Talk:Sápmi (area)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Norway (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Norway, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Norway. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Russia / Human geography / Demographics & ethnography (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the human geography of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the demographics and ethnography of Russia task force.
 
WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken 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.
 

Barents region[edit]

Perhaps the last paragraph should be moved to a Barents Region article.

Done so, it is really two different thingm but with a geographiclly connection.

Note also thath the Finland Lapland county link points here - it probably should point to an article by itself. Egil 23:17 Feb 2, 2003 (UTC)

Sapmi[edit]

An article covering the same region has been started at Sapmi, it should be merged with Lapland. See also Talk:Sapmi -- Mic 13:41, May 19, 2004 (UTC)

See Talk:Sapmi. I wish that the article about Finnmark, Lappland, Lapland and Kola halvön (Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia) should be named Sapmi or Sápmi. // Rogper 16:17, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

I deleted the following footnote: "The word used by the inhabitans themself as well in e.g. weather forcasts is rather fjeld". If taken literally, it stated that the Sami call themselves and their language "fjeld" (an English form of a Swedish word for mountains), which is of course not true. Probably what was meant is that the Sami, when speaking Swedish, call their homelands "fjällen". I'm not an expert on Sami culture but the Sami homeland is certainly bigger than the mountain range. Even traditionally, many Sami were hunters living in the forest, and also the reindeer herding Sami often move far away from the mountains in winter.

No, that was not suppose to be specific to Sami.

The comment about "fjällen" was reintroduced, together with "Fennoscandia". Sorry, but Fennoscandia means Finland, Sweden and Norway, which is a much larger area. "Fjällen" means the mountain range, which is a much smaller area. Bvalltu 17:40, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Okay, take it or leave it. I'm referring to "the Fells" earlier in the article! :-) Fennoscandia include the Scandinavian part of the Caledonian rock (have I learned) and therefore not the whole Nordic. // Rogper 19:13, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Expanding and evolving[edit]

I think this article is a bit centred on the Swedish part of Sapmi, especially the conflicst-section. I am not saying that they ernt relevant, but it should be stated there that the information applies to the swedish part. Inge 16:28, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

People Section[edit]

The Sami are not called Finns in Norway. They are called samer. Several of the statements in the People-section seems to be a bit wrong. I am not sure if it is correct to say that the majority of samiland is sami either, but that is probably subject to how it is defined. It is probably not right to say that most sami herd reindeer either. Inge 16:15, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Reindeer herding[edit]

Is it really necessary to say that only a minority of Saami are involved in reindeer herding in the introduction? To someone who knows nothing about the Saami—which I assure you is the majority of Australians, at least—it is so completely out-of-place it's just not funny. Maybe somewhere else... I hearby propose it's reworded to and placed elsewhere. Felix the Cassowary 10:07, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

It's a bit like saying "Every Swissman is not a clocksmith" on an article about Switzerland; on the other hand, people might have unusual impressions and prejudices, but on the other hand, it's a bit misplaced. --Vuo 22:59, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Ethnicity[edit]

A majority of the current population of this region has Sami ancestry, yet most identify with their respective nation-state ethnicities (only non-assimilated Sami are counted as Sami). I interpret this sentance to something like this (excagerated): The majority of the population are in fact Sami, but they have had their identities oppressed and at the same time you can not be counted as a Sami if you speak a non-Sami language, wear non-Sami clothes or do not work with reindeer. Any estimates about the ethnic divisions in this area are difficult. Many "non-Sami" might have Sami ancestors and many Sami might have non-Sami ancestors. So statements about this should be built on hard facts and surveys. The facts are that the non-sami population are in a huge majority. To speculate about some sami ancestry in the majority population in order to make them sami as well is not the way to go. I am sure that many Norwegians in Finnmark and other places with large sami populations have sami ancestry even if they concider themselves mostly Norwegian (ethnicly speaking). But this also has to do with identity and there is no contradiciton between being Sami and Norwegian (you can easily be both). A Norwegian public survey counted as Sami (for the purpose of the survey) all those who had at least one great grand-parent who spoke Sami. This made the Norwegian Samis number about 70 000. To say that only non-assimilated sami are consicered sami is not true and might be offensive to people who concider themselves Sami but don't live "traditionally" or speak Sami. I would like to remove this sentance and explain the situation in a better way. How can we best do this? Inge 17:15, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Fennicisms[edit]

Hi there. This article seems to be inconsistent in the spelling, the intro prefers the Scandinavian Sami, while further down the Finnish version Saami predominates. I prefer Sami. //Big Adamsky 22:32, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I have changed the spelling. I think this was due to the fact that a long time ago I merged the Samiland article into this one. --Khoikhoi 01:27, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Terms[edit]

I have removed the following terms from the intro: Sameland, Lappi, and Lappland. The first is the Norwegian word for Sapmi. Lappi I believe is the Finnish word for the Finnish Lappi region, and not for the entire Sampi. Similarly I believe Lappland is the Swedish word for the Swedish Lappland region only.Labongo 13:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I also think the article should be moved to Sapmi since it is the term prefered by the Sami people and is being increasingly used in english instead of Lapland.Labongo 13:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

LaplandSápmi — I propose to move this article to Sapmi, since it is the term prefered by the Sami people and is being increasingly used in english instead of Lapland. This will also make it clearer that the articles is not about Finnish Lapland or Swedish Lappland.Labongo 15:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Survey[edit]

Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

Survey - Support votes[edit]

  1. Support, since I suggested the move.Labongo 09:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Survey - Oppose votes[edit]

  1. Based on the comment below, I assume AAikio oppose.Labongo 09:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  2. Must oppose. "Lapland" is not only about Sami people but also about many other peoples and cultures. The current article confuses these in a way that should be thoroughfully cleaned up. For example, the section about the flag implies that the Sami flag is used for the entire area. It is never used e.g. by Finns making a 90% majority of the people in the Finnish Lappland. Today, the Sami aspect is one of the many ways of experiencing and living Lappland, but by far not the only one. I would split the article in two, giving the Sami perspective a separate article. --Drieakko 08:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

