Revision as of 23:17, 16 February 2006 editPhaedriel (talk | contribs)11,206 edits →Capitalization of terms: Valid point, Kuri!← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:36, 16 February 2006 edit undoPhaedriel (talk | contribs)11,206 edits →Redlinked articles: Great idea, KC!Next edit → | ||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
==Redlinked articles== | ==Redlinked articles== | ||
There are a number of redlinked articles at ] - it may be advisable to change the section title as well. Please note ] instead of ] as well - not sure if you want to move that. Another set of redlinks is at ] - and I am sure you have more than enough to do without me mentioning redlinks so I will stop now. ]<sup>]</sup> 17:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC) | There are a number of redlinked articles at ] - it may be advisable to change the section title as well. Please note ] instead of ] as well - not sure if you want to move that. Another set of redlinks is at ] - and I am sure you have more than enough to do without me mentioning redlinks so I will stop now. ]<sup>]</sup> 17:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC) | ||
:Sorry about the belated reply, KC - but please, don't shut up! On the contrary, your suggestions are most welcome. I had already noticed the many red links on the Indian Wars part of the list of US military events, since in fact it was my first interest in Misplaced Pages and my main one for some time. The difficulty to find information about several conflicts made me advance very slowly, but I managed to write a little about some of them, like ] and ]. I find the subject fascinating (I actually joined the ] to expand related articles), and I agree with you: at some point in the near future, thse topics should be included within the scope of this project. I recommend that we go a little slow at the beginning, since the task is already rather big and adding even more subjects may be daunting, but you're absolutely right - this can be (and hopefully will be) a very interesting area for future development. Cheers! '''''<font style="color:#22AA00;">]</font>''''' <font style="color:navy;">♥</font> ''<sup><font style="color:#22AA00;">]</font></sup>'' - 23:36, 16 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | == ] == |
Revision as of 23:36, 16 February 2006
Categories
On the list of categories, would it be better if we were to alphabetize them as we go along? --Aaron Walden 19:15, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Great idea Aaron - be bold and rearrange them ;) I would only recommend to leave the project cat on top, as it will surely be our main working reference. Great work on the userbox, btw! Phædriel ♥ - 20:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- We need to think about reorganizing and pruning the categories. I'm finding a lot of categories to add to the list. Most the categories have sub-categories, which have sub-sub-categories. I've found sixteen categories to add to the list tonight, and I'm still only reached the (now) 12th on the list. -- Dalbury 03:59, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, no kidding. There's a lot of them. Wouldn't it work to just list the top categories, since the sub-categories are listed within each, anyway? --Aaron Walden 04:36, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Unfortunatley no because the category structure is not a strict tree, i.e. not all sub cats are under the same cat, some aren't even under the right cat or may be under something totally unrelated. Like until I edited it tonight, Category:indigenous peoples of Mexico wasn't a sub cat of Category:Indigenous peoples of North America. The cat system is too messy to trust it that way. It would be easier if it were better organized, but it isn't. Maybe we need a separate Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America/Working categories or something if the list gets giant.
