Talk:Yaquina people

Language and people

Yaquina (language) should probably have its own article, but since this one is such a small stub as it is, I'm leaving it this way until it gets expanded. Katr67 21:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus, not moved. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 03:21, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

---

– See rationale for this group of moves on Talk:Chipewyan people#Requested move. Not that many of the standalone forms are already redirects, indicating the previous unnecessary move. Skookum1 (talk) 09:37, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

• Yaquina people → Yaquina
  • target is dab page, started without dab format as a text page about the placenames on Jun 24 2004 by Dino It remained as such, including Native American peoples/language categories and a text line that was only about the Yaquina, until Aug 16 2006 when it was converted into a proper diambig page by Valfontis, who also removed the NA categories then subsequently moved the new, separate "Yaquina (tribe)" title to "Yaquina tribe" on July 24 2009, which was then moved to "Yaquina people" by Kwami on June 8 2010
• Yaquina → Yaquina (disambiguation)
  • see above.
• Umatilla people → Umatilla
• target is a dab page was started as redirect to "Umatilla, Oregon" on March 7 2004 by Stan Shebs which as converted to a dab page on July 28 2005 by Alex R. "Umatilla people" article began as Umatilla tribe and was moved to "Umatilla people" by Valfontis on Aug 17 2011. The Umatilla (tribe) redirect was moved to Umatilla tribe by Kwami on January 1, 2011 and seems to have been the original article title, though I can't find that in the history at Umatilla people suggesting this may have been a copy-paste change.
• Umpqua people → Umpqua
  • target is dab page started as two-item dab on Sept 28 2003 by 67.75.229.189. Original people article was started as Umpqua (Native Americans) as of that page, then moved to "Umpqua (tribe)" by Valfontis on Sept 17 2007. Then moved by XQBot to current title on Jan 4 2011 in the wake of Kwami's move of "Umpqua (tribe)" to "Umpqua people" on Jan 3 2011. NB the opening line of the article states "Umpqua refers to any of several distinct groups" meaning that this move should have been to Umpqua peoples.
• Tolowa people → Tolowa
  • target page is redirect to current title, which was moved/redirected by Carrite on Sept 6 2012, citing "Matches common form used for equivalent Native American tribal peoples)"
• Tillamook people → Tillamook
  • target is dab page started as such with two items (the town and the county) on Dec 19 2004 by SamH. Nehalem, which seems to be the preferred-by-themselves name, is a dab page started on Aug 11, 2005. I'll withdraw this nomination because "Tillamook"'s primary usage in English is not even the town, it's the cheese that comes from there. "Nehalem" should be considered as a title, dabbed or not, because of WP:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes). The article was for a while at Nehalem tribe but moved by Kwami on Jan 1 2011, citing "per language; "Nehalem" is ambiguous" - as if "Tillamook" weren't. According to the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians#Tribes there are subgroups of "Tillamook", including the Nehalem and the Siletz, so Tillamook peoples may be the solution here.
• Karuk people → Karuk
  • target is redirect to current title created by Usyvdi in the course of moving the main article "Karuk" on June 27 2013, citing "identifying this as a ethnic group article to distinguish it from the "Karuk Tribe"] which is a tribal government article. This dab was never necessary and goes against "conciseness" in the naming convention (as with so many others of this kind)
• Chinook people → Chinookan peoples or Chinook peoples
  • target is redlink to modern preferred-term by those Chinook who are part of the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Agency; since this is not provably used by other groups of Chinooks, and noting Category:Chinookan tribes, which could use a move to Category:Chinookan peoples I think: Chinook as a title is not workable because of the other meanings of that name and Chinook people in the singular is not correct; Chinook peoples might suffice, but "Chinookan" is used to distinguish Chinook Jargon from the Chinook languages proper (and is one of those "more common" uses in English, like Chinook (wind) which most people east of the Rockies don't even know was named for these people and think means "snow eater".
• Shoshone people → Shoshone
  • target page is redirect to current title, created by JaGa on Jan 16 2011, citing " The people are the primary topic" and so changing to a "Shoshoni people" redirect on the next edit on the same day, which was updated to current title by Emausbot on the same day. Shoshone (disambiguation) continues to exist and so no dab whatsoever is needed on the primary topic Shoshone
• Siuslaw people → Siuslaw
  • target is small dab page started on Sept 28 2003 by 67.75.229.189, people article began as Siuslaw (tribe) and was moved to current title by Kwami on June 8 2010. The people are the primary topic and source-name for all four items on the dab page, directly or otherwise, and so are the primary topic (nobody can tell me that the Nat'l Forest or the river are more notable, or the bridge)
• Siletz people → Siletz
  • title is dab page started as such, if sloppy, on Sep 25 2003 by 66.109.195.133 Siletz (tribe) title incorrectly moved to "Confederated Tribes of Siletz" by Decumanus on Jun 30 2004 who then reconsidered and wrote it as a "people" article which was then moved to current title by Uysvdi on Jan 3 2011, citing " in keeping with other indigenous ethnic groups' articles". The Siletz dab page contains nothing that could be construed as a more PRIMARYTOPIC than the people (the city has only a population of 1,212) and should become the people-article title.
• Alsea people → Alsea
