Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minnie Hollow Wood


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Zoozaz1  talk 17:51, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Minnie Hollow Wood

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:BASIC and WP:ANYBIO. Unable to locate any significant biographical details in secondary sources. The article suggests this person is notable for one event. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:34, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:34, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wyoming-related deletion discussions. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:34, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Montana-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 14:47, 26 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes WP:ANYBIO – "The person has received a well-known and significant award ", i.e. the right to wear a warbonnet – an exceptional honour for a woman of her tribe. See PBS for a retelling of her heroism. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:01, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree. The PBS coverage proves she is notable.   D r e a m Focus  20:02, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * How does a four minute-long cartoon by a non-notable producer prove she is notable? Magnolia677 (talk) 17:22, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * She won a significant award, and also got significant coverage in a reliable source. An animated documentary about someone is as notable as a page long article about them.   D r e a m Focus  17:32, 26 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. More than a hundred years has passed, and the person is still notable. Also, there is significant coverage. My very best wishes (talk) 01:34, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep for reasons cited by User:Andrew Davidson, User:Dream Focus and User:My very best wishes. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 11:53, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Question Is "the right to wear a war bonnet" an well-known and significant award? I get it is unusual, but is it in the league as the VC?Slatersteven (talk) 14:57, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I will try to best answer you because it is a legitimate question. I am by no means an expert though I may be more of an expert on American Indian culture than some here it just comes with the territory. In simple terms it varies by nation. The Cherokee did not wear war bonnets or headdresses like the Plains Nations did. I've seen a few more today but mostly for ceremonial purposes. For the Sioux, the war bonnet was probably more significant than the VC or MOH of the present. A warrior (male and female) typically earned a single feather for bravery or an important act that stands out above all others so a single feather is more in line with the VC or MOH. That's how most American Indian nations viewed the importance of such symbols. It carried a spiritual meaning as well as being a physical symbol. Most braves were lucky to earn two or three feathers in their lifetime. Think of a war bonnet or headdress as a lifetime achievement award in which every individual award received is a VC or MOH.Tsistunagiska (talk) 19:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source to support this, or is this original research? Magnolia677 (talk) 20:20, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * As with most stories and traditions of American Indian cultures most everything is passed down from one generation to the next orally. That being said, you can look at War bonnet to gain a perspective and, if you wish, there is a plethora of sources to comb over on the web. I have lamented in the past about the lack of written sources to back up the traditions of American Indian tribes and nations and how the standards applied to Euro-American traditions versus those of American Indian traditions can not be held to the same level when you start from a biased (not a bad thing) position. I encourage those who can to visit a reservation or tribal village near them to do so. I spent three weeks with the Navajo Nation in New Mexico and I practically lived on the Crow reservation in Montana when I lived there. It's where I learned an appreciation for the spiritual meaning of tattoos. Anyway, that's a start. I am passionate about this cause and I know I have ruffled some. I do apologize for that and will address those directly but I don't apologize for my passion or for defending the heritage of American Indians and traditions at every turn.Tsistunagiska (talk) 20:53, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I've already looked up "war bonnet", and added a sourced explanation below describing how war bonnets were fairly ubiquitous. I urge you to find sources to support your comments. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:59, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think you understand, I don't have to find sources to support my comments. The article stands on it's own without my comments. I was answering the question of an individual who is fully capable of digging for and coming up with their own conclusions. This is not a court of law and my personal comments and beliefs are not on trial.Tsistunagiska (talk) 21:29, 30 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment. There seems to be some confusion about the status of WP:ANYBIO above. It only creates a rebuttable presumption that someone is likely to be notable (see WP:NOTABILITY) but does not itself guarantee it. Unless some evidence can be found of "significant coverage" in WP:RS, it isn't met. The PBS video is certainly relevant but probably is not enough on its own. —Brigade Piron (talk) 17:37, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Per this comment and that of User:Slatersteven, there have been several discussions about the presumed notability of award winners (User:7&6=thirteen has also been kind enough to post this AFD's at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history). The criteria at WP:MILPEOPLE is obviously intended to cover large, modern militaries, and in several of the discussions about the notability of award winners, none discusses the applicability of this criteria to aboriginal communities. See:
