Talk:Skin-walker

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2018 and 18 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MythologyClass.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Source of Navajo lore

Never seen a redirected talk page before. Is there any source from which the Navajo lore came from? ——Martin^phi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 05:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Similarity of terms does not necessarily mean literal equivalence

Simply because two totally dissimilar Norwegian and Navajo terms happen to be able to both be literally translated into English as "skin-walker", doesn't necessarily mean that the two concepts are identical, even if they are similar in the cultural and behavioral attributes assigned to them. I would suggest that this is especially true in this case, where the geographical and historical cultural separation is so great. It pays to be very careful in these sorts of situations, where it's possible to collapse these kinds of distinctly different cultural categories into one another simply for our own ease of conceptualization, or because one category is more amenable to us because of our own cultural biases. cheers Deconstructhis (talk) 18:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Especially since the Navajo term literally translates as "by means of it he goes on all fours" (lots of Navajo nouns are actually terpsimbrotoi), and the Old Norse terms translate, respectively, as "bear shirt" (berserker), "wolf-coat" or "wolf-hood" (ulfheðnar), and "shape-journey" (hamfarir). Also skinwalkers are always evil in Navajo thought, while berserkers are one of those "Indo-European Warrior Society" complexes, who don't play by the normal society's rules, but they're definitely seen as somewhat admirable (the Fianna would probably be another example). The Olmec Jaguar-men might have been comparable to berserkers, as might be the West African anioto societies (leopard men), but there's nothing in the New World north of Mexico that's comparable to a berserker. Nagakura shin8 (talk) 21:23, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Article history

Due to quite a bit of moving and back and forth the early history and discussion of this article are over at Skin-walker (disambiguation) (specifically the last version before what seems to have been some copy and editing moving is here. It might be possible to fix this although I'm not sure how after so long so I'll just leave the note here so anyone interested can go back through previous discussion and edits. (Emperor (talk) 02:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)) I have inserted the following in the References section for it's relevancy on the subject: Colm A. Kelleher and George Knapp, "Hunt for the Skinwalker". (paraview Pocket Books). Acorn897 (talk) 23:07, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

edit january 5

Can editors please reconcile their differences of opinion? I prefer to let you do it (not me). Good luck,Super48paul (talk) 11:59, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Coale citation

In this edit, CorbieVreccan, you removed multiple sources so let's discuss them. Looking over the history, the popular culture section got dumb so I get not giving Hillerman an excessive mention. Nevertheless, Samuel Coale is an academic source who is describing what is the actual accurate portrayal of skinwalkers and of Navajo culture and contrasting that with the misuse by Hillerman (and the film). The fact that it's being discussed in the context of a film doesn't make the discussion about the culture any less accurate. The only use would be for the rooftops and the infant bones and evil spells at this point. Is there any indication that Coale is actually wrong? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:55, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Once this is cleaned up there's not enough for a proper article and it should be merged. I think at that point Coale could be used to cite that Hillerman is inaccurate. I can get another source for that, as well. I think it's useful that he says Hillerman isn't accurate, but I don't think he's WP:RS for Dineh culture itself. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 15:36, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Here's some more on Hillerman. It's the official site of Prof. Deb Reese (Nambe Pueblo). She does host it on blogspot, but her CV makes her reliable on this: "Tony Hillerman" at American Indians in Children's Literature, here quoting postdoctoral fellow, Larry Emerson, Dine (Navajo):

'Tony Hillerman privileged & authorized himself to write about Navajos & in doing so appropriated, re-imagined, and recreated "Hillerman Navajos" at the expense of Diné realities. Hillerman created a new domain [read dominion] of knowledge while cashing in at the same time.'

- CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 16:30, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Expansion

This article is underdeveloped, and is missing a significant portion of information on its subject. It needs to be expanded in more detail with all aspects of Skin-Walkers added to the article with proper citations for its information. Information such as descriptions of Skin-Walkers from different Native American tribes that mention them should be added with proper citations. Also there should be information on the creature's appearances and references in popular culture (although it shouldn't be added in a bullet point and trivial format), and appearances in cryptozoology. This article has potential, but it needs to have work done to it so that it fully covers its subject. Hopefully this happens since this article is very interesting.--Paleface Jack (talk) 20:38, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I got a number of books recommended by the Skinwalker subreddit. I plan to expand this article, so others don't have to buy expensive books to access the same information. I'm not well-versed in Wikipedia organization and citation, but I'll be bold and trust that others can format my contributions. --OGoncho (talk) 02:30, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

With regard to the source thing, I can understand why people would be reluctant to take Teller/Blackwater as an accurate resource. When sourcing the book, I was trying to only reference things it seemed like the authors already knew about the legend prior to their spiritual exploration that they insist changes the rules. I think Kluckhohn and Brady are good resources because they were writing down actual stories actual Navajos shared and then found the commonalities and made sociological analysis. As for the news article stuff, I get that they don't hold much weight. --OGoncho (talk) 20:00, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Tone

I think there's a tonal issue in the handling of the description of Navajo culture. It might be a little too "woo-woo, mysterious other". Like, the thing about Natives not wanting to share details of Native spirituality with Anglo authors who are not motivated to frame it respectfully isn't described as a note about those of a spiritual belief system and practice so much as an inscrutable other. I think it reads like a D&D book's description of a fantasy culture. --OGoncho (talk) 10:46, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Read Adrienne Keene's explanation. This article should have been deleted. It was about to be, and then came the censorship argument from people who don't know anything about the cultural perspective on this and it stayed. This topic is not something meant for public discussion, and it's already covered better in the Witchcraft article, and better contextualized in the other articles on cultures. But people who think this is just some fantasy-fiction thing, or something everyone gets to learn about, wanted a standalone article. So we wind up with trivia and speculation, some of it downright racist fabrications, written by people who don't know what they're talking about, used as sources. Or we cite the few RS sources that say it's not anyone else's business. I know this might sound "woo-woo" or othering to people who don't know anything about the communities in question. But what people outside the cultures think about this is not something we can really do anything about. - CorbieV ^☊ ☼ 21:09, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

(I have autism and this seems to impact my ability to communicate. It's difficult to understand when to use careful wording and when to use implication from inexact concepts. By "woo-woo", etc., I was trying to indicate that the framing of the concept is a racist, colonialist exaggeration. The gist of the framing issue is otherwise understood.) I reviewed the debate about deletion. It seems like the argument to delete wasn't framed in such a way that the other members of the discussion understood. If you want to reopen that and say to merge it with the Navajo witchcraft article, I can offer support based on having read books on the subject that it's better understood as one part of the greater witchcraft subject and that trying to separate it out as one thing on its own is a silly irrelevance popularized by werewolf fiction and UFOlogy, making most sources claiming it as significant on its own utter nonsense unbefitting of Wikipedia. If you go in like that and use the bit about reliable sources just stonewalling the issue as part of that argument, I think you'd have a better shot at getting a merge accepted. --OGoncho (talk) 10:52, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Or maybe the problem is that when you come with "you should not talk about this because that is our culture" argument, then you could apply this to other topics as well. You should not not discuss gay people in some cultures, because there it is taboo to do so. You should not write about the devil, because some cultures don't want to talk about it. Not to mention that the article is contradictory within itself and the Navajo picked that belief up from the Meso-Americans, so it is not exclusively theirs. Furthermore you "do not talk" about skinwalkers because you don't want to piss them off and not because they are sacred or anything. What you are basically demanding is that we should cow to someone's superstition. So I say this article has to stay.Inugami-bargho (talk) 10:03, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't know if this is helpful, but when I lived in Jemez Springs I had some friends from Walatowa, a Pueblo town and rez. Once I was hanging out with some guys and the subject or word "skinwalker" was mentioned by someone, and the three guys got really serious and kind of agitated looking and pretty much said "drop it" and changed the subject. So, I don't claim to be an anthropologist, and these young dudes weren't even Navajo, but two facts emerged: 1. The subject made them visibly uneasy and 2. They did not want to discuss it. So, for whatever it's worth, that's my anecdote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adkins (talk • contribs) 15:08, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Further, the idea that "We do not talk to outsiders" about this is clearly untrue, because look, here's a Wikipedia article about it. 135.180.133.141 (talk) 11:45, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

To suggest all Navajo share Keene's prejudice against non-Navajo "outsiders" is unfounded. There is no "reliable source" that speaks for an entire people. It is, however, correct to say some are reluctant to share lore. Shankar Sivarajan (talk) 20:43, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

