Talk:Tori Amos/Archive 3

Who is her husband?

 * I'm a fan, but not a rabid one, and other than mentioning that she is married, this article does not have anything about Tori Amos' husband. Don't people who are married normally have their spouses listed in the infobox at least? JuJube (talk) 22:19, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Valid point. Let's add that? Skeptical Dude (talk) 01:36, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

The academic criticism is pretentious and stupid
I noticed after removing the Academic Criticism section that there's been an enormous, pointlessly frustrating discussion about it already. Well, I'm sure the section will be back faster than I can blink, but I'd just like to say that arguing over Wikipedia criteria will not get you anywhere with regards to this section. The real criteria for why it shouldn't be published is that it's stupid and it's bad writing and it's pretentious and it sucks. If someone made a section on every entertainer with writings only from Entertainment Weekly and TV Guide, you would see the point. Nobody comes here to read this kind of god-awful drek. Keep criticism to a minimum in these articles... why? Because 99% OF ALL CRITICS ARE TERRIBLE WRITERS AND NOBODY LIKES THEIR BULLSHIT FOR MUCH OF ANYTHING EXCEPT "BUY THIS/DON'T BUY THIS". Ugh! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.60.6 (talk) 01:54, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I am disinclined to take seriously the argument that we should ignore Wikipedia's policies like NPOV and instead remove content because you don't like it. Phil Sandifer (talk) 13:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

(I am new to wikipedia and do not know if the followinging thoughts are fully in line with the community policies, please enlighten me!) I am not disagreeing with your opinion but I think that it is counterproductive to delete stuff only because presumably nobody would read it; if somebody takes the time and effort to write something (and it meets the criterias of good wiki-writing) maybe someone will also be interested to read it. BUT the articles of wikipedia better not be too long, so this should not be on the main Tori article and the heading should not be "Academic Criticism" because it is misleading (and maybe the main reason for a lot of the intense debate on this page) - I instead simply propose "Writings about Tori Amos" as an own article. WikiPBia (talk) 12:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I think there's a significant difference in purpose between academic writing and other critical writing. Phil Sandifer (talk) 13:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn´t disagree with you on that! WikiPBia (talk) 10:26, 21 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Criticism of works that warrant it are usually nice to include in an article, as they can help provide context for the article in a larger realm.  Also, don't forget 67.169.60.6 that criticism can be both positive and negative, so ideally it can always be neutral.  It's nice here especially since the section is Academically inclined, and not aimed at the artist. ~ Amory ( user  •  talk  •  contribs ) 13:50, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Relationship with Universal Republic Records
It seems that there is some disagreement on Amos's exact relationship with Universal Republic Records. I'm not going to engage in an edit war between naming the current period of her career "Universal Republic years" vs. "Artistic indenpendence", but I'd like to point out this source, which sums up the relationship between Amos and URR: http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE53H08020090418?sp=true This is not an all-encompassing deal, or '360 deal' as the article refers to it, as it seems that Amos is licensing her music to URR for distribution. Just because she's not selling her album through an indie website doesn't mean that she's not independent. --Pisceandreams (talk) 13:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Then I'd like to direct you to Universal, not The Bridge, handing the promotion, not to mention Tori's working on her Solstice album at Doug Morris' request. In the two references I have provided, as well as the link you provide, no where does Tori state she is licensing her music to Universal for distribution. Here she states that it's a joint venture where she explicitly has to financially contribute to her projects in exchange for full creative control; there's nothing about merely licensing her music for distribution. Here her statement further cements the suggestion that her contract is a modified version of an old-fashioned contract except with the exchange of financial contribution on her end in exchange for more control in the deal. Yes, Tori doesn't have a 360 deal, but she's NEVER had a 360 deal. No where does it state "distribution deal" or "licensed for distribution"; she states "joint venture". All signs point to Tori still being a musician under Universal Republic Records but with more control, and not a musician licensing her music to Universal Republic Records for distribution. Butterfly0fdoom (talk) 16:12, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for sharing those links. I guess I am a bit confused here, as this article states she's indie with URR as her distributor and this article says she's licensing to URR. {Scratching head at this point} Either way, it's safe to keep the subsection titled "UR years" for now. =) --Pisceandreams (talk) 02:56, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Petty, but so true.
Not to sound... fanatical or anything, but can someone PLEASE set her up with a better picture? This one makes her look like she's going through chemo. I didn't even recognize her at first. Sorry for the pettiness, but I'm sure it wouldn't take but 10 seconds. I just don't know how to do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.199.245.127 (talk) 06:03, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed 100% Kjetilho (talk) 11:01, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, sounds a bit harsh. It's my picture and I thought she looked adorable that day in her hat and leather jacket.  Hole fan (talk) 20:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think it was a bad picture, and in my opinion she looked fine; but I have to admit I didn't recognize her at all. Perhaps angle or something. -- MardukZero