Add any additional comments:

I must object. First, while "Lapp" is often considered derogatory, this is not really the case with "Lapland" as a name of the area. Lapland is the generally used geographic designation in English, and the same concerns e.g. "Lappi" in Finnish. In newer references "Sa(a)mi" has already replaced the older term "Lapp", but "Lapland" as a geographical term has not been generally replaced by "Sápmi" or the like. While the usage of the latter may have somewhat increased, it is still marginal and not stylistically neutral; I don't think we can make a page move which would violate a commonly accepted usage. --AAikio 07:46, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I have done some searching on the Internet and have found both names used by the United Nation, European Union and Lonely Planet. It seems like the english term used depends on the country of origin of the speaker, or where they have learned about the Sami. If the author/information is from Norway "Sapmi (Samiland)" is usually used, since Lapland is not commonly used in Norwegian. This is also reflected by the top ten results for the google queries "Sapmi" and "Lapland", where the Sapmi sites are about "things" in Norway and Sweden, while Lapland are for "things" in Finland. In conclusion, I don't find any of the names more commonly used (at least on the Internet).Labongo 11:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
If you want to go through with the move, please go through WP:RM and go through the full procedure. -Patstuarttalk|edits 20:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I think I have gone through all the steps now.Labongo 13:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

The relevant policy here is Wikipedia:Naming conventions, which states: "Except where other accepted Wikipedia naming conventions give a different indication, use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things." Unless someone provides evidence that "Sápmi" is more common in English language usage than "Lapland", I feel the proposed move is unsupported by policy. -GTBacchus(talk) 06:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The article has been reorganized by moving large parts to Sami people and the remaining parts to Sápmi. See also the discussion below.Labongo 11:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Many names of Lapland[edit]

Like indicated in another discussion thread, the article is at the moment a somewhat mixed bag of Sami centric chapters and general Lapland material. Sami people make 3-4% of the population in Lapland, so while not forgetting them, neutral view requires also proper emphasize of all other peoples and cultures as well. Starting from the "Name" chapter, kindly list here all worries about its current state and neutrality, as well if it misses elements. --Drieakko 14:11, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Since this article is about the Sami cultural region, it should be Sami centric and only briefly discuss the other peoples living in the area. I assume that the readers of this article are mostly interested in the Sami aspects. The other people and cultures should be discussed in their own articles. Finally, without the Sami, the area in question would not be considered as a single region. Labongo 17:18, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Suggestions for improvements:
* The article should be renamed to Sapmi to avoid confusion with the Finnish and Swedish Lapland regions.
* The area section should describe the different views for what areas Sapmi covers, and how it has changed through time.
* The area section should also describe the counties and municipalities in the different countries that have significant Sami population, and special minority laws.
* A section should be added about the Sami national day.
* The Sami Parliaments section needs to be expanded.
* Add history section.
* Reorganize People section. It should be divided into sections about the different Sami "groups" (Norther Sami, Skolte-Sami, etc). The existing division into countries can be moved to a seperate subsection.
Labongo 17:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
About my now reverted edits in the Name section. I have four problems with the current text: 1) it is very confusing, 2) Finnmark has never been used instead of Lappland/Sapmi, 3) most "Lapp" place names in Norway use "Finn" instead of "Lapp", 4) it does not mention that many places have Sami names and that these neither starts with Lapp or Finn. Again, I am assuming that the reader is mostly interested in learning about the are where the Sami live.Labongo 17:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
The general problem with this article is that it is poorly structured and contains a lot of minor inaccuracies. A major rewrite is needed, and I suggest we start planning one. Basically I agree with everything Labongo suggested except for the renaming. Lapland is the most widely known name for this region, and is not usually considered derogatory in the same way as Lapp.--AAikio 18:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Labongo and Ante. From what I can say about the article, content under title "Lapland" can not be solely about a Sami cultural region. If an article for that is needed (and that would be a great thing), it needs to be titled different. Today, "Lapland" is usually considered to be the geographical area in the northern Fennoscandia, with many different view points in local cultures and languages. I am not a Sami specialist, but it sounds like "Sapmi" and "Lapland" are today two different concepts and should be handled in separate articles. I'd suggest this article here to present only different ways of seeing the area, coming already apparent by presenting the multitudes of naming concepts, and talk about its climate, administrative regions (under which more about languages and peoples in different areas) and general geographical details. --Drieakko 19:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Labongo, about the name "Finnmark". In my understanding, the medieval Norwegian (Icelandic) texts quite clearly use the name Finnmark in the meaning of what Swedes called Lappland. "Finnmark" means "the land of the Sami people" and Swedish "Lappland" originally means the same. Please have a look e.g. this: "Finmark stretches along nearly all the inland region to the south, as also does Halogaland outside." --Drieakko 19:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Drieakko, I was not aware of that. But I still don't think that the area has traditionally been known as Finnmark, since Hålogaland is also covered by the region. Labongo 13:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Norway's Ministry of Trade and Industry calls today's Finnmark as "Norwegian Lapland", see here. --Drieakko 19:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
After giving this some more thought, and as we are writing an encyclopedia here, the English word "Lapland" has basically two meanings:
a) The Province and Region of Lapland in Finland. This is the only area whose official English name is "Lapland". This name is also extensively used by the Finnish travel industry in the same meaning.
b) In addition to this, Swedish travel industry extensively uses the English word "Lapland" as an unofficial name for the northern part of Sweden, around and north of the Polar Circle. Furthermore, Norwegian travel industry uses the name "Lapland" sometimes for the similar part of Norway.
Skipping all kinds of historical non-English names, the English word "Lapland" does not apply to any other thing, as far as I know. As no instance is officially using it to indicate the Sami area, least the Sami people themselves, I'd truly recommend separating Sapmi and Lapland articles from each other. Kindly correct me if I was in error. --Drieakko 21:21, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Suggesting that we add the following disclaimers to the top of the article:

This page is about the general region in northern Fennoscandia. For the Finnish province of the same name, see Lapland Province.
Not to be confused with Sapmi .

