Determining the status of those who claim Indigenous identity may seem complex or confusing to newcomers to the concept. However, while definitions can vary a bit between tribal communities, core principles and legal definitions are held in common. Indigenous identity is not simply defined by ancestry. It is not based on an individual's choice or personal belief. It is a community identity, solely determined by the tribal nation the individual claims to belong to.

As judge Steve Russell (Cherokee Nation) wrote:

The important issue is not who you claim but rather who claims you.^[1]

The United Nations forum on Indigenous Issues agrees that the person must be "accepted by the [Indigenous] community as their member."^[2] In alignment with Indigenous tribal consensus and legal precedent on the issue, self-identification or individual declarations of belief of Indigenous identity are insufficient sourcing for Indigenous identity on Wikipedia.

Indigenous identity is not a racial designation but is based on citizenship and immediate family relationships. Attempting to designate a person as Indigenous based on one distant ancestor would be akin to the outdated one-drop rule. Non-Natives who assert Indigenous identity based on one possible distant ancestor are often ignorant of the realities of contemporary Indigenous communities, sometimes to the extent of not knowing these Indigenous nations still exist.

Ethnic fraud, in the form of non-Native people attempting to pass as Indigenous Americans (aka pretendians) is common in the United States and in Canada. This is an extreme form of harmful cultural appropriation, which misrepresents and diminishes the lives of Indigenous people.^[3][4][5] The United Nations has expressed concern with the "misappropriation and misuse of indigenous peoples’ cultural heritage."^[6] The many tribes who have issued statements on the issue over the decades are also concerned about this problem.

The Native American Journalists Association created a video “Understanding Indigenous Claims and Connections."^[7] NHPR now no longer accepts self-identification as sufficient for claims of Native American identity. They state: "We now understand that verifying such claims – especially when it comes to people who claim leadership or speak on behalf of an Indigenous community and are not members of a federally recognized tribal nation – is part of our basic responsibility as journalists."^[7]

Members of the Indigenous Wikiproject have compiled this essay and these resources to help our fellow Wikipedians navigate questions of Native identity. Once you read further on the topic, it's not as complicated or mysterious as public perceptions suggest. You can always come over to the talk page and ask us specific questions at any time. We are happy to assist you!

In certain countries in the Americas, Indigenous peoples have legal and political relationships to the national government and rights that are negotiated by treaties. Thus, status as "Native American", "Indigenous", "Aboriginal," "Tribal member," or "American Indian" is a political, not racial, designation. This essay will therefore focus on protocols for determining Indigenous identity of individuals (and also organizations) in the Americas.

In the United States, members of the 574 federally recognized tribes have a unique political relationship to the US federal government based upon Tribal sovereignty in the United States and their citizenship in "domestic dependent nations," as defined by the 1832 US supreme court ruling Worcester v. Georgia. Canada similarly regulates relationships with First Nations and other Indigenous peoples in Canada under the 1876 Indian Act, and Mexico recognizes the rights of Indigenous peoples under Article 2 of the Constitution of Mexico.

Tribes determine who is or is not a citizen or member of their nation. While some modern tribes may consider blood quantum as one of the criteria considered for membership, other criteria are also used, such as lineal descent, geography, kinship, and other aspects of inclusion to Indigenous community and culture. So, even people who may have some documented Indigenous ancestry are not inherently entitled to any form of tribal status or citizenship. Every tribal nation has its own criteria, and it is the nations who decide, not Wikipedians.

Editors should always examine the criteria below before listing individuals as being a member any of the following groups, particularly or especially if the individual claims Indigenous identity for themselves:

Plenty of people in North America have felt the need to claim that they have a distant Native ancestor. One iteration of the myth has become so popular, it has a name, "Blood myth."^[8] A widespread cliché is claiming one's grandmother or great-grandmother was a "Cherokee Princess."^[9] Versions of this can be found in the family lore of many famous people - Elizabeth Warren, Johnny Cash, Johnny Depp, Miley Cyrus, and Bill Clinton just for starters. Why this is the case is a matter of debate, but the fact that this sort of mythology is also prevalent in other settler states such as Canada, New Zealand and Australia suggests that these claims serve to make people feel more connected to lands with which they do not have a lengthy ancestral connection. In the US context, some have noted that many African-American families have preferred claiming Native ancestry to European-American ancestry,^[10] while quite a few European-American families have felt more comfortable claiming a false Native American identity for their ancestors who were actually African American.^[11]

Many people have such family myths, and without recognition and confirmation from a legitimate tribe, that's all it is: a myth. Simple assertion is not enough. It is not enough to have someone's unsupported word for Indigenous ancestry, no matter how much anyone likes them, unless you can also provide other evidence as detailed below.

