Talk:Wounded Knee Occupation/Archive 1

Archive 1

Leonard Peltier

The Leonard Peltier article links to here, so I put a link to it. A Runyon 06:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Removed POV header

A big thanks to the anonymous user who rewrote this article--I've removed the POV header. A Runyon 18:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Added POV header

Really the language in this article is very unencyclopedic and is essentially about U.S. martials, not the Wounded Knee incident. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.199.14.222 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed... This article's just sad, biased and lacking any useful substance. It's in dire need of a rewrite. galar71 10:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Argh...someone has gutted the rewrite from last month. It's not as bad as it was when I put the POV up the first time, but it's basically useless now. A Runyon 21:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

This article should be erased from wikipedia. The tone is entirely biased and inappropriate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.97.184.242 (talk • contribs) 02:26, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I highly recommend that interested individuals read Lakota Woman by Mary Crow-Dog, which has several chapters that include her personal account of the events at the Wounded Knee Incident as an AIM member.

This article is terrible

I don't what it looked like back in June 06, when people were complaining about a pro-government bias. But now it's got a huge pro-AIM bias. It makes many conspiratorial and blatantly NPOV claims and accusations that are totally unsubstantiated.Verklempt 01:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Things I've done, things to do

First off, I re-added the POV tag. It was added in one of the many edits by Berkbuns or Zimmerzr, not sure which (I left notices at their talk pages on using Show Preview to prevent this from happening).

Secondly, there needs to be a mention of the claims that the AIM activists only intended to air grievances with certain people at Wounded Knee (owners of the museum and trading station, I believe) and then leave. There is an argument that they only stayed because FBI Agents nearby heard a shotgun fire and immediately surrounded the area to restore order; this move did not allow the AIM group to disperse and thus led to an escalation in the situation. --Edwin Herdman 06:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Yep, the article needs some work. With a little time and patience to get round the huge cultural fog that no doubt surrounds this incident, a very interesting article could be created. I was listening to "Thundercrow" this morning on the radio, an eye witness of the event. What she said key's in with what's here ... the APC's, etc. Of course I'm only getting her perspective. I've never heard it from a US Marshalls perspective, or anyone else, so am unqualified to edit in a balanced POV DJ Barney 16:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I never saw the seige of the Warsaw Ghetto told from the perspective of SS Death Squad members... does that make every description I've ever seen biased? Or perhaps the fact that articles on lynching do not include the point of view of the KKK? I say that their POV is not only unnecessary, but its presence indeed renders the article biased. --Bodybagger 02:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The Response of the larger society

Is missing? The incident can also be classified within the greater civil rights movement.--Jackkalpakian (talk) 00:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I came to this page after thinking about the movie Thunderheart, and having done some very quick reading around I agree this article is missing a couple of important topics. First, as Jackkalpakian says, an account of the public reaction. Or, even better, the consequences of the event for the reservation and AIM. For instance, there is no mention of Leonard Peltier who is in jail and apparently considered a political prisoner by amnesty international (http://www.amnesty.org/en/report/info/AMR51/160/1999). Also, there are many sites which though not authoritative, including the movie Thunderheart, link this incident to uranium and other resources that lie within the reservation. This seems to be very significant as a possible cause for the events and should be included. And finally, the movie Thunderheart :) I couldn't believe that this was not mentioned in the article since this is clearly part of the cultural response to the incident. Looking through the history there has been more info in this article before, but I think someone should add a lot more... there is a lot more that definitely should be in this article that has been "left out". I really don't know enough to do it myself :( ScyllaMutt (talk) 08:33, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Should not the title be "Wounded Knee siege"?

