Talk:Nathan Phillips (activist)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Nice bias of Wikipedia showing again

Guy called kids beasts, and he in article he is portrayed as some kind of a contemporary Ghandi: "There was that moment when I realized I've put myself between beast and prey," Phillips said. " "These young men were beastly and these old black individuals was their prey, and I stood in between them and so they needed their pounds of flesh and they were looking at me for that." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.173.217.32 (talk) 06:50, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

I did not write the anonymous post above, but I'm going to add a ref to the quotes above. "There was that moment when I realized I've put myself between beast and prey," "These young men were beastly and these old black individuals was their prey, and I stood in between them and so they needed their pounds of flesh and they were looking at me for that." Btakita (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I find it interesting how Nathan Phillips's word attacking the credibility of the Covington students is believed despite no film evidence, yet many seem to be bending over backwards to qualify "misunderstandings" of Nathan Phillips misrepresenting himself as a "Vietnam veteran" over a span of 11 years including a documentary of his life raising > $6000. He obviously was involved with the "misunderstanding" leading the director of the film to claim he was a "Marine in Vietnam" and did not correct her statement after 7 years. Btakita (talk) 19:18, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

References

I have added content to this page from a new article I created Indigenous Peoples' March. The content will be re-edited, summarized and/or rewritten.Oceanflynn (talk) 22:56, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Skrillex

Nathan Phillips also starred prominently in the Skrillex video Skrillex & Damian "Jr. Gong" Marley - Make It Bun Dem which as today has over 380M views: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGpzGu9Yp6Y --85.16.193.80 (talk) 23:11, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

More neutral please

This is not based on facts "Phillips joined the Marine Corps, serving in the Vietnam War as a 'Recon Ranger' and Infantryman.[8][9][10][11][12][13] " All those references are not evidence that he actually served in Vietnam (as 16-17 years old?) but only that he says so.

So change to a more neutral and accurate:

"Phillips joined the Marine Corps and claims he served in the Vietnam War as a 'Recon Ranger' and Infantryman.[8][9][10][11][12][13] " — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.143.210.74 (talk) 09:26, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

The Washington Post issued a retraction re: Nathan Phillip's Vietnam War status. "Correction: Earlier versions of this story incorrectly said that Native American activist Nathan Phillips fought in the Vietnam War. Phillips served in the U.S. Marines from 1972 to 1976 but was never deployed to Vietnam." Btakita (talk) 20:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

He was a reservist and refrigerator mechanic and never left the United States. Excerpts from his DD-214 showing that are here: . Here is video where he claimed he was "spit on" and "called a baby killer" because of his service as a "Vietnam times Veteran" . This video shows him calling himself a Vietnam Veteran without qualifiers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.71.123.106 (talk) 06:25, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

It is also worth noting that Nathan Phillips has claimed Vietnam Veteran status while raising money and documentary filmmaker Maria Stanisheva claims that he resents his time as a student in a Catholic Boarding School. Btakita (talk) 20:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Phillips, having served between 1972 and 1976, meets the legal definition of Vietname-era veteran. Some NEWSORGs did not understand the distinction between Vietnam and Vietnam-era, but Phillips seems to have been quite consistent in his stmts.Icewhiz (talk) 20:18, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Phillips has characterized himself "as a Vietnam Veteran" . One could give him the benefit of the doubt, as he qualified his statement by saying he "served in the Marine Core from 1972 to 1976", but it's easy to think that he is a "Vietnam Veteran" from him saying "as a Vietnam Veteran". Btakita (talk) 22:18, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Documentary filmmaker Maria Stanisheva said "he was then a Marine in Vietnam" . Go to 1:15 in the promo video to hear the quote. Btakita (talk) 23:08, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Given the two sources that show Nathan Phillips and his documentarian claiming he was a Marine in Vietnam, one can claim Nathan Phillips mislead the public by statement & by failing to correct the perception of him being a Vietnam veteran (aka "Stolen Valor" - Stolen_Valor_Act_of_2013). Btakita (talk) 23:11, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Although I agree with you that Phillips intentionally misrepresented himself, as shown by these videos with direct quotes, it probably doesn't meet the legal definition of stolen valor due to the "with the intent of" bit not being satisfied, unless one can show he was taking money using that status as part of the reasoning. ResultingConstant (talk) 23:23, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

$6097 was raised on kickstarter.com to support the documentary about Nathan Phillips . In the kickstarter promo video, director Maria Stanisheva makes the claim that Nathan Phillips "was then a Marine in Vietnam". A false claim of military service was involved with money being exchanged for the documentary. Perhaps Maria Stanisheva & associate producer Dorottya Mathe (who initiated the kickstarter campaign) are liable, since they received the payment; however they were expressing information told to them by Nathan Phillips. Perhaps a "controversy" is warranted? Btakita (talk) 15:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Snopes is a biased commentary and their assessment about Nathan Phillip's representation of serving in Vietnam is inaccurate. In the current version of the article there is: "However, according to Snopes while this was an inaccurate presentation by the news outlets it is not clear this originated with Phillips who told reporters he was a "Vietnam-era" or "Vietnam-times" veteran, having served contemporaneously with the Vietnam war." His documentary kickstarter promo video, which raised $6097 in the year 2012, claimed he was a "Marine in Vietnam" at timestamp 1:15 . There was no mention of "Vietnam-era" or "Vietnam-times". Since money was exchanged with the claim of him being a "Marine in Vietnam", the claim of "Stolen Valor" was raised. Please include this fact in the article to show neutrality. There is also no proof that Nathan Phillips said or meant "Vietnam-era" or "Vietnam-times" when speaking to reporters in 2019. Btakita (talk) 16:25, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

We regard Snopes as a RS. As for the documentary on kickstarter - this is not Phillips making the claim, but rather the narrator - Bulgarian filmmaker Maria Stanisheva - who quite possibly made the same mistake as others (Vietnam era -> Vietnam). Icewhiz (talk) 16:33, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Nathan Phillips characterized himself to a reporter in 2015 "as a Vietnam Veteran" , and did not mention "Vietnam-era" or "Vietnam-times". Re: the documentary, he had 7 years to refute the claim of him being a "Marine in Vietnam" and did not do so; yet a documentary about him was funded using that claim. 3 years later he characterized himself to a reporter "as a Vietnam Veteran". Btakita (talk) 16:37, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

"at times it has certainly sounded as though Phillips was trying to foster the impression that he had both served during the Vietnam War and had been deployed to Vietnam at some point during his service." . "Perhaps Phillips just slipped up in one video and forgot to include the qualifier about his service that he used in other videos and later press interviews" , which was caught on video at least 2 times from Nathan Phillips & one time from his documentary kickstarter promo video. There seems to be plenty of "misunderstandings" re: Nathan Phillips. Btakita (talk) 17:03, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

'Phillips also described coming back to the U.S. as a veteran of the Vietnam era. “People called me a baby killer and a hippie girl spit on me.”' "Note: This article has been adjusted from its original version to show that Nathan Phillips was a Vietnam-era veteran and that he was spit on while in uniform as opposed to when he was returning from combat.". . "coming back to the U.S." implies he left the U.S., which he did not; though from the Note, it appears that Nathan Phillips told the reporter he was "returning from combat". This Indian Country Today article was written in 2008. It seems like many reporters are "misunderstanding" Nathan Phillips over a span of at least 11 years. Btakita (talk) 17:13, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Also mentioned "However, since we haven’t yet been able to obtain copies of Phillips’ official service records (due to the government shutdown), we cannot verify when and where he might have served.", which seems to be in conflict with with Don Shipley's ability to acquire a DD-214 for "NATHANIEL RICHARD STANARD ADOPTED BORN: NATHANIEL PHILLIPS" who served in the "UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS RESERVES" discharged as rank "PRIVATE" and went "AWOL" 3 times Btakita (talk) 17:39, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Snopes mentioned another video where Nathan Phillips claimed to be a "Vietnam vet" & "I got honorable discharge and one of the boxes in there that show if it was peacetime or...what my box says is I was in Theater_(warfare)" starting at the 9:40 mark , which led to their above mentioned qualifier "Perhaps Phillips just slipped up in one video". However, he used similar language in other videos & was quoted by journalists, already mentioned above; and with the "what my box says is I was in Theater" quote implies him clarifying that he was in the Vietnam Theater. Btakita (talk) 18:08, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2019

Nathan Phillips aka Nathan Stanards DD214 shows that he was enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve in May 20th 1972 through May 5th 1976. His places of deployment were Topeka Kansas, Lincoln Nebraska and El Toro California. At no point did he see deployment to any country outside of the United States. He had only received one award/badge and that was for Expert Rifleman. His discipline was that of a Refrigerator Mechanic and had training as an electrician. He had also gone AWOL multiple times. He was discharged after less than 4 years with the same rank as he went in, which would never happen if someone was on the actual front lines fighting in the vietnam war. His statement that he was a Recon Ranger, based upon his DD214, meets the exact definition of Stolen Valor, as it would have been impossible for him to be a Recon Ranger based on his record, the AWOLs and the 0 amount of combat action or training. My sources are his DD214 as pulled by Don Shipley, well renowned Navy Seal Senior Chief. I strongly suggest that any mention of him being a Vietnam Veteran be stripped from this page and replaced with either US Marine Corps Veteran or Vietnam Era Veteran. He at least didnt get dishonorably discharged, so he at least deserves to be called a veteran. But the use of the phrase Vietnam Veteran, Vietnam Vet or Vietnam Combat Vet are incorrect and misleading at best. Any claim that he was anything other than a Refrigerator Mechanic state-side is an outright lie at this point and has no place on wikipedia.