Occasionally, a family may actually be able to document a specific, named distant ancestor who can be identified as a tribal member on tribal rolls or (perhaps through census or baptism records) who was known to be Native or accepted as a tribal member prior to the era of reservation enrollment. The best-known example of this is Pocahontas.^[12] However, because Indigenous identity is not a racial construct and only the tribe in question has the authority to determine who is or is not a member, such ancestry is akin to the one-drop rule and thus even documented distant ancestry does not make the descendent in question an "Indian." Similarly, the concept of a tribal "descendent" or "relative" is also culturally determined by the tribe concerned.

In other words, a person who is a descendant of an Indigenous person, without recognition and acknowledgement of Indigenous status from a legitimate tribe, is only that: A descendant of a known, named individual.

Indigenous identity is not a matter of race. Race, as a European concept, had no direct equivalent in Indigenous thought. As professor Kim TallBear (Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate), author of Native American DNA: Tribal Belonging and the False Promise of Genetic Science writes, "Native American tribes did not use blood quantum law until the government introduced the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, instead determining citizenship on the basis of kinship, lineage and family ties."^[13] Therefore, the idea of a single unified "Native American" racial identity is a European construct that does not have an equivalent in tribal thought.^[13]

For that reason, North American people who claim an Indigenous identity should also indicate a specific tribe and be able to name their specific ancestors and living relatives from that tribal Nation. Without naming a particular Nation, there is no way to check the records to confirm that the community knows and acknowledges them, and it remains a case of self-identification or blood myth.^[a]

While DNA tests have become popular, there is no DNA test that can reliably confirm Native American ancestry, and no DNA test can indicate tribal origin.^[13][14][15] Attempts by non-Natives to racialize Indigenous identity by DNA tests are seen as insensitive at best, often racist, politically and financially-motivated, and dangerous to the survival of Indigenous cultures.^[16]

While there are some genetic markers that are more common among Native Americans, these markers are also found in Asia, and in other parts of the world.^[17] The commercial DNA companies that offer ethnicity tests do not have a large enough pool of North American DNA to provide reliable matches.^[8] The most popular companies have admitted to having no North American DNA, and that their "matches" are to Central Asian and South or Central American populations;^[18] smaller companies may have a very small pool from one tribe who participated in a medical study.^[8][19][20] The exploitation of Indigenous genetic material, like the theft of human remains, land and artifacts, has led to widespread distrust to outright boycotts of these companies by Native communities.^[19][20]

While a DNA test may bring up some markers associated with some Indigenous or Asian populations (and the science there is fairly problematic, as TallBear describes in her book Native American DNA), it does not follow that the person should be described as Indigenous.^[14]

Echoing Judge Steve Russell, TallBear adds,

Being a Native American isn’t just about having an ancestor among those founding populations. It’s not just a matter of what you claim, but it's a matter of who claims you. And if no Indigenous community claims you, it’s a little bit presumptuous to be running around saying 'I am, therefore, Native American.' You have people with no lived experience in Indigenous community, they can't even name any Indigenous family or ancestors, but they have a family myth about a Cherokee great-grandmother, or they're descended from Pocahontas — you get that a lot in Virginia. So I think it's another kind of claim to own indigeneity, to try to have a moral claim or sense of belonging on the North American continent and so that's the context in which these tests are so popular.^[21]

People may claim to have ancestry from a specific Native American ethnic or regional group. A claim to a specific tribe, e.g. Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, may be slightly more credible than a generalized claim of "Native" identity. However, a claim of tribal descent or citizenship in isolation should not be the sole reason to categorize someone as being a member of that tribe. Again, editors should also factor in the questions following this section. There are also tribal-specific issues that may need to be considered, particularly for the groups below.

