php). Should this article just refer readers to those two articles? Acadiana-23 (talk) 17:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I don't see where the links are saying it's referring to Dakota people. It says the Assiniboine branched off long ago, doesn't call them Dakota people. oncamera  (talk page) 18:13, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * If you to click on "Nakota" in (https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/assiniboine it takes you the Dakota article. But my point was: could this Nakota article should direct people to the Nakoda people and Assiniboine articles instead of repeating the information from those articles in a confusing manner? Or perhaps combine this Nakota article with the Nakoda people article? Acadiana-23 (talk) 21:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * At the top of the page, it says Main articles: Assiniboine people, Assiniboine language, Nakoda people, and Stoney language. The article is about the misnomer of the term applying to Dakota people, so I don't think it should be redirected. You could edit the lead to better clarify your concerns. oncamera  (talk page) 22:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)