  • target is a dab page, all items having their name source as the name of this people. The Alsea, Oregon title on that page is unincorporated and has only a population of 164 and cannot be construed as a more PRIMARYTOPIC than the people, nor can Alsea (company)'s Mexican-based food-chain conglomerate. The people article was originally at Alsea but was moved by Valfontis on Oct 1 2006 citing "in order to make Alsea a dab page", also re this in the people-page history making the people article into "Alsea (tribe)", this was then moved by Kwami to current title on June 7, 2010.
• Alsea → Alsea (disambiguation)
  • see above
• Clackamas people → Clackamas
  • target is a dab page started as such by Dino on Oct 29 2004 with Clackamas Indians as the title for the people article there. That was moved to "Clackamas (tribe)" by Valfontis on Oct 31 2007 citing "naming conventions", then moved by Kwami to "Clackamas tribe" on Oct 30 2010, then moved again by Valfontis on Aug 17 2011 to current title, again citing "naming conventions"
• Clackamas → Clackamas (disambiguation)
  • target is redirect created by Russbot on Aug 20 2010
• Entiat → Entiat (disambiguation)
  • see Entiat entry on Talk:Yupik peoples#Requested move
• Chetco people → Chetco
• target started as redirect to "Rogue River (tribe)" by Ish Ishwar on May 29 2006 then redirected to "Tolowa" by April Arcus on May 12 2006 then turned into a disambiguation page by Ruhrfisch on June 27 2010 People article started as "Chetco (tribe)" by Ruhrfisch, on June 27 2010, then moved to current title by Kwami on Oct 26 2010. The river, named after the people, and the peak and the weather effect are hardly anywhere close to being PRIMARYTOPIC; Chetco should be moved to Chetco (disambiguation) and Chetco people should be moved to Chetco as PRIMARYTOPIC>
• Clatsop people → Clatsop
  • target is redirect to current title, created by Kwami on June 8 2010. Despite various Clatsop titles including Clatsop County, Oregon there is no Clatsop (disambiguation) page as of yet.
• Tututni people → Tututni
  • target is redirect to current title, started as redirect to "Pacific Coast Athabaskan languages" by Ish Ishwar on May 29 2006 who then reconsidered and redirected to "Rogue River (tribe)" on the same day. The double redirect to Rogue River people was fixed by Xqbot on Jan 4 2011 then redirected to current title by Uysvdi on June 5 2012. Rogue River (tribe) was moved to "Rogue River people" by Uysvdi citing "removing punctuation, in keeping with other indigenous groups' articles" then [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tututni_people&diff=496040724&oldid=447973555 moved to current title by Uysvdi on June 5 2012, citing "moving to name used by the people; taking the liberty of making a unilateral move since I'm the only person who has edited this since 2009" I'm tempted to comment on her actions on the Squamish matter re this comment, but will restrain myself; the "name preferred by the people themselves" gets regularly dissed in various RMs but is in fact in Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes).
• Paiute people → Paiute
  • target is redirect to current title created/redirected by Kwami on June 8 2010
• Modoc people → Modoc
  • target page is a dab page, started as "Modoc (disambiguation)" on April 25 2006 by Dpv, then moved to "Modoc" by Parsecboy on June 21 2011, citing "fixing dab location"; the people article was originally at Modoc but was moved by Kwami on May 15 2011. A survey of what's on the dab page shows nothing that could be construed as a more PRIMARYTOPIC than the people.
• Molala people → Molala
• target is redirect to Molalla, originally created by Kwami as redirect to "Molala people" by Kwami on Jun 8 2010 then converted by him into a two-item dab page on March 10 2010] expanded by Valfontis to include link to "Molalla", which is a dab page. Of the items on that dab page, only the city could be construed as anywhere near a secondary PRIMARYTOPIC but as cities go it's tiny - pop. 8,243. Molala need not be a redirect to Molalla, and the people are the PRIMARYTOPIC with either spelling.
• Multnomah people → Multnomah
  • target is a dab page, created as such by Decumanus on July 2 2004 with Multnomah (tribe) as the people-item there. Multnomah (disambiguation) was created as a redirect by Russbot on Aug 25 2010 Multnomah (tribe) was moved by Usyvdi on Jan 3 2011], "citing removing punctuation, in keeping with other indigenous ethnic groups' articles"
• Multnomah → Multnomah (disambiguation)
  • see above
• Assiniboine people → Assiniboine
  • target is a dab page created as such by Mjazac on Aug 4 2005. the people page was started as "Assiniboine" on Jan 29 2005 by 69.26.28.56 then moved by Kwami over redirect to "Assinboine people" on Jan 15 2011 Of what's on the dab page the people are the PRIMARYTOPIC (the river is debatable as a PRIMARYTOPIC but it already has "river" in its title, and the target should be moved to Assiniboine (disambiguation) and the people page moved back to where it belongs at Assiniboine... why the people article is separate from Nakoda people I haven't looked into yet; a merge may be called for - ??
• Assiniboine → Assiniboine (disambiguation)
  • see above
• Gros Ventre people → Gros Ventre or Gros Ventres
  • target is a dab page created as "Gros Venture (disambiguation)" by Cosmic Penguin on Jan 27 2008 [sic] with Gros Ventres as the people title, then corrected by Kim Dent-Brown. Then [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gros_Ventre&diff=407976015&oldid=407975970 "Gros Ventre (disambiguation)" was moved to "Gros Ventre" by Kwami on Jan 15 2011 then turned into a redirect to "Gros Ventre people" by Uysvdi on Nov 2 2011, citing "moving disambiguation info back to disambiguation page, redirecting to WP:Primarytopic, as almost all links to this page refer to the people"] then restored to disambiguation on the same day by the same editor then restored to a redirect on same day by same editor. I see I'm not the only one who thinks that "Gros Ventre" is the primary topic; Gros Ventre (disambiguation) exists and everything on it devolved from the name of this people, so the target should be the people title as per the redirect.
• Ojibwe people → Ojibwe
  • target is redirect to current title created by Kwami on June 28 2011. NB Ojibwe (disambiguation) redirects to Ojibway (disambiguation); all items there ultimately have t his people as their origin/source, no matter by what spelling.

