Your text unnecessarily so according to many commentators both contemporary and modern. Yet this appears to be cited to a primary source, how could that support this clause?
Porcupine in his preaching phase was clearly a very different person to the young warrior. Vague: different how? Also see WP:EDITORIALIZING; should avoid "obvious" and "clear". Is this supported by the Marquis source?
Isn't that obvious? He went from a fierce, vengeful fighter to a peace-loving priest. I don't think that is vague at all. We can drop the word "clearly" if that solves the problem for you. SpinningSpark18:06, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If it's so obvious, the phrase should be cut. If it's not so obvious, it should be explained what the change was.
I've copyedited this in a way I hope is now acceptable. The change is really quite marked. So much so that I was unsure whether the sources were referring to the same person until I got the Marquis source which covers both periods. SpinningSpark17:55, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Simpson—unless it was first published by a legitimate press (iUniverse is a vanity outfit) all information from this source will have to be removed.
I've removed Simpson. This is mostly covered by other sources already. The only part that was not was Hendershot being burned to death by his own firebox. I've added a replacement source for this. SpinningSpark17:55, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note one "Presumably... of course" editorializing
Well why not, it's in an editorial note. It's perfectly reasonable, and a service to our readers, to explain why we have rejected the account of what we are otherwise considering to be reliable sources. I've deleted "of course" which is unneeded. SpinningSpark17:55, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note 2 "more city focused liberal attitudes" —what does this mean? Just "more liberal attitudes" would work fine.
Done as suggested. It was meant to contrast rural with urban attitudes. But the distrust was just as much to do with Lawrence's long standing abolitionist position, their role in the civil war, and their embracing of "Yankee" culture. SpinningSpark18:21, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note 8 "Crook used a raft of dubious methods" ditto
"Ditto" what? Editorializing? No it isn't. Crook's behaviour was underhand and dishonest by anybody's standards and there are numerous sources saying so. SpinningSpark22:36, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
" Fear of it led to it being suppressed by the U.S. army" vague and awkward, suggest something along the lines of "The U. S. Army suppressed the Ghost Dance because of concerns that it would lead to a new Indian uprising"
"Porcupine and Red Wolf drove off the men with rifle fire but they were pursued" confusing and awkward, you could just say something like "Porcupine and Red Wolf drove off the men with rifle fire and pursued them, killing Handerhan"
The problem with that construction is that it is making a definite statement that Porcupine and Red Wolf did the killing. This is not definitely verifiable, and as they were doing the shooting, it is likely that others did the pursuing, killing and scalping. SpinningSpark15:10, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"This did not work of course" more editorializing. Not at all obvious to many readers
"Porcupine took part in this Northern Cheyenne Exodus" suggest combining with the previous sentence. Something like "..., accompanied by Porcupine, led the Northern Cheyenne back to their homeland in Montana, in a fighting journey known as the Northern Cheyenne Exodus".
I don't much care for that. By mentioning him along with Dull Knife and Little Wolf, it elevates Porcupine to a leadership role he did not at that time possess. SpinningSpark15:41, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"The desperate Cheyennes escaped en masse through the windows on the east side and fled south toward White River." Buecker, Fort Robinson and the American West, 2003
"After six days with no food or water, the desperate prisoners burst from the barracks, jumping out of the building's high windows..." Sonneborn, Chronology of American Indian History, 2014
"During the night of January 10, 1879, the Indians, having secretly retained possession of three guns, shot the guards and began a desperate but hopeless effort for freedom." Curtis, The North American Indian, 1907-30
"A number of Kansas settlers had been killed during the Indians' journey north" passive voice, are the Cheyenne escapees responsible for these killings or did someone else do them?
Likely they did, but it was never proven as the trial was abandoned and it was never established that if they did do it, exatly which group was responsible. This is still a controversial issue to this day, at least in Kansas. The Cheyennes kept quiet (for fear of punishment) even about killing soldiers in the fight against Custer at the Little Big Horn for decades afterwards until elderly members of the tribe finally opened up to the likes of Marquis and Grinnell in the 1920s and 1930s. There is no way that anyone was ever going to admit to killing civilians. There was also an element of various groups blaming each other. These are issues for a different article I think, unless there is something specific about Porcupine's involvement we can write here. SpinningSpark17:05, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"It was not an easy journey;" editorializing, I would suggest cutting this clause.
I don't see what the problem is here. The source used says "...described the Lawrence mob as 'almost overpowering,' led by the mayor, city marshal, and others eager to prevent Masterson and crew from performing their duty..." Another source says "At every station a crowd of 'hoodlums' assembled and cried so vigorously to see the Indians that Masterson 'was compelled to use physical means in preventing his pets being trampled upon'". There is a difference between editorializing to add our own opinions, and editing to clearly summarise the sources. SpinningSpark17:55, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've recovered these from archives. Why do you say they are spammy? Is it because the site has reverted to the web hosting company's standard parking page? The original site was not promoting anything. It is linked because it has good quality images of the subject. The images appear to have originally been taken from the Harris & Ewing Collection at the Library of Congress. If I am reading the licensing information correctly, these are now public domain and could be used directly in the article. SpinningSpark23:14, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
File:Burial Party Wounded Knee.jpg needs correct PD tag with evidence for why it's valid (i.e. first publication before 1924 with publication information). Other images OK.
I believe I have responded to all the points raised by the reviewer. I'm waiting to hear back on how acceptable that is. BlueMoonset, sorry for not responding straight away, I haven't been on Wikipedia much over the last month. SpinningSpark10:08, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Spinningspark, according to the article's talk page, Buidhe closed the review as unsuccessful on January 9; a notice to that effect was posted to your talk page at the time. I don't know anything more than that. There is a query on the article talk page as to the reason the nomination failed this time. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:06, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