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Archive 100
 * Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)/Archive 4
 * Wikipedia talk:Criteria for inclusion of biographies/Archive 1
 * Wikipedia talk:Notability (people)/Archive 4
 * Using the "well-known and significant award" criteria in this discussion seems to undermine the intended use of the criteria. My bigger concern is that war bonnets were fairly ubiquitous.  This source states there could be several "war-bonnet wearers" in a battle.  It undoubtedly was an honor to receive a war bonnet, but it is certainly not so rare as a Medal of Honor. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:26, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * how is "there could be several "war-bonnet wearers" in a battle." relevant? thats like saying having multiple Victoria Cross recipients in the same action somehow reduces the significance of that honor (it does not). Coolabahapple (talk) 15:17, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * What percentage of Braves were awarded a war bonnet compared to British solders awarded the VC?Slatersteven (talk) 15:24, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * not sure, but if it is correct that "Few braves received more than three eagle feathers during their lifetime due to the bird's rarity and sacred status" (i know not cited) and regarding war bonnets - "With few exceptions, only high-placed leaders wor the headdress, and only on important occasions of war or peace." (page 29), than it would appear a small proportion. Coolabahapple (talk) 16:57, 27 September 2020 (UTC)


 * The article reads earned the right to wear a war bonnet because of her valor in combat against the U.S. Cavalry at the Battle of Little Big Horn. How does that not make her notable enough to have a Wikipedia article?  If a white soldier won the highest medal and recognition possible for their valor in a historically notable battle, would we be having this same argument?  Hopefully there is no cultural bias here.    D r e a m Focus  05:21, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I certainly hope we would. WP:BASIC applies to every article here. The war bonnet thing is immaterial. —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:35, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , perhaps you and others here would like to see this for reference of what we speak. How many recipients have their own article and how many have been challenged? The war bonnet is only immaterial because you do not understand it or its purpose or how often an entire war bonnet was earned. So because you deem it immaterial it is so? Tsistunagiska (talk) 17:27, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I suggest you read WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. If there are articles in that list which you believe not to meet WP:GNG you'd be absolutely right to nominate them for deletion and I would absolutely support you. They are there because they meet WP:GNG and not because they happen to have won a medal. The wonderful think about Wikipedia is that the same standards apply to all. —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Not sure that is true, the problem with SNG's is that they are treated as trumping GNG, which they should not. Thus I am not sure that a GMH winner would get deleted. But you are right, all articles should meet GNG and SNG should only be a "do not delete for a while while we look for sources", no a replacement for GNG.Slatersteven (talk) 12:32, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Give me a break. It took me all of two seconds to find one that matched your reasons for wanting to delete this article. No one brought up WP:GNG in any significant manner until I did so to try and turn it to use as part of your argument now is disingenuous. The argument you and others have made is that an article shouldn't be written for a person whose only significance is "one event". I ask you to review Charles Brown (Medal of Honor). He deserted the Marine Corps and never even received his medal. One event is the reason an article was written about him. There are countless others. I believe he should have an article. By your subjective application of Wikipedia guidelines he should not. After all, if a war bonnet is immaterial to you then perhaps simply winning the Medal of Honor should be counted the same.Tsistunagiska (talk) 13:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , in that case please AfD Charles Brown (Medal of Honor) and I will gladly vote to delete it unless enough sources are provided to show that WP:GNG is met. To be absolutely clear, I do not think that earning a MOH (or any other medal) entitles someone to a Wikipedia page because that is not what any guidelines state. —Brigade Piron (talk) 13:43, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * You called a sacred symbol of American Indian culture immaterial, which is the same as saying insignificant and irrelevant, and you simply can't see how offensive that is to anyone who is American Indian? The War Bonnet is so much more than just an award that was stored in a box and allowed to sit an collect dust. You weren't awarded a war bonnet for a single action. I know what the article says and if she was awarded it for her heroics in this one event then she must have done something quite significant to earn it. There were braves who lived their entire lives fighting battles and earning their feathers one at a time because it was incredibly hard to earn a feather. I know headdresses are worn today, mostly for ceremonial purposes, but that's not the case back then. It is woven into the very fabric of these American Indian nations culture and society. One of the whole in which every part is integral. It is not immaterial and quite significant in and of itself. An important moment in her life that was a display of her entire existence.Tsistunagiska (talk) 14:13, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , your argument seems to based on the idea that "notability" is some kind of synonym for personal virtue. As