Forgive me for being an ignorant European, but to call this an "incident" seems blatantly NPOV. Throughout thousands of years of European history these things are consistently called Sieges. Why is this called an incident, like when someone steps on a loose stone and almost hurts his ankle? To get a NPOV one must start with changing the title, in my POV... (it cannot be called occupation since the people of the town were not in feud with the alleged occupants, it can only be called a siege). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.176.181.109 (talk) 16:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

"Siege" implies an army assaulting a town. While some people might view this incident as a siege, there are many others who would take issue with that view. Those folks would argue that there was a legitimate law enforcement response, and that the people occupying the town were not the residents of the town, but outside agitators. Hence "incident" is more NPOV than "siege" or "occupation".Verklempt 21:15, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

If you dare call this atrocity a "legitimate law enforcement response" and call the people who were under seige "outside agitators," you would probably feel very comfortable calling the liquidation of the Warsaw Ghetto a "legitimate law enforcement response" to the insurrection of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. In both sieges, a people of a race/religion were isolated and confined to an area (be it a ghetto or a reservation) and their stand was crushed by lethal force from police and military forces (be it Gestapo and SS or US Marshals and National Guard). The only difference is that one group now has a powerful political lobby. Try seeing it from that point of view and you may understand why calling either of these sieges a "legitimate law enforcement response" might make a person sound like a hate-mongering Nazi. --Bodybagger 01:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:NPOV. You might also look up "Godwin's Law".Verklempt 21:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Not at all. There is no comparison, Bodybagger. First, American Indians are not isolated or confirmed to any reservation. They are free to come and go as they please and always have been in contemporary American history. Secondly, the liquidation of the Warsaw Ghetto was to eliminate Jews whereas the response to Wounded Knee was intended to make arrests. You're comparing apples to oranges. Equinox137 (talk) 02:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Unlike the outsiders occupying Iraq, the "outsiders" of WK were invited there because of an incredible string on deaths on the rez.
I agree with Wolakota that the job can be done, but only if no POV is allowed to dominate. The complete "facts" -- including what people carried in their hearts -- will never be known.
In that spirit, I suggest that a rewrite be done with a skeleton of indisputable facts; then the disputed questions of fact can be listed along with pointers to existing evidence - so that readers can finish the story for themselves.
It might help if people can agree to write the article so that it honors ALL the people who died -- sadly, needlessly -- in that era. As for blame? there's plenty for everybody. Twang 00:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure the word 'siege' should be so politisized. A siege does not imply that this was not also a 'legitimate' law enforcement response. There was also a siege of Waco. A siege merely implies that something is cordoned off and the people inside are under siege, I don't see how it means it is pro or anti-Aim in the terminology. The warsaw ghetto uprising did result in a 'siege' of the ghetto by the Nazis. From the Nazi point of view the siege of the ghetto was a response by the army to an uprising. So what? I think the appropriate title is the Siege of Wounded Knee, that is how it is known in popular culture. Who calls it an 'incident'? Of course the U.S Marshalls had to souround Wounded Knee, but they should be commended for not overunning the place the way Waco was, which would have resulted in the deaths of many activists. Seth J. Frantzman (talk) 08:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Dictionary definition of "siege": The surrounding and blockading of a city, town, or fortress by an army attempting to capture it. That is clearly not accurate here. Leave the NPOV term alone. What non-encyclopedic writers label the incident is irrelevant to NPOV.Verklempt (talk) 20:45, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Richard Wilson Dillema & Article Bias

I just wanted to say that noone has referred to Richard Wilson by his nickname "Dick" in all the articles I've seen. Also this article is a tad one sided. I'd consider looking into other articles for more information as well, particularly "Alcatraz, Wounded Knee, and Beyond: The Nixon and Ford Administrations Responsd to Native American Protest". Granted that this is more of a conservative view on the matter but I believe you should check out both sides of the story --129.15.127.253 (talk) 04:26, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure calling him 'Dick' which is the way he was known to his friends and family is one sided. Either Richard or Dick is appropriate. Seth J. Frantzman (talk) 08:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I am by no means an expert on the incident or either sides point of view. But as someone who has grown up on the reservations of South Dakota and who pays attention to the world at large I think this is a very biased article. Everyone is discussing AIM's side and the role of the government in the incident but no one is putting in the view points of the actual residents of South Dakota. I am not native but many of my friends and family are. I see AIM in the same way as I assume many people in a variety of countries see their uprising residents on the national news. The citizens screaming and calling for justice may not be speaking for the population as a whole; but they are the ones that make the news. I think before you guys make opinions based on what the media tells you; you should find out if the average tribal member agrees with Russel Means or Leonard Peltier. You should also research how much time they actually spent on the reservation. Again I am no expert but from what I know growing up here is that AIM and many others like them were extreme liberals that were not necessarily speaking for the society at large. I just feel that this is similiar as basing views of the Muslim world based on the extremest you see on TV. I would like to see someone who actually was a neutral member of the Lakota tribe that grew up here to set us all straight and until then to take both sides with a grain of salt.