How'd that be? --Drieakko 06:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

About Norwegian Lapland; This is the first time I heard about that term. I guess the Norwegian ministry of tourism is trying to benefit from the very well marketed Finnish Lapland concept :)
About splitting the article; is there really a non-Sami Lapland region? At least in Northern Norway I don't think many people identify themselves to belong to such a region (this is also true for non-Sami people not identifying themselves to live in Sapmi/Lapland). So in my opinion there is nothing to split, we only need to agree on the name of the article (Lapland or Sampi).
About the disclaimer; I would oppose that since this article should be about Sapmi (and there does not seem to be consensus to rename this article from Lapland to Sapmi.
About the names sub-section. Could we structure it as follows: Lapland, Sameland and Sapmi are english words used for the area today... Eariler names for the region were...Placenames in multiple languages... Many placenames in Finland, Sweden, Russia start with Lapp...placenames in Norway with Finn...Lappi also used for other purposes. I assume this would give the reader information about what names she is likely to encounter today and in eralier texts, and provide insight about how place names in the region indicate a Sami presence. Labongo 14:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Most of the Finnish Lapland (the only official Lapland) is non-Sami. Population is 95% non-Sami and Sami people live in the sparsely populated northernmost part that has its own special status as the Sami Domicile Area, covering some 25% of Lapland. The Finnish Sami area is practically never refered to as "Lapland" in English, even though Sami people are effectively used in travel advertisements, along with the Santa Claus and ski resorts.
Regarding the usage of the word Lapland, some Google hits:
  • "Finnish Lapland" gives 159 000 hits
  • "Swedish Lapland" gives 119 000 hits
  • "Russian Lapland" gives 842 hits ("Murmansk Region" gives 141 000 hits)
  • "Norwegian Lapland" gives 794 hits ("Finnmark" gives 6 150 000 hits, "Northern Norway" 600 000 hits)
In my opinion, this quite clearly indicates that the usage of the English word "Lapland" to mean anything else than areas in Sweden and Finland is practically non-existent. This is especially noteworthy since most of the Sami people live in Norway, but the term "Lapland" is not in general usage about the Norwegian Sami area at all. Thus it is difficult to conclude that the English word "Lapland" would be a common English term for the Sami area when it is mostly used for the area with the least Sami people of the three Fennoscandian countries. The same goes to Kola Peninsula's Murmansk Region ("Russian Lapland") - it is very rarely recognized as "Lapland" in English media.
So while we have an official Province of Lapland in Finland, the unofficial usage of the English word is common for the Swedish northern region as well, mainly because of the well-thriving local travel industry. This, like Labongo pointed out, has occasionally lured the neighbours to use the name "Lapland" for their respective areas in the north, but this has remained marginal and seems to be purely commercial.
I would conclude that "Lapland" and "Sapmi" are in my opinion two different terms today and would require two different articles. --Drieakko 20:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
The official Internet site of the Norwegian Sami parliament www.samediggi.no uses the word "Lapland" zero times on its English pages. --Drieakko 21:29, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Drieakko, I agree with you that Lapland and Sapmi are two different terms at least in Norway (and non-tourism english documents produced in Norway). Unfortunately, the Oxford english dictionary and Ante Aikio do not agree with us. Hopefully given enough time both will change their mind :)
About your suggested split. What do you intend to put in the non-Sami Lapland article? And how will it differ from the Lappi article?Labongo 21:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
After thinking this I see no other logical solution than to redirect "Lapland" to "Lapland Province" since it is the only region whose official English name is Lapland. We surely need a Lapland disambiguation page to go through related usage, especially due wide misusage of the name Lapland by the travel industry, but as this is an encyclopedia, we should primarily stick to official meanings. I also think that any division of content between articles Sami people and Sapmi (if such article is created) would be artificial and all content should be in the Sami people article. --Drieakko 10:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Sami flag[edit]

While thinking the content of this article, I came to realize that the Sami flag is the flag of the Sami people, not of the Sami land. Thus it should be moved to the article about Sami people. Also, the section "People" in this article is strange here since it clearly belongs to the article Sami people as well. Comments? --Drieakko 06:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the flag is for the Sami nation. I have renamed People to Demographics.user-Quarl">—Labongo
The "demographics" of Lapland should surely include all other peoples as well. The current section discusses how many Sami people there are in different countries, and such clearly belongs to the Sami people article. The Sami flag is usable to indicate Sami people where ever they are and is in no way attached to the Lapland region. Thus its proper place is in the Sami people article as well. --Drieakko 10:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Reorganization[edit]

So, listing main points I have for the reorganization:

