Major General James G. Blunt

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Organizations This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Indigenous peoples of North America This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Oklahoma Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oklahoma, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oklahoma on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OklahomaWikipedia:WikiProject OklahomaTemplate:WikiProject OklahomaOklahoma articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

All usage of second person, statements about who may edit the article, etc. need to be removed and cleaned up. Article also need better citiation and POV cleanup. Waya sahoni 21:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent progress is being made on the Red Hat Duke article. Cleanup tag removed. Waya sahoni 22:21, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changed based on information provided by blueotter. Waya sahoni 23:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cleanup of links, citiations, and sources needed. Article also needs to be wikified. Waya sahoni 23:40, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completed. Waya sahoni 01:55, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is so much duplication between this article and that on the Keetoowah Nighthawk Society that it is very confusing to try to discern where one ends and the other begins. As this is the current society, it should not duplicate all the history of the society formed in the nineteenth century, including cut-and-paste sections from the other article. It's questionable whether there is sufficient content on this society to stand alone as a separate, notable article. Sources other than the tribal website should be added.Parkwells (talk) 20:54, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This note was added to the "Origin of name" section by a logged-out user who has been blocked and topic-banned for over-flagging articles for cleanup: THIS ORIGINAL SECTION WAS PLAGIARISED FROM THE WORK OF TAKATOKA (MANATAKA AMERICAN INDIAN COUNCIL, HISTORY OF THE KITUWAH PEOPLE, https://www.manataka.org/page838.html, AND IS REWRITTEN HERE FROM THE SOURCES CITED, OR OTHERWISE. Actually, manataka.org is notorious for copyright violations, posting people's work without permission and refusing to take it down, along with posting accurate info via copyvio right next to wild fabrications about Native cultures written by those clearly unfamiliar with Native cultures. So, it's probable the manataka page is the copyvio. It is not an "American Indian Council", despite what they say on their pages. It should be considered the same as a personal blog or personal website and, worse, one known for copyvios, unsourced essays and inaccurate content. I actually came across this while cleaning up the well-meaning but unusable cites to manataka on WP, along with links to the site that look to be linkspam. Proceeding now with long-overdue cleanup. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 20:02, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This desperately needs more sources because right now it's an essay about one guy and that guy's perspective on this history, interspersed with notes by one user who promotes that guy, shouting at other editors, about misunderstood policy, in excessive notes in every section. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 20:31, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]