Under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, Alaska Natives land claims were extinguished, and Alaska Native Regional Corporations established to administer lands and hold compensatory monies in trust. Shares in these corporations are held privately, can be owned by non-Indigenous people, and thus do not establish a claim to Native identity. Enrollment in a specified Alaska tribal entity or proven recognition by such an entity in the case of a descent claim is essential.

Anishinaabe is an umbrella term for Algonquin, Odawa, Ojibwe, Oji-Cree, and Potawatomi people from Canada and the United States. While many people accurately claim Anishinaabe identities, others use this term because it is so broad and vague that is difficult to verify. If you list someone as being Anishinaabe, also include an individual's specific First Nations or tribal identity with a citation.

The Apache are a group of related Southern Athabascan tribes from the American Southwest and Southern Plains. They fill a popular place in the American and European imagination. American and Mexican people frequently claim to be Apache without proof.

Despite being a small band, Chiricahua Apache is a particularly popular tribe to a claim, especially in the Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico, mostly due to the notoriety of Geronimo in the early 20th century. Actual Chiricahua Apache people are enrolled in the Fort Sill Apache Tribe in Oklahoma, the Mescalero Apache Tribe in New Mexico, and the San Carlos Apache Tribe in Arizona. The so-called Chiricahua Apache Nation, based in Miami, Arizona, is not recognized as a tribe.

Search for sources that identify the person's specific tribe, for example Tonto Apache Tribe of Arizona, as opposed to a generalized "Apache" claim.

While the Blackfoot Confederacy is situated in Alberta and Montana, many people from other places claim Blackfoot ancestry, particularly the American South, which has never been Blackfeet territory.

Overwhelmingly, the most commonly claimed tribal identity in the United States is Cherokee, and non-Native people claiming to be Cherokee vastly outnumber actual Cherokee people. The phenomenon of European-Americans falsely claiming Cherokee identity dates back to the mid-19th century in Georgia.^[22] As has been noted, "Rare is the Oklahoma family that doesn’t think it possesses at least one-sixteenth Cherokee blood."^[23] Yet simple logic, backed up with solid documentation, easily proves that almost all of these family tales are just that—tall tales.

There are three Cherokee tribes: the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (EBCI) based in North Carolina and who require a minimum blood quantum of 1/16, based on the Baker Rolls; the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians (UKB), based in Oklahoma that requires a minimum blood quantum of 1/4; and the Cherokee Nation (CN), based in Oklahoma who base their enrollment on lineal descent from the Dawes Rolls.

Because of their blood quantum requirements, fewer people falsely claim to be EBCI or UKB. However, Ward Churchill boldly claimed to be a Keetoowah Cherokee anyway. His claim was refuted by the Keetoowah Chief at the time, but it took genealogical confirmation that Churchill has no Native ancestry for many to respect what was already known by the Nation.^[24] Numerous organizations with no connection to Cherokee communities, who require no proof of Cherokee heritage for membership, yet claiming to be Cherokee tribes, have formed in the last half-century; the EBCI and CN both maintain lists of fraudulent tribes and have had to form taskforces to handle the problem.^[25]

The Cherokee are therefore particularly carefully documented, and it should therefore be assumed in most cases that someone claiming to be Cherokee without also being a tribal citizen is relying on the sorts of family myths mentioned above. Many people who have claimed to be Cherokee without citizenship, such as Jimmie Durham and Andrea Smith, have later been shown via genealogical research to be mistaken, even if their belief in their assumed heritage may be sincere.

