Talk:Oneota

Redundancy
In the process of working on this article for a Wikiedu assignment, my classmates and I found that there is already a fairly good article (c class) on the Upper Mississippian Culture. As far as we can tell Upper Mississippian and Oneota are two terms for the same groups of people. The Upper Mississippian article is much more developed than this one, making this article pretty redundant. Maybe this article should be removed, combined with the Upper Mississippian one, or used only to explain how the term Oneota is used by archaeologists. We made sure to link to the Upper Mississippian article at the top of the page. Henryp011 (talk) 19:27, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Revisions
This stub has been out there for a while and I'm thinking it could be expanded a bit. I don't want to step on anyone's toes but I'm thinking of fleshing it out a bit and including more detail on material culture, subsistence, chronology and associations with historic Native American tribes. I've just added an article on the Carcajou Point site and I'm going to be adding more articles on Oneota sites in the near future. I'm thinking this article could loop back into my individual site articles, which provide even more detail.B1deroo (talk) 00:36, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That would be great! I would love to see this one expanded after all these years as a stub. Have you added your new site articles to the Mississippian and related cultures nav template? There is a section for Oneota sites.  He  iro  00:44, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll try to help. Ho-Chunks do not claim any relation to Oneota and acknowledge them as Mississippian colonists from Illinois who briefly settled on Ho-Chunk lands. Ahalenia (talk) 17:12, 24 May 2020 (UTC)Ahalenia

Wiki Education assignment: ARCN 111 Archaeology of the Americas
— Assignment last updated by Sak201 (talk) 12:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)