He has not been verified as a veteran of Vietnam, either state that he is reported to be a veteran, or remove the statement that he is actually a veteran. 104.139.98.75 (talk) 12:51, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done NYT, BBC, and multiple reliable sources are calling him a veteran of the Vietnam War. Click on the first two footnotes and see for yourself. Also see WP:Verify, a Wikipedia policy. First Light (talk) 14:26, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

I also would like to see verification of Phillips's claim to be a Vietnam veteran. Newspapers calling him a Vietnam veteran - even BBC, NWT, WaPo - is not sufficient verification of his service. Those publications might just be quoting him thus the articles are only evidence that he is claiming to be a Vietnam veteran. Until there is verification, the claim should be given the "Reference needed" citation, or the text should be changed to "claimed to be a Vietnam veteran". Llewkcalbyram (talk) 23:42, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

The articles say he is 64. He stated he joined when he was 17 and that he was in Vietnam 1972-1976 as a Marine. The last Marines left Vietnam in 1971. There were some in the embassy after that but it was first in-first out. It would have been impossible for him to enter the Marines in 1972 and serve time in Vietnam and it would have been even more impossible for him to be in the Marines in Vietnam from 1972 to 1976. For him to have served in Vietnam, he would have needed to enter at age 15 or under. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.71.123.106 (talk) 07:56, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: The article currently cites five separate sources supporting this information. Please cite published sources that call this into question or contradict it. Otherwise, I think Wikipedia's policy regarding verifiability has been well and truly satisfied. Besides, an edit request is not the proper venue to make this request unless there is a clear consensus to make the change. Please discuss and reach a consensus on the talk page prior to reopening this request. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 22:12, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Add as many circular resources as you like, if they did not come from the DOD - they are not sources, and thus not verified. There is ONLY one source for this information. There is a legitimate cause for questioning the claim, as detailed by previous editor. His age does not align with his claimed service.

Procedural closure of edit request - an edit request cannot be completed unless it is clearly uncontroversial or already supported by clear consensus on the talk page. See WP:EDITREQ#General considerations. Please continue discussion here on the talk page, and seek dispute resolution if you feel it is necessary. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 00:57, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Thomas Wictor points out that Nathan Phillips' story about his Vietnam war contradicts the official US military involvement when he would have enlisted. There is no proof, other than what Nathan Phillips himself said (which is what cited sources based their claim on), that he was even in the military, let alone his claim of performing as a "recon ranger" in the Vietnam war. Btakita (talk) 20:06, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

The Washington Post issued a retraction re: Nathan Phillip's Vietnam War status. "Correction: Earlier versions of this story incorrectly said that Native American activist Nathan Phillips fought in the Vietnam War. Phillips served in the U.S. Marines from 1972 to 1976 but was never deployed to Vietnam." Btakita (talk) 20:06, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2019

Please add the following text to the Indigenous Peoples' March section, directly after the end of Nathan philipps' quoete: Nartuladamaria (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Nathan Phillips’ statement, “We’re not supposed to have walls here [in America]; we never did—for millennium” may be a reference to the ancient indiginous migration routes that spanned from northeastern Siberia to the southern tip of Chile in South America, roughly 9,000 miles. Scientific evidence has revealed that costal and interior land migration routes allowed Indigenous Peoples to migrate and settle across the Americas nearly 10,000 years ago when glaciers covering the Bering Strait began to shrink and recede. [1]

 Not done: You're drawing conclusions without supporting citations. Yes, Nathan Phillips made this statement, and yes, people migrated across the Americas. You'll need to cite a published source linking the two in order to put this in the article. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 18:16, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2019

This entire page is COMPLETELY FALSE. Nathan Phillips is the student who is so rudely smirking at the Native American War Vet this page is referencing. Change it IMMEDIATELY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2620:102:400B:8D01:C48E:6139:99E0:C017 (talk) 17:47, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

No, Phillips is the tribal elder. Bkatcher (talk) 17:49, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done incorrect information. Britishfinance (talk) 17:54, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2019

The account of what took place on 18 Jan 2019 is likely not true given other videos that have come to light about this incident. 47.232.88.36 (talk) 18:59, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done. You need to request a specific change. That request must be of the form "please change X to Y" and should include the source(s) used to back up the change. --McSly (talk) 19:12, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2019

Another link should be added as a footnote #20 to this information on the Nathan Phillips incident at the Indigenous Peoples' March 2019 by a registered user. An additional paragraph should be added to this article on the 2019 Indigenous Peoples’ March, because several videos obtained from this incident have now been publicized on January 20, 2019. (see link below) Nathan Phillips and his group approached the school kids who were chanting cheers for their school. They did not “surround him” and threaten him as stated. All videos on this link show students stood there and smiled at them and danced to their drums while Phillips got right in one boy’s face. Please have a registered user add this information so the article is current. It can be footnote 20. 97.88.56.40 (talk) 19:44, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done It is not about what you - or other people on the internet - think what happened. WP is only for high-quality secondary independent sources (Per WP:RS) such as NYT, Guardian, Washington Post etc. Many major news networks around the world have now covered this story and all express the view quoted by the high-quality references in this article. If these sources change their view, the article will change. As of 20 January 2018, they have not. Britishfinance (talk) 19:50, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

As early as 1/20/2018 (Same day), and 01/21/2018 they have - based on information available at that time. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/20/us/nathan-phillips-covington.html https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/21/new-video-confrontation-kentucky-students-native-american https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/picture-of-the-conflict-on-the-mall-comes-into-clearer-focus/2019/01/20/c078f092-1ceb-11e9-9145-3f74070bbdb9_story.html?utm_term=.a8dc41b7a268

Good NYT article may strike a good balance that this article should perhaps emulate

Today the New York Times published an article that gives a pretty good balanced overview of the Lincoln Memorial incident this weekend in which the views of both sides are represented. I am hoping that the people who have invested time in writing this wikipedia article will consider emulating it by perhaps toning down the emotional description of Mr. Phillips's role in the incident (note the NYT doesn't even mention the dog whistle of Mr. Phillips being a Vietnam vet) and adding in descriptions of the behavior by the Hebrew Israelites and the viewpoints of the boys from Covington involved in the episode. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/20/us/nathan-phillips-covington.html Llewkcalbyram (talk) 01:36, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2019

Nathan Phillips Lied. The Media Bought It. Please Tell the Truth That isn’t what happened. Phillips was the aggressor in the situation. It’s a curious feature of our culture that people aggressively seek to be victimized, go out of their way in hopes of getting punched in the face, but here we are. https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/01/nathan-phillips-lied-the-media-bought-it/ 24.119.208.238 (talk) 04:10, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 05:42, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 January 2019

Following sentence should have <allegedly> inserted as noted.
He received national attention in America after participating in the Indigenous Peoples' March in Washington, D.C. in January 2019, when he was <allegedly> harassed by a group of high school students. 2601:1C0:4300:9470:E991:D643:EF86:A9E6 (talk) 05:50, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. My primary opinion is that the whole Article should be deleted, unless and until someone can make a convincing case that Phillips is somehow noteworthy. The only question is: How long will it take before the Article is eventually deleted? I added the word "allegedly" 1) because that's just what you do in an encyclopedia where allegations and facts are uncertain, 2) evidence suggests that the allegation is false, 3) the Article is doomed, and that it's just a matter of time before it's deleted and 4) anything that underlines the non-noteworthy nature of the whole event will serve to accelerate this Article's eventual demise, and 5) someone else requested it.

Tym Whittier (talk) 22:15, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Opening sentence of 2019 Indigenous Peoples' March section is inaccurate

"On January 18, 2019 videos recorded at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC, USA showed Nathan Phillips being harassed by a group of fifty to sixty high school boys who had attended the coinciding annual March for Life;"

There is no video that conclusively shows Nathan Phillips being harassed. In fact, the extensive videos that have now been made public have destroyed Phillip's major claims regarding the incident.

- Phillips is quoted by CBS News as saying that the student shifted back and forth in order to block his path. The video shows the truth. The student is standing still and Phillips walks up to him and plays a drum inches from the student's face in a provocative and taunting manner. The confused kid simply stands still and occasionally smiles.

- “There was that moment when I realized I’ve put myself between beast and prey,” Phillips told the Detroit Free-Press. “These young men were beastly and these old black individuals was their prey, and I stood in between them and so they needed their pounds of flesh and they were looking at me for that.”

Another shameless, vicious lie that is proven false by the actual video. The "old black individuals" were members of a hate group (Black Israelites), were not old, and had been hurling racist and homophobic abuse at the children. There was no aggressive action taken by the children.

- Phillips claimed that the students had chanted "Build the Wall". The video disproves this. Phillip's close friend and fellow "activist" can be heard screaming "white people, go back to Europe" but there is no chanting about a wall.