• Some religions have a problem with being examined and that is a major issue today in friction with native American religions and an open society. There is no forbidden knowledge and it is a human endeavor to collect knowldedge. Things should be presented respectfully, but this is an encyclopedia not a holy book. There is religious conflict when religious practice is not wholly a personal endeavor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.52.222.202 (talk) 08:48, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

• Adrienne Keene is a racist and a bigot and the fact that she is even considered as relevant by a serious encyclopedic article shows that Wkipedia is more interested in an agenda than knowledge. You cannot complain about cultural appropriation and then attack anyone who comes asking for a historically accurate and faithful depiction. --102.38.232.135 (talk) 17:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
  
  

Semi-Protected against IP vandals

The IP vandalism is endless, so I've semi-ed the page. As I also edit the page occasionally, if anyone wants to review this action, feel free to go to WP:RPP. But if you want it unprotected, please commit to page patrol as the vandalism is perennial and relentless. I predict indef in the future. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 20:52, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Every edit since the protection has expired has been IP vandalism or reversion thereof. Extending protection. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 20:42, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Looking over this, it looks like the IP and new account edits continue to be vandalism. So this time I've extended it to semi-indef. Once again, as I have also edited the page, this can be contested at WP:RFPP if anyone finds this controversial. As it is, I think the endless vandalism is a drain on committed editors, and it's not asking too much for those who want to improve the site to create a real account and become an actual WP:Wikipedian. Best, - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 18:06, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Song

A song about the legend, also titled “Skinwalker”, appeared on rock musician Robbie Robertson’s successful soundtrack album Music for The Native Americans. Robertson actually is Native (albeit being of Mohawk ancestry rather than Navajo). Not sure if it would be worth mentioning here in a “cultural references” section or not. 63.231.141.132 (talk) 16:30, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2021

Greetings. Why is there no mention of Norse skinwalkers, that's where the word actually comes from as well. 75.142.16.165 (talk) 14:28, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: It looks like you're asking a question, rather than requesting an edit. Please use this template to request edits in the form of "Please change X to Y", with sources if applicable, being sure to be as specific as possible. If you just want to discuss the topic with other editors, there's no need for this template to be used.  A S U K I T E  14:38, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Closed Knowledge

I'm aware Wikipedia is not censored however this article should at least mention that this is not meant to be public knowledge, both because that is relevant information and to allow the minority of Wikipedia users whoa aren't white chauvinists to avoid it. Frankly, the lack of that information on this article, or even in the talk page suggests that that information is being censored from this. The edit history suggests the same.

Wikipedia talk pages are not the place for racism and bigotry against people who come to Wikipedia and other websites to learn about something. You cannot complain about cultural appropriation and then simultaneously curse someone for trying to avoid cultural appropriation. Which one do you want? Do you want people to be inaccurate, or do you want people to actually seek out primary sources of a cultural phenomenon from the culture that invented it? Also, only cowards refuse to sign their comments. If you are going to insult people who are coming here to learn about something, put your name by it. --102.38.232.135 (talk) 17:04, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

It's Diné not Navajo

Navajo was the name given by y the Spaniards meaning knife. 2600:100D:B057:E95D:709F:42FF:FE50:A8B2 (talk) 12:15, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

AS A YOUNG BOY RAISED IN THE CULTURAL TEACHINGS OF MY DINE' NATION, THE UNRESPECFUL NAME OF "NAVAJO" DID NOT EXIST ON THE TONGUES OF MY ELDERS. THE WORD IS COMMONLY NOW SPOKEN BY THE YOUNGER GENERATIONS THAT IS SADLY ACCEPTED BY THE NON-EDUCATED NATIVES AND OTHER SO-CALLED RACES. PLEASE HAVE RESPECT FOR US IF NOT FOR YOURSELVES, I ASK THIS BECAUSE I'M FULL BLOOD DINE' AND WILL GO THE SPIRIT WORLD AS PURE. 70.90.207.189 (talk) 03:33, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

"Dine" is the Navajo language name. "Navajo" is the Spanish name and the English name for the nation. In English, the Navajo Nation is called Navajo. --102.38.232.135 (talk) 17:05, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Are skin walkers real

Some people don't know if they are real because they don't live in that town so please add this 66.201.135.241 (talk) 18:30, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are based on reliable sources. They are not a musical request programme. --Hob Gadling (talk) 19:16, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2022

