Talk:Teiaiagon

Current article is unsupported

The current version of this article is a very biased representation of history that appears to be slanted heavily toward an interpretation put forward by some members of Haudenoshaunee people, but is not shared by either mainstream historians or the oral lore and history of the Mississauga nation. Please provide citations from reputable previously published sources to support these claims. Deconstructhis (talk) 17:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I've again reverted a large amount of material that consists of what appears to me to be very dubious and highly personal interpretations of the history of various native groups in the areas surrounding Lakes Erie and Ontario. A lot of this material seems to me to be so far out of mainstream thought on the subjects involved that I feel that unless proper citations from reliable sources are provided to support what's being contended that it has no place in Wikipedia. Let me be clear, I'm not suggesting that absolutely everything, on a point by point basis, that was posted was totally *wrong*, the problem with the material, in my opinion is that the editor involved is mixing his own idiosyncratic "theories" in with potentially interesting historical materials to such an extent, that it would be difficult for an average reader to differentiate between the wheat and the chaff. Without proper citations, it is my opinion that the material in its original form is unsuitable for Wikipedia. I would appreciate input on these matters from knowledgeable people involved in the several native history projects here on Wiki. Thanks. Deconstructhis (talk) 05:26, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I've put in a request for assistance at the main WP:IPNA discussion page. CJLippert (talk) 17:16, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Nia:wen CJLippert, it would be good to get other opinions on these matters. I have to admit my patience is beginning to grow thin regarding this article and the one on the Attawandaron/"Neutral" people. Thanks again. Deconstructhis (talk) 20:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Many Problems

In my opinion this article continues to contain a fair bit of "speculative" material. There's nothing implicitly wrong with utilizing regional oral traditions in an article, but they have to be sourced or they're not much use on Wikipedia, original research is not allowed. I've tried to remove a few obvious "clangers" today and I've modified a couple of "weasel word" situations and applied citation request tags to them. Not necessarily because they're 'wrong', but because some of them actually have more than one mainstream scholarly perspective available in the literature concerning them, so in my opinion they should be "proved" and expanded upon.

In my opinion those editors who are interested in contributing to articles regarding historical Iroquoian/Mississauga cultural matters in the Toronto region in general, may be interested in reading the following.[1] A quick Internet search for Mr. "Redwolf" [Nexus news is best] and connected interests, indicates to me that many of the (in my opinion) "questionable" editing choices in Toronto regional historical native articles, over the past while, reflect a theoretical bias toward the ideas of a U.S. based group who call themselves the "Erie Moundbuilders Tribal Nation", with whom Mr. "Redwolf" apparently now publicly self identifies. Those of you who have edited articles in the recent past on these subjects will probably quickly recognize this group. (see news story link above and past versions and discussion pages of Neutral Nation and Erie nation articles.) regards Deconstructhis (talk) 20:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Teiaiagon/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.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

==Attacks on Haudenosaunee people for Editing errors written about there own history== (copied from User_talk:Loganelm2001) Skenon; The village of Taiaiagon, was never a Mississauga village site. As sited in Percy Robinson's , "Toronto During the French Regime" doesn't locate a Mississauga village on the old site of Taiaiagon. It actually locates a Mississaga village on the west Bank of the Humber River in 1788. The actual statement that the Mississauga chiefs in 1784 understood that they did not own the land or any Indigenous Entitlement to it is found in a prelude record, to the Haldimand Tract. Therefore the information that I have provided, has come from multiple reliable sources and resources. And as for Mississauga oral lore, I very seriously doubt that, as many of them have lost their way of knowing what their past has been. So therefore whether some academics share the same views or not is irrelavant to the facts, and facts that are proven with the test of time, through multiple archaeological excavations done in the Toronto area have yet to reveal any Mississauga burial sites, according the Ontario Ministry of Culture. So your so-called army of academics are far and few between, since you will not get the Ontario Ministry of Culture to agree with your bs Mississauga claims and this sites support of them. Also there are very archaeologists in the Toronto area if any that will also agree with your claims. It is well known, that Taiaiagon was a Seneca-Mohawk village, and also there is other information that I have chosen not share publicly, that also proves that there has been continuous occupation of the site since 9,000 BC. And all of these people are the ancestors of the Iroquoin language family and not Anishnawbek. Toronto is not the traditional homeland of Mississaugas. And that has been verified by many sources, even their own New Credit website, verifies that they came from up north. So by you saying sources are biased and not verified by academic resources, think again before you make such claims, because I can tell that many of your sources, have come from elementary library resources and very out dated materials, that many people no longer believe. Loganelm2001 05:39, 18 November 2007 It seems you are just as guilty of jumping to conclusions. Reading the article, it does not say that "Teiaiagon" is/was an Anishinaabe village, but it does say that 1) their village was across the river, and 2) in the treaty period, they were the dominant Nation of the area. Anyway, the Iroquoian peoples have had moved in and out of that area, where the village site itself have always been Iroquoian, but the village itself was not continuously occupied, though the area of the village have always have had human presence. You have to remember that the Iroquoian peoples were forced northward with the expansion of the Siouan peoples north and westward, forced southward with the expansion of the Algonquian peoples (specifically the ancestors of the the Council of Three Fires Nations) westward, forced again northward with the growth of the Algonquian peoples to the south (specifically the Shawnees and the Lenape peoples), moved south and east with the Mississauga expansion, and then "boxed in" through the treaty process of the British and the US, both with the Six Nations peoples and with other Nations surrounding the Six Nations. During each of the "north" movement periods, the Iroquoian peoples occupied the village site while during each of the "south" movement periods, other Nations respected the site and did not live there, though did make use of that trade-strategic site. I have seen ample documentation that the Algonquins (another Anishinaabe Nation) were part of the Seven Nations, and that the Mississaugas and the Wendats had covenant of peace between them, but I have never seen any documentation that the Mississaugas were ever in protective relationship with the Five/Six Nations. Now, you do know of Wikipedia's WP:NPOV and of WP:Cite, well, the unfortunate part of Wikipedia is not truth but verifiability, so if you don't like what is currently there, please contribute positively by adding in in-line citations. In-line citations that can be verified will uphold any edits you make for the positive. CJLippert (talk) 06:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 06:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 07:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)