Talk:List of Australian Aboriginal group names

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

geographic areas[edit]

It'd be great if we could include information on each tribe's geographical area, perhaps formatting the whole thing as a table with main name, alternate names, and area. I know the locations of only a couple of the tribes, but I imagine other people could contribute quite a bit, and google might be helpful. Any thoughts? --Skud 06:12, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hello my name is megan warrell i he 110.142.253.131 (talk) 03:30, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I started on this. I'm currently working through Tindale's list (see the refs at the bottom of the page) finding locations. For now I'm just putting the state for each one, but Tindale lists more specific areas, so eventually I'd like to put that, too. Tindale might be a good source for at least stub-level information on each tribe. --Skud 12:29, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great work - I always wanted to do that but there was always something else... - —Moondyne 14:02, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AIATSIS have a great (clickable) map which shows the locations of the various groups. I've added a link to that at the bottom. Rayd8 22:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Moruya?[edit]

Hi I am currently working on the article on Moruya, New South Wales. I want to talk about the two tribes which inhabited the area: the Walbanga (no trouble there is a red link to them and they are in the list and associated with Moruya) and the Brinja Yuin. This second tribe is not in the list. Nor is there any entry for Yuin although there are quite a few (190+) google entries for Moruya and yuin [1]. The Tindale elist diverges to two places for Yuin [2] - first to Djiringanj which extends south from Cape Dromedary (and therefore commences south of Moruya) and the second to the Thaua [3] which is the right geography (north of Merimbula to Green Cape). I just can't quite see why Brinja Yuin might = Thaua and not sure what links to use. Any advice? Thanks--AYArktos 09:58, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the ATSIS map link just added and specifically the quadrant from the south coast of New South Wales - the Yuin dominate the area. However, they are not on the article as a primary tribe. Is this list complete - are we working off different naming conventions? - yours in ignorance but hoping an encyclopaedia might help :-) I note the language group to the north - the Tharawal are on our list as a primary tribe name--AYArktos 22:46, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Tindale list is quite dated, and although it can be useful, it misses out quite a few groups (e.g. Yolngu!). The Yuin are shown on the AIATSIS map - see the link I've added at the bottom of the table. This (and the assocaited AIATSIS material) should probably be used as a reference rather than Tindale.Rayd8 22:45, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The problem then seems to be that we need to update the article to the AIATSIS authority since that is the current thinking and presumably incorporates Tindale. I note that AIATSIS are generous on copyright - " ASP grants permission to reprint copyright material from our publications, including the Aboriginal Australia wall map." I interpret this to mean we could upload their map image for reference to the wikipedia.--AYArktos 22:52, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I guess you're right. Note also the Ausanthrop link which has a good database (and it calls them "tribal" names - see discussion below!). Rayd8 12:31, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The word "Tribe"[edit]

Some people feel that the word "Tribe" has a negative (colonial, patronising) connotation, and that we should use another word such as "language group" instead. ("Nation" is also used, but that seems equally inappropriate to me, for a population per group of a few thousand.) Any feelings or reactions to this? Rayd8 22:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I thought a "tribe" was a group of several "clans", but several "tribes" make a "language group" or "nation". Not sure where I got that impression, but I think I've seen "tribe" on interpretive signs put up by local government bodies, so it must be an acceptable term. --Scott Davis Talk 00:17, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I just had a poke around and found that (1) as you say, the word "tribe" is used in several places by people who should know, but (2) I found a guideline in a Queensland website which said that the word "tribe" should be avoided, because it has a particular meaning which is inappropriate in an Australian context! It recommends using "nation", "people", or "language group" instead. So there you go. I guess we continue to use it unless someone can definitively show that it's wrong. Rayd8 12:28, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tribe is not really a meaningful or useful word in the Australian context. Clan is not applicable to many Australian groups either. As a linguist I prefer to talk about 'language groups' as this is, in many cases, the highest level of group affiliation (altho people from different language groups can have ceremonial, and other, ties).