Genealogist and researcher David Cornsilk (Cherokee Nation) writes, "Most people are not aware that there are 30 rolls made of Cherokees between 1817 and 1914. There are thousands of linear feet of records created by colonials, missionaries, U.S. officials, schools, travelers and newspapers that trace our ancestries to the mid-1700s. Much of this paper trail was created by the tribe itself." This makes the Cherokee far more documented than most non-Cherokee of the era. Referring to the vast amount of records documenting the actual Cherokee people, vs the number of people falsely claiming Cherokee ancestry, he added, "On a sadly comical note, if there were enough Cherokees to produce all the wannabes now claiming to be us, we would have never lost the war!"^[26]

The Cherokee Scholars, an organization of Cherokee academics, created a public Cherokee Scholars’ Statement on Sovereignty and Identity which states:

"Any person who publicly identifies as Cherokee has initiated a public discussion about their identity. It is appropriate to ask such persons to explain the verifiable basis upon which they are claiming a Cherokee identity. If they cannot substantiate that they are a Cherokee citizen, they should be clearly and directly asked to cease identifying as Cherokee."^[27]

Hunka is a Lakota term for an adoption ceremony, and if someone says they are hunka Lakota, they have been adopted by a particular individual or family,^[28] but that does not confer tribal enrollment or acceptance at the tribal level.

Métis people in Canada are a specific group of people with a shared history and heritage and who historically spoke the Michif language.  Métis peoples are recognized as one of Canada's aboriginal peoples under the Constitution Act of 1982. Since Métis can phenotypically resemble European-Canadians, their identity is increasingly claimed by non-Native people, particularly in Eastern Canada, with no historic ties to Métis communities.^[29] The author Joseph Boyden falsely claimed a Métis identity for years.^[30]

The Yaqui are an Indigenous people of Mexico. Fleeing state-sanctioned violence by the Mexican government in the late 19th and early 20th centuries,^[31] many Yaqui emigrated to Arizona. The Pascua Yaqui Tribe of Arizona gained US federal recognition in 1978.^[32] If an individual is an enrolled member of the Pascua Yaqui, they should be listed as such. Other Americans who claim to be Yaqui can be listed as being of Yaqui descent, if the exact person they claim descent from was clearly Yaqui. Do not list them as Yaqui unless reliable Indigenous sources establish that they maintain active connections to the one of the eight Yaqui pueblos in Sonora, Mexico, and are acknowledged by those communities as a Yaqui person.

If someone is clearly described as a legal citizen of their tribal nation in a reliable source (preferably one published by the tribe in question), that should be sufficient.

Style note: On Wikipedia, we use the most common form used in Indian Country media to indicate citizenship: listing the person's nation in parentheses after their name. For example: Deb Haaland (Laguna Pueblo). For more examples, see List of Native American musicians. Somewhat less popular but also acceptable (and preferable when more information is included) is listing the person's nation as a clause after their name, for example, Wilma Mankiller, Cherokee Nation chief, as seen in List of Native Americans of the United States. See also the examples at MOS:CITIZEN / MOS:NATIONALITY and WP:TRIBE.

People may self-identify as "Indigenous peoples at the individual level" but this is not enough by itself: the question is whether they are "accepted by the community as their member."^[2] In the US, being openly claimed by the claimed tribe is crucial.

When considering non-citizens who claim to affiliation to tribal nations, ask if that claim is reciprocated. Are they mentioned on the tribe's website or newspaper as a member? Do they have a record of working with tribal nation organizations that recognize their claims? If they are mentioned by the tribe's website, use the language the tribe uses. They may be described as a:

• descendant: this term is used for a person who has known and acknowledged ancestry from the nation but who is enrolled in another tribe or cannot enroll, often due to insufficient blood quantum. Wikipedia has categories for recognized descendants, such as Category:American people of Comanche descent.
• honorary member: not an enrolled member, has no legal standing.

Families can adopt members, such as Lakota people making a hunka relative; however, this does not confer tribal membership.

Some people may descend from multiple tribes but don't have sufficient blood quantum to enroll in a particular tribe. (Tribes such as a the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians address this by requiring lineal descent from their tribe and a minimum quarter blood quantum of any documented Michigan Odawa or Ojibwe ancestry.) Individuals who cannot meet minimum blood quantum are listed as descendants.

Some people might have been disenrolled by their tribes. In such cases, despite any perceived or actual unfairness, Wikipedia's policies on original research mandate that editors should defer to the tribal nation's legal authority to decide citizenship and relationship, and use the same terminology for the person's status as is used by the nation the person claims.^[b] Just state that they have been disenrolled.