- The Washington Post states "In an interview Saturday, Phillips, 64, said he felt threatened by the teens and that they swarmed around him as he and other activists were wrapping up the march and preparing to leave." Extensive video footage shows that Phillips walked up to the crowd of boys, who were waiting for a school bus.

In short, it is clear that Phillips can be described, at best, as an "unreliable narrator". What the video shows is perhaps in the eye of the beholder, but there is certainly no video that conclusively shows Phillips being harassed by anyone, let alone 50 to 60 boys.

This sentence should be removed. In addition, a fair accounting of the incident should mention the racist and homophobic slurs hurled at the children by the Black Israelites and by Phillip's close friend and fellow "activist". It should also mention that Phillips' major claims about the incident (listed above) are now known to be false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8A:500:415:54B1:E96D:6DB5:8B7 (talk) 14:25, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Requested oversight from Wikipedia admin

I just sent a request for oversight of this article from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Oversight

It seems that there is consensus here that the article needs revision to present a more complete and balanced view of the incident involving Nathan Phillips as well as verification of claimed military service in Vietnam. People suggesting changes have followed protocol and discussed suggestions on the talk page rather than editing the article without discussion and perhaps starting an edit war, but the main author seems wither to have abandoned the article or to be unwilling to edit it to reflect the concerns of others.

Llewkcalbyram (talk) 15:06, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I agree!! Coastiejon99 (talk) 05:19, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

November 2000 sources

Here are some sources from November 2000:

• https://www.omaha.com/news/nation/who-is-nathan-phillips-years-ago-omaha-tribe-member-said/article_6cc049c4-d6d8-5e3c-8ee6-939a203682af.html
• https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/2000/11/21/a-mourning-wake-up-call/c9fd1ab8-dfdc-42fd-a5b7-c9e8d3b3512e/

Both include details of his origins. --Dual Freq (talk) 18:23, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2019

Sources questionable. Needs to prove the man was a Marine Recon Ranger when there is no such thing. I cannot attach proof, as there simply is and never was any such job or MS. His age at the end of the Vietnam War would have been 17. Entire military career needs to be proved and is just based on Philip's story. Scoundrel13 (talk) 18:58, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:31, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

The context in which he used "Recon Ranger" is certainly nebulous, but doesn't appear to be referring to his time in the military. It doesn't belong. Buffs (talk) 23:26, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Not Noteworthy

Does anyone think this anonymous nobody is noteworthy? I don't. However, if someone wants to assert that he is, they should also be aware that the details of the recent "media splash" have been clarified and it does not look good for Mr. Phillips, and that this Article might just as easily be reframed as an example of how the gullible Media is willing to publish allegations and lurid assertions as if they are facts, without checking them first. Second, I would also argue that Mr. Phillips "notoriety" could equally be attributed to his memeworthiness. I have one in particular that I like, depicting an image of Mr. Phillips, with the caption "Chief Crying Wolf".

I just think that it would be better for everyone all-around if this Article were "speedily deleted", since the only place it can legitimately go is towards mocking Mr. Phillips.

Tym Whittier (talk) 21:10, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

"On January 18, 2019 videos recorded at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC, USA appeared to show Phillips being harassed by a group of fifty to sixty high school boys who had attended the coinciding annual March for Life; it was widely shared through social media, including Twitter and YouTube with one video reaching two million viewers in two hours."

Keyword here being "appeared". Since the "twitterstorm", several other videos have come out showing that Phillips had the choice of remaining where he was, a safe and respectful distance from the teenagers, but instead Mr. Phillips chose to engage with the teenagers by closing the distance between them (about 30 feet) to within 1 foot, while banging his drum in one teenager's face. Meaning, in terms of "who harassed who", Phillips clearly initiated the conflict. Many reliable sources are now "walking back" their original narrative of events, while other sources are ignoring the whole story, and pretending that it didn't happen.

Either way, any source used by this Article that does not reflect this new and updated version of the Narrative are by definition NOT "reliable", since they got the story wrong. Which means, in order to keep the Article, new sources need to be found to correct the incorrect and unreliable sources used in the Article's current version, reflecting a new version of events that will only serve to cast Mr. Phillips in a negative light, as well as the unreliable and inaccurate media that fabricated this story, and from there, this Article. All of this is an argument to speedily delete this not-noteworthy Article, IMO.

Tym Whittier (talk) 21:56, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

The guy was all over the news for several days, and he has a history of doing EXACTLY what he did here. It may be fifteen minutes of fame, but it was fame, and how Mr. Phillips conducted himself to attain that 15 minutes is fair game. After all, Kim Kardashian has a wiki page.

Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2019

https://www.greensboro.com/warning-offensive-language-full-video-of-covington-catholic-students-black/youtube_8383524a-d9b5-5c5b-a751-5e864a3ac645.html Redcanyonkim (talk) 22:01, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 22:12, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2019

There is no actual source material that confirms any of the claims of Mr. Nathan Philips. He makes extra-ordinary claims but he can't back them up with FACTS. For example: "Vietnam veteran". He does NOT provide evidence, dog tags, military reference numbers etc. Same goes for the claim as "native american". He needs to provide source materials, not just news paper clippings ( that is not evidence, or facts. People can claim anything but in order to make them true they need to provide the correct documentation). This is: no reference to military numbers and codes+ documentation, no reference to native american registers. This page was created on the 19th because it is FULL of biased references of known biased newspapers who came out that "they were wrong". Suggested approach: the academic approach: SOURCE MATERIALS ONLY. Secondary references are ok to add extra info but NOT about "claims of being Native American or Military personnel" that is fraud and diminishes the accomplishments and suffering that Native Americans and Military personnel went through.

Suggested edits: completely remove all references about "veteran, military service, vietnam, etc" and all "Native American" claims until they can be checked with registers and provided with correct photographic material that needs to be uploaded. Here are what needs to be changed and the "references" need all to be removed for being biased and unproven. Delete those sections or give the uploader 10 days the chance to load up the required info.: 'Bold text'Background and activism He was brought up in a traditional tribal home in Nebraska[1] of the Nebraska Omaha Tribe.[2] The New York Times identified Phillips as a former Director of the Native Youth Alliance, a group that works to ensure that traditional culture and spiritual ways are upheld for future generations of Native Americans,[3] and that he leads an annual ceremony honoring Native American war veterans in Arlington National Cemetery.[3] The Guardian called him "a well-known Native American activist who was among those leading the Standing Rock protests in 2016 and 2017 against the construction of an oil pipeline in North Dakota".[4]

Phillips was in the news in Michigan in 2015 when a group of students from Eastern Michigan University allegedly harassed him.[5]

In a January 2019 article in Indian Country Today', Phillips was described as a "keeper of a sacred pipe".[6][Notes 1][5] Another January 2019 article in the Washington Post described Phillips as a "a veteran in the indigenous rights movement".[7]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Bradv🍁 03:58, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 January 2019

He served in the US Marines from 1972-1976. This was during the period the US was at war, but there were no Marines in combat after 1972. He has never said he served in Vietnam, he served during Vietnam War period. 2600:8805:3B00:24:A80E:C53F:C555:4DFF (talk) 00:23, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Bradv🍁 03:59, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Military service

Was he a "Vietnam-era vet", or did he actually serve in Vietnam? What were his dates of service, where did he serve, what was his MOS? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.248.247.218 (talk) 03:11, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I agree that more information should be provided or that the sentence should simply be removed. As it stands, it seems designed to obfuscate rather than inform.

If he's actually 64(?) in 2019, as has been alleged elsewhere, Vietnam War dates might make him too young to have served (legally).

I can find no record of a military position "recon ranger". Are we spreading blatant falsehood? Please delete the military position until we can cite something besides his word. 50.35.67.82 (talk) 22:42, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

According to Vogue and Indian Country Today (quoting Chase Iron Eyes), "Recon Ranger" is an informal term based on military jargon that he and his relatives used for the point person/scout on the "prayer walks" at Standing Rock. See more below in section marked Recon Ranger. 06:52, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

References to news articles and media publications are not an indication or proof of military service. Coastiejon99 (talk) 04:08, 22 January 2019 (UTC) Vietnam Veteran Phillips served in the U.S. military during the Vietnam War in the Marine Corps as a Recon Ranger and Infantryman.[3][8][9][10][11] AcademicUniversalis (talk) 23:01, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

So I looked into it and there is no way he was deployed in Vietnam, so the claim he was a veteran of the war is simply a falsely. He was 17 in 1972, the age at which he claimed he joined the Marines and at that time the Marines had pulled out of Vietnam. I would recommend removal of that portion of the page as well until he either provides more proof or until a source points out that he lied about it and create another section regarding his stolen valor. https://granitegrok.com/blog/2019/01/is-nathan-phillips-too-young-to-be-a-vietnam-vet here is a blog that summarizes the information and provides sources. 23:55, 21 January 2019 (UTC)~~

Joined Marines at 17?

I can't find anything in the Vogue article that mentioned he joined the Marines at 17 years old.