Someone (Ezeu) moved yamaji to the list of tribes, but I'm going to remove it. Yamaji is the word for 'man, human being' in Wajarri and is also one of the words used for that meaning in Badimaya. As such it, like ngayarda in the Pilbara and Koori in south-east Australia is used to refer to Aboriginal people from a particular region (the Murchison-Gascoyne region of WA), but may also be used to refer to Aboriginal people from any part of Australia. It's not a 'tribe' in any sense that I can determine. Dougg 01:52, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing that out. Could you also create an article or stub for yamaji so that others can learn. --Ezeu 13:13, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Ezeu, that sounds like a good idea. I'm curious tho to know why yamaji was put in as a 'tribal' name. If there's some source making this claim I'd be interested to know about it. Dougg 04:28, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I've finally put in a brief comment at the start of the page about the word tribe. It's not easy to spell the situation out clearly without a lengthy discussion and many examples, but I hope what I've written makes sense. Dougg 06:37, 18 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

complete list of tribes[edit]

this article needs a COMPLETE list of the australian aboriginal tribes. i think the list is missing at least a few hundred of them... Gringo300 15:05, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the authority for this list was work by Tindale. As discussed above in my query about the Moruya area we probably should use AIATSIS as an authority which should be comprehensive. I cannot find a list associated with the map, however, the map "represents work carried out for the Encyclopaedia of Aboriginal Australia, developed between 1988 and 1994. Using the published resources available at the time, the map attempts to represent language, tribal or nation groups of Australia's Indigenous peoples." The caveat is it "indicates only the general location of larger groupings of people, which may include smaller groups such as clans, dialects or individual languages in a group." There are many groups not on our list that are on the map. This reference (from the links at the bottom of the article) gives results from a number of databases. However when I typed in "yuin" I was left confused as it appears in the AIATSIS database but not in others including not in a list for NSW. I don't think it is going to be easy to produce a list. For the moment I will put a caveat on the article to indicate lack of completeness. --User:AYArktos | Talk 20:27, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Its complete now I think, at least from the Tindale source. Cfitzart 23:39, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinks within list[edit]

I removed the wikilink to Anmatyerre because that link only redirects to Anmatjera which is the tribe name against this entry in the table. I think wikilinks in the central column (Alternative names and/or component tribes) should be limited to those for component tribes or at the very least those for which there is a distinct article not for redirects back tot he tribe name. Ohterwise the reader will spend fruitless time pursuing links they would have probably already visited.--User:AYArktos | Talk 01:00, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thats fair enough. I made that this morning when I was trying to make a couple articles on Anmatjera and Alyawarre and it gets SO confusing with all the different names used. Cfitzart 01:42, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate List[edit]

Hi Guys, stumbled accross a duplicate list of tribes at Australian tribes. Might be worth checking for any missed info, and then converting to a redirect. Martyman 00:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like everything there is in this article already.. I think this table must have been made from that info? made it a redirect. Cfitzart 14:17, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

redirects[edit]

not sure if this was the right thing to do, but I've redirected some of the tribes to the main article about them - compare these two maps of eastern Arnhem land: [4] (yellow part - Yolngu) with [5]. The area taken up by the Yolngu in the ATASIS map is taken up with about 9 tribes in the Tindale map - so I made redirects for all of those to the Yolngu article; Djangu, Nango, etc. Cfitzart 14:06, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with the redirect approach - see below--A Y Arktos 20:18, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Barada[edit]

There's a group in the list called "Barada." The name is in the form of a link that points to the page concerning the Barada river in Syria. This is clearly inappropriate and needs to be fixed; but, being the clueless newby I am, I don't know how. I'd try to figure it out, but I'm a little pressed for time. I'll check back later, when I have more leisure, and see if someone's fixed it. If not, I'll try to learn how and do it myself. CKA3KA (Skazka) 17:28, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, me! I figured it out. If anyone wants to take a look and make sure I used the best method to accomplish this, I'd appreciate it. But I've tested my solution and it seems to be working as hoped. CKA3KA (Skazka) 06:45, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Link[edit]

The link for the Kurama people of WA goes to a Japanese Manga hero. I'm not competent to fix it -- the name itself might be a mis-spelling -- but I can remove the link and leave it bare. Some proof-reading on this page would be in order. 14:16, 19-12-05. Also Maia, Mandara and Mangala. These 4 may also be an internal Wiki thing due to not having stub-entries in place. All the more need for a proof-read. —preceding unsigned comment by +11 hours (talk • contribs) 17:34, 19 December 2005 210.80.168.62 (UTC)

