Talk:Indigenous peoples of the Northwest Plateau

Head binding

Information on the practice and he created McDonalds of head binding would be appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.162.155 (talk) 04:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Appears to be high school essay

This unreferenced, relatively orphaned article, created only in May 2009, appears amateurish in tone and I suspect was originally a high school essay. I almost added a mergeto Interior Salish if not for the Sahaptian and Yakama and certain other peoples, e.g. the Shoshone, who are not Salish. There's been a need for a while for an article for the Plateau peoples corresponding to Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, which would be Indigenous peoples of the Northwest Plateau, following the ethnolinguistic subdivision, but this article "ain't it" by a long shot, though the title could refer to the proposed article. Skookum1 (talk) 15:42, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I like the direction of reorganizing these under Indigenous peoples of the wheresoever, perhaps integrated (if possible) with Classification of Indigenous peoples of North America. Duff (talk) 10:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

That page - Classification of indigenous peoples of the Americas - uses simply "the Plateau" but I don't think for Wiki purposes that's specific enough, i.e. "which Plateau?"....I think the papers of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition use "Northwest Plateau", I'll see if I can confirm that but I know it's in some major reference; without "Northwest" it would be like saying "Indigneous peoples of the Mountains" or "Indigenous peoples of the Valley".Skookum1 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

thanks Uysvidi, but....name change?

I won't take long for someone to object to "Indians" in the title....I'd say the three options are, apposite to the Northwest Coast article, either Indigenous peoples of the Northwest Plateau or Indigenous peoples of the Plateau or Indigenous peoples of the Interior Plateau, which are the usual forms; Northwest Plateau is of linguistics classification/derivation, "Interior Plateau" is primarily, I think, a Canadian/BC usage (but not necessarily). I"m more comfortable with the first one because of the relationship/ties to the coastal cultures/peoples...and I gather the linguistics cutoff for Sub-Arctic excludes the Tshilqot'in and Carrier from this, even though their territories are on the Interior Plateau; it also happens that some bands have "cultural duality" and are both Tshilqot'in and Secwepemc, but then if they're included, there's some bands that are allied between the Carrier and the Tshilqot'in. Both those peoples, though Athapaskan, have closer cultural ties/ resemblance to the adjoining Interior Salish, and less similarities with the Subarctic tribes to their north.

I'm completely fine with the move but "Indians" is hardly an archaic term, since the majority of "Indians" still refer to ourselves as "Indians." -Uyvsdi (talk) 16:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)Uyvsdi

issue with geographic terminology

"the Plateau or Intermontane region of western Canada and the United States..."

The problem with that wording is that the Canadian equivalent of the Intermontane Belt is called the Interior System and includes areas far to the north and beyond the Interior Plateau, namely the Hazelton, Skeena, Omineca and Cassiar Mountains, plus the Stikine and Yukon Plateaus; in other words it goes all the way into the Yukon, and so includes the Sub-Arctic peoples in BC and the Yukon. It might be easier to define the Northwest Plateau as the combination of the (southern) Interior Plateau and the Columbia Plateau and the ranges of mountains in the upper Columbia Basin...I qualified southern Interior Plateau, or perhaps we could use "Fraser Plateau and southern Coast Mountains" as the Chilcotin and Nechako Plateaus, which are part of the Interior Plateau, are Tshilhqot'in and Carrier territories, and the Lillooet and Thompson peoples' territories are on the inland side of the southern Coast Mountains.....Skookum1 (talk) 23:46, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

merge discussion

Plateau First Nations is so misleadingly titled it's a perfect example of the mis-application of the term First Nations, i.e. in the context given it sounds like a band government, whereas what's meant is "Indians of the Northwest Plateau in Canada", but Indigenous peoples of the Northwest Plateau is the proper ethnographic unit, and division by the colonialist US/Canada partition of the Plateau is not culturally appropriate. As with Coast Salish it's wholly inappropriate to divide these cultures by the boundaries of the nation-states that did their utmost to eradicate/suppress them. This is an obvious merge, I'm curious to see who disagrees, if anyone; I only found this article by looking at Category:First Nations in British Columbia which is another instance of poor use of "First Nations" as a catch-all substitute for other terms; Category:Indigenous peoples in British Columbia is more like it. But this gets back to the guidelines problem, i.e. that IPNA conventions have been ignored by people applying external guidelines as hard-and-fast rules (despite WP:There are no rules) resulting a chaos of mis-usages like this one, among many other problems resulting from the knee-jerk substitution of terms without regard to context. This is becoming such a frustrating, and worsening situation, that this editor is exhausted with trying to fix the many problems resulting (e.g. Haisla people was Haisla, yet the Category:Haisla people category is for "people who are Haisla" and the main category, which is a subcat of FNs in BC named above, is still Category:Haisla and should remain so. This merge seems obvious, but I'll be there'll be someone out there making a contrarian argument supporting keeping them separate even when it's obvious they shouldn't be.Skookum1 (talk) 13:41, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Support merge. I wasn't even aware of the Plateau First Nations article, but the point of choosing the terms "Indigenous peoples" is to be able to span national boundaries. -Uyvsdi (talk) 14:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Well, the merge has been proposed since August, so I'm going for it. -Uyvsdi (talk) 01:33, 26 November 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

I do not agree with this. Plateau first nations is what they are called. The name is also misleading as there may have been other tribes that lived on plateaus in the north :-(!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!99.253.40.224 (talk) 18:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Indigenous peoples of the Northwest Plateau/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article is a stub, isn't it? -DG

Last edited at 01:46, 1 January 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 18:54, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Indigenous peoples of the Northwest Plateau. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110602092035/http://www.fallsapart.com:80/biography.html to http://www.fallsapart.com/biography.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)