Talk:Red River War

Untitled
The Red River War made the buffalo become nearly extinct!

WP:MilHist Assessment
This article has a good image, fair length, and some detail, but lacks an infobox. I also wonder if there isn't more to be said. It's just not that long of an article, and it would actually look even shorter if the image were removed. LordAmeth 11:28, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Obgectivity and information sorely needed
The article contains little military information about the actual conduct of the war, just as it glosses over numerous transgressions on the Indian side. On the other hand it is positively briming with mercilessly repetituos, demagogically ahistorical and stylistically inane propaganda against the settlers and the army. No doubt some American Indian editors of the `Eternal feud` school of `thought` - perhaps along with some non-Indian sympathisers - see it as an opportunity to vent. While some of their grievences may have historical foundation, as others surely do not, the affect of their propagandistic zeal on the article is rgrettable and destructive. As my knowledge on the period is limited to information gleaned from other internet sites I do not at this point feel able to rewrite it myself. However I urge those better versed to execute a rescue Soz101 (talk) 21:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality
This article is not only totally uncited, it is also biased and rather unencyclopedic. Examples:


 * "Euro-Americans homesteaders, hungry for land, began to pressure the Federal Government to take military action against the Indians." As though "Euro-Americans" were a monolithic block; this is also not a common term. "Hungry for land" is inflammatory language, and the claim about pressuring the government is totally unsourced.
 * "But the treaty was a failure." It's one thing to say that certain groups ignored the treaty (which is true, but needs citation), but it is original research to deem the treaty a failure.  At most, you can say "So-and-so historians have called the treaty a failure" if you provide sources.
 * "The hunters killed the animals by the thousands [...] and the U.S. government did nothing to stop them." Unsourced, and "did nothing to stop them" is condemning, POV language.
 * "Cattlemen [...] caused enormous environmental disruption." POV and unsourced.
 * "A good number of the cowboys treated all Indians as 'hostile.'" Unsourced.
 * "The Native Americans, with a hunting tradition that stretched back to time beyond memory..." Romantic, unencyclopedic language.
 * "The promises made by the U.S. government [...] proved largely empty. Food was inadequate and of poor quality." Unsourced.
 * "The restrictions on personal movement, trade, and worship were all but impossible for the Indians, who were used to roaming over the plains at will, to tolerate." Complete original research, totally POV, and over-romantic.

--NetherlandishYankee (talk) 14:02, 22 August 2009 (UTC)