Talk:Pretty Nose

File:Arapaho woman Pretty Nose, 1879, restored.jpg to appear as POTD soon
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Arapaho woman Pretty Nose, 1879, restored.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on March 10, 2018. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-03-10. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:58, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Two grandsons...
... one who fought at Little Big Horn in 1876 and one who fought in the Korean War. Is this really possible? 162.89.0.47 (talk) 18:37, 10 March 2018 (UTC) Eric

Cheyenne/French ?
The picture in the Al-Jazeera article has an old handwritten note attached saying "N. Cheyenne/French" under her name. I assume that to mean she is of mixed heritage, probably a French father (possibly French mother but seems unlikely for the time). Has anyone seen anything else, or another explanation what French means? -- Green  C  17:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The Jim Fergus novelization of her also says she had a French father. Obviously not a reliable source, but indicates other people have arrived at this same idea. -- Green  C  14:45, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

"war chief"
This should not be in the lede of the article, her grandchild is the only person who has used it besides casually, and there are no references to it ever having been used in her lifetime. The caption on the illustration is however correct, and a statement of that nature could be added to the article. So I have done so. It treats oral history the way all primary sources should be treated in Wikipedia: it repeats what the source says, and indicates the nature of the source in the text. The reader can form their own judgment about the reliability and the significance.  DGG ( talk ) 06:26, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Per the Al Jaz article: "Soldier Wolf’s 101-year-old grandmother, Pretty Nose, was a veteran herself and her red, black and white beaded cuffs meant she was an Arapaho war chief." Al Jaz states it unequiv in the voice of Al Jaz. That we don't have additional sources is a systemic problem of poor sourcing for this culture, it doesn't mean her grandchild was the only person to say so. COMMON sense informs us people who wear those colors carry a title. -- Green  C  14:55, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Seems to me like saying someone is a general because they're wearing a hat with stars on it. Not good enough to meet WP:V. Lev!vich 00:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * We can't ignore the source entirely but can state it was reported as such. -- Green  C  01:06, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The AJA article is, in my humble opinion, not really reliable. For example, it identifies Pretty Nose as Soldier Wolf's grandmother and great grandmother (math suggests the latter is more probable; PN was born in ~1841, Soldier Wolf in ~1931). It's apparent that the only source of information is SW, who is an 83-year-old man recalling a meeting with PN 62 years prior in 1952. That and two photographs are the sources of all the information we have about PN (unless I'm mistaken). I'm not getting involved in the DRV but I question whether this article meets V at all. Nevertheless, the most reliable source we have, in my opinion, is Soldier Wolf. I think if it's attributed to SW, it's ok as essentially an ABOUTSELF source: "a war chief according to her great grandson". Lev!vich 01:19, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The article says "At the time he [Soldier Wolf] reported her wearing cuffs that he said indicated she was a war chief." The lead then says "reportedly" because that is what Soldier Wolf reported. The Al Jaz reporter then confirms it, in the journalistic voice, which you don't consider reliable though I disagree. The source is reliable for reporting what soldier wolf said, I think we both agree. -- Green  C  01:31, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm ok with "reportedly" although it raises the question ; my !vote would be to identify the source (SW) in the lead - the article is short enough, we have room ;-) but either way is fine with me. The reason I don't think the reporter's confirmation is reliable is because how does the reporter know? What did the reporter do to confirm it? If the reporter had interviewed other people, and then said it in the journalistic voice, I'd consider it reliable. Either way though as you said we both get to the same place: reliable with attribution. Lev!vich 01:35, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The lead reflects what the body says in summary per WP:LEAD. I personally don't think we should go into who reported it in the lead at this point since it's such a short article, reportedly adds an appropriate qualifier. -- Green  C  01:39, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Regarding the reporter.. this goes to the limits of what is truth. Wikipedia defines a source as being good enough if the publisher is known for fact checking. Beyond that we have to trust they fact check. Unless there is evidence they didn't (ie. another more reliable source that contradicts it). The mix up with the grandmother I'm not too concerned about that could be a copyediting error or oversight while writing. It doesn't disqualify the entire thing IMO. There is a chance we could verify the colors as signifying war chief in another source, though it might be OR, it would be permissible on the talk page to confirm Al Jaz is accurate. -- Green  C  01:46, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If I can't trust the copyediting, I don't trust the fact checking, as a personal rule. Someone has to read the article in order to fact check it, after all. Did the fact checker confirm both grandmother and great grandmother, or did the fact checker not read the article in the last six years? :-) To me, a mistake like that shows that no one read the article ... not even after it was published, for years. You're right, I don't think it disqualifies the source entirely, but I think everything in the source should be considered aboutself from SW and attributed (which it currently is, I think, so no problem there). I don't believe there was any fact checking or corroboration, judging by the sloppy copyediting and signs of abandonment. I think the author interviewed one person, wrote up the story, published it on the website in 2014, and hasn't looked at it since. Lev!vich 02:07, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

