Talk:Aboriginal Victorians

Australia: Victoria / Indigenous peoples Low‑importance

	Australia portal Aboriginal Victorians is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Victoria (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Indigenous peoples of Australia (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Victoria.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Requested move 4 February 2019

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 06:20, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Victorian Aborigines → Aboriginal Victorians – As discussed in the Indigenous Australians article, "Terms that are considered disrespectful include Aborigine and ATSI". This move would also make the page consistent with the title of Aboriginal Tasmanians. tamasys (talk) 06:05, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support for consistency and per nom's point about the current name being disrespectful --DannyS712 (talk) 08:40, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per all the above. I was coincidentally just today reading several Australian style guides by govt. agencies (e.g. the Gov.AU Content Guide), universities, and media organizations, and they're unanimous in not calling indigenous Australians "Aborigines", but that "Aboriginal" remains a viable adjective. If the proposed title is considered a hair too potentially ambiguous (in that "aboriginal" retains some currency as a general adjective, not always tied to Australia except when capitalized, but we can't tell if the first letter of a WP article title is meant to be capitalized in mid-sentence), an alternative (at the cost of some WP:CONCISE) would be "Victorian Aboriginal Australians". — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 01:57, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per all the above. Bacondrum (talk) 01:26, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.