User talk:Horse Dancing

OK beg pardon for neglecting to do this before. I've done a little editting for Wikipedia before. I'm creating this user page specifically for Native American interest articles. Horse Dancing (talk) 13:17, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Manitonquat (Medicine Story)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Manitonquat (Medicine Story), and it appears to include material copied directly from http://deletionpedia.org/w/index.php?title=Manitonquat&redirect=no.

It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

CorenSearchBot is in error. This page has been cleared for re-creation following review of its deletion and newly-available reference materials submitted. Any duplicate text is from the edit of this page made by myself Dec 15-ish last. See DRV discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2015_December_29 Newly-available material establishes notability. Seems to be cleared for re-creation. Horse Dancing (talk) 16:45, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Manitonquat (Medicine Story)


A tag has been placed on Manitonquat (Medicine Story), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate,. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Rubbish computer (Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 16:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Any nomination for deletion is redundant. See DRV discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2015_December_29 Newly-available material establishes notability. Seems to be cleared for re-creation. Thanks for being a lert. We need more lerts. Horse Dancing (talk) 16:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Manitonquat for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Manitonquat is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Manitonquat (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Montanabw (talk) 16:35, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

This is redundant. See DRV just concluded https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2015_December_29 I'm not seeing any indication that nominators for deletion are at all familiar with the contents of this DRV. Notability has been established.


 * Consensus can change, the DRV was conducted without notification to anyone involved in the original AfD. Hence I have renominated it.  Montanabw (talk)  20:09, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

A Thought
Hi!

I notice you said you had created this account purely for working on Native American topics. That implies you have other accounts, too. Personally, I don't care how many you have as long as you're a decent individual. However, you may be running afoul of some policies regarding sockpuppetry; "to edit specific topics" is not listed as one of the legitimate reasons for having multiple accounts.

Again, I don't personally care, but an Administrator might feel differently, so I thought I'd bring this to your attention so you're not unpleasantly surprised.

Best regards,

* Septegram * Talk * Contributions * 17:14, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest. My legitimate reasons for having an alternate account are covered in the policy under "privacy"; which does include editing specific topics which are particularly controversial.

Conflict of Interest
COI Admission by WP:SPA : "I myself was a crowd security specialist, and took part in designing Rainbow security arrangements at several Gatherings. Over the years, I heard Manitonquat speak many times. In the evening enjoyed his performances of traditional Native American medicine stories. Sat in sweat lodges which he led, ... In the wake of a security incident, I sat in councils with him, that went on for days, ... (Incidentally, I've never read any of his books, except to give them a cursory glance over.) ... I offered to make available a letter from Manitonquat himself"" (bolding added). You are too close to this subject to be writing about him, let alone creating articles and arguing in an AfD.- Co rb ie V    ☊ ☼ 23:39, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

WP:GRAPES WP:SVT WP:REPEAT WP:WABBITSEASONUser:CorbieVreccan has in recent days been warned by User:Horse Dancing for Vandalism, subtle and otherwise; also concerned in report to Administrator Notice Board:Biographies for vandalism to page in question, and instigating an edit war immediately following a DRV whose outcome was contrary to said user's vote. Also has been notified in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Thparkth that extraordinary emotion demonstrated in this debate suggests advisability that User:CorbieVreccan could, in this case, stand to back off & take a few deep breaths (if I may paraphrase.)

In seeking a balanced view, direct experience of the subject cannot be entirely silenced and disallowed, in favour of ignorant prejudice, or passionate hostility based on complete lack of direct experience. It is certainly significant that the person rushing to shout "COI" is the one who has been previously been named in vandalism allegation. WP:SVT I allege that this COI complaint by User:CorbieVreccan is retaliatory User:Sandstein User:JReferee User:Thparkth

As for COI, my acquaintance with the person who is the topic of the article in question by no means amounts to COI. He is neither family, client, employer, nor any other connection mentioned in COI policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest. I have no interest pecuniary or otherwise in the outcome of the discussion. The direct experience of his work which I detailed in the spirit of complete candour explicitly amounts to no more than what a hundred others also saw, in the course of his public appearances. My account also explicit that this occurred most recently in the 1990s, over twenty years ago. Horse Dancing (talk) 11:49, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Horse Dancing I'm bringing our conversation here. I continue to stand firm in my belief that there is a conflict of interest here. If you are going to keep bring up aspects of indigenous culture into the conversation (we are all related etc) then the simple facts that you participated in ceremony and council with the topic individual then you have a relationship with him. If you stand fast on his position in community then you need to respect that and what it entails. If he is to be held up as a respected ceremonial leader then in turn, as a participant in ceremony, please respect what goes along with that and be accountable to your experiences with him.Indigenous girl (talk) 15:39, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Indigenous girl Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this. However, I can't avoid the impression that you were typing in an excited emotional state and or very hurriedly. If you'll please read back carefully your preceding post above, you may realize why I'm having a hard time understanding precisely what you're trying to say.Horse Dancing (talk) 14:38, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Horse Dancing. I was neither typing in an excited emotional state and or very hurriedly. Let me restate it. You have made several statements regarding indigenous perspective. If it is your desire to promote an indigenous perspective, whether it is in regard to Mr. Talbot or somebody else, then I would expect you to apply that indigenous perspective accross the board. I realize that none of this has anything to do with wikipedia protocol which is why I took it to your talk page. I chose to speak to you in a traditional way since you seem to dig ndns so much, I made the mistake of thinging you would understand where I was speaking from. Clearly you did not. My apologies. I still feel that there is a COI that falls within the wikipedia guidelines. You stated yourself you are in contact with him and were willing to provide a statement from Talbot. Though there may have been a span of time that you did not interact with him you are willing to provide information on his behalf.Indigenous girl (talk) 01:09, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Dear Indigenous girl no doubt you are more native than moi. However, I strongly suggest you look over https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons. You may note there that input even from the person who is the subject of an article is by no means prohibited by Wikipedia. But, au contraire, editors are particularly enjoined not to bash newbies, or people who are the topic of articles, for doing so. Certainly my connection with this topic is far more tenuous. And, as stated previously, does not, in my estimation, fall at all within COI criteria. Thanks again for sharing & attempting to clarify your thoughts. Horse Dancing (talk) 11:50, 27 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Horse Dancing, you clearly have not fully understood these wikipedia guidelines and policies. The only direct intervention a person who is the topic of a BLP or closely associated with said person is allowed is extremely limited (for example, stuff like saying they are dead when they aren't).  Here, what you can do is post to the article talk page, not edit it directly yourself. "Don't bite the newbies" is not carte blanche for editors claiming to be new (and you aren't) to break all the rules.   Montanabw (talk)  22:08, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry I wasn't claiming to be a newbie. Just pointing out some of the many policies which point out that emotionally bashing well-meaning contributors is not constructive. Don't know of any rules I've broken. Horse Dancing (talk) 13:37, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

You have been pruned from a list
Hi Horse Dancing! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at WikiProject Biography/Members, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 3 months.

Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting WikiProject Biography/Members.

Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) &#124; Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. &#124; Sent at 18:15, 27 June 2022 (UTC)