Talk:Unistʼotʼen Camp

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Unistʼotʼen Camp article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Indigenous peoples of North America Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Neutrality

While this topic has received some national media coverage, it appears to have been written by authors close to the subject, if not within the camp itself. I would suggest that editors pay close attention to the language and be wary of emotive language that may suggest or impel people to a certain direction while reading the article. Notes and information should be descriptive in nature. Some sections may not be notable and rather are inserted into the article, again by supporters, for their own gain. Neutrality is important, no matter how noble a cause may be. Krazytea(talk) 21:21, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Krazytea: I think the main points have been cleaned up. The checkpoint section, though, remains. Not sure how to organize/title it for neutrality concerns. I think we need to make clear it is the underlying issue/principles but I think we have to attribute it to authorities through secondary sources, not the primary sources? Alaney2k (talk) 18:48, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It looks a lot better, thank you. I would be comfortable removing the neutrality banner. Krazytea(talk) 18:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's still a significant problem of balance in the article. For starters, unistoten.camp is from the subject of the article, and is therefore inherently non-neutral. The article takes a clear position on a the dispute, by referring to the "intrusion" of RCMP. According to dictionary.com intrusion in law is defined as "an illegal act of entering, seizing, or taking possession of another's property." Even if many sources, including reliable sources, including lawyers, would argue the RCMP are in fact "intruding", there certainly is not a consensus to say that. So, it's inappropriate for Wikipedia, to say in Wikipedia's voice, without attribution, that the RCMP are "intruding". Something contentious like this, needs a citation, and in-line attribution. Even when we cover opinions, we should try to cover those of reliable sources, or of those covered by reliable sources. We shouldn't be citing an on-line petition as a source (if it's covered by third-party reliable sources, then it can be mentioned). The {{POV}} is best left on, until more editors get involved, and can improve the article. I'm not yet well-read enough on the topic to substantially edit the article myself . --Rob (talk) 04:57, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I originally wrote this article. I will add the necessary citations.I added reliable sources. I will add more. Smallison (talk) 16:40, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

unistoten.camp

We should not be using http://unistoten.camp/ as a sole source for any significant or contentious facts, as it is published (presumably) by the subject of the article. There's other questionable sources in the article, but this is a pretty obviously biased one. There's an ample supply of reliable sources (aptn, cbc, etc...) available. --Rob (talk) 06:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Uncomfortable with 'land defender'

@Krazytea: Seems pretty clear to me they are acting as land defenders, like those in South America. What is the objection? Alaney2k (talk) 15:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]