Battle of Locust Grove

Page contents not supported in other languages.

Moved from comments page

This Seneca Page is suppose to be about the Seneca Nation, yet as of Nov. 13th 2006, everything that has been written explaining the Seneca Nation has been edited to represent a view that is overtly opposed to the existence of the Seneca Nation and its citizens. This is wrong and extremely biased, yet not a single Wikipedia user or monitor has noted this discrepancy. It is my opinion that Wikipedia users and monitors do not know. Now they do.

So I must ask why are Wikipedia monitors allowing overtly hostile and anti-indian hate group leaders to mercilessly edit the Seneca Nation page, and reverting edits that are legitimately made to assist in the production of a page that fully represents the Seneca Nation? There are legitimate experts on Seneca Nation history and contemporary issues that are attempting to edit this page, yet instead, anti-Indian bias and hatred is consistently edited back in. Edits that provide NPOV content about the Seneca Nation is consistently reverted to the content that represents the POV of a racists and overtly anti-Indian hate group.

I am formally requesting the assitance of any interested monitor to investigate the recent edits to the Seneca Nation page. Please begin by investigating the leader of an anti-Indian hate group located in Western New York called the UCE-Niagara Chapter which is lead by Daniel T Warren. His username is dtwarren and he has provided unsolicited information on the Seneca Nation page (and other native pages), along with other members of this organization. These edits are an outrage to the Seneca Nation and if permitted to continue are akin to Wikipedia allowing the KKK to mercilessly edit the NAACP page, or permitting the Neo-Nazi party leadership to consistently provide content on the Jewish Holocaust page. If these afforementioned actions are permissible, then please continue to permit UCE-esque content to be inserted onto the Seneca Nation page. However, a disclaimer from the Seneca Nation must be inserted that highlights the misinformatin provided about the Seneca Nation. This disclaimer will direct users to correct information about the Seneca Nation that is located off of the Wikipedia site (at the top of the page--not at the bottom).

This is not a discprepancy about a date or a minor edit, but a serious action taken by certain individuals that seek to cause serious damage to the Seneca Nation and its citizens. This action also represents the legitimacy of Wikipedia, as a source of information that truly represents the topic under discussion.

Until a monitor takes these concerns seriously, I will continue to edit this page on a massive scale. Any monitor or editor can look at the edits I have provided to this page already and the massive content I have introduce to this page. All of it is about the Seneca Nation, non of it is about some outside organization that is seeking to gain a voice on this page.

As such, I will be edited the Seneca Economy again. I ask that if you feel a specific part of it is a POV that you edit that, not revert the whole thing. Also, I will be editing out all edits by individuals that I know to be associated with anti-indian hate groups. I will be noting these in the Summary as a known Anti-Indian hate group member and I will cite the group. Finally, I will adding considerable content at a time. The Seneca Nation has been in existence for over 4,000 years. Thus there is a lot to cover. I can cover this information and provide it in a manner that can and should be edited; however, I will make it my priority to edit out all non-related Seneca Material off of this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by scuggy (talk • contribs) 19:28, 13 November 2006

"Contact with Colonial Minded Oppressors"

Heh.. sounds a bit biased? I agree that some of the article's text is Euro-centric and needs work, but I'm not sure whether the Seneca were the victims and the Europeans/Americans the oppressors. I'd agree that by the 19th century it ended up that way, but my understanding is that for a century or two before that, the Seneca and the Iroquois in general were as powerful or more than the European colonists -- that while the Europeans did try to take advantage of the Seneca and Iroquois as best they could, the Seneca and Iroquois did much the same -- and managed to become the most powerful Indian nation in America for a long time, with the ability to dictate terms to both Europeans and other Indians.

I hope I don't offend in saying these things. I have tremendous respect for Native Americans, Iroquois and Seneca in particular. I come from Buffalo, New York, and was fairly ashamed to learn how the land I grew up in was taken from the Seneca. I had to learn it myself, it was not something taught in school. I think American history has been and continues to be too biased toward Europeans, with the Indians put into the role of savages, perhaps noble savages, but in any case of little import. It maddens me to read about Euro-American pioneers "blazing trail into the wilderness" or how before the Euro-Americans came, America was in a pristine and natural ecological state, as if there were no people here at all.