Skinwalker is a term used to describe a Native American mythical creature originating in the Navajo culture. In Navajo culture, a skin-walker (Navajo: yee naaldlooshii) is a type of harmful shapeshifting demonic witch that has the ability to turn into, possess, or disguise themselves as an animal, Most commonly spotted in a wolflike human form, they exhibit superhuman strength and agility, deriving their shapeshifting ability from dawning the pelt of an animal, such as a wolf. The Skinwalker is also said to have red or orange glowing eyes able to pierce through the darkness. The creature has also been known to replicate a human voice, mimicking the screams and cries of a human in order to lure its victims away.

The term is derived from the Navajo words “ Yee Naaldooshii” directly translating to the phrase “ by means of it, It goes on all fours”. The term is notably never used for healers in Native American culture nor is the creature to be mentioned by name as it is widely believed in Native American culture naming the creature is to call upon it increasing the chances of an encounter with the creature. While it is not entirely clear it is believed that the skinwalker drives its origins from being children of a corrupted medicine man who abused the magic of his people, while others believe that those who have committed terrible crimes against their tribes are transformed into Skinwalkers as punishment.

Sightings:

While the creatures’ sightings date back to 1866 when the Navajo tribe inhabited the land. The creature’s sightings were most notably documented in 1994 when couple Terry and Gwen Sherman purchased a property to raise cattle on in Uintah County, Utah, U.S.A this property would become in later years known as Skinwalker ranch. The Couple first began to encounter the paranormal on the ranch in 1995 when they claimed sightings of glowing box-shaped UFOs centralised to a large mother ship reportedly the size of several football fields.

Encounters continued when a group of unknown sourced lights from the sky followed Gwen as she drove towards the ranch. In the following weeks, the couple began to experience more paranormal activities with crop circles running 8 feet in diameter appearing on the ranch forming a triangle without any explanation as to why. Following this in April 1995 husband and father of the family, Terry Sherman left his home to check up on a cow that was nearing birth upon approaching the field he began to notice a set of lights that rapidly accelerated 50 feet into the air. Chasing after it he soon encountered a mutilated cow with its eyes removed and body drained of all life, after inspecting it he began to realise the cow was untouched and that there were no signs of a predator’s trail near it. The dead cattle continued to be the source of the paranormal as soon after Terry discovered another suffering the same fate, taking further inspection Terry noticed the cow had a 6 inch hole carved around the cow’s rectum. Terry drew further comparisons of the two dead animals when he noticed a pungent chemical smell radiating form the creatures. With the months passing the Shermans discovered approximately 21 cows that had either dieded in the same way or had vanished entirely.

The family’s tribulations with the paranormal did not stop there and after 18 months of the couple living on the property, Terry Sherman was out walking the family’s dogs around the ranch at night, when he encountered a large wolflike creature with glowing red eyes. Armed with a rifle Terry fired 3 close-range shots into the creature’s hide however it stood there unfazed. Months later in 1996 the family traumatized by the incident moved out, following this the property was purchased by Robert Bigelow a paranormal investigator and founder of the National Institute of Discovery Science. Sightings of the creature continued with multiple other encounters documenting similar experiences to that of Terry Shermans, with the ranch eventually becoming well known for the paranormal and aptly taking on the title of Skinwalker ranch. Specifically named after its abundance of sightings of the aptly named creature.

In March of 1997 following the change in ownership of the ranch to Robert Bigelow the ranch was being used for paranormal investigation when one of the investigators working for the National Institute of Discovery Science spotted and shot at a large deformed human-looking creature amongst the trees in the woodland area of the ranch. Upon investigating the area further the team discovered a large pronged footprint in the snow, similar to that of a large bird of pretty or raptor-like creature with a significant amount of weight to it. In more recent years the documentation of the creature has become more broadly spread with documentaries such as Hunt for the Skinwalker ( 2018 )

Most recently with the popularisation of the social media platform TikTok, sightings of the creatures have become more prominent, with many users documenting a howling sound or sightings of the creature.

