User:Harryawhite

I am creating my user pageHarryawhite (talk) 18:12, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

I propose that the article "Tongva," which refers to either of two tribes of Indians in present-day Southern California, the Tongva-Gabrieleno or the Tongva/Gabrieleno, be renamed "Kizh" (pronounced "keech") on the grounds that the culture referred to in the article, which predates Spanish contact with the Indians in Southern California beginning in the mid 1530s, was created by the Kizh Nation not the Tongva. The so-called T-G and the so-called T/G did not exist before the 1990s. Apparently, the ancestors (of some members) of the T-G and T/G had a hand in the creation of the culture described in the article but they weren't known as Tongva during said creation; the term "Tongva" did not exist before 1903. This is an undeniable fact. Rename the article "Kizh" and remove any mention of Tongva.

Helpless against the powerful nation of Spain, members of the Kizh Nation or "The People of the Willowhouse" as they are also known were rounded up and enslaved by priests and soldiers and forced into servitude farming, etc., at the San Gabriel Mission starting in 1771. The Spanish referred to their slaves as Gabrielenos or Kicherenos; later, the Kicherenos struggled against the governments of Mexico and the United States, trying to hold onto their culture and heritage. The Kizh Nation has persevered to this day, in the face of difficulty with members of the Tongva and with little or no prospect of becoming a tribe recognized by the Federal government. Still, the T-G and the T/G, having created themselves out of thin air in the 1990s, have no chance whatsoever at recognition.

Inviting unscrupulous individuals to a meeting in the early 1990s, the Kizh are partly to blame for the T-G and T/G debacle by failing to attend to their responsibilities or duties to guard against cultural appropriation, or perhaps they were simply inattentive to that which is important or for which they and they alone are responsible, never suspecting or fearing appropriation, not to mention betrayal by certain individuals from within their own tribe. But it doesn't matter if the chief and elders of the Kizh were asleep at the wheel. The culture in the article belongs to the Kizh or the people of the Willowhouse or the Gabrielenos but not the Tongva founded in the 1990s. This is an undeniable fact.

Doing what they can to hang on to what little is left of their heritage hasn't gotten any easier. In 1993 some outsiders, non-Indian academics, etc., began attending their meetings and boning up on their culture. Then these attendees went out and attached the word "Tongva" (sounds like "Tonto") to "Gabrieleno" and — Voila! — the Tongva-Gabrieleno tribe and the Tongva/Gabrieleno tribe out of thin air, in the hope of gaining federal recognition in order to develop a casino and making themselves fabulously wealthy, basically, among other things. Since 1993 the Gabrielenos have had to deal with the Tongva who have no qualms about appropriating their culture purporting to be Gabrielenos.

There was no such thing as a Tongva tribe before 1993, sadly the Tongvas have been very effective at promoting themselves since then, thus they get more "hits" than the Gabrielenos, though they have been around since the first Spaniard called out "Gabrieleno" (adding the suffix) to some poor San Gabriel Mission (Native American) slave from the San Gabriel area.Harryawhite (talk) 23:27, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Listen, neither the slash group nor the hyphen group will ever receive federal recognition, because there is no such thing as a tribe of Tongva. Federal recognition is not going to happen for these pretendians, ever. As for developing a casino, the State of California denied them in 1994. A casino is not going to happen for these pretendians, ever.

But the hyphen and slash groups are far better, far more effective at promoting themselves (i.e., developing sources) than the original tribe, unfortunately; thus, Wikipedia gladly accepts articles such as "Tongva," "Tongva Populated Places," and "Tongva Language," etc., for publication, bogus though they may be; not to mention numerous others who are happy enough or gullible enough to publish Tongva articles, and books even, each of which does further harm to the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians in their struggle to do what they can to hang on to what little is left of their heritage. And the Tongva will continue to promote themselves federal recognition or not, casino or not, come hell or high water. Make no mistake, each and every time someone reads the word "Tongva" the Gabrielenos fade a little further into history. As Tongva grows Gabrieleno fades.

Any right-thinking individual would hate to see what little is left of the Gabrieleno heritage disappear forever. I don't believe that Wikipedia knowingly supports these pretendians in their efforts to promote themselves into a common and accepted name but they do; ignorance is no excuse. The Gabrielenos, the legitimate band of Native Americans, should not be discarded and abandoned in favor of a bogus band that gets "more hits" or has a "more common name" — give the Gabrielenos a break! — putting too high a premium on or giving too much credence to promotion, i.e., making "more hits," bogus or not, the be-all and end-all in the discussion for acceptance for publication, is a big mistake.

Get this, The Tongva admit in their Wikipedia article titled "Tongva" that the villages inhabited by the Gabrielenos (and other slaves of other missions) were inhabited by Native Americans who called themselves the "People of the Willowhouse." "Kizh," the closest thing to a pan-tribal name for these true Native Americans or "People of the Willowhouse" is the only legitimate name, the only legitimate title for articles about them or the villages they lived in or the language they spoke. Tongva this or Tongva that is illegitimate and harmful.

In closing, neither the Tongva-Gabrielenos nor the Tongva/Gabrielenos have the right to attach the word "Tongva" to "Gabrieleno," and then promote the hell out of themselves for the sole benefit of themselves. They are mercenaries. Furthermore, Wikipedia had no business accepting, has no business publishing "Tongva" on its website — it's a slap in the face to the Gabrielenos, "The People of the Willowhouse." What's worse, it's nothing less than blatant support of cultural appropriation, pure and simple and evil. Harryawhite (talk) 18:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)Harryawhite (talk) 23:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)Harryawhite (talk) 23:31, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Should Wikipedia's administrators decide that "Tongva" should be deleted, I would be happy to fill in the gap with an article titled "The People of the Willowhouse," if approved by the Gabrielenos. Please see my stuff on the Tongva talk page.Harryawhite (talk) 16:48, 15 May 2019 (UTC) Please see my stuff. Help me help the Gabrielenos. Thank you.Harryawhite (talk) 00:15, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Harryawhite (talk) 16:32, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Harryawhite (talk) 16:39, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Harryawhite (talk) 16:42, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Harryawhite (talk) 23:43, 4 April 2022 (UTC)