  • Redirect "Lapland" to "Lapland Province" since that is the only area whose official English name is Lapland. At the end of the day, that is just a clear fact.
  • Move Sami specific parts (people, flag, conflicts) of the current Lapland article to Sami people. I see little reason to split that between Sapmi and Sami people.
  • Redirect "Sapmi" to "Sami people". Note that the word "Sápmi" means also Sami people.
  • Create "Lapland (disambiguation)" page where Lapland related terms may be handled, especially "Swedish Lapland", "Norwegian Lapland" (Finnmark) and "Russian Lapland" (Murmansk_Oblast), as well as "Lappmarken" and "Laponia (historical province)". We could also create a new article for "Lapland (tourism)". --Drieakko 10:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
After giving it some thought and looking at for example how the Cherokee article is organized I also believe most parts of this article can be moved to "Sami People". However, there should still be a short article about Sapmi since it is a concept of its own.Labongo 12:27, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Please check if the article "Sapmi" looks now like something we are looking for. --Drieakko 09:01, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Drieakkio, I moved two sections from this article to Sami people. When the Demographics section is also moved this article starts to look like the start of the Lapland/Sapmi article I am aiming for. That is, an article about the Sami cultural region, its history, and all its inhabitants. I guess the Sapmi article is OK just as a link page. But I was not aware that Sapmi also means Sami people. Labongo 10:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. I am still wondering the administrative divisions as well. If we are talking about the divisions of Sápmi, they are traditionally the following:
  • Eastern Sápmi (Kola peninsula, eastern Norway and Finland Sami regions)
  • Northern Sápmi (most of Norway and Finland Sami area, northern part of Swedish Sami area)
  • Luleå Sápmi (Luleå river valley area)
  • Southern Sápmi (southern Sweden and Norway Sami area)
whereas we now have in the article the list of different official regions from different states listing their Sami populations, which in my opinion is a matter of the Sami people article. However, the breakdown of Sápmi to four main regions overlaps the division of Sami people and could just as well be in the Sami people article. --Drieakko 11:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I would put the following content in the "Lapland" article and move the current article to "Sapmi (area)":
Lapland can refer to:
Lapland may also refer to:
Other related terms include:
--Drieakko 12:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Sounds great. I would do it myself, but I would prefer not having to manually change all the links to this article. Perhaps there exist a tool that can do this?
PS! I think the content should be moved to Sápmi, which is the official spelling of the word.Labongo 12:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Carried out the changes now. Please check that it is all fine now. --Drieakko 05:59, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I think there could also be an article about the whole Lapland region.-SM (talk) 20:31, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Lapland[edit]

Lapland is a northern region of eastern Europe. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.182.202.226 (talk) 17:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

Name[edit]

Why isn't this article at Sápmi? /81.170.235.234 14:59, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Sápmi can also refer to the theme park in Karasjok [1] (that was stupidly enough allowed to use that name).Labongo 09:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Natural resources[edit]

I see that the part that I restored was simply deleted because it was supposedly plagiarised from Encarta. Of course, simply deleting text out of an article is not particularly smart as it usually makes the article incoherent (the title of the section made little sense without mentioning mineral resources, and consequently was mistakenly changed later). The logical solution is to simply rewrite the text. Can someone who is better than me at that do that? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Bot[edit]

Is it possible to stop these bots adding interwikis to wrong articles?--SM (talk) 20:26, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Issues[edit]

(this discussion started in: User talk:SM)

User Labongo asked me to describe more specifically the issues which this article has:

  • References: the article has very few, in some sections not at all, references for verification.
  • biased: the Sami POV is much too strong as long as they constitute only a small minority. e.g. the info-box is Sami-biased (national anthem etc.) — in a case this is not meant to be general article of Lapland (which is the English name for the region traditionally inhabited by the Sámi people), should the general information be moved to Lapland (region).
  • WP:NOT: WP:SOAP – from the word go the name of the page? Where is the name Sápmi used for this area in English? In every dictionary I have checked up and e.g. in Encyclopaedia Britannica the name is Lapland, as it is the sole name used in tourism-commercial purposes too. --SM (talk) 14:25, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Re missing references, it would be extra useful if you could specify which sections need references. Many of the sections are just summaries of information from other articles. Re, NPOV I do not find it strange that an article about the Sami cultural region has a Sami focus. Also, the other people living in the area are described in the article. Re, the naming it has already been discussed above. Including the naming in dictionaries and by the tourist industry. The issue is still that the term Lapland is very rarely used on the Norwegian side and not at all for the three southernmost Norwegian counties in Sapmi. Labongo (talk) 06:22, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Excuse me but it is useful to reference the information when it is written on the article. There are so many whole sections without references and you can see them without specifying.
I find it very strange that the Sami national symbols are used, because they are not symbols of the Lapland area, just the Sami people. I made Lapland (region) because it seemed that there were no neutral article of it, and this article seems to be hankered only from the POV of a small Sami minority.--SM (talk) 11:59, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
This is not Norwegian Wikipedia, this is English Wikipedia, and all the The "discussion" above seemed that just you and one other user decided to do so. There are no any reliable English sources that use name "Sápmi (area)". --SM (talk) 11:59, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I would have to agree with Labongo on every part (and it rare that we agreed on anything), except the article can use more references. It is very rare that an article has too many sources.
Regarding the naming of the area; the word "lapp" has long been regarded as derogatory by the Sami and has been ceased to be used by the Norwegian government and people. "Lapp" was used by outsiders to describe the Sami. In English, "lapp" had been borrowed from the Norwegians, who before used it in a derogatory way - without the English knowing about the loaded term. Today in American English, "lapp" is very quickly being dropped in exchange to "Sami", and "Sapmi" in place of "Lapland", although more slowly. You are not going to find a serious academic article that describes the "lapps" or "lapland" in the past ten years because of this change. Encyclopaedia Britannica is that last to know about anything, that's the reason why it is still listed there. These naming changes have only been coming to term in that last fifteen years. The Norwegian government no longer uses the term. However, "Lapland" is still used for the counties of Sweden and Finland, and that is outside this debate.
There are many English sources that describe Sapmi, instead of 'lapland': Try, Veli-Pekka Lehtola's, The Sami People: Traditions in Transition, University of Alaska Press, 2004. Look for any source published after c.1995. There are many others.
The Lapland (region) article has a lot of problems. "The name Lapland comes from the Sami people, also called Lapp people..." That is simply flat-out wrong. "Lapp" is not a Sami word. "Lapland" is a derogatory term, just same loaded as "Jew-land" for Israel, "Spik-land" for Mexico, "Frog-land" for France, etc... That's the reason why there should be only one term - Sapmi, and not 'lapland'. Dinkytown (talk) 21:00, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Like I already wrote: this is English language, not Norwegian or any other language version of Wikipedia, so what words are used in Norwegian or other languages is irrelevant (even in the opposite case you ignored that in Sweden and Finland the Lapp-based name is in use...). The naming issue has nothing to do with derogatory and there are no sources provided that Lapland itself is derogatory. The naming issue is about what is the most common name used in reliable sources, and what I have found it is Lapland in every encyclopedia and dictionary. You claim that the name "Sapmi" is more commonly use is quite unconvincing, you could only name one marginal publication. The issues regarding article Lapland (region) should be discussed on its talk page, not here. --SM (talk) 22:25, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Note that when I write that it is not used in Norway, then I am thinking about Norwegian people speaking/writing in English. Also, as Dinkytown writes there have been many political and history/archeology changes the last 25-30 years that have expanded the traditional "Lapland" area (e.g. in UN publications). This is illustrated by for example the rather outdated Encyclopædia Britannica article [2] (check the image) vs. an english language presentation by a Sami/Norwegian research center [3]. The Lapland (region) should be deleted since it about the same topic and is therefore a parallel article. Labongo (talk) 04:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't think it should be deleted. Lapland is notable enough to be a subject to an encyclopedia article as it is in every other encyclopedia. --SM (talk) 17:07, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
If the topic for the Lapland (region) article is about the region traditionally inhabited by the Sami people it needs to be merged/deleted since there is already an article for that (this one). If not, you need to clearly define what the difference between Lapland and Sapmi is. I am adding a merge tag to Lapland (region). Labongo (talk) 03:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Labongo, you beat me to it, regarding the tagging....
There are many examples of name changes within the English languages that have changed recently. Try typing in “lapp” on wiki and see where it goes. Fifteen years ago you couldn’t find the word “Sami” in any academic title or description of the Sami People, now you will never see “lapp” - not only in academic sources, but popular published works. Things have changed a great deal. BTW, the Norwegians never called Sapmi “Lapland”, but “Finmark” - which did include the present day Nordland, Tromso and Finmark counties. The Lapland county names are only in Sweden and Finland.
“Lapland” is not a geographical, environmental, or climatic region, but rather a description of a land where the ‘lapps’ live. Since ‘lapp’ is derogatory, the ‘Lapland’ name should be downplayed, and not on par with Sapmi, although it should be mentioned and described.
The Lapland (region) page should be deleted and redirected to the Sapmi page. However, there are a few changes that should be made to the Sapmi page: 1) identify and describe the history of the ‘Lapland’ in the article, like everyone did in the Sami People article introduction; 2) moved some of the material from Lapland to the Sapmi article; 3) describe that “Lapland” is derogatory to the Sami; 4) recognize that it is still a common English term, but is quickly being remove in place of Sapmi; 5) Identify the Swedish and Finish counties of “Lapland” that fall into the area of Sapmi. Dinkytown (talk) 04:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Agree to the suggested changes. Regarding the history I believe it is necessary to create maps that show: (i) archeological traces of Sami people (this area is larger than current Sapmi), (ii) Lapland/Finnmark as described in earlier sources (this area is usually smaller than current Sapmi), (iii) Lapland as described in early-mid 20th century, (iv) the current Sapmi map. PS! Nordland county, and Troms west of Lyngen were never part of Finnmark since these were in Halogaland. PPS! Dinkytown, you should add a support bullet to the Merge section. Labongo (talk) 05:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Disagree. The name Lapland has nothing to do with the naming issue of Sami people (formerly Lapp). It is not the Lapland's fault if in this Sapmi article there is material that should be in the general article of the Lapland region. And again: the word used in Norwegian has nothing to do with English - it is an issue of Norwegian language versions of Wikipedia. --SM (talk) 17:13, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
You're right Labongo, I was thinking of the time after the Halogaland naming (during Medieval times) when all three counties were called just one of them (believe either "Finnmark" or "Nordland") during the 1600-1700s. Over the years the were later split off. The point is that Sapmi was never called "Lapland" in Norwegian, but rather Nordkalotten [4]. I'll throw my support for the merger. Dinkytown (talk) 20:48, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