Where specifically in the article (not in the comments section) does it reference that?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by BneiBrakPhone (talk • contribs) 23:36, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

"Born to an Omaha Nation family in Nebraska, Phillips was separated from his mother around age 5 and raised by a white family until he was 17, when he joined the Marines and served as an infantryman in the Vietnam War".[2] Snooganssnoogans (talk) 23:41, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

I removed the mention of the age, because it seemed unlikely, given that this source[3] says he worked jobs between the age of 17 and joining the Marines. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 23:49, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Again, a news article or media input is not an official and accurate account of an individual’s military service. You need to provide that information or delete this inaccurate passage. Coastiejon99 (talk) 05:23, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Recon Ranger??

Umm. There’s no such thing. And I find it troubling that a supposedly factual information website lists such a statement as fact, and that the only reference for the (mis)information is the testimony of Phillips himself. In addition, I’ve seen several reports that he was born in 1956, which would have made him 17 (at the oldest) on March 29, 1973 - the date that the last of the U.S. Military forces were withdrawn from Vietnam. Being that Elder Phillips supposedly served from 1972 - 1976, that would mean that he graduated Marine Recon Ranger school (if there was such a thing) AND gotten deployed to Vietnam as just a 16-year-old boy. Rather impressive. Or a fraud. You choose. JBlaski13 (talk) 01:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

There is indeed no such thing. Phillips is obviously confusing two quite different elite units: the United States Army Rangers and United States Marine Corps Force Reconnaissance. That confusion casts doubts on his claim to have been in the Marine Corps at all. -- 1.129.104.42 (talk) 15:23, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

• He says that he was "what they called" a recon ranger, not that that was his formal position; that's why it's in quotes in the article. The rest of what you're saying is WP:OR. That said, we could just remove the "what they called a recon ranger" bit, as it seems like only one source mentions it, and (unlike his service itself, which many news sources report as fact) that source just attributes it to him. --Aquillion (talk) 15:33, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

• It seems simple enough to state that's what he claims (this has been reported in several reliable sources. At that point, the credibility of the statement itself stands/falls on its own merits without having to address the accuracy of Mr. Phillips' claim. Buffs (talk) 18:54, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

(update) statement is too nebulous to pass WP:BLP. Buffs (talk) 23:28, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

the fact that "Recon Ranger" isn't an actual position in the marines should be noted as he calls it his "role" yet even in unofficial marine terminology is that term used to describe any role a marine does. A quick search pulled up no mention of it being used in the marines besides Nathan's usage. The fact that he uses that to describe his position in the military multiple times instead of his rank or actual position is just to glaring an issue to not at least explain that this isn't an actual thing in the Marines 4.34.191.66 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:53, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

In the Vogue article, Nathan Phillips is referring to his usual role during the prayer walks he goes on: "They were outfitted in head-to-toe camouflage, masked by bandanas printed with the word Resist, and bearing walkie-talkies. “I have a relative here who said he’d lead the way and scout ahead for us,” Phillips continued, his voice breaking. “You know, I’m from Vietnam times. I’m what they call a recon ranger. That was my role. So I thank you for taking that point position for me.” He never says he was a recon ranger during Vietnam times. Recon Ranger is a term they made up for the point person that leads the prayer walks they were regularly going on. He clearly says "I'm what they call a recon ranger." He does not say "I was what they call a recon ranger during Vietnam times." The confusion is understandable but there are hardcore Stolen Valor activists out to get him now because he and his friends invented a term based on military jargon for a role in the group they were involved in 40+ years as a civilian. The reference to "recon ranger" must be removed. Kire1975 (talk) 06:23, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

• Another source reports: "Chase Iron Eyes, lead attorney for the Lakota People’s Law Project...told Indian Country Today, “The recon ranger quote was taken completely out of context. I’ve known Nathan a long time. He was speaking about his role at Standing Rock, he was not talking about his role in the military. He has always said Vietnam Times or Vietnam era when referring to his military service.”

Vietnam war veteran vs Vietnam era veteran

Is there actually any source where Philips has claimed to have served in the Vietnam war? In the Vogue ref. Philips states: "You know, I’m from Vietnam times. I’m what they call a recon ranger". In the recent Indian Country Today ref. he say" I'm expendable. You know, when I was in Vietnam times and when I was in the Marine Corps times, that's what I was." The magazine itself refers to him as "Vietnam-era Native American Veteran". This sounds like a Vietnam era veteran to me, but no claim to have actually served in Vietnam. According to our article on Vietnam veteran the official American definition says: "A Vietnam era veteran is a person who served on active duty anywhere in the world for a period of more than 180 days, any part of which occurred between August 5, 1964 and May 7, 1975", making no distinction between those who served in Vietnam and those who served elsewhere between 1964 and 1975. Iselilja (talk) 17:02, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Following a discussion on BLP/n, seems he's been saying consistently over the years he is a Vietnam times/era veteran - not a Vietnam vet - however a number of different outlets were confused by this. WaPo printed a correction.

Added clarification; WaPo isn't the only one. Buffs (talk) 18:55, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

References

IMO this needs to be clarified further. If "Vietnam era veteran" is legally defined as meaning that the person served "served on active duty anywhere in the world for a period of more than 180 days, any part of which occurred between August 5, 1964 and May 7, 1975..." then it is not clear that Nathan Phillips meets this standard. It seems that his service was entirely in the Marine Corps reserves--there is no evidence he ever was on active duty to meet the 180 day threshold. "Vietnam Times Veteran" is an undefined term and should be avoided.

Returning to this, after having viewed some excerpts of Phillips' DD-214 (posted online), it does show that Phillips had active duty time greater than 180 days during this time-frame. However, some of this active duty time was apparently "in confinement." Whether or not this counts as "creditable service" to satisfy the 180 day requirement is still unclear. Phillips should probably not be identified as a "Vietnam Era Veteran" (which has a specific legal meaning) until it can be demonstrated that he really is one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.118.38.197 (talk) 19:28, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

• (Moved Comment from elsewhere):

This article reports that Phillips told them he served in the Vietnam war.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2019/01/20/native-american-leader-nathan-phillips-recounts-incident-video/2630256002/

Phillips said he grew up in an abusive home, started working on construction and lumber jobs, and then joined the Marines, serving in the Vietnam War.

BneiBrakPhone (talk) 20:16, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

That strikes me as another misunderstanding -- note that it also says he is a "former Marine." Seems like more of the same garbling in the press, though everyone's mileage may vary! Dumuzid (talk) 20:55, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Also this: Mr. Phillips served in the Marine Corps in Vietnam from 1972-76.

https://www.toledoblade.com/frontpage/2007/07/02/Pow-wow-gives-life-to-past-and-present-in-Tecumseh.html

BneiBrakPhone (talk) 21:01, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Given the controversy, IMO we at a minimum need sources which specifically quote what Phillips actually said. Or maybe go as far as to sources which explicitly note the controversy and mention that Phillips did say to them he was a Vietnam veteran (or whatever). A lot of sources do seem to have misinterpreted what was said. For example as noted in BLP/N, this CNN interview has been touted [4]. But the transcript doesn't claim to be verbatim, "Here is the transcript of Phillips' interview, which has been lightly edited for flow and content" and it's clear from the actual interview this is one area where it isn't accurate since he said "Vietnam times" [5]. While this is ORish, given BLP concerns and the fact it's clear sources have gotten it wrong, we need to be careful here IMO and simply excluding sources which are questionable even if normally RS is an acceptable option. Other then the Washington Post, this source [6] which was earlier used in our article [7] has also been updated (correction posted at the end although weirdly the wording doesn't seem to entirely reflect the correction). Frankly, the "recon ranger" thing seems far more likely to be contentious going forward. Nil Einne (talk) 05:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

"Mr. Phillips served in the Marine Corps in Vietnam from 1972-76. " https://www.toledoblade.com/frontpage/2007/07/02/Pow-wow-gives-life-to-past-and-present-in-Tecumseh.html BneiBrakPhone (talk) 22:54, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Veteran?

We know that Phillips was not a "Vietnam Veteran" but has anyone been able to get an official source to confirm whether he actually served in any branch of the military?

Formally, one way to get military records on someone who was a veteran is by writing a letter or filling out a form with usa.gov but you can only get the info if you are the veteran or authorized to obtain that information. I spoke with Ted Puntillo, the Director of Veteran Services for Solano County in CA and he confirmed that and that you could also get that info from the VA but you would need the vet's social security number to get that info.

So, at this point, I can't get any info on whether Phillips was a veteran of any branch of the U.S. military. Couple that with his false statements about being in Vietnam and that he claimed that he was a "recon ranger" when there is no such thing as a "recon ranger", why are we taking at face-value that he is a veteran at all? Wouldn't it be more prudent and more accurate to state that he "claims" to have served and that he "allegedly" is a veteran?