As far as Thunderheart I can say with authority that that movie was a very good example of Hollywoods view of something they know nothing about and not bothering to do any research. That movie in no way belongs in any discussion of reservation politics or AIM Croppy (talk) 22:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, Croppy, as we tend to say here in Wikipedia, rather than bitch about what's wrong with the article, you should instead fix the problem yourself. If you see undue weight in the article, seek out info that addresses the other side of the story. Being the grandson of someone from the 'rez, and having spent a few summers there, i am well aware of how the media misses the less neatly-wrapped parts of the story. Search the tribal council library. I am sure that there are transcribed accounts that have been read into the record, either during the AIM congressional discussions or in nonfiction books available at LOC (which you can get sent to your local library, btw). Good luck with that. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 22:22, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

What about the innocents?

This makes it sound like the whole “incident” was between the AIM and government officials. When the AIM came in almost all local residents left. The AIM moved their own people in to the houses, churches, and property of the local residents with out permission, then did as they felt like with out asking.

While it was true that some (one can argue if it was many) local residents of the reservation did want the AIM to come in. However the bastion of that request was for the AIM to come in to Pine Ridge NOT Wounded Knee. In fact the AIM drove right in to Pine Ridge but then kept going on to Wounded Knee.

I remember one elderly couple we were friends with in Wounded Knee. When we went back with them the house had been stripped bare of EVERYTHING. There was not a single dish left. The squatters had used one of the bedrooms for a bathroom and just urinated and had bowel movements directly on the floor. When the AIM left Wounded knee, anything of value was carried off if it could be. If it could not be, then it was broken or vandalized. Broken windows and holes in the walls of peoples homes for no reason was the norm as was spray paint and graffiti.

I agree “incident” is not the best word to describe what took place there. However I am afraid we are stuck with it to be as honest and neutral as we should be for lack of a better word that captures all the contradictory things Wounded Knee was. Yes it was also a siege. As well as an invasion, a liberation, a retaliation, an insurrection, a righteous rebellion, an act of vandalism, a cry for justice, a destructive tirade and more. Much much more all at the same time. I guess this is one place where “Man made disaster” would truly be the intellectually honest title to give Wounded Knee. However honest it may, be it’s still too charged a title so we are stuck with “incident”

Yes there were real legitimate griefs the Lakota and all first Americans had and have. However to utterly destroy the property and lives of the very people you are claiming to be there to help shows at best “misguidance.” The vast number of people on the reservation were stuck between the rock of Dick Wilson and the Hard places of the AIM run by Denise Banks and the Means. For these people stuck in the middle the whole "Incident" was nothing more than whole sale destruction. It’s sad their story, the REAL story will probably never be told.

JJohnDough —Preceding unsigned comment added by JJohnDough (talk • contribs) 06:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Terrible Article

No mention of the slain fbi agents, Leonard Peltier, or why the AIM went into wounded knee? This article is useless and a great example of why wikipedia is garbage. IT doesn't even cover half the basic facts surrounding the incident 159.83.54.1 (talk) 20:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Call it a conflict?

Would calling it the "Wounded Knee conflict" be better? It doesn't imply one side being an attacker and it's less generic than "incident". Abeger (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

No way! You're so wrong.

Please refer to the subsequent article, as this page is substantially flawed.