(un-indent): SM, I think you need to describe what the "general information" about Sapmi/Lapland is and why this information should be split out of an article about the Sami cultural region. The Sapmi article exists because there is a need to spill out sections from the Sami People article. It does not make any sense to not have descriptions such as the geography and demography of the area in this article. Also I don't see any issues with having a lot of Sami centric content, since (i) I think it is of interest to most of the readers of the article, (ii) readers who don't care about that can just skip to the sections that interest them, and (iii) the article describes the other people in the area including a statement in the introduction that the Sami are a minority in the area. Labongo (talk) 06:12, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

The Lapland as a region is notable enough to have article which is not just a "spill out section" of the Sami people article. Maybe I rushed, but this "Sapmi" article is so much Sami biased that I thought it would have been better to have a neutral article of the region, even though this version is very poorly referenced and provides false information. Lapland (or Sápmi) does not have those national symbols, and even the introduction does not any way bring out the most common name: Lapland - so I thought this is not even meant to be a general encyclopaedia entry. We should not guess what is the interest of the readers. --SM (talk) 09:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
SM, The reason why there is so much Sami biased on this article is because twenty-five years ago, the Sami had no autonomy in any of the four countries it encompass. There has been a reemergence of Sami culture that has long been erpressed. I personally and willing to redefine some aspects of the Sampi page inorder to incorporate the lapland issue into the article. This could be a step-by-step process.
But SM I have a question for you: How would you define the concept of Lapland and how is this different from Sapmi? Dinkytown (talk) 11:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
It is not relevat how would I or you define it, but how do the reliable sources, e.g. Merriam-Webster Dictionary: region of Fennoscandia above the Arctic Circle. I don't find the sporadic word Sapmi from these dictionaries, but the Wikipedia article Sapmi (area) the Sapmi is defined "cultural region traditionally inhabited by the Sámi people" althought not providing any kind of sources for that. To the best of my knowledge the Sami people have traditionally inhabitated much larger area in also the Southern parts of Fennoscandia. --SM (talk) 18:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
It is highly relevant how you define it to understand if there should be one or two articles (and I guess for me and Dinkytown to understand what you want to do). So far your definition is the exact same as for Sapmi. We need to first agree on the number of articles, then on the name, and finally about the content. Labongo (talk) 03:24, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Like I said I use the definition used by reliable sources. So far I can't say if it is the exact same or not, because I haven't seen any reliable sources defining "Sapmpi", but again: as far as I know the Sami people have traditionally inhabited also the Southern parts of Fennoscandia which are not considered to be Lapland.--SM (talk) 05:46, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Merge Lapland (region)[edit]