* Amikwa people → Amikwa

• • target does not exists.... hmm I'll move this myself, as there is no Amikwa (disambiguation) i.e. any other use.
• Odawa people → Odawa
  • target is redirect to current title, started as "Odawa (tribe)" by BKonrad on July 23 2004, then turned into a WP:TWODABS dab page by Sonjaaa on Sept 26 2008 then redirected to "Odawa people" by Usyvdi on June 28 2011 citing WP:TWODABS. Odawa people title was moved to "Ottawa people" by Kwami on Feb 27 2011, wrongly citing COMMONNAME, apparently because of a plethora of older cites using "Ottawa", in direct confusion with the MOSTCOMMON use of "Ottawa" in English. This was moved back to "Odawa people" by Uysvdi on Feb 28 2011, citing "Restoring previous name, move to "Ottawa" was not discussed, not necessary a more common name for this ethnic group and easily confused with the Canadian city)".

– See rationale for this group of moves on Talk:Chipewyan people#Requested move. Not that many of the standalone forms are already redirects, indicating the previous unnecessary move. Skookum1 (talk) 09:37, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

• • Note please centralize discussion on this group of articles at Talk:Chipewyan people#Requested move. Other requested moves in the same large group are listed on Talk:Yupik peoples#Requested move and Talk:Cayuga people#Requested move.Skookum1 (talk) 16:41, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose bulk nomination. Per e.g. English or Uzbek; it is common practice to have a disambiguation page when there is both Foo people and Foo language. Tassedethe (talk) 03:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
  • by now you've seen my notes in reply on that issue on the Talk:Chipewyan people discussion; there is no such convention, and that "common practice" for North American indigenous topics was largely the work of one editor acting alone without consensus or without bonafide conventions/consensus behind him. And there are equally "common" practices which do not involve two and three-item dab pages when the primary topic is clear and the secondary items relate directly to the people.Skookum1 (talk) 04:32, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
• Procedural oppose any swapping of a page with a disambiguation page should be requested separately, for every swap instance, a separate discussion should occur. Any displacement of a disambiguation page and replacement of its location for some other use should also occur separately for each instance. These are all different primary topic discussions. Several of the targets are disambiguation pages, so overwriting a disambiguation page is a primary topic dispute, and should each be discussed separately. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:48, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Creating many of those disambiguation pages, e.g. Mi'kmaq, were not done by consensus or any discussion, and two/three item dab pages are frowned upon per WikiProject Disambiguation guidelines. Why should such bulk speedy-moves without any consultation or consensus be considered so legitimate that an item-by-item consensus is required to move them back? Doing things by fiat, then insisting on procedure to revert them, is not the way things should be done.Skookum1 (talk) 04:56, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

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.

Comment on this close - WP:BATHWATER applies. Those that are redirects to current title should all have been moved for obvious reasons, whatever other dab/primary topic issue might be in only some. That many of these moves were done by speedy without any consensus at all, and in violation of various guidelines, is grating given the arduous nature of using procedure to correct wanton, ill-advised, needless moves. WP:UNDAB applies in all cases. Looks like I'm gonna have to re-RM all the redirect-to-current ones. Thanks for the workload. Have a nice day....I won't.Skookum1 (talk) 03:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

References