Talk:Battle of Whitestone Hill

Military history: North America / United States / American Civil War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  North American military history task force United States military history task force American Civil War task force

United States: North Dakota Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject North Dakota (assessed as Low-importance).

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Whitestone Hill. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160910155127/http://www.democracynow.org/shows/2016/9/8 to http://www.democracynow.org/shows/2016/9/8

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.

• 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) 06:55, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Whitestone Hill. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051214135621/http://www.civilwar.com/batthome1.htm to http://civilwar.com/batthome1.htm

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.

• 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) 01:21, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've challenged the neutrality of the first two paragraphs of the background section of this article. Several non-neutral words are in this section. The Sioux killed "innocent" people and the U.S. "only" executed 38 Sioux for their crimes (it was the largest mass execution in U.S. history) as examples. The section likewise puts too little emphasis on the most important cause of the rebellion: the failure of the U.S. government to provide annuities to the Sioux in a timely manner. Those annuities were required by treaty under which the Sioux had surrendered their hunting grounds (their livelihoods) to the U.S.

Secondly, this article is about a battle that followed the Dakota War of 1862, and these two paragraphs describing the Dakota War are much too detailed. An editor has insisted that his formulation of the background prevail over the much briefer and more-neutral background I had earlier drafted.

Opinions? Smallchief (talk) 22:50, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree on both counts. The background section is excessive at roughly half the article – larger than the section on the battle itself. I prefer your briefer and more neutral version. Mojoworker (talk) 06:11, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with caveats, especially that the background on the 1862 uprising is too extensive and too detailed. As for neutrality, I concur that some words seem non-neutral, and if not supported by modern historical reference citations, should be eliminated. Yes, even though 303 Dakota were sentenced to death by military court-martial, the word "only" in describing 38 executions should be removed. While the word "innocent" is not used in the current citation from the Minnesota Historical Society, the use of "innocent" when describing the killing of hundreds of women and children does not seem an egregious violation of neutrality. Indeed, the words "massacre of innocent white settlers" were used in official reports sent by telegram to President Lincoln in Washington, DC. (See https://www.dcbar.org/bar-resources/publications/washington-lawyer/articles/may-2014-lincoln.cfm ). KVJackson (talk) 13:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]