The Lapland (region) article is a clear duplicate of this article. The former article was created by moving/copying sections from this article. It has no additional information not found in this article, so the merge can be implemented by reverting the Lapland (region) article back to a redirect to this article. Labongo (talk) 03:52, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

In that case the general information of Lapland should be moved from this article to the neutral Lapland article. This is only a Sami culture article, which is in minor role in Lapland. --SM (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Disagree - merge/delete Lapland (region) article, but "Lapland" should be described more in the heading paragraph because of its common, albeti waning usage. Dinkytown (talk) 20:52, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
You must understand that Wikipedia does not rewrite history nor predict the future (Wikipedia:NOT#CRYSTAL). Lapland is still clearly the most common name used. The name must be changed after the major credible sources and dictionaries change the use. --SM (talk) 03:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Search engine test: Google (English pages), NOT Wikipedia
  • Lapland 1 890 000 hits
  • Sápmi 17 300

I think there is no ambiguity which is more common name. --SM (talk) 03:59, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

If you want to use the Wikipedia common methodology for determining what is more commonly used [sic] you need at least to:
  1. Include the common misspellings of Sápmi: Sapmi and Saapmi.
  2. Exclude all Lapland articles about the Finnish and Swedish Lapland regions.
  3. Exclude duplicates.
  4. Determine in what time period we are interested in and exclude entries that do not fall within that time period.
It is also useful to use the commonly used metric for search quality result and compare the relevancy of the top 10 google results. For Lapland mine are all about tourist destinations in Finland, except number 3. which is about a resort in upper state NY). While for Sapmi 5 of 10 are about the Sami cultural region. Also try to compare google image search for Sapmi and Lapland maps. Labongo (talk) 06:02, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
I think the Lapland would still get more hits because now it already got hundredfold than Sapmi. The use in tourism advertising does not bring down the common use of Lapland, vice versa: it is a clear sign of the common usage. See Wikipedia:Name#Common_names: "--Wikipedia uses as article titles instead of a more elaborate, formal or scientifically precise alternative" and "Search engine testing sometimes helps decide which of alternative names is more common." and especially "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball". PS. From the "Sapmi" results 4 out of first 10 are SAP MI (Mobile Infrastructure) related.--SM (talk) 08:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Let's not be characterizing the use of the English alphabet when writing in English as a "misspelling", okay. It is perfectly legitimate to do so. That being said, the searches for "Sápmi" and for "Sapmi" will find each other on many search engines. Gene Nygaard (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
My main point above is that you cannot use the count of documents returned by google if you cannot differentiate between Lapland (Finland), Lapland (Sweden) and Sapmi (and the SAP MI protocol). See Precision and recall for more info. All the google results demonstrate is that if you want to find non-wikipedia documents about this topic you should Sápmi as your query string. Labongo (talk) 03:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Like I have already shown I only used the search engine test as an additional proof for the much larger use on Lapland than Sapmi. I mean: Lapland is the word used in 1. dictionaries 2. encylcopaedias 3. commercial purposes. Sapmi is used only by some marginal Sami groups. Finnish and Swedish Lapland are part of Lapland so I don't see a problem. --SM (talk) 05:42, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
The problem, and reason why Sapmi was chosen as the name (see above), is that Lapland often is used exclusively about the (former?) Finnish or Swedish Lapland region, and not about the bigger area which this article is about. Re usage, I would not call the UN and EU "marginal Sami groups". But this section is really about whether to merge the two articles. It seems like we all agree that Lapland and Sapmi are synonyms and that the articles should therefore be merged. Right? Labongo (talk) 07:39, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Lapland and Sapmi are not exactly synonymous as the Sami cultural region extends much southern than the Lapland described in dictionaries (area above the Artctic Circle). In Finland the provinces (läänit) were abolished but the Lapland is still the name of the region (maakunta). But only the northern part of the region (and former province) is Lapland when standing for the meaning of area in question, so the name has not much to do with this issue. Even in Finland in the Sami language news the area is translated to Saamenmaa (lit. Sami land which I think means the same than Sápmi), not Lappi (Lapland). --SM (talk) 08:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
So Lapland is a subset of Sapmi (i.e. whole of Lapland is covered by Sapmi, but Sapmi has additional areas not part of Lapland)? Labongo (talk) 02:54, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Not whole Lapland is covered by "Sami cultural region", as I explained in my previous comment. As you can see looking the map in Finnnish Lapland only the northern half is the Sami region, but in Norway and Sweden the area extends south of the Arctic Circle. And even if it was a "subset" then it is not the same as Sami cultural region is not the same than culture of Lapland which is much more diverse and the Sami part is minor.--SM (talk) 14:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