Until we have proof of his true status and considering his false claims at the incident at the Lincoln Memorial, I would recommend that the article remove the favorable bias of Phillips having served. Obviously I can't make that change because this article is locked so I would appreciate some thoughts about this issue. Thank you. --Jtpaladin (talk) 23:35, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

I definitely agree with this. He seems to be consistently lying about his background, and given that he - at best - purposely misinterpreted what happened at the indigenous march, this section should be altered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.81.208.233 (talk) 23:39, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Military service info

FYI, in case this hasn't come up yet. Don Shipley (Navy SEAL) obtained primary sources for military status of Nathan Phillips. This twitter link has the pictures in case you don't want to watch the video. https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1087881473225572352 Summarizing, entered Marine Corps Reserves, Topeka, Kansas. Active Duty for training, May 20, 1972 - November 3, 1972, Basic Electrician training, Expert Rifle Badge only listed decoration. Refrigerator Mechanic in Lincoln, Nebraska. Active Duty again Aug 12, 1974 to May 5, 1976. Discharged in 1976 as a Private, a handful of Unauthorized Absences/AWOL for a couple days in 1975, etc. Separated El Toro, CA. Nothing about Marine Recon or recon rangers, etc. Obviously, there needs to be 3rd party reporting by reliable sources for this, but Shipley is fairly well regarded in tracking down this info, basically that's why he has a wikipedia article. --Dual Freq (talk) 02:47, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Interesting (I watched the video) and possibly true - but entirely unusable for BLP. Shipley for instance, to get to the records, uses a different name (Nathan Stanard) - and while people changing names is common - we need a WP:RS making this (which might happen given this story isn't dead yet). Icewhiz (talk) 07:13, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

The form lists both names but unless mainstream RS start reporting it there is nothing to add. PackMecEng (talk) 14:59, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Don Shipley's YT channel, whose latest video started with Indian Chants making fun of Nathan Phillips' heritage, has been terminated: "This account has been terminated due to multiple or severe violations of YouTube's policy prohibiting content designed to harass, bully or threaten." Kire1975 (talk) 23:04, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Infantryman in the Vietnam War

Born to an Omaha Nation family in Nebraska, Phillips was separated from his mother around age 5 and raised by a white family until he was 17, when he joined the Marines and served as an infantryman in the Vietnam War.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/power-nathan-phillips-apos-song-161810017.html

As far as anything out there, he does not appear to ever be an Infantryman anywhere.

BneiBrakPhone (talk) 16:17, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Interesting, that article seems to be an outlier from what most are saying. PackMecEng (talk) 16:26, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

It also seems to be hearsay. Kire1975 (talk) 04:52, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

He also specifies that he was an infantryman here as well.

"I'm a veteran," says Phillips, "a Marine Corps infantryman in the '70s."    

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/2000/11/21/a-mourning-wake-up-call/c9fd1ab8-dfdc-42fd-a5b7-c9e8d3b3512e/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0717977a8f4b

BneiBrakPhone (talk) 16:29, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Early life section

The page needs to be edited to reflect his DD-214 and not what’s in the media. IEditThingsForYou (talk) 04:00, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

• https://www.redstate.com/jenvanlaar/2019/01/22/nathan-phillips-dd-214-released-shows-hes-not-quite-claims/WTucker (talk) 14:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
• https://newsmaven.io/indiancountrytoday/news/well-known-navy-seal-don-shipley-obtains-nathan-phillips-military-records-p3Gs--zUpUiwJPURPIlzxg/Visser003 (talk) 21:54, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
• https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2019/01/23/nathan-phillips-man-standoff-with-covington-teens-faces-scrutiny-his-military-past/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b11b5f77034dWTucker (talk) 02:02, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Controversy

Perhaps what's called for is a "Military service controversy" section (or even "Stolen valor controversy") which would open up more of the discussion between those who say one thing and those who say another. The barest factual outline of his military service would remain in the "Early life" section.--Artaxerxes 18:42, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

“Vietnam era Veteran... Recon ranger” several articles from reputed publications (Washington Post, Military Times) There’s also videos of Nathan Phillips stating “I’m a Vietnam vet...” He’s been accused of stolen valor and those accusations have been publicized. The accusations should be mentioned.... 0pen$0urce (talk) 11:15, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 January 2019

January 2019 event labeled as young boys wearing MAGA hats: check your facts which appear to be hastily put on this page. It appears that whoever put this here has an agenda which is not supported by the FACTS. I support Wikipedia but not when it is abused like this. Origionalcowboydave (talk) 17:06, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done - no discernable edit request made. GAB^gab 17:09, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Year of birth?

Some sources are reporting 1955 as Nathan Phillips's year of birth:

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/exclusive-here-is-nathan-phillips-record-of-criminal-charges/

https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2019/01/21/nathan-phillips-not-vietnam-war-veteran-richard-blumenthal-problem/

If one was sourced to a government record such as a speeding ticket, it should be considered.Ryoung122 20:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

According to public records, Nathan Alan Phillips was born on February 22 1955 Murdery1 (talk) 07:10, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Indigenous Peoples' March incident

I notice repeat deletions of the entire section on the Indigenous Peoples' March incident. The section is reliably sourced and seems due weight to be included in the article given the widespread coverage of the incident. I think it would help if the editor deleting this entire section could instead be specific about concerns. If you believe there is information in section which is not supported by the references cited, that needs to be discussed and addressed. Per WP:BLP, content about living persons must be reliably sourced. Currently, it appears this information is reliably sourced, unless the references cited are being misrepresented somehow. Instead of just repeated deletions, please discuss and be specific about concerns so they can be addressed. DynaGirl (talk) 22:25, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Should only positive information from the WP:RS be added?

Not sure how to add the following to the article:

Phillips was overwhelmed by the loss of his family, his troubled upbringing and the lack of ties to his own culture and turned to crime and drinking.  For the next 14 years, he used the skills he learned in the Marines to work as a thug-for-hire.

This would nicely fill out the two-decade-plus gaping hole in between the subject's military service and activist career. It seems Wikipedia does not forbid adding WP:RS info which is less than hagiographic about biographical subjects. If you go to John Hemingway article, for example, it says he "embarked on "alcoholic sprees" (per one source) and if you go to Woody Allen's -who's alive-, it says a child female "had an eight-year affair with Allen that began in 1976 when she was 16 years old and thus underage" (per one source). A don't even go into the Roman Polanski page -he´s also alive-, yet the lead paragraph says in Wikipedia's voice "Polanski was arrested and charged with drugging and raping a 13-year-old girl," before it drolly notes the guy won several Oscars afterwards. How should we add the "thug for hire" info? XavierItzm (talk) 22:45, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

The Daily Nebraskan is a student newspaper; it doesn't pass WP:RS for adding negative material to a WP:BLP. (And, per BLP, there is a higher standard for negative material, since it's capable of doing more immediate harm.) We can add negative stuff, definitely, but we'd need a much higher-quality source than a student-run newspaper. --Aquillion (talk) 16:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

But now there are sources confirming and corroborating. I don't see why a source dating back to 1871 should not be included, especially as it has not been determined that the Daily is not a WP:RS. XavierItzm (talk) 10:42, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Belatedly, those two are partisan sources (especially the Washington Examiner, which is an extremely partisan source and is totally unusable in a WP:BLP); Fox might pass, but it alone is not sufficient to use for a negative claim about a WP:BLP, especially when its own coverage is so cautiously-worded and says little itself. And as I said, the Daily Nebraskan is a student newspaper - it clearly fails WP:RS for a WP:BLP. (You can bring it up on WP:BLPN if you want, but I guarantee you'd be wasting your time.) --Aquillion (talk) 04:05, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Sources

Proposed new article: "2019 Lincoln Memorial controversy"

Main article: 2019 Lincoln Memorial controversy

I'm too new here to create a new article, but I'm hoping someone else will click on the link to create it.

Burtbroil (talk) 01:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

VIDEO CONFIRMS NATHAN PHILLIPS LIED ABOUT EVENT

The involved student released a statement saying that the students were confronted by four members of the Black Hebrew Israelite movement, that Philips tried to provoke the students and that they never chanted "build the wall" or used any racist language or gestures.[28][29][30 VIDEO CONFIRMS THIS TO BE CORRECT Italic text — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.55.249.100 (talk) 17:21, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 January 2019

The "recon ranger" citation is to the wrong Vogue article. It should be https://www.vogue.com/projects/13542941/return-to-standing-rock/. 100.6.49.192 (talk) 03:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC) 100.6.49.192 (talk) 03:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done This appears to have already been done, or the link is already the same as what you posted. Bradv🍁 04:01, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 January 2019

It needs to be noted he was AWOL 3 times while stationed ONLY in the US during his service time. A copy of his DD214 is at the following link:

https://newsmaven.io/indiancountrytoday/news/well-known-navy-seal-don-shipley-obtains-nathan-phillips-military-records-p3Gs--zUpUiwJPURPIlzxg/ Stellartrack777 (talk) 17:40, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Bradv🍁 04:01, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 January 2019

If the updated TRUE information about his DD214 and his AWOL is not published. I will create my OWN WIKI on him that ANYONE can add too. Stellartrack777 (talk) 17:43, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

You are very welcome to create your own wiki about Phillips, and I am sure he would be very honored. You can download the MediaWiki software at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Download. MPS1992 (talk) 17:54, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 January 2019

There are 2 sources after the 3 names in the lead, yet none of them support the middle name, or the last name, which was recently added with no source by a new user. My edit request is to remove the middle name and the recently added name, as there are no sources for any of that. (source [2] is just a video and should probably be removed completely as it doesn't seem to support the names any better than the first). Alternatively, provide new sources to support the names. Thanks -70.174.93.74 (talk) 18:32, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

 Done I've removed the names entirely, in both the lede and the infobox, as they are unsourced. The video is removed as well, as I don't believe it supports any of the article content. Bradv🍁 04:07, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

error/lack of citation/not NPOV

Regarding "Military service" under "early life"

One sentence reads, "some conservative sites went as far as classifying this as "stolen valor"" to which I ask, "which conservative sites? (WHOM says this?) and additionally it's not NPOV to brand them as conservative unless they do so themselves. The New York Times and Washington Post are mentioned two sentences later with no regard to any political stance.