Yet I cannot subscribe to the notion that the Europeans were always the Bad People and the Indians always the victims. By the 19th century it may have ended up much like that, but for the 2 centuries before that, it was often the Indians who had the upper hand, as far as I can tell -- and they yielded their power in many ways, good and bad.

Just some thoughts. I say them because it seems that this page is particularly dense with the suggestion of Indians as innocent victims and Euro-Americans as evil. Pfly 08:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seneca Economy

There is no 1826 Treaty at Buffalo Creek only the 1838 and 1842 treaties with the Seneca were at Buffalo Creek.

The Senecas have litigated their claims that the 1842 Treaty of Buffalo Creek or the 1794 Treaty of Canandaigua give them an exemption from collecting taxes from non-members and to date they have lost in court on those claims. Acting as if these issues were never raised and decided is certainly POV.

I corrected the treaty reference added a cite to the Seneca's actual position on this issue and reverted the history of the fight over taxation. --Dtwarren 00:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Anti-Indian Hate Group Leaders editing Seneca Page

Wikipedia users. Please note that the constant POV insertions on this page that do not belong. This page is about the Seneca Nation (historical up to contemporary) and is not about one person or small group of 30 or less people that hate Indians and want to get their message out about how bad Indian Nations and people are. The information provided by dtwarren above comes from the viewpoint of anti-Indian. If you do not know what it is to be anti-Indian, then please look as a reference to the page on anti-Semitism.

Therefore, the information about the Seneca Nation that revolves around the Seneca Nation will be included on this page (btw -- the Seneca Nation has been around for thousands of years and this information needs to be put up instead of constantly re-editing some anti-Indian bias).

Let me restate what I have been stating to other wikipedia editors: If you wish to allow and assist an anti-Indian leader to continue to add biased, negative, and non subject matter information on this page, then please do so. Do so, if you would also assist a Neo-Nazi leader in writing about the jews on the WWII Holocaust page, or the KKK leaders writing on the catholic, jewish, or NAACP pages.

If you are internet savvy, it will not take you long to find out that the organization run by dtwarren is an anti-Indian hate group. So, now that you know, will you continue to assist in the propagation of anti-Indian hate? Or will you assist in making this page something that rises above it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scuggy (talk • contribs) 20:59, November 22, 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, Scuggy. I'll look into it. --Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:53, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Scuggy, we see your point, but you don't make your case very well by deleting large sections of referenced material, and replacing it with your unreferenced material. When you do that it will simply be reverted. Make your case point by point, in smaller bites, with references, and you will be able to get a hearing better. Significant changes are best discussed on the talk page first. We want the article to be as accurate as possible. Pollinator 15:53, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I am new to this process and will make mistakes, but I have been taking time out over the past months to learn more about the wikipedia process instead of editing. I continue to ask for understanding and for a little "walk in my shoes" perspective for my past edit "chunks". I find this situation outrageous, especially since I have extensive knowledge and information to share (look at the content I have provided, especially literature). I will back up everything I submit; and other submission should be held to the same standard. And I want this article to be as accurate as possible, because I am Seneca. This entire page needs significant changes, including the way it is structured and even a majority of space for a non-Eurocentric and non-Americancentric perspective (which currently dominates a page that is about an Indigenous group, very odd indeed). I ask of all the editors to this page, who is to provide this perspective? An anthropologist, history teacher, the person who took one class on natives in college, a leader of an anti-Indian hate group? Or say, a recognized and educated member of the people being described? Scuggy 17:12, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seneca Nation of Indians

I have noticed that an article has been started for the Seneca Nation of Indians which raises the question what should be the direction of this page. If this page is to contain information on the original Seneca Nation (Tribe) then the material that is dated after approximately 1848 (the date the Seneca Nation adopted its constitution and form of governance) should be moved to Seneca Nation of Indians or Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians. How should we proceed, go forward as set forth above or redirect Seneca Nation of Indians to this article?--Dtwarren 16:58, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I find it interesting that the greatest contributor (in total submissions, not verifiable content) to this page did not even think to recognize that there is the Seneca people as well as Seneca governments. As a Seneca, I would appreciate it if the above discussant (Mr. Daniel T Warren) was barred from editing any Seneca Nation or Seneca people pages in the future. Why? Because of his stated desired to eradicate the Seneca Nation (do not believe me, go to the UCE home page and look for op-eds by Mr. Daniel T Warren). As a Seneca, I find it abusive and offensive that UCE members consistently and mercilessly input anti-Indian rhetoric and perspectives on Indian pages. Is the Wikipedia community responsible for the submissions of individuals that seek to eliminate the very thing that they are defining and describing? Scuggy 16:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kinzua Dam