Skinwalker Ranch: Located in the southeast of Ballard Utah, spanning 512 acres of land, the ranch is most infamously known for its paranormal activity sightings from alleged UFO sightings to unknown poltergeist voices, however, the ranch is most well known for its history and ties to the Navajo tribe and it’s mythical being the Skinwalker. Whilst the ranch was traditionally owned by the nomadic tribe of the Native American Ute people, it is also entrenched within Navajo culture as the ranch situates itself nearby to Navajo land. Throughout the years the ranch has been the site for several paranormal sightings and investigations most notably from a selective program known as NIDS investigations Housed in the pentagon. The ranch has also been the site of filming for multiple documentaries such as Hunt for Skinwalker Ranch 2018.

61.68.86.203 (talk) 01:41, 20 June 2022 (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. Cannolis (talk) 01:53, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

References

Wiki Education assignment: HUM 202 - Introduction to Mythology

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wadlet (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Little Tears, Dr.pepperlvr.

— Assignment last updated by Dr.pepperlvr (talk) 22:58, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Reference lacking attributed information

There is no reference to word or compound word "anti'įjhnii" in the source cited. I'd be happy to provide a pdf of the Navajo-English Dictionary for investigation or verification. 64.185.2.22 (talk) 04:04, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: HUM 202 - Introduction to Mythology

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2023 and 12 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Bella088 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: BundlesofRoses013.

— Assignment last updated by Rockethound (talk) 21:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 April 2023

wiki is supose to lurn people.. all they above is not treu. but moost will no. all humans could become skin walker. hass nothing to do with native americans.. 2A02:A454:3946:1:6C9D:EA40:574E:8E09 (talk) 20:21, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't appear to me that that's implied - the article simply states that this is part of Navajo culture. Is there somewhere in particular there's an issue? Tollens (talk) 20:54, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Removing Keene.

While Keene is an academic, the source provided came from a blog, and such material might lack proper editorial critique for scholarly validity and fact. In other words, it reads very much so like an opinion. Furthermore, it seems to be more of an opinion on Rowling's use of skin-walkers rather than something that could provide non-redundant "background" information. Because of this, I have removed the material in question. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 19:33, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

At the risk of sounding forum-y, I am going to air other grievances. This article doesn't feel like it belongs. It has had a long history of reading awkwardly and being unfitting in terms of encyclopedic tone and material. This article doesn't add anything that the Navajo witchcraft section doesn't already say.

I don't know what the policy on pushing for another AFD is, but I would consider doing it again. I get the "Wikipedia isn't censored" crowd, but consider the state of this article. Is there seriously anything that this article says that isn't more adequately covered elsewhere? Furthermore, I worry about the inclusion of pop-culture material (see Keene on Rowling) tainting the quality (again). This article should be merged, as the objective, verifiable, or historical aspects are take the backseat when pitted against the McTrends that have enduringly warped public perception on fact versus fable. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 19:56, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Definitely regular blogs and other non-RS sources should be removed. However,

Per This RfC: Request for comment regarding Keene, Adrienne Keene's official blog, Native Appropriations, meets the criteria noted as an exception in the WP:BLOG policy/guideline: "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications. Per the RfC, Keene is a notable expert on the topic of cultural appropriation from Native American cultures, having been cited by RS sources on the topic; therefore her writings on her official site are an acceptable source on this topic.

I was for not having an article on this topic, but I was in the minority. I'm going to put Keene back in, per policy and consensus, and see about any other needed changes. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 21:18, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm also going to edit the other witch content as Skinwalkers are not the only type of Diné witches. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 21:28, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Your blanking of content introduced a POV spin, implying that the only reason non-Diné may not understand is due to a lack of sharing on the part of Diné people, which is not what is in the sources. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 18:22, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Witches being the antithesis of positive cultural values, being evil, and performing acts that otherwise act against positive cultural values and magic performed by healers is almost certainly redundant. This is assuming this an accurate statement from The Navaho. I couldn't verify, and I do not own the book, so I couldn't try if I wanted to.

Secondly, POV spin? I can break down my reasoning. It is evident in the article that she is justifying why the information isn't generally public or accessible to most people. If anything, asserts quite the contrary to what has been described in that non-Diné don't understand it because of the refusal to divulge such information. The only statement within the source that touches on this is:

"What you do need to know is that the belief of these things (beings?) has a deep and powerful place in Navajo understandings of the world. It is connected to many other concepts and many other ceremonial understandings and lifeways. It is not just a scary story, or something to tell kids to get them to behave, it’s much deeper than that. My own community also has shape-shifters, but I’m not delving into that either."