sub-sections
I realize it is a clumper vs spliter debate but when a sub-section has a single sentence it is probably not a good idea until more material can be added. It becomes a distraction from reading the core content when the article is inflated with sub-section titles in shorter articles like this. A single biography section can easily hold what we know about her, and the photography section deserves it's own given the length. -- Green  C  18:01, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I concur. It reads better now. The only part that's a bit awkward is her appearing as a character in a book being in the Bio section. I guess the Photograph section could be renamed "in media," but that seems to give undue weight to the appearance in the novel. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 21:59, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Wampum (beads)
The "beaded cuffs", or bracelets made of beads, are known as wampum. They started with Eastern Indians, but were traded and also part of the plains Indian culture. This is verifiable in "Eastern Beads, Western Application. Wampum Among Plains Tribes" (p. 221) by Jordan Keagle. He says the colors classically signify:
 * the beads’ color, “specifically white, red, and black, [was] fundamental to the  symbolic  meaning  or  cultural  ‘value’  of  wampum.”  Anthropologist  George  R.  Hamell  goes  on  to  describe  these  colors  as  they  relate  to  the  conditions  or  states-of-being  of  those  giving the wampum. White beads represent “social states-of-being,  exemplifying  the  desired  state  of  the  individual  or  community,  physical,  social,  and  spiritual  well-being.”  Black  beads  denote  “ritual  asocial  states-of-being,  such  as  the  ‘darkness’ of mourning,” and red-painted beads reflect “antisocial  states-of-being,”  war  in  particular. Thus, the colors of beads used in a belt or string corresponded  with  the  particular  purpose  for  which  the  wampum  was  intended.  A  primarily  white belt with dark patterns or pictographs communicated  a  positive  social  message  while  a  primarily  dark  or  red  belt  represented  less  amiable  circumstances.

However there were some variations by tribe. This confirms bead colors are symbolic in Indian culture not only ornamental though they were that also. -- Green  C  02:44, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Source
This cite is not working:

There are a couple errors. The original URL is returning blank content. The archive URL is returning a technical error with the WaybackMachine. I reported it to them, but no guarantees it will be repaired. Still, the archive URL can be accessed by disabling JavaScript in your browser, or using a browser without JavaScript, such as Lynx. I copied the source text below for reference. -- Green  C  03:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

On June 25, 1876, a battalion of the 7th Cavalry, led by George Armstrong Custer, was wiped out by an overwhelming force of Lakota, Dakota, Northern Cheyenne, and Arapaho. There are many stories that come from this most famous battle of the Indian Wars. However, the most overlooked account is of the women warriors who fought alongside their male counterparts. Minnie Hollow Wood, Moving Robe Woman, Pretty Nose (pictured), One-Who-Walks-With-The-Stars, and Buffalo Calf Road Woman were among the more notable female fighters. Pretty Nose fought with the Cheyenne/Arapaho detachment. One-Who-Walks-With-The-Stars (Lakota) killed two soldiers trying to flee the fight. Minnie Hollow Wood earned a Lakota war-bonnet for her participation, a rare honor. Lakota Moving Robe Woman fought to avenge the death of her brother. And Cheyenne Buffalo Calf Road Woman holds the distinction of being the warrior who knocked Custer off his horse, hastening the demise of the over-confident Lt. Colonel. Green C  03:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)