Yeah, these days the name is usually spelled 'Kurrama'. I'm not sure about 'Mandara', but the other two are spelled 'Maya' and 'Mangarla'.
One of the problems with this whole idea of an article on Australian Aboriginal 'Tribes' is that the idea of a 'tribe' is not very applicable to much of Aboriginal Australia. And most of the names in the list actually refer to language groups, so Kurrama is a language as is Mangarla. Maya on the other hand may well have been a local group name (but no-one's really sure as they were disappeared pretty early on). So a question that arises is, where there's no relevant 'people' article should links go to the relevant language article? For example, in this article 'Malgana' doesn't link anywhere even though there's an article 'Malgana language'. Dougg 10:14, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Red links are OK. If the text is wrong fix it. If the link is wrong disambiguate it. If you don't know how, please don't remove links but leave a note here for another editor to fix as I am doing now with the links mentioned.--A Y Arktos 10:38, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Standardising disambiguation[edit]

As some aboriginal names require disambigiation, and the Australian Aboriginal tribe or language group is not unique in usng that name, I propose, that where disambiguation is required, it is dismbiguated to ... people (Australia) - for example Mandara referes to a people of Cameroon as well as an Australian Language Group.--A Y Arktos 19:52, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the Barada disambiguation according to this standardisation. I checked the redlink of Barada (people) to ensure nothing linked there--A Y Arktos 20:17, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Similarly I changed Mandi(tribe)--A Y Arktos 20:38, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Link to Language Groups rather than an article about people[edit]

I have no objection if the links are redirected to the language in the case of Malgana language, but instead of doing it directy in this page, I think better to create a redirect page from the appropriate blank article page. For example, create a redirect from the currently red linked Malgana page to Malgana language. That way anything that links to the people will link correctly if an article is later written. It is quite possible that material will be added on a people that will not fit within an article on the language, for example Ngunnawal people is separate from Ngunnawal language.--A Y Arktos 19:52, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have created the redirect for Malgana to Malgana language. The Special:Whatlinkshere/Malgana shows the Malgana page linked to the Kartu languages article and thus I think confirms my approach to redirects on the article page rather than altering this list in isolation.--A Y Arktos 20:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Different spellings[edit]

Variations in spellings should be fixed with redirect pages if a link has been created, unless the red link has been checked to see nothing links to it. If the misspelling, or alternate spelling has ended up in this page, it may well have been used elsewhere. If the misspelling leads to a disambiguation page, then it only needs to have the dab page corrected.--A Y Arktos 19:52, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed Maia ->Maya and associated dab pages plus Malgana -> Malgarna and Kurama -> Kurrama as per comments above. I have also fixed a redirect from Barara to Burarra.--A Y Arktos 20:36, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]


These things you've done are all good, but it doesn't address the question of what the article is a list of. If it's meant to be a list of Tindale's tribal groupings then changing the spellings is wrong. If it's meant to be a list of 'tribes', well, in many cases the term doesn't really apply to much in Australia. Here's some examples:

  • 'Mandi' (usually spelled Manthi) was a local sub-group of Yinggarda (the ones who lived around the mouth of the Gascoyne river)
  • Eora and Daruk, one is people the other is the language
  • Jaburara (nowadays Yapurarra) was the northern Ngarluma people and possibly also a different variety of the language
  • Jungkundjara (=Yankunytjatjara) is a dialect of the Western Desert Language
  • Jumu (=Yumu), a name which no-one has been able to figure out exactly where it's from (Tindale seems to have gotten it from Roheim's strange writings)
  • Maduwongga (=Martuwangka) is a communalect (i.e. grew out of people from several different dialect groups living together)
  • Mardudunera (=Martuthunira) refers to people from a particular location on the Fortescue River
  • Yolngu, which means 'person' and refers to a group of closely related languages in NE Arnhem Land
  • etc...

So, the article is a list of names which have been applied to different kinds of groupings of Aboriginal people, by those people themselves or by others (and in some cases there's two names that refer to the same group). It should be remembered that Aboriginal people were not (and are not) one-dimensional, and have always had numerous ways of grouping themselves, and often names for more than one of those groupings. But there's not much that correspends to what the word 'tribe' is usually used to mean.