Some people using Indigenous identity for personal gain have been known to deliberately exaggerate their connections, even going so far as to create fake organizations and give false quotes to newspapers. Vet reliable sources before accepting such claims at face value.

When someone identifies themselves as being a member of a tribe in the United States, research if that tribe is federally recognized. Those 574 tribes in the United States (including Alaska) have either been recognized through an Act of Congress or met seven criteria of an American Indian tribe: being an American Indian entity since at least 1900, a predominant part of the group forms a distinct community and has done so throughout history into the present, holding political influence over its members, having governing documents including membership criteria, members having ancestral descent from historic American Indian tribes, not being members of other existing federally recognized tribes, and not being previously terminated by the U.S. Congress.^[33]

State-recognized tribes in the United States do not necessarily meet the seven criteria listed above, but are recognized as tribes by individual states, whose criteria differ from each other and lack a consistent standard. Approximately 16 states recognize 62 state-recognized tribes. These are not universally accepted as legitimate Native American tribes. For instance, the Cherokee Nation opposes state-recognized tribes, as well as Cherokee heritage groups and similar organizations made up of individuals who have no documented ancestry yet still insist on claiming Cherokee identity.^[34]

Some state-recognized tribes are legitimately Indigenous people who became landless or faced tribal termination (for example, the Chinook Indian Tribe in Washington state). In rare cases a state-recognized tribe will later gain federal recognition, such as in the case of the Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians of Montana.

Other organizations identify as Native American tribes — and might use sovereign or nation in their names — but are unrecognized organizations. More than 550 of these organizations exist across the United States including in Puerto Rico. These groups often assume the identity of an historic Native American tribe, particularly on the East Coast, but fail to demonstrate a meaningful connection between their contemporary organization and the historic tribe whose identity they claim.

Some of these unrecognized groups do indeed have Indigenous ancestry, particularly in California, where the US created but never ratified 18 treaties.^[35] Some of those groups are seen as legitimate by recognized California tribes.

Some fraudulent tribal organizations are essentially "heritage groups" of people who claim Indigenous ancestry but who do not meet any criteria for status as an Indigenous nation.^[36] Some of these may be motivated by a simple desire to misappropriate Indigenous identity. Others desire to dishonestly gain access to funds earmarked for tribes or other minorities. Others may have even more problematic goals; for example, the fictitious "Little Shell Pembina Band of North America" was described by the Anti Defamation League as an extremist sovereign citizen group.^[37]

First search the federal register or appropriate Wikipedia pages to determine if the organization is a federally recognized tribe (including Alaskan tribes), a state-recognized tribe, or an unrecognized organization. If they are not listed as being federally recognized or state-recognized, they are unrecognized.

List the organization as being a state-recognized or unrecognized tribe. Individuals who are members of unrecognized groups should not be automatically identified as being Native American or Indigenous, or included in Native American categories.

In the case of California, in which several historic tribes lack federal recognition, search for published confirmation by respected sources such as News from Native California, the Indian Basketweavers Association, or the Advocates for Indigenous California Language Survival. This is not foolproof but will still help.

Fraudulent organizations claiming to Indigenous tribes are usually identifiable by public opposition raised by recognized tribes, and, for BLP purposes, members of such groups should not be identified as Indigenous.

There have been some exceptions to the rules, such as historical figures for whom we lack adequate documentation, but for whom there is tribal consensus that they were probably tribal members. Editors are asked to consider the questions above and, if at all in doubt, ask for feedback from more experienced editors in the field, such as at The Indigenous Wikiproject. If after this it is still unclear, indicate in the article and on talk, using reliable sources for Indigenous identity.

If outside sources claim (or claimed) a person has Indigenous heritage but that person denies it, the controversy needs to be examined in the context of that individual's life. For example, in certain historic periods, some people passed as white and assimilated into mainstream society. But as addressed above, one distant ancestor who chose to assimilate does not make that person Native now. It makes them someone with an ancestor who assimilated into their non-Native family.