I wasn't talking about the hat/leather jacket one. Even if I was, though, I apologize if my tone was rude in any way. The current picture is very Tori. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.36.44.52 (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks!! I really did think you were talking about the hat/jacket.  I was confused hence my comment above.  Cheers!   Hole fan (talk) 15:07, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Citizenship sources, does Wikipedia Assume if no sources can be found?
Should Wikipedia default to stating that a person is a citizen of the country that person was born in or what if a person lives outside their birth country for most of the year? What should be done if no specific sources regarding citizenship can be found? Assume birth country? Is it possible Tori Amos is an ex-patriot? Does someone have any sources for the allegation that Tori Amos has addressed the citizenship situation in a recent interview? 208.59.112.152 (talk) 15:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I think this might be what you're after: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI_s3Ens8Xc 78.147.83.132 (talk) 21:35, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm skeptical. 208.59.112.152 (talk) 05:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

You Tube isn't an acceptable source
Perhaps we should simply call a U.K. government office and ask if Tori Amos is a dual citizen since youtube isn't an acceptable source? 208.59.112.152 (talk) 14:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Article (and sub-articles) cleanup needed
A certain editor has failed to comply with the notice at the top of this talkpage and a lot of the Tori-related articles are overloaded with fluff words and sounds frighteningly like a fan page (at least from my perspective). The UR subsection is as long as the Epic subsection, and there's considerably less that's gone on during the UR period of time than the Epic period of time, for instance (are those long quotes really necessary?). I don't know if it's just me that feels this way (on here, at least, some people on Yessaid have noticed how a lot of the articles have been edited in a very un-NPOV way), but I just wanted to throw this out into the open. I'll try to do some cleanup, but I really should be studying for exams instead. Butterfly0fdoom (talk) 02:39, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Survivor/Victim
Someone changed the phrasing of the article to say that Tori Amos was a victim of sexual assault, not a survivor. I'm going to change it back, for the following reasons: Thanks, Annalise (talk) 00:26, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The source cited describes Amos as a survivor.
 * Amos and the group RAINN, which she co-founded and which is recognized as a reliable source for sexual assault information, both use the term "survivor" over "victim."
 * The edit summary described the term "survivor" as an "exaggeration." While I would personally argue that it is almost never an exaggeration, it certainly isn't in Amos's case. She has stated that the man who assaulted her also intended to kill her, which means that she is a survivor even in the strictest sense.
 * I agree with you, Annalise, and thank you for changing it back to "survivor". --Pisceandreams (talk) 01:16, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Solo career
Why does this section not mention the name of the first album. It talks about the content and the reaction of the record label, but seems to skirt around the actual name. Is there any reaosn for this omission? 138.77.2.133 (talk) 11:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Reference
The article needs a reference saying that she owns a costumized Bösendorfer piano. That she plays normal Bösendorfer pianos in concerts is not notable instruments, according to some other users meanings. Fanoftheworld (talk) 16:03, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It is funny to see some users saying that Bösendorfer can be mentioned in Tori Amos, but on the other hand Steinway can not be mentioned in e.g. Hélène Grimaud. Fanoftheworld (talk) 16:11, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