BTW, it's Malgana, not Malgarna. I'll fix it. Dougg 00:53, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for fixing--A Y Arktos 06:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What is this a list of, or should it be two lists?[edit]

With reference to Dougg's comments above, I am not sure what this is a list of. I don't believe it is appropriate for it to be limited to a list of what Tindale researched. That list of course is available on the web. We have discussed whether or not "tribes" is an appropriate descriptor and one editor has tried to provide a meaningful introduction to cover the scope of not just tribes, but communalects (my new word for today), dialects.... If somebody talks about or wishes to find out about an aboriginal people, whether tribe, nation, language group, whatever - I would hope they could find a link on this list. Others may have different views. Feel free to be bold about the introduction. Page moves to describe the list differently should probably be discussed here first to arrive at concensus - that does not mean that there can be no changes. If there should be more than one list, say a list to cover people and another to cover language, communalect, dialect, ... that might be sensible--A Y Arktos 06:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for those comments. I wrote the intro para about 'tribes', but I don't think it solves the problem of what to put into the article. As you suggest, one thing that this article could be (or work towards being) is a comprehensive list of names that have been used to refer to groups of indigenous Australians, which are linked to the appropriate 'standard' people and/or language names. Two problems with this are how to determine the 'standard' or preferred term (and its spelling) and working out what the correspondences are. But the main problem is the sheer number of such group names that have been used. I've seen a list of over 9,000 such names. Still, completeness is not necessary and such a list would be a very useful resource. I've mentioned elsewhere that AIATSIS is developing a major on-line database to deal with this issue, but it won't be publicly available until late 2006 (when it is I'll be sure to post a note here). Dougg 07:31, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I like the list of names used to refer to groups of Australian indigenous people. Perhaps we could clarify between people and language by some annotation or additional column. For example, in the case of Eora and Daruk, mentioned above, where one is people the other is the language - the two would appear in separate columns, one for people and the other language; or could be annotated Eora (people) and Daruk (language of the Eora people) or whatever.
A list of 9,000 sounds scary. The lack of completeness is indicated by the tag at the header. The issue becomes which name to use. Redirects can take care of alternatives, but is there an authorative source for preferred spelling or name. Spinifex people seems a little unusual to be joining this list for example, but is that any the less preferred than Pila Nguru - I am really not qualified to venture an opinion. However, if somebody said we would use so-and-so's atlas of 19xx then I feel I would have more basis for editing to a particular standard. There has been some limited discussion at Talk:Indigenous_Australians#Naming_of_groups but seems to be no conclusion.--A Y Arktos 11:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you like It! What do others think? As you say, there would a need for annotations, but while many of these would be 'people' or 'language' I don't think it would be good to limit them. Regards authoritative sources for all names, there is nothing at the moment, nor do I think such a thing is really possible, athough the AIATSIS databaase being developed will (eventually) be the nearest thing. For many names there won't be a problem, but for many others there will be no simple answer and it will require caneful sifting of sources.
Re Spinifex people my understanding is that this name was used primarily for Native Title purposes. 'Pila Nguru' is, I imagine pilanguru (Western Desert Language) i.e. pila 'plain' plus the ablative suffix -nguru and would mean something like 'from the plains'. Dougg 01:44, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I would support a renaming of this list, in view of the multiple contexts and range of meanings attached to these group names. I also think that it is highly useful to have all such names in one place, such as here. Dougg's introduction could be further expanded to explore the subtleties re collective divisions such as tribe, nation, people, community, moiety, linguistic affiliation, Native Title formal name, etc, and some sort of key employed to mark where possible the "type" of group name for the entries in the list. For a new article title I'd suggest something like List of indigenous Australian group names, which should be generic enough to cover all possibilities. One further point, if we do rename along the lines of "indigenous Australians", then the list should probably also include Torres Strait Islanders' group names, like Merriam/Mer etc.--cjllw | TALK 22:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Spinifex people - Pila Nguru[edit]

