Wikipedia talk:WikiProject South Dakota

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject South Dakota and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

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

WT:SDAK

Archives: 1

Courthouse Photos

I propose that photos of all South Dakota county courthouses be added to their respective article, and possibly the corresponding county seat article. This would serve to beautify the article and serve as a visual representation of the county. Help is needed adding them to their respective county pages by adding the following to the County Infobox template

|ex image = courthouse image filename.jpg

|ex image cap = xxx County Courthouse in xxxx, South Dakota

The following counties do not have courthouse photos. Contributors may want to cross them off once a photo is taken and uploaded. -- Ichabod (talk) 01:52, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Rushmore

It was brought to my attention a few days ago that the historical facts presented in the section Controversy in the Mount Rushmore article are questionable. I posted this on the discussion page but since I have not heard anything, I thought perhaps I should post it on one of the project pages associated with the article. Atuuschaaw (talk) 09:04, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since this article is semi-protected, I have a question about the peaceful takeover and renaming of Rushmore to Crazy Horse Mountain in 1970. According to what I have seen and heard, it was not only AIM members Dennis Banks and Russell Means, but also a group of United Native Americans led by Lehman Brightman. The 1970 NBC news video interviewing Brightman can be viewed here on Quanah Parker Brightman's YouTube channel. Quanah Parker Brightman is the son of Lehman. There are also photos of newspaper clippings posted on Quanah Parker Brightman's Facebook concerning the takeover. If necessary, I think I could acquire copies of the photos of the articles. Please let me know what the next step should be. Thanks! Atuuschaaw (talk) 22:45, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great Sioux Reservation

How many km2 were in Great Sioux Reservation in 1868?--Kaiyr (talk) 09:50, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been able to find an area given anywhere - as they said on the reference desk you could get a rough estimate by eyeballing it - or if you want to add up the area of all counties in West River and add a bit for the piece in Nebraska, I suppose that would give you an estimate that's a bit more exact. AlexiusHoratius 17:49, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New proposal to be supported by WikiProject United States?

Besides my recent edits to the members list, this WikiProject's main page has been inactive since January. It's quite sad to see this WikiProject in such disrepair, especially since South Dakota is one of the most underrated states in the US. I noted that it was proposed that this WikiProject be supported by WikiProject US, and the proposal failed. I'm still new to Wikipedia and newer still to its community, but I suspect that if WP:US was a parent of WP:SD, it would bring in many more editors to aid in the development of SD articles. I have no record of the recent work that has been done on South Dakota articles, but I suspect that it's low. The state of some of the highest-priority articles in this WikiProject is appalling, to say the least. While we are a tight-knit community, and it is difficult to find sources out-of-state (especially when relying on a Google search), perhaps some more prospective editors would be willing to get this project back on its feet. Editors in nearby states also might have access to physical resources on South Dakota. South Dakota has a very rich history (which is what I deal with) and a unique culture that is often ignored. At the very least, a to-do list needs to be produced. Being a newbie, I haven't the foggiest idea how one would start a proposal to have WP:US support WP:SD. Thoughts? TCMemoire (talk) 00:01, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Contact the US project and request that the group be "merged" into it. In circumstances like this, that would generally just mean the US banner would be used for SD articles. This state, like a lot of others, including Nevada and some others, has a bit of a problem in terms of lack of readily available sources to outsiders. If someone were able to get together a good list of reference sources on the state, and possibly those sources listed as among the best or most useful sources in those reference sources, that might be a good way to start in working on the content. Although not a listed member of this project, I would myself probably support such a merger, to the degree of using the common banner at least, because that also adds those articles to the US project's assessment list, which is probably more widely seen than this project's separate list. John Carter (talk) 02:52, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you. Does that mean that, like WP:Nebraska, the US project would be listed first and then would say "This article is supported by WikiProject Nebraska"? (For example, what is shown on the Omaha, Nebraska talk page.) The list of references is an excellent idea; I will try to start one on the main page of WP:SD (unless there is a better spot for it), though I won't be able to complete it by myself. Thank you for your input! TCMemoire (talk) 03:55, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