This, however, does not appear to be saying that non-Diné have limited understanding due to "lacking the lived experience Native commentators feel is needed to understand the lore." A better way to phrase it would be that individuals who are not part of the Diné community might not have knowledge about the various concepts and rituals that are integral to understanding, say, Diné witchcraft.

Finally, Keene is not "commentators." She is one person--a commentator.

Thus, I should suggest that the material be rewritten or removed. The wording, to me, suggested removal as more reasonable, since this was still only one commentator's opinion, which seemed not to be talking about skin-walkers specifically, but, more broadly, Navajo or Diné witchcraft.

I hope this clears things up. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 20:20, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

It's common enough and no problem to state something briefly up top, and then go into more detail in the body of the article. Cutting details isn't helpful, especially in a brief article like this. Keene isn't the only source, which is why I think it's plural, but I'll check the ref placements. The text you are trying to cut is specifically about skinwalkers, and you are removing text sourced to both Keene and others. I don't understand why, as this is specific to this type, not general witchcraft. - CorbieVreccan ^☊ ☼ 21:14, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Have I misread Hampton? They seem much focused on relaying that ghost stories ≠ skin-walker stories rather than reiterating what Keene says. Furthermore, I couldn't verify "The legend of the skin-walkers is not well understood outside of Navajo culture, both due to reluctance to discuss the subject with outsider" as being explicitly stated in Hampton, and alluded more to Brady not doing their due diligence on the subject, though this does not apparently seem to be attributed to a lack of discussion in the broadest sense. I don't doubt this claim, however, as Keene heavily alludes to it in mentioning "“Ethnographic refusal,” “a calculus ethnography of what you need to know and what I refuse to write in.”". Thus, I am led to believe that this is perhaps an issue of reference placement more than anything.

While I am inclined to agree that cutting details isn't helpful, the addition or permanency of details not thoroughly established in the body of sources does nothing to help this article. I probably should have rewrote it in hindsight, seeing what you are saying. Maxx-♥ talk and coffee ☕ 12:37, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

In popular media

Skin-walkers or more commonly skinwalkers are often portrayed in internet stories such as creepypasta as demons or other spirits, that have taken over the body of an animal and use it to get close to humans to kill them. They're described to have an uncanny appearance, and having human-like features such as the ability to stand on hind legs as well as features often associated with demons, such as bending their limbs and head to an unnatural degree. BetrizOFF (talk) 18:50, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Mythology

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2024 and 10 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ssg0r (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Ssg0r (talk) 09:37, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Adrienne Keene's Blog Is Not Notable Enough to Be Included

[We] as Native people are now opened up to a barrage of questions about these beliefs and traditions but these are not things that need or should be discussed by outsiders. At all. I'm sorry if that seems 'unfair,' but that's how our cultures survive."

Imagine, if you will, a person of another race or culture saying that to the face of someone asking a legitimate question. Anyone else would be deemed a racist, and one blogger's bigotry is not worth including just because the majority of Wikipedia's editors agree with it.

Leaving aside the fact that a random blogger's bigotry against people seeking to learn and appreciate something from the actual source is hardly worth including in a serious article, it is also racist.

Obviously, if that was a mainstream view instead of a blogger's opinion, it would be worth including. However, there doesn't seem to be any indication cited within this article, or elsewhere, that American Indians actively hate or attack people who express an actual interest in depiction of historically accurate folklore, only that they are slightly xenophocic when discussing it with outsiders.

This is an example, in my opinion, of bias sneaking into the article.

--102.38.232.135 (talk) 17:01, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

I couldn’t agree more. Overall, a poorly written article. 72.208.3.124 (talk) 19:31, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Trash entry

Either this Wikipedia entry should be removed or rewritten entirely. It’s repetitive and not informative. 130.45.106.101 (talk) 00:37, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Not helpful. What is "not informative" about it? --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:25, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

hunters use skin

are there leads to hunting? since a hunter can use a dead animal to hide in. like a hide is a skin. 'to hide' might mean exact that, to use a skin as cover to not be visible for your prey. If a hunter has a hunting ritual this might become like skin-walker but i am an outsider and have no clue about.178.84.214.198 (talk) 15:02, 1 November 2024 (UTC)