The Federal Court of Australia Native Title case uses Pila Nguru as first option

The persons holding the communal or group rights comprising the native title ("the common law holders") are the Pila Nguru People (otherwise known as the Spinifex People). http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/federal_ct/2000/1717.html

Could an administrator look at swapping the redirect and the article Paul foord 01:20, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

But then again it appears to have been discussed before and resolved to keep Spinifex people Paul foord

Although Wikipedia:Naming conventions gives supports the guidleines under development at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English), I believe there are good reasons to prefer Pila Nguru (or agreed transcription) in place of Spinifex people, unless the people of that group themselves prefer Spinifex people. We need to conduct a straw poll, perhaps at WP:AWNB.--A Y Arktos 11:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kurama[edit]

Could someone please consider this edit [6] from Kurama? I don't wish to break the 3 revert rule and it is perhaps about time another editor had a view.--A Y Arktos 11:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just changed 'Kurama' in the list to 'Kurrama' but you (impressively quickly!) reverted it. You cited AusAnthrop [7], but please note that the Encycclopedia of Aboriginal Australia, AIATSIS and SIL (all cited on that page) agree in using 'Kurrama', as does the WA Handbook at [8]. Also 'Kurrama' is the preferred spelling used by Wangka Maya Pilbara Aboriginal Language Centre (the Aboriginal organisation in the Pilbara that carries out work on Pilbara languages on behalf of the language speakers themselves). I've created an article Kurrama language. Dougg 00:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And having posted the above, I see your post that you've created a page 'Kurama language'. Dougg 00:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
'Twas I who originally created the Kurama people article a little earlier, given AYA's call above for assistance in arguing the case for some kind of disambiguation with the Kurama article on the manga character. Their several Native Title claims appear lodged with the NNTT as "Kurama people". I don't really mind which of Kurama/Kurrama is used - seems to be a judgement call as to which is the "most preferred term"; note that "Kurrama" seems to be employed when referring to the language, such as by SIL and the Pilbara language centre Dougg mentions above, but "Kurama" is attested as a form for the people's name. However, we should I believe maintain two separate articles, one for the people, the other for the language, as is commonly done. Thus Kurama people (or Kurrama people) should appear on this list, not the "___ language" article. Thoughts?--cjllw | TALK 01:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Apropos disambiguation of Kurama, the situation is further complicated by the term also being the name of a Benue-Congo language of Nigeria (see ethnologue). "Kurama" is also the name of a town to the north of Kyoto, and its nearby mountain. Although these other articles don't yet exist, they should be catered for, and ideally, Kurama should be turned into a dab page, and the related article titles qualified.--cjllw | TALK 01:26, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I don't think there's a need for disambiguation with other 'kurama' articles because I think the name 'Kurrama' should be used. I'm well aware that the NNTT applications used the spelling 'Kurama', however NNTT applications are no guide as they're generally put in by lawyers who commonly use Tindale's spelling. The language has a contrast between retroflex 'r' and trilled 'rr', so it does make a difference--the word is pronounced with the latter. 'Kurrama' does indeed refer to the language, but also thereby to the people who speak that language (or nowadays to people descended from those whose primary language affiliation was to Kurrama). As such it should be in this list; I guess 'Kurrama people' could be there as well, though it seems redundant. BTW your Kurama people page seems to have been redirected to Kurama language. Dougg 01:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks Dougg for the info re the language; "Kurrama" it is, then. However, I do think that some kind of disambig pointer for the alternate "Kurama" is still warranted- it would aid any potential reader searching for info on the people/language, who might have come across this spelling. As for the change from people to language, I'm not sure why this was done. IMO the (yet to be written) Kurrama language article ought to contain naturally enough particulars such as grammar, phonemics, etc, while the article on the people should describe their situation, history, culture, traditions, and so on. The two have distinct purposes, and the latter is the appropriate topic to be linked to here in this present article. The corresponding language article would be better placed on Australian Aboriginal languages.--cjllw | TALK 04:58, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, fair enough about the need for disambig. I'm not sure what would be the best way to implement it, though. As for 'people' vs. 'language', this list started off using Tindale's names, and he's the one that used the 'dialectal tribe' notion to define his so-called 'tribes' largely in terms of their language. This means that most of the names on the list are names of languages, by which means groups of people may be defined (NB only one of the ways by which this may be done). But I can certainly see your point, and can see the value in having the two articles. Dougg 08:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have created a Kurama (disambiguation) page, which is referred to on the Kurama page and I believe complies with the manual of style. I have also created a disambiguation link on the Niger-Congo Kurama language to the Aust Aboriginal Kurrama language. I think the disambiguation is warranted as there are reputable sources spelling the Aboriginal language as Kurama. Thanks for all the work in creating the articles and sorting it out in such a constructive way.--A Y Arktos 09:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
no worries AY, and your dab work should address the issue just fine. And Dougg, your point re the scope of many of Tindale's group names being linguistic rather than necessarily community divisions only further underscores the need to rename this page. Per my suggestion supra, we could add something like a "Notes" column to the tables which could be used to describe the scope of the name, be it linguistic, 'tribal', 'sub-tribal', exonym, community, etc— where this is known or relevant, to go with an expanded blurb at the front. Ideally, each indigenous group or people in the list will have an article describing their particulars, and there may or may not be a corresponding article describing the related language as well (but not listed here, rather at Australian Aboriginal languages or some such). If there are no further objections, I propose to rename this article to List of indigenous Australian group names in the next couple of days. Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 05:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article rename[edit]