Hello all! I was curious if anyone else thought it might be a good idea to make a (nonbinding) guideline on how all the individual US state WikiProjects should organize themselves, to help standardize them. I originally put this suggestion in the WikiProject United States talk page, so feel free to look there if you're interested. It's pretty empty though; basically all they said was to see what each of the individual projects thought about it. Please tell me if you have any concerns with this idea; hopefully we can find a way for everyone to love it! Also, I'm new at making proposals, so please forgive me if I do anything silly. :) Hope that you like this idea! JonathanHopeThisIsUnique (talk) 04:57, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Controversial issues

I have ran across several issues that affect multiple articles concerning South Dakota and there is almost no coverage in the relevant articles. In fact I have ran across only one that contained information that should be found in a comprehensive encyclopedia.

The Cheyenne River, or part of it, has arsenic issues: "Arsenic Pollution On The Cheyenne River Reservation"
Uranium concerns: There are past and present concerns over uranium mining, abandoned uranium mines (AUM's), and possible wide-spread contamination or radioactive pollution in the environment. There is some content in the article Uranium mining in the United States#South Dakota with mention of the Black Hills and anti-nuclear activists. Aside from possible contamination there is the fact that restoration of strip mining areas were not provided for during mining. Mount Rushmore reportedly has 169 AUMs within a 50 mile range: Uranium Contamination Across America: Holding the Silent Killers Of Environmental Destruction Accountable

References:

The Toxic Threat Of Abandoned Uranium Mines In The United States

Study of Abandoned Uranium Mining Impacts
"Clean up the Mines"
Clean Water Alliance
There are future plans for in situ uranium mining by Powertech (USA)
Uranium Mining Poisons Native Americans

These are issues with much controversy, and almost no coverage withing Wikipedia. I just briefly looked concerning South Dakota, and the references are staggering, which would suggest there needs to be coverage and possibly "Controversy" sections in relevant articles. I suppose, unless it is not really a problem just "conspiracy theories", that it is important. If I missed content someone please point it out to me. It seems we have a lot of great advertisement articles, like the good article South Dakota, but there needs to be coverage on the "not-so-nice things in the world to keep us informed. Otr500 (talk) 13:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Erickson

Caroline456 and I could use some eyes on the new article Paul Erickson, where we've run into a whole bunch of neutrality-related issues. This is an article about a South Dakota Republican operative who's received a lot of news coverage recently in connection with Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:14, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New South Dakota userbox templates

New South Dakota userbox templates are now available at Template:User WP South Dakota and Template:User WP United States. Let me know if you have any suggestions. Yours aye, Buaidh talk contribs 23:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on election/referendum naming format

An RfC on moving the year from the end to the start of article titles (e.g. South African general election, 2019 to 2019 South African general election) has been reopened for further comment, including on whether a bot could be used move the articles if it closed in favour of the change: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (government and legislation)#Proposed change to election/referendum naming format. Cheers, Number 5 7 15:46, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Drafts for missing Justices of the South Dakota Supreme Court

Drafts have been seeded for the following missing Justices of the South Dakota Supreme Court (many of whom also held other state offices, or played other parts in the history of the state):

Any help getting these finished and moved into mainspace would be appreciated. Cheers! BD2412 T 02:04, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

on covering archeological sites in South Dakota

Hey, i am not an archeologist, but am developing about a lot of sites (in South Dakota) which are listed on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places. I have been encountering problems/gaps in trying to link to wider archeological topics. Have raised some specific and general questions, would welcome comments, at: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Archeological sites on NRHP in South Dakota. Thanks for considering! --Doncram (talk) 19:03, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia US Mountain West online meeting

Wikipedia users in the United States Mountain West and High Plains will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MST, Tuesday evening, February 14, 2023, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in the history, articles, or photographs of our region is encouraged to attend.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Wikipedia:Meetup/US Mountain West/Invitation list. Thanks.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

North Dakota / South Dakota boundary markers

Please someone create a page, there is tons of history! [1]. Jidanni (talk) 04:31, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]