This page needs a mention of Kinzua Dam. 165.189.91.148 21:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Excellent point. The reason why I began editing was to insert information about the impacts of Kinzua Dam construction on the Seneca people at Allegany (if you look, I attempted to edit the Kinzua page but my zeal did not match my Wiki skills yet). I would be happy to share this information; however, I will wait for the Wikipedia community to address the presence of anti-Indian leaders editing Indian pages prior to any future content submissions. Scuggy 17:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oklahoma Project

The Seneca Nation does not have any connection to Oklahoma. See [1]

Well not exactly. The court merely validated the view that the Mingoean descendants were not under control of the Six Nations at the time the treaty in question was negotiated therefore they could not participate in the lawsuit. Wouldn't it be be more accurate to say that the Seneca Nation not longer has any current connection to Oklahoma? Just a thought.
Anyhow, I did run into reference(s) to Tyoga Native Americans in the West during a recent Google search. These references include: hiking in Michigan, an historical pathway in Michigan, and a campground in Michigan. I don't have time to do any more research on the matter but perhaps someone else might. JimScott 16:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should we include these references also ?

There were also many links to contemperanious reports from the day, such as this Journals of the Military Expedition of Major General John Sullivan against the Six Nations of Indians in 1779 (tho to be honest some of the entries brought me to tears); and books on that period, such as this book about George Washington. And last, but not least, there is a Tyoga Atlatl group. JimScott 16:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While these sound interesting for further reading, the article should be based on secondary, valid, preferably scholarly sources, not use of original, primary materials. Similarly, some commentary on the land claims and thruway issues would be valuable sources, rather than the copy of the court decisions. This is not supposed to represent Original Research (OR) in primary sources.--Parkwells (talk) 18:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The neutrality of this article is disputed?

Maybe all the disputed stuff has been removed because I can't find anything now that is of dispute. Can we either put back the disputed stuff, rewritten so as to take care of the problem, or remove the Disputed tag? Or is there still something disputed here? I don't like tags on articles that don't belong there and with the current article, it doesn't belong. Fanra 00:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • It has been over a month and no one has responded. Therefore, I'm removing the neutrality tag. Anyone who disagrees can comment. Fanra 13:08, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Land Claims

I removed this sentence,"If the federal government believed there was any merit to these claims they would have intervened on the Senecas behalf on their claim to the thruway like they did in relation to their claim to Grand Island.". Without some source to back it up, it is biased. If someone can cite an official of the federal government saying this, it can go back, otherwise it is speculation. Fanra 01:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

To me, it appeared that this article had a mess of several different types of citations that make it harder to read and look messy. I've changed all of the citations to one type and have them listed in the References sections. Fanra 14:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are dam right it needs to be merged, it is crap

"related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 17:00, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name change

Can this article be renamed Seneca people, since it is about the Seneca people as a whole? There are articles for each of the individual tribes/governmental organizations of Seneca: Seneca Nation of New York, Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma, Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians of New York, and Six Nations of the Grand River First Nation. -Uyvsdi (talk) 23:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Due to lack of response in a week's time, I'm going to move this page. -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:14, 10 January 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Name not related to the Roman statesman

The article currently claims that the resemblance to the Roman statesman's name "is entirely coincidental" but offers no citation. Clearly, there's no direct link, but I find it hard to believe that the English (and/or French?) spelling wasn't at least influenced by knowledge of classical authors. It could have been Anglicized in a form more like "Cynical" just as easily, and there apparently are several older spellings that are much less similar to the Roman name:

http://www.accessgenealogy.com/native/tribes/seneca/senecahist.htm

Indeed, Governor Andros, two years after Greenhalgh's visit to the several tribes of the Iroquois in 1677, still wrote, "Ye Oneidas deemed ye first nation of sineques." The Journal of Van Curler, mentioned above, records the interesting fact that during his visit to the tribes he celebrated the New Year of 1635 at a place called Enneyuttehage or Sinnekens. The first of these names was the Iroquois, and the second, the Mohegan, name for the place, or, preferably, the Mohegan translation of the Iroquois name. [...]