Two suggestions to date:

  • List of names used to refer to groups of Australian indigenous people
  • List of indigenous Australian group names

Any more? Any preference, or objections?--A Y Arktos 11:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


My preference is for List of indigenous Australian group names, more economical to type!--cjllw | TALK 01:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since some time has passed, and no specific objections raised, I've gone ahead and moved the article to List of Indigenous Australian group names.--cjllw | TALK 06:29, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tindale's catalogue is online[edit]

See Norman Tindale's Catalogue of Australian Aboriginal Tribes[9], in his book Aboriginal Tribes of Australia. Their Terrain, Environmental Controls, Distribution, Limits, and Proper Names

A useful reference for all articles on Indigenous Australian groups. -- Paul foord 12:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tindale's list is already provided in the External links section. As per comments above, "The Tindale list is quite dated, and although it can be useful, it misses out quite a few groups". We actually need to be using some other authority. In the section above: "What is this a list of, or should it be two lists?", we do try to discuss the issue, it is almost certainly not limited to Tindale's list, nor even some of the terminlogy or spelling by Tindale, though any that he gave should be covered in the alternatative names area.--A Y Arktos 19:49, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

In response to an addition to the list from an editor only identified by an IP address, it made me think we really should have all addtions to this list referenced. It would help to understand where the name is coming from and where there are different names for the same people. language, ...--A Y Arktos 01:28, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly support this both for the reasons given and also because it makes it possible to track down typos (which are very common) and ad hoc spellings made up by people: this last happens a lot in the art world, especially where the speaker is illiterate and the recorder is unfamiliar with the language they are trying to record. Dougg 23:56, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a reference to the names used in the AIATSIS map, and to those used on the SA site about Tindale.. If I get round to it I would also like to add the names used from Tindale's earlier 1940 map at the NLA, including its use of the Ŋ symbol --Astrokey44 03:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Palm Island -Manburra[edit]

Hello Can someone with knowledge check the Palm Island Qld page, Not sure about the tribe mane of the original people. Said to be Mandarra but your list says there from WA

preferred name[edit]

on the article Five Dock, New South Wales it is stated

One of these groups, the Wangal (sometimes spelt Wanngal, Wann-gal or Wanegal) people...

Each of these names is returned from different articles if they are searched for. Which would be the preferred name, and I will unify the spelling across all articles. I will also create a stub article they can all point to identifying that there is more than one spelling although the "preferred" / "standard" spelling is.... ? Garrie 03:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misplaced sentence[edit]

Not sure where this should go, but it was put under the "See Also" section of the article, where it obviously should not be:

"Yorta Yorta of the central Murray and Lower Goulburn River Region of Victoria stretching into New South Wales."