It is a matter of fact that AIM leaders were invited to Pine Ridge to help the community, because of the violent atrocities that were and had been perpetuated against members of that community, for which no level of government was taking any responsibility. There is evidence to suggest that countless beatings, deaths, and murders, were never investigated nor prosecuted when they occurred; nor have they been investigated to this day; there is also substantial evidence that suggests that in fact, the two levels of government responsible for the governance of the community were in fact colluding together, against innocent men, women and children. Is it any wonder that such atrocities such as the murder of Anna Mae Aquash occurred, given the climate that was the norm at that time in Pine Ridge history. 18:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)~ *********************************************************************************************

Ellen Moves Camp—Hero of Wounded Knee By Stephanie Hedgecoke Published copyright 1995-2011 Workers World, Jun 8, 2008 9:34 PM

Photo: Anne Pearse Hocker Ellen Moves Camp, known along with Gladys Bissonnette as the “Grandmas of the American Indian Movement (AIM),” passed April 5 at the age of 77 on Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota. Moves Camp and Bissonnette played key roles before, during and after the 1973 occupation of Wounded Knee, which moved the Indigenous struggle into the view of the whole world.

The struggles of Indigenous people globally are illustrated in the story of Ellen Moves Camp and Wounded Knee.

The Lakota Nation’s title to most of South Dakota and parts of Montana and Nebraska, including the Black Hills (Paha Sapa), was recognized in the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty. George Armstrong Custer took miners to the Black Hills to find gold and the U.S. broke the treaty and stole 34 million acres of land, leaving the Lakota divided among separate reservations. Over time that land base was further eroded as the Oglala Lakota were forced to lease their land to ranchers for pennies.

In the 1970s, the federal government moved Oglala families into cluster housing to reduce spending on utilities, freeing more land to be leased by cattle ranchers. Meanwhile over 100 Indians had been murdered in racist white towns surrounding Pine Ridge.

Unemployment was at 90 percent. Traditional families and activists were attacked by the Bureau of Indian Affairs-installed reservation government of Dick Wilson and his paramilitary GOONs (Guardians of the Oglala Nation), armed by the FBI. Wilson signed over some 200,000 acres of land to the U.S. for a bombing range.

Underlying these events, the U.S. had secret plans to turn the Paha Sapa into a “National Sacrifice Zone.” The continent’s richest deposits of weapons-grade uranium lie under the bombing range. Uranium and coal were to be mined, over 188,000 acres destroyed, and incredibly toxic smog and debris would have poisoned the region and destroyed countless square miles of waterways and ponds.

Energy companies signed up to create dozens of coal-fired plants to surround the Black Hills and build a “nuclear energy park” of 25 reactors. Test drilling began on a huge scale. Leaking uranium poisoned the aquifer, the only source of drinking water.

Resistance at Wounded Knee

On the basis of estimates of half a billion dollars in uranium revenue, the U.S. was determined to eliminate AIM and traditional opposition. But the strength of resistance at Wounded Knee forced the Interior Department to retreat from some of its plans.

In 1973 traditional elders with the Oglala Sioux Civil Rights Organization (OSCRO) called AIM to Pine Ridge to protect the people from the GOONs. Denied access to the BIA building at Pine Ridge by federal marshals, AIM held a meeting at Calico with 600 supporters where 1,500 grievances against the BIA and Wilson were taken in a two-day meeting. Then traditional elders Ellen Moves Camp and Gladys Bissonnette stood and challenged the men to take action.

AIM warrior Dennis Banks said of that meeting: “The decision to take Wounded Knee came when Ellen Moves Camp pointed at us and said, ‘What are you men going to do about it?’ If the women hadn’t done that we’d still be meeting at Calico.”

Clyde Bellecourt recalled Bissonnette asking AIM, “Haven’t you heard enough? Go back to Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Los Angeles or Portland. We are going to stand here and be warriors.” He said that he “was stunned by that confrontation with an elderly woman, wrinkles all over her face.”

Wounded Knee was chosen for the takeover protest as it was still held by the Lakota community. The village is the site of the 1890 historic massacre of Big Foot’s band of 300 Lakota Sioux women, men and children as they were peacefully moving to the Pine Ridge Reservation to avoid starvation. Instead, they were viciously murdered by the U.S. Army Seventh Cavalry in the snow. The world had heard of Wounded Knee through Dee Brown’s book, “Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee.”

Some 200 Native people went to Wounded Knee on Feb. 27, 1973, to hold an early morning press conference. The government attacked. The press conference was never held. And the big business media did not report the total government deployment of 17 armored personnel carriers, 130,000 rounds of M-16 ammunition, 41,000 rounds of M-40 high explosives for grenade launchers, helicopters and other aircraft. An army assault unit in Colorado was put on 24-hour alert.

