Talk:Bureau of Indian Affairs building takeover

Neutrality

The article seems rather biased against the protesters, at least in the authors word choice and lack of reference for some claims Orin334 (talk) 17:16, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Anachronism

While I am certain Rage Against the Machine approves of this event, they certainly did not exist at the time. 67.10.89.49 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:08, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

POV and tone problems

The article has POV and tone problems. A few examples (there are other instances) include, "The incensed protesters then began to vandalize the building in protest." (POV, "incensed" and "in protest" are editorial judgements, it's probably better to just describe their behavior (show, not tell)), "Understanding the law was essential to bringing the just claims of Indian tribes" (POV, it is not our job to pronounce which side is "just"), "Land had been stolen and the BIA was the instrument of the theft." (entire sentence including "stolen" and "theft" is POV and tone is incorrect), "There was nearly no one among them who would call the U.S. on its rough handling." (tone and POV, e.g. "rough handling"), "It reminded Nixon how unprepared he was to deal with Indian issues across the country and how he had failed in his effort to quell Indian pressures for reforms." (no citation that he considered himself "unprepared" or thought he had "failed", tone), "fell dramatically short" (clear POV and tone issue), "Sadly he was correct" (obvious tone and POV problem).

There are also entire areas of the article that are unreferenced, which also overlaps with the above issues. Superm401 - Talk 01:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Agree, have made language more neutral and deleted extensive unsourced content. Have added a major website with contemporary materials of the time to show how the media was covering the story and provide more historic perspective, so new editors have resources at hand to read and use. The books referred to likely have much more material as well, and there has been much written about this. Article needs major work. Parkwells (talk) 15:33, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

I've tried to fix some more of the POV and tone issues alongside some of the poor sentence structuring. I've added one more citation on the provisions to have a tribe be federally recognized by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. This being my first edit on wikipedia ever I hope it is alright. - Permars (talk) 20:21, 3 August 2023 (UTC)