If anybody knows where it goes, be my guest and add it back to the article. -Oatmeal batman 01:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Table format[edit]

The tables would be easier to parse if you put the 'geographical location' columns in the 2nd position rather than the 3rd. As it stands, the eye strains to cross blank space and match up an item in the 1st and 3rd columns. Regards, --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 20:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The names in the 2nd column are just as important as those in the 1st as there are different names for each group --Astrokey44 11:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ngala[edit]

Ngala is not mentioned, is this ngalawanka ? There more in the center (west) dough —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.178.160 (talk) 13:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mandingalbay Yidinji and Gunggandji[edit]

Re: Frankland Group National Park
These two "Aboriginal peoples", identified from The State of Queensland Government site as "traditional sea country" of the Frankland Isles:[1]

These aren't on this list. I don't know where to link from the article, or how/if to include on the list. If some kind editor would like to handle this, it would be appreciated.
~thanks, ~E : 05:06, 21 December 2012 (UTC), modified:74.60.29.141 (talk) 18:33, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also note:

"The Federal Court of Australia has today recognised the Combined Mandingalbay Yidinji-Gunggandji People's Native Title rights and interests ..."[2]
  1. http://www.nprsr.qld.gov.au/parks/frankland-group/index.html
  2. http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2012/9/21/mandingalbay-yidinjigunggandji-peoples-native-title-rights-recognised

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on List of Indigenous Australian group names. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:57, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of Indigenous Australian group names. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:33, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of Indigenous Australian group names. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:46, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Naming[edit]

In the process of moving a couple of names around in the tables after I had effected article name changes, I noticed that there are a lot of discrepancies in the "J" list, in particular where an alternative spelling begins with "Y", but also a few others where the article name is completely different. A task for someone some day... Go through the whole list and check that the names reflect those used in article names? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:01, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As a follow-up - a good example also is (from article) "Yuwaalaraay, also spelt Euahlayi, Euayelai, Eualeyai, Ualarai, Yuwaaliyaay and Yuwallarai...) - with website and other contemprary references appearing to favour Euahlayi. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:07, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes some early researchers (notably Tindale) used <j> to represent the palatal glide, which is often written <y> in English (ie [j] in IPA). Re Yuwaalaraay, yes there are quite a few variant spellings, many arose because people think Australian languages can be written as though they're English... Austlang aims to use the form of the name that is preferred by the community, so I would suggest that WP articles, including the list in this article, should use the Austlang name. Dougg (talk) 04:32, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks Dougg - I have usually been following that rule myself. Yuwaalaraay is particularly complicated by the varying opinions on their language though (here all under Gamilaraay, as per Austlang - haven't rechecked that spelling yet). I have commented on both pages just to note it - but haven't dug very deep and I'm not a linguist myself. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:03, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yuwaalaraay has its own Austlang entry, and the title spelling there seems to be pretty widely accepted, to my understanding more so than any of the variants.
Thanks again Dougg. I had started looking at the Gamilaraay language article before, in which are included all of the dialects/languages, but had somehow missed D27, I think. I'm doing a bit of a cleanup and clarification at the moment, and will check all of the associated articles (people who speak the dialects) to ensure that everything matches up, with AUSTLANG citations to each, eventually. It does look as if we need to move Ualarai to Yuwaalaraay, at least, in this list article. Should we leave a line with a "see ref" (link) to the main name where the spellings are so widely different, such as in this case? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:44, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that a "see ref" is necessary, I think it may be enough simply to make sure that 'Ualarai' appears as one of the alternative names under 'Yuwaalaraay' so that it can be found by a search. Dougg (talk) 05:26, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorted. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 09:25, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Request for info[edit]

I'm currently working on Aboriginal cultures of Western Australia and I'm hoping someone can help find me a source.

Hey folks, would anyone have a source as to why the region names in the AIATSIS map (compare the old AIATSIS map with the current map) are no longer in use?

I'm asking this here as I saw the note in this article that points out that the 18 region names are no longer given/used.

I can make the guess that they often gave the impression that these groupings were stronger than they actually are, and so AIATSIS decided to remove them. But I'd like/need a source to put that in the article.

I'm hoping to find a source as (I think) the article I'm working on benefits by being structured by some set of highly general cultural groupings, but I want to do that while noting that these cultural-regions are not well divided. I think this would be the best way of giving a general overview of the many different Aboriginal cultures of WA.

FropFrop (talk) 15:32, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Australian_Aboriginal_group_names&oldid=1203622191"