Talk:Circumpolar peoples

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Requested move 19 December 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. There is a clear consensus against the proposed title. SmokeyJoe has made a case for "Arctic peoples" that might be worth pursuing in a new RM. Jenks24 (talk) 12:54, 7 January 2016 (UTC)


  • Circumpolar peoples → Indigenous people of the Circumpolar – Conistency with other Template:Cultural areas of indigenous North Americans articles. --Samantha Ireland (talk) 23:58, 19 December 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 11:15, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose proposed title does not make grammatical sense. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 08:31, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Rename to Arctic peoples. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:16, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose as suggested, for grammatical reasons per the IP comment above, but some move is probably desirable. As for the suggestion to use "Arctic peoples", that also seems grammatically awkward (as does the current title) due to the unusual pluralization "peoples". "Indigenous people of the Circumpolar region" or "People of the Arctic" or "Arctic people" would seem better. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:09, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
    • wikt:Peoples is not awkward at all. A people is like a nation, but without formal or legal definitions or boundaries are even necessarily connection to specific land. Native American peoples have for some time used the term "nation", but many other per-industrial peoples don't. Historically, including in the bible, non-agrarian and nomadic populations are referred to as "peoples", not "nations". The arctic people are not one people, and they are not "nations", the different groups are appropriately referred to as peoples. It is somewhat rare a usage, but standard. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:34, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.