The standoff held the attention of the world. Support committees formed to help educate non-Native people about the conditions of the Indigenous on the reservations, and the significance of Native American Indian culture, language and the land in the fight against genocide.

During the 71-day struggle against the U.S. military assault of the National Guard and armed FBI agents, Moves Camp served as negotiator for the protesters with the Justice Department. As Banks recalls: “Once the strength was reawakened with the Oglalas, they became the principal negotiators—especially the women. Because it was their future. From there, AIM took a backseat. The further we stepped back, the further the Oglalas stepped forward.”

Moves Camp was from Wanblee and had lost family members in the 1898 massacre. During the military assault in 1973, her nephew Buddy Lamont was one of two Indians killed. On the occasion of the 1998 commemoration of the struggle, Ellen Moves Camp said it’s “just a matter of time before another Wounded Knee and ... a violent confrontation with the U.S. government.”

On the loss of Ellen Moves Camp, Native political prisoner Leonard Peltier said: “Those of us who really knew her will dearly miss her as she was a big inspiration to all of us. She loved and fought for her People and the Nation without ever once that I know of complaining or asking for something for her personal use.”

Ellen Moves Camp stands as an inspiration to Indigenous people in struggle everywhere.

Sources include articles by Ian Record, Lakota Student Alliance; Jon Lurie’s article on the 25th anniversary of Wounded Knee for the Pulse of the Twin Cities; and the Sioux Falls Argus Leader.

---

Sources

Sources need to be improved and used to tell the whole story. The events and participants have been studied now, and further trials have brought out new evidence as well, as regarding the 1975 murder of Anna Mae Aquash. Parkwells (talk) 14:09, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Needs analysis/evaluation of influence

Wounded Knee was considered a turning point by many American Indians in terms of their sense of themselves, their pride, their willingness to claim their differences and revive traditional Indian culture - it was powerful in terms of inspiring political organizing and more activism in a variety of ways. We need to address that part of the aftermath. For instance, at that time there was not one Native American working on a South Dakota newspaper - decades later there are several independent American Indian papers, numerous tribal colleges, programs in Native American studies at many universities, a Native American Journalists Association and foundation providing scholarships, and the rise of independent Native American newspapers and other media, to name some changes in one area.Parkwells (talk) 02:53, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Organizing POVs

This was a complex event involving the POVs of hundreds of different people, and evoking very strong emotions. The question is which POVs make the best sources for an encyclopedia article. I suggest breaking it down along a timeline, starting with the most influential POVs from the 1970s, and moving on to present day re-evaluations and scholarly assessments. Trying to organize it according to political viewpoints hasn't been working.3Tigers (talk) 00:19, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Aftermath?

Where is the aftermath? The prosecutions? The surrender? The negotiations led by Kunstler? This article is very bare bones. Its not about bias, its about the fact that there is a lot of information missing. I would help edit this but don't have time at present but this is a disappointing entry for such an important 'incident'. Seth J. Frantzman (talk) 08:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow...I wondered why this was so slanted in favor of the government, then I looked at the history and found it's been lifted verbatim from a US Marshall website. This REALLY needs a more neutral stance. A Runyon 16:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

---

This incident/Issue is one of the most controversial and inspiring events that has occured in Indian country in contemporary American history in the view of many American Indians. Documentaries such as Tatoo on My Heart and some others have tried to capture the intangible spiritual catharsis that Wounded Knee played a pivotol role in the 1970's.

It is also a very complex issue. Wikipedia's nuetrality position would be best served by reviewing the view of the US Marshal's and other government entities involved including the 82cnd Airborne, FBI, South Dakota National Guard, BIA PD, OST PD, and Special Operations Group of the DOJ executing "OPERATION GARDEN PLOT" (The NY Times exposed this in the 1980's) but also the views of the assimilationists represented by then OST President Richard Wilson, his auxilliary force known as the GOONS, and others like Webster Two Hawks. As Well as the view of traditionalists who were not part of AIM but supported it at the time-Frank Fools Crow, Matthew King, etc. And then AIM and OSCRO leaders such as Pedro Bissonette, Russell Means, Dennis Banks, Carter Camp, Stan Holder, Clyde Bellecourt....