The last sentence regarding his early life currently reads, "The United States Department of Veterans Affairs classifies the period between 5 August 1964 and 7 May 1975 as the Vietnam Era" and it links to a page called "Vietnam Era". Currently the page "Vietnam Era" contains no citations. I don't think this sentence should remain in this page until the supposed era is cited. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_Era

Currently the edit status of this page is protected and I cannot make edits to these errors. However, I do believe that the editor responsible for this lack of NPOV should be prohibited from adding additional information to this page. 2600:1700:7A51:10B0:9475:5865:BAE1:C3E5 (talk) 14:13, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Discuss Vietnam Era on that page (not that sourcing Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act would difficult) - I'll note that the citation from Snopes (which is a WP:RS) supports this (specifically the dates). As for "some" and conservative - I rectified this, diff, by adding Conservative Daily News which is the example Snopes gives. Icewhiz (talk) 14:20, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Stolen valor

There is a lot of ongoing discussion regarding stolen valor. Stolen valor isn't new by any means and there are dozens of video compilations on Youtube made by Veterans and people currently serving calling out people for stolen valor. Common red flags are inaccurate dates, confusing MOI titles, and lack of transparency. I don't care about the recent conflict regarding Nathan Phillips. I care about stolen valor. It is a federal offense. If we can collectively prove that he has committed that offense then good on Wikipedian's for getting together and figuring this out. 2600:1700:7A51:10B0:9475:5865:BAE1:C3E5 (talk) 14:19, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

That would be original research, and it's not what we do. We summarize the information available in third-party reliable sources. Bradv🍁 14:21, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

This may change as more "news outlets" start researching/writing on his actual military service records, not just those outlets Wikipedia generally regards as not reliable news sources. Perhaps the government "shutdown" affects this. If stolen valor is, in fact, a prosecutable federal offense -- and we can certainly count a number of public officials who have committed it without official penalty -- that only adds to the importance of getting the facts straight here (with substantial support).--Artaxerxes 16:14, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

The fact-checking processes of resources on Wikipedia results in OR. I know Wiki isn't for OR but it happens on Wiki whether Wiki bureaucracy likes it or not. This encyclopedia is great at compiling and fact checking information and that process has resulted in OR. Take for example the California Republican Party controversy when someone added 'Nazism' to their ideology days before midterm elections. This led to the removal of the ideology information box on many State-level political parties. This was all because of the discussion and OR that took place in the talk section. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:California_Republican_Party#Who_determines_what_are_the_ideologies_of_the_California_Republican_Party 2600:1700:7A51:10B0:9475:5865:BAE1:C3E5 (talk) 16:01, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, OR does happen quite often on Wikipedia, and it should be removed on sight. That other instances have not been removed promptly does not justify a suggestion that we should tolerate it here. Bradv🍁 17:01, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Go ahead and try to revert all the edits regarding the removal of ideology sections of State level political parties then. It's in view to you now. That instance of OR clearly contributed to the Reliability of Wikipedia. If you don't think that justifies itself then whatever, there's no convincing you. 2600:1700:7A51:10B0:9475:5865:BAE1:C3E5 (talk) 17:28, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

AWOL and General Discharge from the United State Marine Corps Reserves as a ReferMech and claims of being a "Vietnam Veteran"

"His role was as a refrigerator mechanic, or ReferMech." "his duty status lists “discharged,” not “honorably discharged.” That could have to do with his multiple stints in confinement after being AWOL."

"Phillips also described coming back to the U.S. as a veteran from Vietnam.", from archived Indian Country Today article Dec 5, 2008 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Btakita (talk • contribs) 20:40, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Video where he refers to himself as Vietnam Vet - "I'm a Vietnam Vet. I served in Marine Corps 72 to 76. I got discharged May 5, 1976. I got honorable discharge and one of the boxes shows peacetime or, what my box says is that I was **in theater**. I don't talk much about my Vietnam times."

He can been seen in this recent video stating that his was a Vietnam Vet, and that he was **in theater**, meaning he saw combat.

"I'm a Vietnam Vet. I served in Marine Corps 72 to 76. I got discharged May 5, 1976. I got honorable discharge and one of the boxes shows peacetime or, what my box says is that I was **in theater**. I don't talk much about my Vietnam times."

"I'm a Vietnam Vet. I served in Marine Corps 72 to 76. I got discharged May 5, 1976. I got honorable discharge and one of the boxes shows peacetime or, what my box says is that I was **in theater**. I don't talk much about my Vietnam times."

BneiBrakPhone (talk) 11:07, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Gateway Pundit should not be used as a citation for anything. It's renowned for hoaxes and falsehoods. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:25, 24 January 2019 (UTC)]

The video is in a few places. Philips is speaking himself. I believe it is from one of his Facebook pages. Phillips clearly says he is a "Vietnam Vet". So where it was posted is not so relevant. BneiBrakPhone (talk) 14:34, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

It does matter, as we don't write articles based on what subjects say about themselves. Our articles are written based on coverage in reliable sources, which exclude Gateway Pundit, Youtube, and Facebook. Bradv🍁 14:41, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Meh. The guy probably spoke on his veteran status hundreds or thousands of times. In actual interviews aired - he says "Vietnam times". It also seems he (or probably he) requests corrections when this is misreported (per a number of corrections we've seen around this issue). If someone dragged up a video or two where he slips and says "Vietnam vet" as opposed to "Vietnam era vet" - including this is WP:UNDUE unless you've got some actual WP:RS lending credence to this (it doesn't fail on RS grounds - as WP:ABOUTSELF probably allows inclusion - but it is just simply UNDUE if no one is covering this). If you want a much more interesting take on the incident, then The Atlantic's mea culpa is actually an interesting read ([8][9]). vox is also an interesting read for a critical 2nd take. Icewhiz (talk) 14:46, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

I know they don't base articles on what people said. However, on the issue if he referred to himself as Vietnam Vet, the video is proof.

BneiBrakPhone (talk) 14:59, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Vogue Article Return to Standing Rock

https://www.vogue.com/projects/13542941/return-to-standing-rock/ "He raised a wooden staff adorned with nine eagle feathers in the air as he addressed his security team, volunteers who had stepped back into familiar roles guarding gates at camp. They were outfitted in head-to-toe camouflage, masked by bandanas printed with the word Resist, and bearing walkie-talkies. “I have a relative here who said he’d lead the way and scout ahead for us,” Phillips continued, his voice breaking. “You know, I’m from Vietnam times. I’m what they call a recon ranger. That was my role. So I thank you for taking that point position for me.”"

Pretty clear he: A: Claimed to have served in Vietnam B: Claimed to have been something that did not exist C: Force Recon guys were never called recon rangers.

It is a reasonable conclusion that Mr. Phillips is either lying or delusional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.143.208.230 (talk) 15:38, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Per The Washington Post's coverage of this - "Nelson said that Phillips’s comments at Standing Rock were taken out of context and that Phillips actually was referring to the work they were doing at the time on the reservation." - this does not refer to his service but to his Native American activism work. Icewhiz (talk) 16:01, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Willfully ignoring the "relative here who said he'd lead the way and scout ahead for us" and "So I thank you for taking that point position for me" in this quote and the multiple references to prayer walks in the omitted sentence and paragraph just before this in the Vogue article, plus the corroboration from Nelson in the Washington Post article and Chase Iron Eyes in the ICT article above, is not reasonable. To say otherwise violates the Neutral Point of View rule. Kire1975 (talk) 18:08, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Nathan Phillips indeed falsely claims to have served in Vietnam

Please add as a reference to his Military Service, the following reference:

https://www.facebook.com/NativeYouthAlliance/videos/1552014181500389/

In this video, Nathan Phillips indeed makes the claim to have served in Vietnam: "I’m a Vietnam Vet.I served in Marine Corps 72 to 76. I got discharged May 5, 1976. I got honorable discharge and one of the boxes shows peacetime or, what my box says is that I was **in theater**. I don't talk much about my Vietnam times."

Ethlor (talk) 16:44, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

References

Facebook is not a reliable source. Bradv🍁 16:57, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Bradv Actually, this is not entirely true. It can sometimes be used as a reliable source per WP:FACEBOOK, especially if it helps clarity in the article, which it seems to in this case. --Leitmotiv (talk) 00:30, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Here are a few more sources that posted the video of Nathan Phillips. Is Phillips a reliable source? If not, should we delete everything else he said?

https://www.theepochtimes.com/native-american-activist-nathan-phillips-lied-about-being-vietnam-veteran_2777438.html

https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/01/nathan-phillips-continues-to-play-victim-in-nbc-interview/

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=aIzDD_1548316918

https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1088285433673515009

BneiBrakPhone (talk) 17:11, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Here is Washington Post reporting on it "Nathan Phillips, man at center of standoff with Covington teens, misrepresented his military history"

“I’m a Vietnam vet . . . I got an honorable discharge, and one of the boxes in there shows whether it is peacetime or what my box says is that I was in theater,” he said.

