Which part(s)? Link?

Not bullshit here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalping

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redskin_(disambiguation)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redskin specifically says:

" Some Native American activists in the 21st century, in contradiction of the etymological evidence discussed above, assert that "redskin" refers directly to the bloody, red scalp or other body part collected for bounty.[32][33] While this claim is associated in the media with litigants in the Washington Redskins trademark dispute; Amanda Blackhorse[34] and Suzan Shown Harjo,[35] the NCAI's support indicates that the belief is widespread. Goddard (2005) denies any direct connection to scalping, and says there is a lack of evidence for the claim.[18]:1[36] King (2016) argues that the lack of direct evidence for the assertion does not mean that those making the claim are "wrong to draw an association between a term that empathizes an identity based upon skin color and a history that commodified Native American body parts".[37] "

" The term "red-skin" was, in fact used in conjunction with scalp hunting in the 19th century. In 1863 a Winona, Minnesota, newspaper, the Daily Republican, printed an announcement: "The state reward for dead Indians has been increased to $200 for every red-skin sent to Purgatory. This sum is more than the dead bodies of all the Indians east of the Red River are worth."[38] A news story published by the Atchison Daily Champion in Atchison, Kansas, on October 9, 1885, tells of the settlers' "hunt for redskins, with a view of obtaining their scalps", worth $250.[39] In his early career as the owner of a newspaper in South Dakota, L. Frank Baum wrote an editorial upon the death of Chief Sitting Bull in which he advocates the annihilation of all remaining Redskins in order to secure the safety of white settlers, and because "better that they die than live the miserable wretches that they are."[40] "

Wikipedia is biased and unreliable and can range from shit to great and they only cite a handful of select corporate media pages (including some that are no longer there) but they cherry pick what info they want to present. What's more telling is the political counter-stories found on the talk pages and history of the articles.