To put this in its historical and significant implications here, in a nuetral relatively objective format will take some doing but Wikipedia can do it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wolakota (talk • contribs) 21:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

---

It is a complex issue, and I wonder if a few paragraphs here can even do this story justice. There are so many side issues and layers of corruption and cover-ups that someone would need a great deal of knowledge to even try to form an opinion, much less report the facts without bias. A Runyon 20:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

It is not up to Wikipedia editors to make judgments about the conflicting accounts by reading and selecting from the primary accounts by the government entities and AIM, which is OR or Original Research, but to read second-party, reliable sources published in peer-reviewed journals and books, and to represent the historians' differing views. Rather than reporting what the US Marshals said or AIM said, editors should be citing published sources that have considered all the information since the incident and using those sources. There has been plenty written about the events and history, neither of which are very clear here.Parkwells (talk) 15:41, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

hry breiguheudfjksguyiheicbidshb — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.165.232.237 (talk) 23:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Shootout at Pine Ridge

The article contains no explanation of why the shoot-out at Pine Ridge is related to the Wounded Knee incident. On the contrary, it states that the shootout happened two years later (and only near Wounded Knee). That FBI agents were at Pine Ridge looking for Jimmy Eagle on the basis of assault and robbery, also unrelated to Wounded Knee. How are these things related? And since the Anna Mae Aquash murder is only connected with the Pine Ridge shooting, I don't see why it belongs here either. If there is some reason for these subsections to be included in this article, please make that connection explicit. Thanks! 69.166.24.117 (talk) 22:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Agreed completely. Anna Aquash and Peltier happened after the trial of Means and Banks. They're two different things related only to Oglala being involved and the proximity of Pine Ridge to Wounded Knee. If you tried to blame the American Revolution on the Whiskey Rebellion, it would look just as bad. Like Pine Ridge, those two incidents happened within the same general time frame, but they weren't the same thing--at all. The Peltier/Pine Ridge information doesn't belong here, so take it out, including the spam for that person's self-published book.173.174.230.178 (talk) 06:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)Awua

Where does government death come from?

Where's the source for the "1 killed" under government causalities? The idea that a government agent (US Marshall Lloyd Grimm) died in the incident has shown up in a lot of recent stories referencing WK, but there's no references to it in historical accounts of the event such as Like a Hurricane: The American Indian Movement from Alcatraz to Wounded Knee. US Marshall Lloyd Grimm ended up paralyzed from the waist down after being shot during the incident, but he survived his injuries, as evidenced by his testimony at the trial of Banks and Means in St. Paul the following year. (Prosecution Rests in Trial of 2 Indians Over Wounded Knee, "New York Times," July 25, 1974.) If anyone has citations for him dying as a direct result of the injuries he sustained they need to be added to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.249.185.152 (talk) 01:09, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

The BBC podcast provided as a source for the government casualties only notes that two government officials were injured, it does not make a claim that any died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jleberle (talk • contribs) 19:23, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Former US Marshall Lloyd Grimm died in 2000 at 83 years of age. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.53.137 (talk) 02:09, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Conflicting claims

The article’s lead claims that 11 people were taken hostage at gunpoint, but in the body of the article, it is claimed that this is false, and that there was no hostages. Hostages aren’t mentioned elsewhere in the article, and these two claims are contradictory. The fact that the claim of hostages is in the lead is a bit concerning, since I wouldn’t be surprised if most people just read the lead, and not the rest of the article, which would lead to misinformation (if the claim is false) Helloimahumanbeing (talk) 03:39, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Death of FBI Agents

The info box claims that two FBI agents were killed, but this seems to be conflating the Wounded Knee Occupation with the Pine Ridge Shootout several years late. The shootout isn't mentioned in this article (at least that I noticed).

Am I missing something? The Pine Ridge Shootout is referenced here. Geneusutwerk (talk) 19:15, 16 March 2023 (UTC)