(un-indent) It seems like your Lapland is a part of Sapmi, probably based on mid-1900 view of where the Sami traditionally lived (i.e. it is some kind of historical Sapmi, without the Sami article). I don't see anything that you can put in a separate Lapland article that cannot, and should not, be included in this article. Labongo (talk) 00:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Disagree. Geography, climate, demographics etc. are general subjects that are not only a subset of "Sami culture" or "cultural region" but the general and neutral POV Lapland. You seem not to understand the difference: Lapland is the name of the whole region (in four countries), "Sapmi" or "Sami cultural region" is only used in Sami culture subjects, and of course when not speaking of the whole Lapland the names of the regions (Murmansk oblast, Lapland, Norrbotten, Finnmark etc.) are used. --SM (talk) 06:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
It does not seem like we can agree on a merge and I still don't understand how Sapmi and Lapland differs. As for this article it needs a description of the geography, climate, and demographics of the area covered, so please don't remove these. Also you need to add a "not to be confused with" tag to both articles that explains the difference. Finally, I don't agree that removing the significant Sami places, etc makes this article NPOV or "neutral" (not including all points-of-view is rather opposite). However, I will remove the merge tag from the Lapland (region) article so you can write about your Lapland, and thereby hopefully make it clearer what it actually is. Labongo (talk) 07:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, not just removing those make it NPOV, because the whole article is Sami biased. Not the majority of people living in Lapland (not Sami) are living in "Sami culture", they don't have those Sami national symbols as theirs etc, and no law either describes so - but yes they are the symbols of the Sami and their culture, land etc.. But I still am not sure if Wikipedia should have that kind of parallell pages - like I said these general sectios are for whole Lapland and they should anyways be included, and I saw the part in touch especially on Sami people is already in the main article of Sami people. You still haven't made it clear what is the function of this whole "Sapmi (area)" article. --SM (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
This discussion does not make any sense for me anymore. It seems like user SM alternates between claiming that Sapmi and Lapland are not synonyms, that they are synonyms, and that Lapland (or the other way around) is a sub-area of Sapmi. But to repeat what I wrote above. This article is sub-article for Sami people and if there is duplicate content the latter should be cleaned up (it is a mess currently). But since there is now a non-Sami Lapland article I believe focus should now be on writing that one (and improving this article). I consider myself done with the merge discussion for now. Labongo (talk) 05:58, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
No, in the beginning of the discussion I only answered to your claim that "Sapmi" is the most common name used instead of "Lapland", which is not true as I have proved, because 1. Lapland is clearly more common and 2. They are not exactly the same. That's why it would be a bad solution to merge the pages under the name Sapmi. But maybe it would be good idea to merge the Sapmi cultural area section to Lapland, but there is no consensus so the second best olution is to keep it on its own page. --SM (talk) 18:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Lapland: Consists of the Swedish province of Lappland and the Finnish province of Lappland (Lappi). Sápmi: the above plus Jemtland and Herjedalen (Sweden), Troms, Nordland, Nord-Trøndelag, Sør-Trøndelag (Norway) and Murmansk Region (Russia). Merging them makes no sense whatsoever. It would be like merging the article on Schwyz canton with Switzerland, claiming that the former is redundant since it is part of Switzerland. And as for renaming this article "Lapland", that would be like renaming the article on Switzerland "Schwyz". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.156.29.128 (talk) 14:35, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I think need merge, becouse Lapland and Sapmi are exactly synonymous--Gaga.vaa (talk) 17:58, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Editwarring over "Lapland" v. Sapmi[edit]

SM - First, you are editwarring. If you revert the original edits again, you will be reported as such. Second, you have not demonstrated that 'Lapland' and Sapmi are not one and the same. The proof of burden rests with you before those changes can be made. Describe here what are the differences between the two. Dinkytown (talk) 22:44, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Also, it is a very bad idea to start changing Sápmi to Lapland in other articles as was done for Tromsø. It seems like there is an attempt to "take over" the Sápmi article. I thought the end of the previous discussion was that these two things were not the same. I agree with Dinkytown in that a clear definition of Lapland is needed including how it differs from Sápmi. The proper place to do that is in the Lapland (region) article. Labongo (talk) 02:03, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Pardon? I thought it was clear because neither of you disagreed my answer above where I described, but I can do it again: Sápmi = Sami cultural area (no other source than Wikipedia for that), Lapland = northern part of Fennoscandia. It is necessary to mention Lapland in the introduction, rather it is foolish to leave out.
And I think it is good idea to change the links that alreay were [Sápmi (area)|Lapland], some were even meaning Finnish province/region. Or why on earth should Lapland link to go Sápmi? I mainly changed those that are meant to point for Lapland, not "Sami cultural area". If something here looks like attempting to "take over" it is the recent changing Lapland to Sápmi rage. --SM (talk) 06:45, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
It is not clear what the difference is. Giving a dictionary type of definition is not helpful, since you need to explain the difference between Sapmi (area) and Lapland (region). For me region, cultural area, and area means the same thing (an area of land that can be defined by a border). SM, I don't know which other articles you have changed. But to my knowledge Tromsø has never been part of the old Finnmark/Lapland since it is west of Lyngen (the border between Finnmark/Lapland and Halogaland). The links to the Finnish Lapland should be changed to point to the Finnish Lapland article. Labongo (talk) 06:43, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Re, take over. Before the Lapland (region) article was created the division was quite clear between the Sami area, the Finnish province, and the former Swedish province. Creating a, what still seems to be a, parallel article and then start changing links is in my opinion to take over an article in a very disruptive way. Labongo (talk) 06:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Article Lapland was named "Sápmi (area)" and was written from the Sami point of view. That is what would be called "take over". I have explained the difference dozen times but still the "Sápmi" thing lacks of references. Even the article itself included the claim "It [Sápmi] is frequently mistaken for being synonymous with Lapland". Sapmi is mostly a subset of Lapland, not other way! This conversation is as stupid as would be trying to rename Americas "Indian cultural area". --SM (talk) 10:25, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
"Lapland" is the 'land of the lapps', Sapmi is the 'land of the Sami' There is no difference between the two. You have not described this difference "dozens of times", in fact, you have not convinced anyone of your argument. "Lapland" should be described in the introduction of the Sapmi article as the archaic way of describing the present day Sapmi, separating it from Swedish and Finnish counties of Lapland. You have changed the the Sapmi/Lapland many times before coming to a consensus. I strongly urge you to read Wikipedia:Etiquette and consensus, then changed these back these edits. This will save us all the effort in filing a complaint about you. Dinkytown (talk) 23:12, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Yes, that is the name, as Finland and Finnmark mean the same, isn't there a difference? And I have quite many times described it, even if its not actually my responsibility, it is from the dictionaries and encyclopedias. --SM (talk) 10:21, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
(edit-conflict) (i) I added a reference to the Sapmi concept/area last week (it is in the introduction). (ii) The Lapland article neither has a description of the area covered, nor a map so it is hard to say which parts are overlapping and not. (iii) The correct quote is "...frequently mistaken for being exclusively synonymous with the province of Swedish Lapland", where Swedish Lapland is a province of Sweden. (iv) there is no single "Indian culture" in America and hence there are several cultural areas, and for historical reasons and differences in the Nordic and US political system there is a big difference between for example the Cherokee Nation and Sápmi. Labongo (talk) 23:26, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
As Lapland is not a single administrative region there are no exact borders of it and I think you know that very well. Even if Sapmi and Lapland were exactly the same in the area, they are not same as much as there is no 1. Sami flag, 2. Sami national song, 3. Sami national day, etc... (which seems to be case in "Sapmi" according to this unsourced article) in Lapland as general, where the majority are other ethnic groups than Sami. BTW I haven't seen any other "cultural area" articles like that in Wikipedia. It is good you have passion for this, but please remember we are trying to create a reliable encyclopedia. --SM (talk) 10:21, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
What is this... I am a Sámi who has lived my entire life within Sápmi, yet outside Lapland, and I feel it is totally absurd to try and construct these two entities as coterminus. Stating that Sápmi is Lapland, is like saying that the USA is the Midwest. And if you want non-wiki examples of the difference between Lapland and Sápmi, be free to check out SNL, the most authoritative Norwegian dictionary around: http://snl.no/Lappland/landskap_i_Sverige; http://snl.no/Lappland/landskap_i_Finland; http://snl.no/samer. o sum those links up: Lapland = (i) the northernmost province of Sweden, including western parts of Norrbotten and Vesterbotten counties plus minor parts of Jemtland; (ii) the Swedish name of Lappi county/province of Finland. Sápmi = "broad areas in Scandinavia and Northwestern Russia, from the Kola Peninsula in the Northeast to Dalarna [Sweden] and Femund [Norway] in the South". Following this description of Sápmi, the lexicon links to this map: http://snl.no/.bilde/samisk_%28kart_over_utbredelsen%29

