Talk:Kamloops Indian Residential School/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Removed text

"In 1962, the dancers were awarded the Norman Day Confederation Life shield, after taking the first three places in an under-18 folk dancing competition at the Okanagan Music Festival.

Trying for WP:DUE. Currently article lists awards then right at the end casually mentions physical abuse. Will need more work, but currently cutting this paragraph.

Removal of content

@Elinruby in this edit you removed the citation for the claim 'Despite significant resources invested in various investigative efforts, including fieldwork, archival searches, and securing the school site, no human remains have been found.' Then in this edit you remove it for being unsourced. Pending consensus on the RS noticeboard, is there a reason why the content shouldn't be restored? Riposte97 (talk) 08:29, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

yes. RSN isn't going to go in your favor. I am also unsure what you are talking about, to be polite. I removed both text and citation for the reasons given at RSN. I am still trying to understand the second diff but the reasons given at RSN are sufficient, whatever happened there in that second diff.

Please be very careful when describing the actions of other editors. Your misportrayal of the first diff is problematic and might be construed as casting aspersions.

Elinruby (talk) 08:44, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

heck, it's right there in the edit summary. The source is atrocious but ok, let's assume it isn't and that the band did put out a press release saying it had no comment. So what? Elinruby (talk) 08:49, 20 June 2024 (UTC)se

doh. different texts. I think you should strike your post, which makes an untrue statement. People need to be able to believe what other editors tell them. Elinruby (talk) 08:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

@Elinruby my aspersion-casting arm has been broken for a week now, so don't worry about that. Respectfully, you need to look two sentences before the sentence dealing with the band's statement. I don't believe I have said anything untrue. Riposte97 (talk) 09:09, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

(trying again) the two diffs demonstrate the removal of two different sentences.

The first one has a terrible source, but you know that, because Fluorescent Jellyfish told you so on June 6. The sentence I removed in the second diff, two sentences earlier, as you say, was unsourced. And is, as you say, two sentences earlier. One of these sentences is not like the other. Despite your claim that I removed a reference, then removed the associated sentence as unreferenced. That is a heinous accusation, which you should strike. Also:

• First of all I don't know of any good reason why you would want to reinsert the sentence with the terrible source, which you have been told is a terrible source
• Second, that sentence is not, as you claim, the same material that is in the second diff. Maybe possibly with some AGF on top you may be mistaken, but your claim is false, and you should strike it. Your arm looks fine to me.
• Third, the sentence in the second diff is unsourced and may be removed on sight. The WP:ONUS is on you to gain consensus for its reinsertion and that will not be forthcoming from me. There will also not be any new editors showing up to agree with you here as Daniel Case has e-c protected this article. Elinruby (talk) 09:43, 20 June 2024 (UTC)s

Better source

This recent article from the National Post discuses how they there have been no excavations at the site: "But none of the 215 anomalies at Kamloops Indian Residential School have been archaeologically confirmed as graves." The article also notes that the Kamloops Indian Band initially reported the "remains of 215 children" after the radar survey in 2021, but is now calling them "anomalies". And there's discussion of the misinformation reported by the The New York Times back in 2021; see here. This from CNN was also rather egregious. Jweiss11 (talk) 19:42, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

National Post isn't recognised as a reliable source as it is an opinion piece. For further discussions see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard under the section 'Western Standard as a source for Canadian residential schools അദ്വൈതൻ (talk) 20:34, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

The May 28, 2024 article by Tristin Hopper is not an opinion piece. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I guess it is categorized under opinion on the website. But that doesn't mean its unreliable. Jweiss11 (talk) 21:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

See the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Elinruby (talk) 22:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Elinruby, there's a lot of stuff Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard related to this article, but none of it discusses the National Post. What specifically did you want me to see there? Jweiss11 (talk) 22:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

I think this academic article might provide a high quality source, discussing facts of the issue (particularly the miscommunications based around mass graves/remains) in a non-biased, evidence-based manner.

Saying what we mean, meaning what we say: Managing miscommunication in archaeological prospection, by Wadsworth, Halmhofer & Supernant in 2023. It was published in the (peer-reviewed, scholarly) journal 'Archaeological Prospection'.

They state, for instance:

"Over the past 15 years, some Indigenous communities have been searching for missing children, but it was not until the news of potential unmarked graves being located using GPR near the Kamloops Indian Residential School was announced in May 2021 that international attention spotlighted the issue (Sterritt, 2021)....The initial rush of reporting used terms and language that misrepresented the GPR results, including the use of mass grave and reporting that the ‘remains’ of 215 children had been found.

...The widespread use of initial and enduring misconceptions led to almost immediate backlash in various circles, including those who used the misconceptions to support and spread denialist misinformation and disinformation about the IRS system. Heath Justice and Carleton (2021, n.p.) define residential school denialism as ‘not the outright denial of the Indian Residential School (IRS) system's existence, but rather the rejection or misrepresentation of basic facts about residential schooling to undermine truth and reconciliation efforts’. Quoting French anthropologist Didier Fassin, Jones (2021, p. 104) also noted that denialism is ‘an ideological position whereby one systematically reacts by refusing reality and truth’."

Overall, they discuss the miscommunications and misconceptions from media, etc., in a pretty thorough manner, and I believe this source would be considered one of the most reliable ones available. Fluorescent Jellyfish (talk) 00:14, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

This source seems like it's going to send us down a rabbit hole of misdirection and conflation between 1) denying that the IRS existed or committed any human rights violations (I'm not sure which, if any, non-fringe people have actually done this) and 2) a simple discussion that the Kamloops site not yet been demonstrated to contain graves, but nonetheless, three years ago, after only cursory radar survey, the NY Times, CNN, and elements of the Canadian government, and others proceeded as if human remains had conclusively been found. Jweiss11 (talk) 00:39, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

The article specifically discusses how the media misreported the initial findings. Fluorescent Jellyfish (talk) 00:49, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

I see no mention of the NY Times or CNN there. And the focus of this study doesn't seem to be media misreporting. Can you point me to specific passages? Jweiss11 (talk) 01:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you mean. No, that article does not specifically refer to the individual instances of outlets (such as NY Times) that misreported; it more discusses why that occurred and the effect it had. Sorry, I misunderstood what you meant! Fluorescent Jellyfish (talk) 01:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Claim of Western Standard as REPORTED SPEECH style from secondary sources

The reliability of Western Standard as a whole is ongoing at RSN. The question here, what about using the reports by other news medias that made headlines on the WS's claims in a reported speech style.

As In May 2024, Western Standard, a Canadian conservative social commentary media claimed that investigations into the reported mass graves at the Kamloops Indian Residential School in British Columbia have end with no conclusive evidence of such graves, despite significant resources invested in various investigative efforts, including fieldwork, archival searches, and securing the school site, no human remains have been found.

See here the citation isn't WS but another news agency that reported on WS's claim.

Also the latter part of my edit Carolane Gratton, spokesperson for the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations confirmed the allocation of $7.9 million for these endeavors. In a statement, the Tk'emlups te Secwepemc First Nation reiterated their focus on the scientific work required but declined to discuss the $7.9 million allocation.

Isn't sourced from WS and not even as a secondary source.

The citation to this(The Catholics Register) I got from RSN discussions on WS reliability. The Reliability of The Catholic Register at the moment isn't at discussion. അദ്വൈതൻ (talk) 13:58, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

References