Sequitur (talk) 17:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

This WaPo article is the best source on this issue. We already cite an earlier version of this article --87.177.119.88 (talk) 07:45, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

The quote says that his discharge form says he was "in theatre" ... Phillips does not claim that he was in theatre, only that his paperwork said so. 172.88.134.103 (talk) 13:05, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 24 January 2019

In the Vogue article, Nathan Phillips is referring to his usual role during the prayer walks he goes on: "They were outfitted in head-to-toe camouflage, masked by bandanas printed with the word Resist, and bearing walkie-talkies. “I have a relative here who said he’d lead the way and scout ahead for us,” Phillips continued, his voice breaking. “You know, I’m from Vietnam times. I’m what they call a recon ranger. That was my role. So I thank you for taking that point position for me.” He never says he was a recon ranger during Vietnam times. Recon Ranger is a term they made up for the point person that leads the prayer walks they were regularly going on. He clearly says "I'm what they call a recon ranger." He does not say "I was what they call a recon ranger during Vietnam times." The confusion is understandable but there are hardcore Stolen Valor activists out to get him now because he and his friends invented a term based on military jargon for a role in the group they were involved in 40+ years as a civilian. The reference to "recon ranger" must be removed. Kire1975 (talk) 06:23, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Another source reports: "Chase Iron Eyes, lead attorney for the Lakota People’s Law Project...told Indian Country Today, “The recon ranger quote was taken completely out of context. I’ve known Nathan a long time. He was speaking about his role at Standing Rock, he was not talking about his role in the military. He has always said Vietnam Times or Vietnam era when referring to his military service.” See also.

Any reference to "Recon Ranger" without reference to his role in the prayer walks at Standing Rock imply false accusation of Stolen Valor and should be considered a violation of Neutral Point of View and defamation. Kire1975 (talk) 15:16, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Ok, well in please change X to Y format: Please remove references to Phillips claiming to be a "Recon Ranger" unless they solely refer to his civilian role in the prayer rocks at Standing Rock as cited in vogue, washington post and indian country today. Kire1975 (talk) 15:22, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

The words "recon" or "ranger" are not currently in the article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:28, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

It keeps being edited in. Kire1975 (talk) 15:37, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

If there is a good source describing what "recon ranger" actually refers too (and I'm not sure that Chase Iron Eyes in an interview in Indian Country Today qualifies) - it would be a good idea to edit that in - that would prevent this being edited in based on a possibly misleading source (that is a RS generally). Icewhiz (talk) 15:48, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Worked in - diff - Wapo's coverage of the "recon ranger" bit.[10]. Icewhiz (talk) 16:18, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Maybe we'll find out "recon ranger" is a little joke the (refrigerator) mechanics -- whose who were reconditioning equipment at home -- had (which he then tried out on the rest of us).Artaxerxes 14:42, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

References

CN Tags

@Artaxerxes: -regarding tags you placed in diff - the entire paragraph is sourced (and attributed to Snopes). Snopes says several + provides a number of examples (specifically - covering the retractions of NYT, WaPo, and CNN as well as additional coverage). I don't see what you want cited here - as Snopes should be sufficient (see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. WP:SECONDARY coverage of the claims and retractions - which Snopes provides - is better than the individual articles (though all the citations are in Snopes - if you really want to drag them in - in my mind this would be Wikipedia:Citation overkill). Icewhiz (talk) 16:11, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Not everybody trusts Snopes. Please cite the actual articles they pulled from, then we can know whether we can trust the passage. And, please, do not pre-label "news outlets", as a way of coloring what they say, according to your (or anybody else's) view on where you think they're coming from on the political spectrum.--Artaxerxes 16:18, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Per the page's BLP edit notice, I have removed unsourced contentious material. Properly sourced text can be returned to the article. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:43, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

@Jonesey95: - your removal of a paragraph sourced to Snopes is counter to consensus in RSN - see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources as well as [11], [12]. Snopes is a perfectly fine source, particularly for an attributed stmt. Icewhiz (talk) 16:51, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

The paragraph was about multiple news sources making multiple errors in their reporting and implied that Phillips had made claims that he does not appear to have made. I saw no way of correcting it without rebuilding it from scratch. Snopes's summary is detailed, but not concise. Perhaps a smarter editor than I can summarize this tiny tempest in a teapot. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:06, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Check this reference

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/2019/01/24/opinion-few-questions-nathan-phillips-covcath-encounter/2636259002/

71.29.252.150 (talk) 01:01, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

As an op-ed, it's really only reliable for statements attributed to the author (per WP:NEWSORG), but I don't see why this particular contributor's opinion is worth including. Any factual content in the link should instead be supported by non-opinion news articles, especially since this is a WP:BLP. clpo13_(talk) 01:20, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2019

Please add this single-line paragraph at the end of the "Military service" subsection: "Phillips misrepresented his military history multiple times." source. 151.38.142.186 (talk) 18:19, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

That kind of text would fall under {{weasel}} and is also unsourced. Pretty sure this won't fly here. 172.88.134.103 (talk) 13:09, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi, did you check the provided source? "Nathan Phillips, man at center of standoff with Covington teens, misrepresented his military history" is literally the title of the article I linked. The source (Washington Post) is reliable and even listed in Wikpedia's "Suggested sources" for newspapers. 151.82.33.103 (talk) 14:42, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done this page is no longer protected and may be edited directly. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:45, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Criminal Record

Nathan Phillips has a criminal record with the following: "charged with escaping from the Nebraska Penal Complex where he was confined May 3," , "pleaded guilty to assault on June 19, 1974, and was fined $200", "charged with underage possession of alcohol in 1972, 1973, and 1975, as well as negligent driving", and "In December 1978, he was charged with driving without a license" Btakita (talk) 20:17, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Those of us outside the country in which Phillips seems to have found himself, aren't necessarily sure of the significance of offences like "underage possession of alcohol". MPS1992 (talk) 06:20, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Oh, there's a term for this -- Status offense. MPS1992 (talk) 17:39, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Hmm yes, I see that a kind of smear campaign has also found its way into the article. Drmies (talk) 16:55, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

You might actually also or only be watching at people being hungry for facts, so don't you be too quick to judge either. Jürgen Eissink (talk) 18:56, 28 January 2019 (UTC).

• The Washington Examiner is a WP:BIASED / partisan source; they can be used in some cases, but they absolutely do not pass WP:RS for negative material about a WP:BLP. --Aquillion (talk) 04:14, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Sources

Image in infobox

Can we just have a picture instead of a video in the infobox please? The video can go elsewhere in the article, and people shouldn't have to play a video just to see what he looks like. Richard75 (talk) 20:43, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

@Richard75: BB & FIXIT, but I don't think the only picture available is suitable for the infobox, since Phillips is vague on the picture. I have, like others probably, spent hours to find footage that matches Commons and could find only the video and the one image, so sofar it is all we have. Jürgen Eissink (talk) 21:23, 26 January 2019 (UTC).

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2019

In the subsection "Between Earth and Sky", replace "passed away" with "died" per WP:EUPHEMISM. 79.74.183.113 (talk) 22:02, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Seems to have been done. Thank you for pointing this out. MPS1992 (talk) 06:16, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Military misrepresentation

I would like to add "Phillips misrepresented himself as being a veteran of the Vietnam War." to the end of the "Military service section". My source is the washington post; as per WP:BLPRS it is "reliable, published source using an inline citation" (and taken straight from the article, if I may add). Opinions? CC: @Drmies: 151.36.43.107 (talk) 17:13, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

• Yes. Stop smearing this guy. That it was reported in a newspaper article doesn't mean it should be included here. Drmies (talk) 17:15, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
  • I was strongly opposed to inclusion of this last week - when this was sourced to the likes of the Washington Examiner. However, it seems that WaPo posted a correction to their story and that WaPo now says he misrepresented his military history in some cases - I do think it merits inclusion as long as this bio is standalone (I think that we should, however, discuss a merge once Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MAGAkids incident is closed to 2019 Indigenous Peoples March Incident - Phillips seems mainly notable for the event - we really don't need a standalone article here). Icewhiz (talk) 17:20, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
    • I do too, but in the meantime this smear campaign under the guise of "it's in a source" has no place here. Drmies (talk) 17:25, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
      • Smear might be a little harsh and assuming bad faith but I can see issues with weight in the article. There are several RS that have had to issue retractions based on his statements being disputed. That alone might be worth mentioning but it would be rather difficult to do so in a NPOV way. PackMecEng (talk) 17:34, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
        • Icewhiz and PackMecEng: thanks for providing your opinion; am I wrong in saying that all 4 people participating in this discussion ultimately agree on the fact that the information provided should be added to this bio? @Drmies: I come in peace and assume WP:GF on that "smearing campaign": if you disagree with the wording, maybe you would like to propose an edit yourself? I chose "Phillips misrepresented himself as being a vietnam veteran" because I found it to be factual, less inflammatory as possible, and lifted straight from the article. If you have a better idea, please share! 151.36.43.107 (talk) 17:46, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
          • PackMecEng, I've seen this happen in article after article. Yes, IP, I have a proposal: don't include it at all. Cut the rest of the paragraph after the "5 May 1976" of the first sentence. Drmies (talk) 18:02, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
            • @Icewhiz and PackMecEng: do you think my proposed edit is worthy of inclusion as it is? I won't comment on the previous paragraph, as I haven't checked its sources. 151.36.43.107 (talk) 18:15, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
              • IMHO it is DUE here and well sourced (though I would tone it down, and mention what he said in most interviews) - and is part of the debate. However, I also think this bio is a WP:BLP1E and should be merged to the event.Icewhiz (talk) 18:29, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
                • I am leaning to the BLP1E as well but doubt it would come out that way at an AFD. Perhaps a merge discussion. PackMecEng (talk) 18:51, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
                  • @PackMecEng: Sorry to be insistent, but regarding the edit at hand, do you feel it is WP:DUE to add it to the article or not? I understand that this is not a vote, but I think starting from DUE/UNDUE is the first step to reach middle ground. 151.36.43.107 (talk) 19:33, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
                    • I think there is a case to be made there is weight behind the incident but I would like to see a list of the sources purposed. I know there is the Washington Post one but some others would help establish that. PackMecEng (talk) 21:56, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