Lapland vs. Sápmi[edit]

I noticed two things that suggest Sápmi (area) and Lapland (region) should be merged:

  1. Currently, the Lapland (region) article reads "The name Lapland refers to land inhabited by the Sami people" while Sápmi article reads "Sápmi is the name of the cultural region traditionally inhabited by the Sami people"
  2. As already mentioned, the Sápmi (area) article originally existed at Lapland https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=S%C3%A1pmi_(area)&diff=116465496&oldid=116315311

Even if there are perceived minute differences in what parts are considered Sápmi and what parts are considered Lapland (from my understanding, neither have unambiguous borderlines anyway), if it's just word usage trivia, make a small passing note in the article. We shouldn't duplicate articles for the sake of our readers. --Makkachin (talk) 07:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

There may be potentially misguided POV in the Lapland (region) article. Traditionally in English language dictionaries and world maps, Lapland marks an area that stretches across multiple nations. Lapland (region) currently adds uncited POV assumption that the terminology has been bastardized in modern times to refer to the same region as Sápmi by silly marketers, which I completely disagree. The supporting argument given for this theory (again, in the article itself, not in the talk section where it could have been placed) is that its inhabitants don't call their region by that name:

However, the Norwegian and Russian parts of the area "Sápmi" are neither formally called "Lapland", nor considered part of "Lapland" by its inhabitants

Does that ever matter? For example, Germany is called Germany in the English language dictionaries and world maps. Inhabitants call it Deutschland, so it turns out. Is the word Germany suddenly invalid? Does the fact that inhabitants call their land by a different name proof positive that modern day marketers are introducing lies into Wikipedia for the sake of tourism, no citation necessary? Take another example: Ryukyu Islands. Ryukyu Shoto, which means "Ryukyu Islands" in Japanese, encompasses a subset of the English term "Ryukyu Islands." Inhabitants of the Kagoshima Prefecture portion would not define their land as "Ryukyu Islands" because that's an English language word. Does that automatically mean that (1) "Ryukyu Islands" is a modern day invention that's made up by marketers, no citation needed and (2) the article "Ryukyu Islands" needs to be split into two articles to drive home point (1)? Take another example: Turin. Locals call their city Torino, not Turin. Does that mean the word "Turin" was a modern day invention by marketers, no citation needed? To me it seems like the article is adding a fake distinction between the two words on the basis that the English language terminology is unfamiliar to the inhabitants. --Makkachin (talk) 08:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I see the "Sapmi" article as an article of the nation of the sami people, and the area they consider their homeland, while Lappland is an area only, and not a nation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.222.163.149 (talk) 16:03, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

"Swedish" inhabitants[edit]

The article currently says:

"About 700,000 people inhabit the Swedish counties Norrbotten, Västerbotten, Västernorrland and Jämtland. Many of the counties' inhabitants are not exclusively Swedish. Notable minority groups include the Sami, Tornedalians and Finns."

Exactly what is the definition of an inhabitant being "Swedish"? Being from Jämtland I don't consider myself Swedish other than in terms of citizenship. In fact, both Finns (living in Sweden) and Tornedalians are more Swedish than me since Tornedalen and Finland have been parts of Sweden for 800 and 600 years, respectively, while Jämtland has only been part of it for about 350 years. Why not use the term "Scandinavian" instead of "Swedish" (or "Norwegian" for that matter)? (217.208.138.80 (talk) 01:27, 30 June 2014 (UTC))

Why the "(area)"?[edit]

Hey, why is this article called Sápmi (area) and not just Sápmi, or at least Sápmi (region) or Sápmi (Nation), because in the norwegian wiki, it is spelled just "Sameland" (Which means Sapmi in norwegian) and it is considered a region there, so either have it be a region, a nation or nothing. By nation, I mean the same as Kurdistan, Basque country etc... Definition of nation: "A nation refers to a large group of people who share a common language, culture, ethnicity, descent, or history." --85.113.164.206 (talk) 08:42, 19 August 2014 (UTC)