- Yes, Dalbury, you're right - the pile-on of categories is far greater than I expected. Imho, it's best to list subcats as well, since we wish a global overview of the location of all existing resources both for searching and (re)location purposes. However, now that the number of them that we've identified is making the list too large to be included at the project's main page, I suggest that we move it to a subpage. I also think that maybe we should split it a little more, following the same criteria that you've currently used, i.e. maybe a Culture subsection is in order - please, go ahead and follow your own ideas. You're doing a great job searching for cats and posting them here, guys - congrats! Phædriel ♥ - 04:46, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- I went ahead and moved the cats to the subpage Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America/Working categories. Seemed like a logical thing to do. pschemp | talk 05:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- And I suppose another reason each must be listed is that future editors could come along and remove their sub-category status, rendering it an insufficient list. --Aaron Walden 06:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Some of the categories are very sparsely populated. Hopefully, new articles will help populate those categories, but we may want to consolidate some of them. -- Dalbury 11:45, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- My suspicion is that they are sparsley populated due to nobody knowing article should go there rather than there are no articles to go there. I've been working in related category schemes (all the archaeology cats for examples) and have seen this to be the case usually. Let's hold off on merging until all the available data is collected. I'm making it my project to deal with the cats and their populations and classifications. pschemp | talk 07:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
- There are some candidates for merging on other grounds: Category:Native Americans' rights activists and Category:Native American activists, and Category:Lakota mythology, Category:Lakota deities, Category:Lakota goddesses and Category:Lakota gods. -- Dalbury 11:30, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Scope
Can we include Indians of Mexico too? They have no category and most of their articles are stubs (except Aztec). Needs a lot of work. I have some books on Mexican Indians in Spanish, so if the language is a barrier, maybe you could send those projects my way?--Rockero420 21:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- As long as we have users with expertise in the subject, like you seem to do, Rockero, I think the idea is great. Please, feel free to add the proper template to each article's Talk Page in order to identify them. As the project has just begun, the first step is to identify all artciles under its scope, and list them at the project page as soon as we have categorized them. I'll remake the templates in order to include Indigenous peoples of Mexico asap. Thank you for your cooperation, and welcome! Phædriel ♥ - 21:57, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
scope 2: prehistory?
hi.
question: how about including prehistory? (unless your meaning of "historic" includes prehistory as well). i note that the coverage of American archaeology is a rather weak point of Misplaced Pages.
peace – ishwar (speak) 00:09, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed, dear Ish - in fact, now that we're going through the categorizing stages (an absolute must imho, in order to identify as many related articles as possible), I've already tagged a few artciles that fall into that period of time. Please, go ahead and include any others you see fit. Cheers! Phædriel ♥ - 00:45, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Inuit/Eskimo
The Inuit and other Eskimo-Aleut speaking peoples should also be included. What do you think? Also, it might be useful to invite the numerous people who have contributed to aboriginal-related articles. Luigizanasi 00:35, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Definetely, Luigi - in fact, I just went into a categorizing spree and tagged as many articles related to that group as I could. Again, I encourage you to seek any others you deem appropriate and tag them at their Talk Pages as well with the {{NorthAmNative}} template. I also created an invitation template to let as many interested users as possible know of the existence of this project; you can add it at their Talk Pages with {{NANWP}}. Welcome aboard, and happy editing! Phædriel ♥ - 00:45, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Then the Wikiproject notification template should change to include them explicitly. They do not consider themselves First Nations, and would be insulted by the term. I would like to suggest the wording "Native American, First Nations, Inuit and Alaska Native". I would do it, but I fear I will probably screw it up. Luigizanasi 07:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Good, point, Luigi - I'm on it! Phædriel ♥ - 20:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- Then the Wikiproject notification template should change to include them explicitly. They do not consider themselves First Nations, and would be insulted by the term. I would like to suggest the wording "Native American, First Nations, Inuit and Alaska Native". I would do it, but I fear I will probably screw it up. Luigizanasi 07:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Redlinked articles
There are a number of redlinked articles at List_of_U.S._military_history_events#American Indian conflicts, wars, battles, expeditions and campaigns - it may be advisable to change the section title as well. Please note Native Americans in the United States instead of Indigenous peoples of North America as well - not sure if you want to move that. Another set of redlinks is at List_of_Native_American_Tribal_Entities - and I am sure you have more than enough to do without me mentioning redlinks so I will stop now. KillerChihuahua 17:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry about the belated reply, KC - but please, don't shut up! On the contrary, your suggestions are most welcome. I had already noticed the many red links on the Indian Wars part of the list of US military events, since in fact it was my first interest in Misplaced Pages and my main one for some time. The difficulty to find information about several conflicts made me advance very slowly, but I managed to write a little about some of them, like Winnebago War and Peoria War. I find the subject fascinating (I actually joined the Wikiproject Military history to expand related articles), and I agree with you: at some point in the near future, thse topics should be included within the scope of this project. I recommend that we go a little slow at the beginning, since the task is already rather big and adding even more subjects may be daunting, but you're absolutely right - this can be (and hopefully will be) a very interesting area for future development. Cheers! Phædriel ♥ - 23:36, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Sitting Bull
I would love to help out this project. I think one of the articles that needs immediate attention is Sitting Bull. Just reading through it, the tone is wrong, it is not comprehensive, and needs major clean-up. It sounds like a 13-year old wrote it. I will help out when I get a chance, but I'm currently busy working on two other article. Gflores 18:38, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Lot's of Indigenous information out here - All jumbled around!