• Media outlets for some reason (and probably not because Phillips told them so) at first wrote Phillips was a Vietnam vet, but a few days later most of them corrected that. While on some rather obscure video's Phillips might seem to say he was a Vietnam veteran, I don't think he actually said that. Quoting some multi-interpretable lines from a remote video to me seems original research, and not of the best kind. That WaPo probably felt it should justify it's initial mistake, is no reason to put it in this article. It's all a bit far stretched, imo. Jürgen Eissink (talk) 19:43, 28 January 2019 (UTC).

• We are not quoting a video though, but a WaPo article; I don't think that is WP:OR. If you have got any source that says/implies that WaPo felt it should justify its error by "dumping" Phillips, we could add it to the edit. 151.36.43.107 (talk) 20:09, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

• Perhaps I didn't make myself clear, but I think we could leave the "he was / he was not / he said / but he said / they said / he probably said" out, so there's nothing to add. And there's certainly no need to get agitated towards me for only giving my opinion. Jürgen Eissink (talk) 20:29, 28 January 2019 (UTC).

I pushed what I think it is a tactful yet truthful edit to the article page. I hope this addresses the concerns expressed in this discussion. I'll refrain from further edits here or on the article page, thanks everyone for their contributions. 151.36.43.107 (talk) 20:35, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

And I deleted it. See Theater (warfare) and find out that, unless PROVEN otherwise, he might well have a checked 'in-theatre' box, if at the time the US was considered 'theater of warfare' (not 'theater of operations'). Jürgen Eissink (talk) 20:57, 28 January 2019 (UTC).

If we're going to be all fair and balanced, and include the ancient history of this man who came to prominence only because of one single event, perhaps we should do that for the students as well. The "MAGA boys" or "MAGA kids", as they're sometimes called. What they do, and how they do it, and how their parents do it at a school where annual tuition is $8000, or possibly up to $10,000. Whether maybe they misbehaved in school or at the store, etc. Were any of them ever expelled? Did any of them ever kicked a dog or said something stupid on social media? NO. Not for them, and not for this guy. What he did or did not do 43 years and more ago is of no relevance. Drmies (talk) 00:58, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Removal of the name of Phillips' wife and number of children

I am re-removing (after my previous edit was reversed) the names of Phliip's wife and information about his having children. I point to WP:BLPNAME, WP:BLPPRIVACY and WP:NPF. We are infringing on the privacy of his wife and children by including this information. Oska (talk) 23:55, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

• Well, I didn't go that far--I did remove the names of the children, which for me is standard operating procedure. But I don't have strong objections to your edit; it's not like they were in the news or whatever, and these are living people--if you have to source that kind of information to an organizational blog (which doesn't even mention a husband, let alone name him) or a dead link to the staff page of another organization, you don't have much of a leg to stand on, Artaxerxes. Drmies (talk) 00:51, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Didn't his wife die of cancer? FloridaArmy (talk) 01:09, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

I haven't actually seen the documentary Between Earth and Sky, but based on what I've read, it's about a trip to the Omaha reservation after she was diagnosed with cancer, so her name is notable. His children are adults, but I can't think of a reason to include their names. The number of children on the other hand may or may not be notable depending on the circumstances. I feel like this edit was made out of fear generated by the hysterical right wing mob willing to accuse anyone who publicly disagrees with the Covington Boys of doxxing and child abuse. Kire1975 (talk) 05:12, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

• I agree his wife's and children's names should not be included for reasons Oska stated above. Just their relation to him (Ex: Philips has a wife and x number of children). Pokerplayer513 (talk) 06:44, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

• You agree that the memory of his wife should be forgotten and he should be made to look like a lonely old loser loved and supported by nobody because Oska said she, who willingly made her cancer fight and subsequent death a subject of a documentary film, deserves privacy? Kire1975 (talk) 17:16, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Discussion moved to 2019 Indigenous Peoples March Incident article per WP:MERGE. PackMecEng (talk) 15:09, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

There is a discussion on 2019 Indigenous Peoples March Incident about merging this article to there. PackMecEng (talk) 15:09, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Pre 2019 sources

• https://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2017/07/100_protesters_march_against_r.html
• https://bismarcktribune.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/one-year-after-protests-end-i-would-have-done-it/article_18649aa2-1fef-5d59-b290-af5ab6a47be1.html
• https://www.vogue.com/projects/13542941/return-to-standing-rock/

ResultingConstant (talk) 21:57, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Some older sources for further information:

• http://www.loka.org/conf2003/2003crn_report.pdf (many details)
• https://web.archive.org/web/20190120044157/https://www.toledoblade.com/frontpage/2007/07/02/Pow-wow-gives-life-to-past-and-present-in-Tecumseh.html
• https://indiancountrymedianetwork.com/news/heritage-of-healing-project-2/ - article not found, only these words on Google remain:

18 jun. 2008 (...) Native Youth Alliance's Heritage of Healing Project hopes to prevent this from happening again. It all started with Alethea Mae, Little Miss NYA and daughter of NYA Project Coordinator Shoshana Beth Phillips. ”She started Jingle Dress dancing really young, because she had a really good understanding of Jingle Dress and she understood that it was a)

• https://web.archive.org/web/20170910150525/https://indiancountrymedianetwork.com/news/native-youth-alliances-presidential-pow-wow/
• https://gregornot.wordpress.com/about-gregor/ - reaction "Native Youth Alliance November 29, 2009 — 11:15 am

Nathan and Shoshana of Native Youth Alliance here. Yes, we remember Corbin Harney from the many actions at Nevada Test Site we participated in from 1990-93. Nathan many times led us to the Cattle Guard with the drum and helped with the ceremonial fires. NYA continued the Healing Global Wounds Pow Wow in Washington, DC, for 8 years, which Corbin attended some years; and we held a youth environmental conference about nuclear issues at the White House. At one or more of the Test Site events we were exposed to radiation, and Shoshana has been fighting Bone Marrow Cancer for the last 8 years as a result. We are now in Ann Arbor, MI, receiving treatment."

• https://twitter.com/grild_cheez/status/1087027231828791296/photo/1 "Nathan Phillips and his wife helped Corbin Harney and members of the Shundahai Network put on the first Powwow ever held in DC, the Healing Global Wounds 1992 Powwow with the first tepees ever on that grassy mall."
• http://bayareaaction.org/?p=6 Native Youth Alliance says: November 28, 2009 at 11:41 pm

Nathan and Shoshana of Native Youth Alliance here. Yes, we remember the 100th Monkey. It was one of the many actions at Nevada Test Site we were at from 1990-93. Nathan many times led us to the Cattle Guard with the drum and helped with the ceremonial fires. At one or more of those events we were exposed to radiation, and Shoshana has now been fighting Bone Marrow Cancer for the last 8 years as a result. We are now in Ann Arbor, MI, receiving treatment.

• http://home.epix.net/~landis/aisibpowwow.html
• https://www.hotfrog.com/business/mi/ypsilanti/native-youth-alliance
• https://www.indianz.com/News/2012/04/27/qa-raising-money-for-film-on-o.asp
• https://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2017/07/attorney_files_complaint_with.html

Many info on ancestors etc. here:

• http://marycumminsrealestatemarycummins.blogspot.com/2019/01/who-is-nathan-phillips-native-american.html

I currently lack the time for editing. Jürgen Eissink (talk) 09:41, 30 January 2019 (UTC).

Here's the Ypsilanti PD incident report on EMU racial harassment episode dated 4/11/2015: https://imgur.com/gallery/ED1KwoS Kire1975 (talk) 04:05, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

4 February 2019 Guardian Interview

Philips has just given an interview to The Guardian newspaper in London - high-quality source independent of U.S. politics, and The Guardian does not have a paywall. Worth considering if there is material that would help the article as it is Philips himself on-record to an independent secondary source:

• https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/feb/04/nathan-phillips-his-story-hate-division-covington