Thus, the Iroquois Oněñiute'ā'gǎ', the Mohegan Sinnekens, and the Delaware W'tassone are synonymous and are homologous in derivation. But the Dutch, followed by other Europeans, used the Mohegan term to designate a group of four tribes, to only one of which, the Oneida, was it strictly applicable. The name Sinnekens, or Sennecaas (Visscher's map, ca. 1660), became the tribal name of the Seneca by a process of elimination which excluded from the group and from the connotation of the general name the nearer tribes as each with its own proper native name became known to the Europeans. Obviously, the last remaining tribe of the group would finally acquire as its own the general name of the group. The Delaware name for the Seneca was Meχaχtǐn'nǐ (the Maechachtinni of Heckewelder), which signifies 'great mountain'; this is, of course, a Delaware rendering of the Iroquois name for the Seneca, Djiionoñdowāněñ‘'ākǎ’, or Djiionoñdowāněñ‘'ākǎ̉', 'People of the Great Mountain.'

Yes, it coincides, but it's not "entirely" coincidental -- http://www.behindthename.com/name/seneca

From a Roman cognomen which meant "old" from Latin senectus. This was the name of both a Roman orator (born in Spain) and also of his son, a philosopher and statesman. This name also coincides with that of the Seneca, a Native American tribe that lived near the Great Lakes, whose name meant "place of stones".

Similarly: https://www.familysearch.org/learn/wiki/en/Union_County,_New_Mexico,_Place_Names_S-Z SENECA - The anglicized form of the spanish word "cienega" or swamp. This was once a heavily populated farming community on NM 18, 14 miles northeast of Clayton. After the dust bowl of the 1930's, much of the land was retired or leased by the US Forest Service to ranchers. Post Office 1908 to the present day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zipperbear (talk • contribs) 20:00, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • An interesting presentation of facts, although I suggest presenting it to a local historian, as the Wiki has the common standard of allowing anything appropriate to be written, unless a cited source can improve or prove otherwise. Your provided argument is very interesting, especially regarding the Spanish "cienega" and the fact that Seneca the Elder was born in Spain, which is to me a new fact that may further convince me of the possibilities of more than a coincidence existing, but possibilities cannot provide etymological explanations. It is also interesting to note that Latin is a very unique language that has lasted at least 1600 years with a large variety of adoptions from other languages, as well as that Latin words change in spelling depending on usage, meaning that if the Romans had spoken a language with the rules of English, their language would have a smaller amount of words. Therefore the possibilities of coinciding words between languages without a true link (false cognates) are greatly increased. One example is the Latin verb 'servare' (servo, servare, servavi, servatus, a, um), which most at first sight believe translates into English as 'to serve', yet the word translates into English as 'to save' or 'to guard', for 'servare' means 'to save', and not 'to serve'. Regardless, the possibility of European settlers with anything from limited to extensive knowledge of either of the famous Senecas having been influenced by that knowledge to name the native tribe in a similar fashion or anglicise with a similarity to the orators' names is present, and we may have to wait until there is more decisive evidence to prove that the naming is anything more than a coincidence.--ɱ 03:52, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Original Descendants

Do the 'real' Seneca people live in the U.S. or Canada? We should make a point of originality to state the difference between an adopted/assimilated person of Seneca heritage and that of an original descendant. 216.223.90.44 (talk) 15:56, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are a real clown. 2607:FEA8:BFA0:BD0:B104:FAA9:9858:D2C9 (talk) 21:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Seneca people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:20, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Seneca people/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

lengthier than a stub but needs expansion, map, POV check --Skookum1 (14 May 06)
  • Has a number of citation needed tags (despite relatively good referencing overall), and still some potential POV problems. The section on land claims should be rewritten; at present it's essentially a timeline in paragraph form, and the style is too leagalese-y --Miskwito 15:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 01:51, 1 January 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 05:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Seneca people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:39, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Seneca people. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:08, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ganiodaiio

Should we create an article for the Seneca prophet Ganiodaiio? 98.123.38.211 (talk) 20:10, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Handsome Lake Peter Flass (talk) 02:45, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Seneca_people