Maybe we can come to a consensus to consolidate as much Indigenous information onto one page as possible, since everyone is Indigenous to somewhere? My current count for disambiguation pages is at least 20 (I stopped trying to count them). Anyone have any ideas on how to do this efficiently? -- 24.11.91.3 07:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Some Examples:
- Indigenous American
- Indigenous peoples
- Indigenous peoples in the United States
- Native Americans in the United States
- Native American name controversy
- See the talk pages on those articles. There was substantial discussion back in September 2005 about the jumble of stuff in Native American, Indigenous people of the Americas, etc. The consensus reached was that three separate articles were needed and stuff was moved to the appropriate articles: Native Americans in the United States for the strictly US-related material, Indigenous peoples of the Americas for an overview, and Native American name controversy for the material related to collective names. Luigizanasi 16:17, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Reservations
I notice your list of articles has no category for reservations/reserves. We have a number of these articles (List of Native American reserves in Canada, List of Indian reservations in the United States will help find them.) I also noticed that while we have a list of U.S. federally recognized tribes and a list of U.S. state recognized tribes, I couldn't find a list of U.S. unrecognized tribes. I only know 3 or 4 which is hardly enough to justify starting a list but there should be a large number in Virginia, New England and California. Rmhermen 21:32, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Capitalization of terms
Hi all - Currently the term "Indigenous" is capitalized the majority of the time when used on the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America article. However, over at Indigenous peoples, it is capitalized the minority of times it is used. It would be quite helpful to establish a naming convention for use on Misplaced Pages regarding whether or not the ethnic group term "Indigenous" and its synonym "Aboriginal" should be capitalized all the time, none of the time, or perhaps some of the time and in which general cases. Aboriginal peoples in Canada#Capitalization may be helpful to a discussion. Kurieeto 23:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
- This is a valid point, Kuri - I simply used the capitalization every time we mention the project's name more as a title than a naming convention for indigenous peoples themselves. My humble opinion is, that it should not be capitalized if we actually mean indigenous peoples, and only use the capitalization when mentioning the project's full name. Again, your input is more than welcome. Phædriel ♥ - 23:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Lists
Not sure were it would fit on the project page, these lists are fertile ground for finding red-links.
- List of Indian reservations in the United States
- List of Native American Tribal Entities
- List of Native Alaskan Tribal Entities
- List of State Recognized American Indian Tribal Entities
- List of U.S. Indian Tribal Government Web sites - not redlinks but very incomplete
- List of Aboriginal communities in Canada - on list of most red-linked Misplaced Pages articles
- List of place names in Canada of Aboriginal origin
- Classification of indigenous peoples of the Americas - listed for possible merge
- List of Native American tribes - listed for possible merge
- Indigenous languages of the Americas
- Classification schemes for indigenous languages of the Americas - not wikified
I couldn't find any list of Archeological cultures/complexes. (List of pre-Columbian civilizations is related but very incomplete and Cultural periods of Peru could be a format guide.) Rmhermen 15:36, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
- List of First Nations has ample red links as well. Kurieeto 16:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
- These lists can certainly provide rich reference to artciles that we need to work on. Perhaps it would be a good idea to broaden our Categories sections to "Working lists and categories", and add them to the proper subpage. What do you think? Phædriel ♥ - 23:15, 16 February 2006 (UTC)