 * User:TheRealFennShysa thinks that this sentence is reason for keeping Bösendorfer mentioned as a notable instrument: "Having secured an endorsement from Bösendorfer, the company would be providing Tori with their pianos for use on tour and in the studio". This means that more than 1,500 pianist articles can have Steinway added as a notable instrument, because Steinway provides all the more than 1,500 Steinway Artists and ensemles with their pianos for use on tour, in the studio and more. Fanoftheworld (talk) 16:23, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't. What it means is that in THIS instance we have a legitimate independent third-party source that claims that Amos has a custom-made piano from a specific company. All you offer is primary sourcing directly from a Steinway promotional site, which is not acceptable for verifiability. 16:26, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * "All you offer is primary sourcing directly from a Steinway promotional site, which is not acceptable for verifiability." – It is completely other reasons written in the history of the articles with Steinway mentioned. Fanoftheworld (talk) 16:35, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * "It is completely other reasons written in the history of the articles with Steinway mentioned." - What? Coherent English, please... TheRealFennShysa (talk) 16:43, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Fanoftheworld (talk) 16:53, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Musical Style?
Most of the artist featured here on wikipedia has a musical style section which lacks in Tori Amos Page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hualda (talk • contribs) 15:54, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Merge "Early Life" and "Personal Life"
The personal life section at the bottom is stupid. That should be merged with or added in front of the early life section at the top. I might get to it later but if I don't, it'd be nice if someone did. Sixthcrusifix (talk) 19:55, 20 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Why don't you just drop off your laundry while you're at it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.176.170 (talk) 08:35, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Dead external links to Allmusic website – January 2011
Since Allmusic have changed the syntax of their URLs, 1 link(s) used in the article do not work anymore and can't be migrated automatically. Please use the search option on http://www.allmusic.com to find the new location of the linked Allmusic article(s) and fix the link(s) accordingly, prefereably by using the Allmusic template. If a new location cannot be found, the link(s) should be removed. This applies to the following external links: --CactusBot (talk) 11:01, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=Bnqq8b5t4tsqj

Tori's Media Break
--Why is MTV not referenced as the media that 'broke' Tori Amos? In the early 1990's MTV had Tori Amos in heavy rotation from 2 AM to 5 AM; prime time for gen x and insomniacs. This was before--just before--the internet. In the Miami radio market she got zero airplay period, until, at least the third album. One station also played her version of 'Smells Like Teen Spirit' from the Crucify EP.Bdgriz56 (talk) 12:51, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

--I'm surprised that the main article doesn't mention her cover of Nirvana's 'Smells Like Teen Spirit'. At least in Seattle, this was the break-through song for Tori Amos. This cover received heavy airplay on the new alternative/commercial radio station KNDD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.121.231.237 (talk) 04:58, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Tori Amos a synesthete
Tori is a synesthete. Where can this be Integrated in the Article? Cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famous_synesthetes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.94.248.50 (talk) 20:54, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Under her personal biography section.

Mezzo Soprano
Here is the problem with Wikipedia. If something can be referenced it must be right, this is ridiculous. Amos may have been referred to as a mezzo soprano, that does not mean she is one. A mezzo soprano has a cavernous tone, Amos' tone is light and cannot fit this vocal fach — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.7.197.195 (talk) 13:46, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Error on tour dates
Hi, just a correction for the Dew Drop Inn tour - your dates are a little out, which I know because I still have the ticket for her performance at the Royal Albert Hall which if memory serves was 26th January 1996 (certainly January and not February as shown in the tours section of this page.

Thanks for the page though.

Kind regards, Timo Thomas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.19.96 (talk) 20:44, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Tori Amos. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070913023518/http://everythingtori.com:80/go/book/ to http://everythingtori.com/go/book/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121019034727/http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/search/google/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=951854 to http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/search/google/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=951854

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 19:40, 27 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Verified as working, turned sourcecheck to true Mburrell (talk) 05:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Photo
Does she really still have that horrible "carroty" hair?? If not, I'd appreciate it a lot if someone had an alt photo to put in. This is just ... er ... unpleasant. -andy 77.190.58.4 (talk) 12:45, 30 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The infobox image is there to identify her and is not necessarily there to show what she specifically looks like today. Because she is alive we can only use a freely licenced image, so unless you can find a better portrait, it should stay for now. A performance image would make a poor substitute. Of the 300 or so freely licenced Flickr images I can only find lower quality performance images, usually where her face is obscured by a microphone where she is too small to extract a reasonable sized headshot, or from around the same time as this one with the same or very similar color hair. Good luck. ww2censor (talk) 15:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Amos' appearance has changed since that picture was taken. Still, its the best quality, most recent image we have. 12.217.185.194 (talk) 16:47, 11 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes please we need a new photo, this is horrible! If I find one, how can I submit it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.169.132.154 (talk) 21:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * It must be a verified freely licenced image. You cannot upload unless you are a verified registered user. ww2censor (talk) 22:45, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

This picture is atrocious. I am sure there are tons of fans who have taken pictures of her in which she looks a lot better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.77.139.152 (talk) 22:44, 11 October 2013 (UTC)


