Talk:Territorial evolution of California

Native American Territorial claims
This article is very European-centric. It completely ignores Native American territorial claims. To my knowledge Native Americans did not apply the concept of land ownership, but I believe they did, in many cases, make territorial claims. I'm thinking Native American Territorial Claims should be covered somewhere in this article, even if it is a general statement at the beginning of the article. It could also include a summary or reference to the reservation land agreements that were reached. I think it would make the article more comprehensive. Any other thoughts on the matter? OvertAnalyzer (talk) 02:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * This map might be a good summary or starting point. OvertAnalyzer (talk) 02:19, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * California Indian Reservations and Cessions might also provide some perspective on how to approach the matter.OvertAnalyzer (talk) 03:28, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Not receiving a response, I incorporated early Native American territorial claims.OvertAnalyzer (talk) 00:38, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Gran Cuenca
I cannot find anything that would indicate "Gran Cuenca (Great Basin), 1776–1821" and "Gran Cuenca (Great Basin), 1821–1848" have anything to do with the territorial timeline of California. Following the link to the Great Basin provides no information on the matter. Can anyone provide insight on this, or should it be deleted? OvertAnalyzer (talk) 00:38, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and removed the two entries because I could find no evidence on Wikipedia, or on a general web search, that Gran Cuenca was ever a separately administered territorial region. OvertAnalyzer (talk) 15:37, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Map Source?
I was trying to identify the sources used in File:California tribes & languages at contact.png, but the only source I could find for the boundaries on the map appears to be of linguistic boundaries, not tribal ones. I also can't find any source for the claim that the groups on the map are those at European contact, as opposed to an earlier time.

I looked on the website that created the original map, and could not find a source for either of those claims, and neither of those were on the original map that this one took its boundaries from. Does anyone have more information about why this map claims tribal boundaries instead of linguistic ones, or that these are the boundaries at the time of European contact, or what sources were used to make those claims? ReliableDragon (talk) 21:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)