Civic Engagement at Werowocomoco: Reasserting Native Narratives from a Powhatan Place of Power
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The King William Reservoir project, the largest CRM effort in coastal Virginia, required consultation with three Native American tribes and direct participation by Virginia Indians, but in practice consultation and native participation were fraught with miscommunication, confusion, and frustration; the project was predicated on political marginalization and exclusion of the public and was ended in
“The King William Reservoir project, the largest CRM effort in coastal Virginia, was structured by a memorandum of agreement that required consultation with three Native American tribes and direct participation by Virginia Indians (Gallivan and Moretti-Langholtz 2007).In practice, though, consultation and native participation were fraught with miscommunication, confusion, and frustration (Atkins 2”
From The Archaeology of Native Societies in the Chesapeake: New Investigations and Interpretations (2011) · cites this paper as Gallivan and Moretti-Langholtz 2007
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Archaeology of Native Societies in the Chesapeake: New Investigations and Interpretations
Gallivan, M. (2011) · Journal of Archaeological Research · doi:10.1007/s10814-010-9048-4 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
- Authors
- D. Gallivan, M., & Moretti-Langholtz, D.
- Venue
- Archaeology as a Tool of Civic Engagement
- Publisher
- AltaMira Press
- Published
- 2007
- Pages
- 47-66
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
