Talk:Tsuutʼina Nation

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Indigenous peoples of North America

	This article 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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Canada: Alberta / Communities Low‑importance

	Canada portal 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Alberta.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian communities.

Proposed split

Tsuu T'ina, currently a redirect should be split off as the "ethno" article with Tsuu T'ina Nation as the government article; I note also a lot of overlap with the IR article. In cases like this where the band is 'unitary' with the ethnic group and IR it's maybe less necessary to do such splits, other than for categorization reasons; Category:Tsuu T'ina Nation with its capital-N nation belongs in government categories, not in the general First Nations in Alberta category....its title should be Category:Tsuu T'ina...but from experience I know that unless there's a relative match to the main article title it won't go through, not on a speedy anyway. If no one objects within a week or so I'll do the split; the history section goes to the ethno article, the modern information belongs on the government article along with any lists of officers or band enterprises etc; as with Squamish people/Skwxwu7mesh re Squamish Nation, there's a difference between a people and their government as an institution.Skookum1 (talk) 05:10, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is small. I see no need to split it into separate ethnocultural land government articles. If anything, better organization into sections within this article is the best solution. Hwy43 (talk) 10:34, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's not hepful re the category name being at odds with relevant comparisons, or with the categorization system's delineating between ethno and government articles; I'm find with using a redirect on Tsuu T'ina for Category:First Nations in Alberta, and with Tsuu T'ina Nation being in Category:First Nations governments in Alberta, but ideally that parent category would be where Category:Tsuu T'ina Nation is, and the "TTN category should not be in Category:First Nations in Alberta, the intention of which is for ethnographic group categories/titles, not for government categories/titles. the use of "Nation" or "First Nation" in titles, other than the top-level "First Nations in FOO" ethnographic groups categories, has been used for a long time as a wiki-convention only for band governments, and some tribal councils. Plain old "FOO" rather than "FOO n/Nation" or "FOO people" or "FOO tribe" was a good convention; this never had a separate ethno article or category, as with other unitary FN reserves/government/communities/peoples, as is also the case with Tsawwassen First Nation, Semiahmoo First Nation and others (those have no categories as yet, nor probably will they ever); and there was never a no-Nation Category:Tsuu T'ina....I'm saying there should be.... whether the article should be split, or how it can be, remains to be seen, but similar was done for Nuxalk people re Nuxalk Nation. I mean, I can create that category and put it where it belongs...and given the unilateral mode so many people do now, I might as well; I've learned there's little point in consensus when the ill-informed feel a compulsion to take part and throw guidelines around without knowing the subject matter...I'm not saying that's you, I'm referring to other matters (imagine if there were a people/ethnic group named Calgary and someone wanted to make Category:Calgary the category for the ethnic group, and relegate the city-related content to Category:Calgary, Alberta....that's where I'm coming from.....Skookum1 (talk) 12:41, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and created the top-tier ethno category properly, and adjusted the articles within it per relevant category; and see Talk:Sarcee_language about why that name should not be used {read the main article).Skookum1 (talk) 12:41, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the primary ethno category to the Tsuu T'ina redirect and also targeted that at the relevant section of the Tsuu T'ina Nation government page. It's not like there's not ample ethnographic material that could expand the "History" section into a fullblood parent/ethno article.....a convention exists to separate band governments from ethnic group titles...for now this redirect-separation will suffice.Skookum1 (talk) 12:44, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rename needed

About two years ago the nation officially changed its name spelling to Tsuut'ina - one word. (Source). The article should be retitled to reflect this. 68.146.233.86 (talk) 03:03, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:CURLY

Is there any special reason this article's title uses ʼ instead of '? MOS:CURLY says we should use '. I was going to boldly move the title but I thought there might be a reason for it. Thoughts? Masterhatch (talk) 19:36, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's because that character is not a quotation mark or an apostrophe (punctuation), it's actually a modifier letter, U+02BC ʼ MODIFIER LETTER APOSTROPHE, kind of like a diacritical mark that goes beside a letter instead of on top of it. It's used to mark ejective consonants in this language, if I remember correctly. Indefatigable (talk) 23:24, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Masterhatch (talk) 00:22, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]