the earning of any award or honour is not a consideration in WP:GNG, it is immaterial from the point of view of notability which is what we are discussing here. As an editor who usually works on African subjects, I am genuinely baffled by your arguments here. —Brigade Piron (talk) 14:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Your work on African subjects is immaterial to this discussion. My argument is that she does meet general notability under the essence of the guideline as many have stated here. What I find baffling is that an editor or any editor who has never written about American Indians, have never displayed an interest in American Indian culture or their people and just happened upon an article written about an American Indian would then juxtapose their own personal subjective view of Wikipedia guidelines and use those instead of the premier guideline to make their argument. If it passes WP:GNG then its a keep, if it doesn't, then it is delete but that was not the nominators argument. The nominator used two guidelines that do not supersede WP:GNG to make their argument because they can't make the argument that it doesn't meet general notability. Had they been able to that would have been the only guideline needed to be mentioned. WP:GNG supersedes all other guidelines, period. My personal feelings about the virtue of this woman only come into play when personal attacks or ignorance, not a slight but a reality, about the subject come into play and simply as an appeal to the better judgement of our human nature. It still does not supersede WP:GNG. Tsistunagiska (talk) 15:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Except wp:gng does not include "highest award for valour", that is an SNG.Slatersteven (talk) 15:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , if you actually look at them, WP:BASIC and WP:GNG are effectively identical. In fact, I was actually brought here by an attempted canvassing at WP:MILHIST and not, as you seem to think, by some anti-American Indian agenda. I am still waiting for someone to explain how the subject has received "significant coverage" in "reliable sources". Friends Of The Little Bighorn Battlefield probably fails WP:RSSELF which leaves two remaining sources apparently attesting to nothing more than her existence and award of the honour. Is that correct? —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:45, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

{od} Unless you believe the ones who published Friends of the Little Bighorn Battlefield actually fought there or any of them are the subject of the article it is not self-published and if it was self-published it would still pass notability because it is not the sole source, it does mention the subject in a significant way and no one here is disputing their claim she had a significant enough role in her culture and this particular event that she received the war bonnet, a top honor among her culture, for her bravery and importance.Tsistunagiska}} (talk) 16:21, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * "self-published" refers to the publication process rather than the person who actually wrote it! It applies to "newsletters" and "personal websites" which have no obvious quality controls, such as the Friends Of The Little Bighorn Battlefield who seem to be a local group of enthusiasts. —Brigade Piron (talk) 16:36, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I would like to point out that it is not necessary for any of you to "win" this argument. The person who gets the last word will not be rewarded with the outcome of their choice. Continuing to expand this wall of words only makes it more likely that the closing admin will simply skip all of this wrangling, and move on to the voters with more concise arguments to make. The best thing to do is for all of you to take a step back, and allow other editors to look at the article, and the sources, and make their own judgment. — Toughpigs (talk) 22:37, 30 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep, meets WP:ANYBIO, yes, receiving the right to wear a war bonnet is "a well-known and significant award or honor", it is not "immaterial". Coolabahapple (talk) 14:55, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per all of the above, and to prevent further erosion of our coverage of notable women of colour. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:30, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per all of above. oncamera   (talk page)  23:44, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep For the many reasons already stated above Spudlace (talk) 01:58, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - I don't expect that most people will know what it takes to earn a war bonnet. I'm not sure I could do it. This is the equivalent of winning a "Medal of Honor". She passes every criteria of a notable person per WP:GNG which is the primary and supreme decision making guideline for ALL articles. Such a strong woman and dedicated warrior to her people. She is an inspiration to me, personally.Tsistunagiska (talk) 17:20, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per the significant honor of the war bonnet. — Toughpigs (talk) 19:12, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per various arguments above. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 00:06, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete The relative status of a war bonnet is unclear, but even if it was the highest award and so satisfied #1 of WP:SOLDIER I don't see WP:SIGCOV in multiple WP:RS of her and so she fails to meet WP:GNG.Mztourist (talk) 07:07, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as the war bonnet is significant. Note to closing admin if this is looking like a delete, please wait another week to close as I'm gathering sources for Minnie Hollow Wood and others from my local library. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 15:03, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - meets notability criteria as per the significant honor bestowed upon this person, and the rationale listed above by many editors. Meets GNG guidelines. Netherzone (talk) 14:51, 1 October 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.