 * this is the same irrelevant discussion regarding the Kate Bush article..why these two? I wonder...it`s what she looks like..this is not a fanzine leave it alone..if it bothers you so much change it but stick to policy...the powers that be will have a problem with it otherwise..they love to argue rhetorical pseudo legality when it suits them or they have something to prove although what rock star is sleeping with what movie star doesn`t seem to be a priority with them..opposing academic careers politics or money maybe..i think she looks just fine the way she is.97.82.198.30 (talk) 01:38, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

2014 new album
The new album will be released on Mercury Classics internationally and on Mercury Classics/Universal Music Classics in the US. - I doubt this is true. I watched a recent interview clip on Youtube where she mentioned another label. Also, it would be strange if she released a pop album on a classics label.(84.250.45.95 (talk) 07:08, 11 March 2014 (UTC))

Tori Amos did in fact release Unrepentant Geraldines on Universal's Mercury Classics. "Launched in April 2012 by Universal Music, Mercury Classics aims to identify and work with strong creative individuals who bring a distinctive and fresh perspective to classical music, whether they are young artists approaching the genre in a new way, or established musicians, outside the field, curious about exploring the genre." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chorvacommander (talk • contribs) 04:31, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

MusicBrainz missing and incorrect information
I recently used https://musicbrainz.org/artist/c0b2500e-0cef-4130-869d-732b23ed9df5 to tag many recordings. The most incorrect tags were related to Tori Amos recordings, which are apparently based on this and related Tori Amos Wikepedia articles, many of which take information from hereinmyhead.com, only to find tremendous errors in some basic information intensely wrong: composers/publishers/release dates/especially given many releases of the "same" song/different recording/version etc, were a unified mess. While Tori Amos covers many many other artists, sometimes authors of books written about her, even some so obscure that extensive searches could not find said book, end up as composer of her music, and it then follows that publisher etc gets messed up. Many links that point to information in the articles here have apparently been wildly misinterpreted. I honestly don't know where to begin, but when trying to edit MusicBrainz, I was pointed here for many releases starting at the main article. Is there a correct way to begin to fix this? I can fix my own collection, but I would rather see the sources corrected, since right now it resembles an awful game of "telephone" where every time something gets transferred, it loses or changes facts in the "translation." (Also hereinmyhead.com is not as well maintained as it once was and underwent a massive hack several years ago.) I am duplicating this question here as well as MusicBrainz.org. Thanks for any help. --Useralreadyexistsx1000 (talk) 23:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Tori Amos. 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/20090511043152/http://www.out.com/detail.asp?id=25182 to http://www.out.com/detail.asp?id=25182
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131225233841/http://toriamos.com/tours/2011.html to http://toriamos.com/tours/2011.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131231002709/http://www.salisburypost.com/News/082912WEB--NC-Music-HAll--of-F to http://www.salisburypost.com/News/082912WEB--NC-Music-HAll--of-F

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) 13:14, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Amos didn't need them
This article said "Her older brother and sister took piano lessons, but Amos didn't need them". Since her brother and sister would also have the surname "Amos", would this article be better worded if it said "Tori did not need them"?Vorbee (talk) 07:39, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree. When it comes to talking about family members, it is useful to specify which is being referred to by using first names. Mburrell (talk) 19:57, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

OK I have edited the article accordingly now. Vorbee (talk) 15:36, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Trial By Jury
The article on the Trial By Jury TV show with Raymond Burr says that Amos appeared on the show, but it's not mentioned in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.255.220.117 (talk) 05:33, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Added citation needed note to Trial by Jury (TV series). Unsupported information. Can be listed in the Tori Amos article if a source can be located. Mburrell (talk) 21:07, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

1995 thing
According to an interviewer on Spotify, Tori was the first artist to make an album entirely available online for streaming back in 1995. Can we find a better source for this? Thmazing (talk) 07:49, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

