Category talk:Native American topics

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America 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.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles

change

Suggested change:

This category should probably not be used. There are two different usages of Native American:

all indigenous peoples
only indigenous peoples confined to the US borders

As this is ambiguous, any articles that are about (1) should be under Category:Indigenous peoples of the Americas & any articles about (2) should be under Category:Indigenous peoples of the United States.

This will clear up any misunderstanding. (See Talk:Native Americans#Indigenous peoples of the Americas for more discussion.)

thoughts? – ishwar (speak) 18:08, 2005 August 8 (UTC)

I agree with this proposal and the fact that Native American is ambiguous. DoubleBlue (Talk) 18:46, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ishwar, on the whole I agree with this proposal, for the stated reason that the term "Native American" is ambiguous in its common application. When I had first set up the family of Indigenous peoples of (region) Categories, I was unsure what to do with the articles in the previously-existing Category:Native Americans. Now, if there is general consensus, moving these to the appropriate "Category:Indigenous peoples of..." would be more appropriate, and "indigenous peoples" would be the most neutral and non-regionally specific term available.

I do have a further amendment to your proposal to suggest, however: namely, that the following four sub-regional categories be used in preference to (or at least alongside of) their parent Category:Indigenous peoples of the Americas:

Of course, further sub-categorisation by country can also be pursued, such as Category:Indigenous peoples of the United States or Category:Indigenous peoples of Brazil; however, there will be several instances where particular groups are not presently or formerly confined to the modern borders of one country.--cjllw | TALK 00:28, 2005 August 9 (UTC)

I would support this proposal. But I would advise that for categories regarding countries and not continents/areas, we use "Indigenous peoples in {country name}" as opposed to "Indigenous peoples of {country name}". This is preferable because the indigenous people pre-date the country, and it is desirable to avoid implying belonging of an indigenous people to a country. This method of naming is currently done for Category:Aboriginal peoples in Canada. Kurieeto 05:42, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Kurieeto, nice point...I agree, in country is preferable to of country.--cjllw | TALK 06:22, 2005 August 9 (UTC)

These are all great ideas, with which I agree. But I notice that it's a year & a half later, & there is still this category "Native American." So what happened to this proposal? --Yksin 10:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

article proposal

Hello...I want to create an article on Cherokees living outside their tribal homelands. A large number of Native Americans claim to be Cherokee, though a few large-sized tribes/nations and hundreds of tribal groups exist. There's a title called "Cherokee American" sometimes used as a self-title, instead of terms like "part-cherokee", "generokee" and "Pretendian" [1], are condescending to those of mixed White/Amerindian ancestry. It will take time to find all the information on the history of Cherokees, whether are tribal members or evidently of Cherokee descent, live across the United States. I think the article is a brilliant idea to expand knowledge of Native American history and culture. + 207.200.116.14 21:36, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there anon contributor. Talk pages for categories (such as this one) are generally not closely monitored by other editors, so may I suggest that you make mention of your proposal at talk:Cherokee instead, where it has a better chance of being responded to. You might also like to make mention of it at the WikiProject which looks after a number of Native American-related articles - WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America for some further discussion/advice. Regards, --cjllw | TALK 01:31, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Native American religion" -> "Native American spirituality"

I'm proposing this change of name for Category:Native American religion to Category:Native American spirituality as I'm uncomfortable with teh term "religion" (fr. Latin religio - "rules"), which to me resonates of organized religion rather than general spiritual beliefs and mythologies and rituals; I noticed it being added to Potlatch which is of course is also in Category:First Nations culture and Category:Native American culture (or should be)...which begs the further question - can religion/spirituality and culture be so neatly divided? I don't think they can be, and it's a presumptive definition that maintains that they can. Someone had placed the religion category also on Totem pole, but as totem poles are not religious in any usual sense of the term I removed it; that they are connected to the spirituality of the peoples involved is without question; but so is the art, so is the music, so is the politics. Saying "Native American religion" also makes it sounds like there's ONE "religion" and also is reminiscent of the name of the Native American Church; the notion of "religion" is largely a Western concept, and doesn't clearly apply, for example, to Taoism or Confucianism or a variety of other large-scale "faiths"/creeds, likewise to many tribal practices/beliefs worldwide. "Spirituality" has that New Age touchy-feely sound to it, but at least it's a bit more accurate. Also all these categories sometimes get applied on cross-border topics i.e. involving non-Native American First Nations; t hat one country uses the one term and the otehr sues the other term is probably best solved by "indigenous" although the cumbersome "North American indigenous peoples' culture" and similar constructs are the result. The spirituality/relgion issue is the more important, and more easily resolvable, of the two issues presented here, however. Thoughts?Skookum1 (talk) 02:35, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]