This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Duh. The page that madmanbot claims this is a copy of is a copy of the former contents of the Nuxalk Nation page, it's a wiki-clone to start with. Would somebody please reprogram their bot; or just don't use bots when some forethought and "oh yeah" thinking is required. Sheesh.Skookum1 (talk) 13:23, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
I just reviewed http://www.nuxalknation.org/content/blogcategory/16/40/ which appears to be another copy of what had been the Nuxalk Nation page content which I transferred here today; they claim copyright on that page but I don't recall it being extant when the Nuxalk Nation page was created; I suspect they copied over the Wiki page to their new blogpage, I'll ask it of them; the way this could have happened is one of their people wrote the Nuxalk Nation page (given the folsky and kinda POV tone) then just used that as the basis of their new website; this article needs reworking and de-POVizing anyway, and more cites than AUTO ones.....`Skookum1 (talk) 14:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Chipewyan people which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:14, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 23:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Oppose until the issue is addressed properly. These should be discussed at a centralized location.
There was a discussion once on whether the ethnicity should have precedence for the name, and it was decided it shouldn't. That could be revisited. But it really should be one discussion on the principle, not thousands of separate discussions at every ethnicity in the world over whether it should be at "X", "Xs", or "X people". — kwami (talk) 12:42, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Support per nom. An identified people should be the primary topic of a term absent something remarkable standing in the way. bd2412T 02:37, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.