"5 ½ Weeks Tour" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect 5 ½ Weeks Tour and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 2600:1700:9BF3:220:9DFE:C535:CFDA:2BAF (talk) 03:12, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Cherokee ancestry claims
Tori Amos is not Native. She and her sister have alleged for many years to be not only Cherokee in some vague sense, but specifically Eastern Band Cherokee. Tori's sister uses demeaning racial stereotypes while claiming an "Eastern Band" identity, asserting that her MeeMaw "used to throw a mean tomahawk" as evidence that she was "Indian". Sometimes they make the work easy by narrowing things down to a single federally-recognized nation. They are not EBC citizens. The Eastern Band has a tribal enrollment office. They can search their files for citizens. Try emailing them. See what they have to say. The Amos ancestors from North Carolina were white Confederates and missionaries. I've read passages from Tori Amos's memoir where she defends her Confederate ancestors, including the supposedly Cherokee "Little Margaret", claiming they were acting in self-defense against the North. These white supremacist Daughters of the Confederacy-esque passages are available for free on Google Books. Why these Confederate-apologist redface-wearing white women have been allowed to claim a Native identity for literally decades without any questions is beyond me. The Amos family genealogy is also posted on a bunch of geneaology websites and it is white as snow. This family myth shouldn't be catered to, nor these ridiculous pseudo-historical claims of "Cherokee hiding in the mountains". Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 01:17, 13 July 2023 (UTC)


 * The wiki has been carefully edited to make clear that Amos does not "allege to be Cherokee" or an EBC citizen. She has never done so. If she has, this should be cited. There is a diversity of views on how vocal individuals with First Nations connections should be about these connections, but these views are not the subject of this wiki. As it stands, the wiki lists publicly verifiable factual information about Amos's claims, as it should. Value judgments about whether or not Amos should be allowed to speak about these issues are not relevant unless these judgements have been made publicly by a noteworthy and verifiable third-party source. I empathise with your view on this issue, believe me. But the wiki as it currently stands is accurate. Akkeri (talk) 05:40, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @User:Akkeri The claim that Amos "does not personally claim Cherokee descent" is demonstrably false. She has claimed Cherokee ancestry, specifically Eastern Cherokee ancestry, on countless occasions. She's done this for years. She had said, "My grandfather...was part eastern Cherokee" and that "my grandfather was Eastern Cherokee." That is a claim to be of Cherokee descent. It's also a claim to descent from a specific Cherokee tribe, the Eastern Band Cherokee. You can read about her family lore here and here and here and here and here. She talks about her pseudo-Cherokee roots in Kevyn Aucoin's book "Face Forward" where she wears redface, as well as in her memoir that you removed from the article. A quote from Face Forward: "Tori's mother's paternal and maternal ancestors are registered on the eastern Cherokee tribal rolls". This claim is also featured in Piece by Piece: "I looked over at Nanny and realized her people were on the Eastern Cherokee tribal rolls also." The Baker Roll is public. These claims are false. "Nanny and Poppa" are not listed on the Baker Roll, which has no Calvin Clinton Copeland or Bertie Copeland. Her claim is that her mother had a great-grandmother and a great-grandfather who were "full-blooded Cherokee". Where's the evidence for this? There's no "Little Margaret" (Margaret Lorain Little) on the Baker Roll, nor is her other "Cherokee" ancestor John Akins listed on the Baker Roll. This sort of bogus family lore is common among white Southerners with Confederate heritage.
 * Her sister Marie calls herself "an Eastern Cherokee Native American" on her NIH profile. She is not. That is simply false. Neither sister is affiliated with the Eastern Band. You can ask their office yourself if they are enrolled and rest assured that the answer will be no. She has no documented Cherokee "connections" at all. The article isn't accurate, it's a whitewash. The fact that Dobyns has joined Native American groups that allow self-identifying people to join doesn't actually prove a connection to any Cherokee tribe, let alone with the Eastern Band. Many Pretendians have falsely profited from these Native claims. That she either duped people or joined a group with no verification process doesn't prove Native status or ancestry. Many of these Pretendians have vague Cherokee princess great-granny stories, but Tori and Marie have been unusually specific and those specifics can be checked. Their family fib doesn't stand up to scrutiny, either in terms of citizenship OR in terms of descent OR even in terms of "connections" to any Cherokee tribe. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 12:20, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Akkeri, it's not just about false claims of citizenship. Bohemian Baltimore has amply demonstrated the degree of false heritage claims here. The sister doesn't even know what the Eastern Band community is called by members, and she and her sister repeat the most common falsehoods repeated by false claimants. None of their claims are even vaguely credible. While non-Natives may not see it, these falsehoods, the stereotypes and misinformation they promote, do real harm. Please read what the Indigenous wikiproject has written about navigating false (and legit) claims: Determining Native American and Indigenous Canadian identities. I know it can seem confusing at first, but it's really not. Best wishes, - CorbieVreccan  ☊ ☼ 20:40, 22 August 2023 (UTC)