User talk:HistoryGirl2014

disputing a revert made by Denisarona on Native American Identity in the United States
I wish to dispute the revert you made to my changes to the above mentioned article. You have stated that the changes were unhelpful. To the contrary; they were changes made on a historically factual basis. The article states that for European colonists to imagine that the native americans lived in a state similar to their own ancient tribal ancestors, (such as the Gauls, Picts, and Britons)is erroneous and incorrect, and based solely on a stereotype. My suggestion is to look at the historical facts and edit this part of the article to more accurately reflect those facts. The facts are that the ancient European tribes before and during the iron age shared many lifestyle similarities with the native americans. Both peoples lived in tribes, with similar settlement layouts, similar houses, similar lifestyles, occasionally similar tools and clothing, (with the exception of the european use of bronze and iron, of course) Organization under a chieftain or tribal confederation, possessing a few similar cultural and religious rites, the list goes on and on. (If you desire a list of sources, please let me know and I will provide them for you.) While the "noble savage" stereotype is certainly erroneous, and was applied by prejudiced European settlers incorrectly to the native Americans, for that to be correlated with the lifestyle and culture of the ancient european tribes is incorrect and a mistake. Also, this small paragraph is out of place in the article. It does not follow what comes before or after it and therefore doesn't belong and is unuseful. Because it was both unuseful and incorrect, I judged that it should simply be cut out. However, an edit to make it more reflective of the historical facts may be more desirable. Please edit (or allow me to) edit that part of the article so that it does not deny the fact that the early Europeans were similar to the native americans. HistoryGirl2014 (talk) 06:29, 15 February 2014 (UTC)


 * If you are referring to my edit of 8 February to Native American identity in the United States which reverted the unexplained removal of content by 184.155.69.149 then I explained the revert in the edit summary. If you are the same person then it is necessary to explain your edit and back it up with reliable sources. Regards Denisarona (talk) 06:53, 15 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I read your explanation. Am I to understand that all you require now is for me to give you some sources? Because I've noticed that you haven't referred to anything I just sent you. Will you address the issue if I send you some sources? HistoryGirl2014 (talk) 06:58, 15 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I am NOT preventing you from editing - you can edit any article on Wikipedia, as long as you provide a clear edit summary and the relevant, reliable sources. Regards Denisarona (talk) 07:05, 15 February 2014 (UTC)


 * ohhhh! So it wouldn't be considered "warring" if I went back and edited that part of the native american identity article again, but provided sources? Do I just re-write it in a way I think suitable? Also, do I include the sources in the explantion summary part? I'm new to this. I don't want to break any rules. perhaps you can keep an eye on it for me and let me know if I don't do it correctly. ?HistoryGirl2014 (talk) 07:07, 15 February 2014 (UTC)


 * There is no problem rewriting the section, again provided the revision is sourced. The sources go into the article, not in the edit summary. I recommend that you first read the following Wikipedia articles: WP:RELIABLE and WP:VERIFY before you consider changing the article. Hope this is of some help. Denisarona (talk) 07:17, 15 February 2014 (UTC)