Talk:List of indigenous peoples of Brazil
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comment
editIt has been suggested that this page be merged. I would recommend that it be kept independent in that it would make a merged simple too big. What really needs to be done is to create pages for all the dead links! Would it be possible to form some sort of group to do so? I am a student studying anthropology and would be glad to help with an organized effort. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any suggestions.
- I agree — it should not be merged. I will remove the template.--DorisHノート 16:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Link Repair
edit- Links checked down TO: Campas in entry sequence NOT alphabetical sequence. SBaker43 (talk) 08:09, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
- Links checked down THRU: Kali'na people Kali'na tilewuyu, Galibis, Galibi Carib language creoula - SBaker43 (talk) 07:34, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Move
edit{{help}} List of indigenous peoples in Brazil was moved to List of indigenous peoples of Brazil here. This talk page Talk:List of indigenous peoples in Brazil was not moved. Is there something else I should do to get the Talk page moved so that it's with the article page? Thanks,SBaker43 (talk) 02:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
List of people
editI removed the list from the article because it was redundant to the table. I added all the bluelinks into the table. Here are the redlinks from the list.
-Uyvsdi (talk) 22:19, 5 December 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi
Asundria people
editI reverted addition of "Asundria" people by User:OutreachService per Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Verifiability. Macedonian, a Greek (talk) 15:20, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- This was added as per the survey of indigenous peoples in Brazil from 2009. None of the entries in this article are cited. I'm happy for you to remove any article that isn't notable or verifiable, but why have you singled out my edit? The vast majority of the results listed have no citations and very little (if anything) shows up about them on Google. The general policy is to WP:AGF, but I'm not sure how far that extends on a list that has zero citations. I suggest we go through each entry and cite it or delete it. In terms of Wikipedia:Notability, I'm not sure what standard to apply that with in terms of tribes. Should we delete tribes that have little written about them or that have less than a dozen people? - User:OutreachService —Preceding undated comment added 16:34, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
- Your suggestion sounds good, let's do that. Macedonian, a Greek (talk) 06:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Someone pretty much lifted the list of indigenous peoples from the Instituto Socioambiental. I've tried to add individual references and move away from potential COPYVIO. All ethnic groups, regardless of size, are automatically considered notable. There are two tribes in the US that only have 5 and 8 members; however, it's extremely notable historically why these tribes are so small today. However, WP:Verifiability is important, and I can't find any published resource on the web discussing the Asundria people (Wiki mirror sites don't count). Ethnologue and Instituto Socioambiental are good sources for lesser known ethnic groups. -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:15, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi
- I just added the Ethnologue Languages of Brazil (ref name=brazil) and ISA's Table of the Indigenous peoples (ref name=pib), so between those two almost every listing on the table can be referenced. -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:53, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi
- Well done, much better now. Macedonian, a Greek (talk) 08:50, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
- I just added the Ethnologue Languages of Brazil (ref name=brazil) and ISA's Table of the Indigenous peoples (ref name=pib), so between those two almost every listing on the table can be referenced. -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:53, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi
- Someone pretty much lifted the list of indigenous peoples from the Instituto Socioambiental. I've tried to add individual references and move away from potential COPYVIO. All ethnic groups, regardless of size, are automatically considered notable. There are two tribes in the US that only have 5 and 8 members; however, it's extremely notable historically why these tribes are so small today. However, WP:Verifiability is important, and I can't find any published resource on the web discussing the Asundria people (Wiki mirror sites don't count). Ethnologue and Instituto Socioambiental are good sources for lesser known ethnic groups. -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:15, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi
- Your suggestion sounds good, let's do that. Macedonian, a Greek (talk) 06:57, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
Missing templates and flags
editper WP:OVERLINK and MOS:ICON and Template:Brazil and Template:Suriname, I have reinstated the IP's edits. we should try to keep these out of Wikipedia:Database reports/Transclusions of deleted templates. Frietjes (talk) 17:52, 27 July 2013 (UTC)