Hopefully, reading the above essay has given you a sense of the issues. Here are the types of sources we look to, or rule out, when noting someone is Native in their articles.

• An article from the tribal newspaper will often mention if they are enrolled, or a descendant or relative. Tribes have websites and publications and frequently write about their notable citizens.^[b]
• An intertribal newspaper or website may or may not be accurate, depending on the site, and the author. Some check out the people they are writing about, others do not. Sometimes there needs to be a discussion on talk, or at the Indigenous wikiproject, about the particular source.
• Obituaries are usually not fact-checked. Sites like Find-A-Grave can be edited by anyone, and have been edited by scammers for the purpose of identity theft. These are only useful as hints for which tribe and relatives to look to for further information.
• Self-identification in non-Native sources like People Magazine or TV Guide is never fact-checked with the tribes and is not reliable for Indigenous identity.
• Unfortunately, sources that Wikipedians usually regard as reliable, such as mainstream newspapers "of record", may also fail to fact check on Native identity, especially if it is not an in-depth profile on the individual themselves. Even The New York Times has interviewed people for articles on Native topics and falsely reported, multiple times, that non-Native people are Native — simply taking the subject at their word with no fact-checking. This is why we go to tribal sources above even the usually-reliable mainstream ones.^[c]

If someone states they are an enrolled member of a specific, recognized tribal nation or First Nation and this is validated by reliable sources as outlined above, list them as such and add the appropriate First Nation, Inuit, Métis, or Native American categories. (Read above in the Is the tribe recognized? section.) Only if there is published opposition does this need to be questioned, and the first step would be to list both views with citations.

For how to format their name and tribal citizenship, see this style note.

If someone or a media outlet claims someone is an enrolled member but doesn't accurately list an actual, recognized tribe ("enrolled in the Paiute Nation"; "Paiute Nation" is not a recognized tribe), treat it as below: someone claiming descent from an ethnic group. (Unfortunately, many media outlets tack Nation onto ethnic group's names without researching further, e.g. The New York Times claiming people belong to the so-called "Kiowa Nation." This is a red flag.)

If someone says that they belong to an Indigenous group without listing a specific tribal nation (i.e. saying one is "Cherokee" as opposed to saying one "is an enrolled member of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians," then list them as "claiming [blank] descent." Ancestry and heritage are interchangeable terms and imply the person is not an enrolled member. The terms descent and descendant are used in several ways. Some may use the terms vaguely, to self-identify with no evidence; in other cases they are used to honestly state a person is the documented child or grandchild of an enrolled tribal member, or the documented descendant of a more distant ancestor who is known to have been a tribal member.

If someone claims ancestry/descent/heritage and this can be proven, i.e. they name the specific tribal member who is their parent, grandparent, etc., with reliable published sources, list them as "being of [blank] descent" or "having [blank] ancestry." Unenrolled individuals whose parents are enrolled increasingly use the term "direct descendant" to clarify their close connection to their community. "Direct descendant" is also used by individuals who have been disenrolled.^[44] Recognized descendants can be be placed in the appropriate category such as: Category:American people of Comanche descent, Category:American people of Ojibwe descent, etc.

If they are of First Nation heritage but non-status, simply state that they are "non-status." If they have been disenrolled, mention that.

If the individual publicly asserts an Indigenous identity even after being shown to have no connection to the community they claimed, and no right to even call themselves a descendant, their article can be added to the Category:American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent.

• Pretendian
• Racial bias on Wikipedia

See the Native American Journalists Association (NAJA) website, particularly their

• Reporting Guides
• AP Style Insert,
• "Reporter's Indigenous Terminology Guide"
• "So you need an Indigenous Expert?" - Particularly helpful for evaluating sources
• "How to Find Tribal Constitutions," Native American Rights Fund. Tribal constitutions spells out the tribe's enrollment criteria.
• Syllabus: Elizabeth Warren, Cherokee Citizenship, and DNA Testing - University of Minnesota, Critical Ethnic Studies compilation by Cherokee citizens. Sources discussing claims of Cherokee identity "as part of a longer history of cultural appropriation, erasure, and settler colonialism."