Template talk:Coast Salish
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Skookum1 in topic Questions
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
{{help}}
Broke the navbox code somehow during recent additions; can't find the glitch....Skookum1 (talk) 23:49, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've fixed it. Seems to have been unclosed link.--Sunny910910 (talk|Contributions|Guest) 23:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Questions
editHmm, I've never heard of a tribe called Seabird Island (though that def doesn't mean they're not out there), but Seabird Island redirects to Yerba Buena Island, which has no info on any tribe. Murderbike (talk) 19:20, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Seabird Island is a large reserve just east of Chilliwack; it's also one of the largest islands, as a geographic object, in the Fraser River. Not sure what their particular aboriginal name is; the band's name is Seabird Island First Nation, but there's likely a Halqemeylem tribal name, unless they're part of the Popkums or Skways or Aitchelitz or another nearby group; ethnicity and reserve don't always coincide on either side of the border....Skookum1 (talk) 23:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, and I'm confused. I've always been under the impression that "First Nations" was a Canada specific term, but it seems a couple of the listings in the other section refer to Canadian First Nations. What's the qualification for being in the first section? Murderbike (talk) 19:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- The title of that section could just be changed to "governments"; the format was cribbed from {{Kwakwaka'wakw}}; I should have revised the section heading but hadn't added any US-side governments, other than those in teh Okanagan and Ktunaxa organizations; the Canadian-side ones will be grouoped by trial council wherever possible, I don't think there's an equivalent in WA/OR (tribalcouncils are several different bandgovenrments in a metagovernment). anyway about the first nations thing I'll change it now....Skookum1 (talk) 22:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Their are definitely tribal governments in Washington that encompass more than one tribe, if that's what you're asking. Many tribes never got their own reservation, but were sent to reservations of other tribes. Murderbike (talk) 00:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know; I've been explaining that to the other Canadian-side contributors here because I've become familiar with the scope of indigenous articles in WA/OR/ID/MT and have some knowledge of who all the peoples are, and more or less where they are. The tribal councils in BC are always of the same tribal affiliation, but groups of different bands of that tribe; although a few councils combine different groups, as with the Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council; Naut'sa Mawt Tribal Council is a bunch of variously different but neighbouring-across-the-waters Coast Salish; the Nicola Tribal Association combines a subgroup of the Syilx, the Spaxomin, with a subgroup of the Nlaka'pamux, the Scw'exmx (however that's spelled. But I know Colville and Grand Ronde and others are polyglot and polynational, and aren't quite the same thing as a tribal council in teh same way as in Canada, partly because, as I understand, people are of multiple heritages so there are no separate Spokan, Colville/Kettle, Sinixt, Okanagan bands within Colville; everybody's tangled up in each other's families, same at Grand Ronde, which is Chinookan, Kalapuya, Klickitat, Nehalem and more (even "French Canadian Algonquian", which probably should be Metis. Anyway, so long as there are tribal governments to put in that section that's fine; again I'm concerned about order/organization so for now either north to south or alphabetical, take your pick; I guess that puts the Siletz at the end of the list, or that's where they'll be, and the Nuxalk at the start; hard down Oregon Way to decide, for the full Indigenous template not so much this one, is where to draw the line southwards; for now Siletz and Grand Ronde; the Umpqua and such are more Plateau than Coast; but it seems, for example, that Grand Ronde will turn up on both {{Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast}} and {{Indigenous peoples of the Northwest Plateau}}, its counterpart, because of its mixed composition.....anyway, in closing this one post of potentially many, are the Coosans (Coos Bay) still Pacific Northwest in culture area....or isn't that getting into the California culture area; the Coast Salish template will take in the Nehalem and Siletz and so will have Grand Ronde in it....but are the peoples of the Williamette and others part of the Pacific Northwest Coast, or the inland peoples of the Plateau; it's not as clearcut as northwards where the Cascades and Coast Mountains seem to have made the cultural divide all the more clear; I'd venture, correct me if you will, that the Pacific Northwest Coast template should end at the Columbia plus a bit, i.e. including the Chinookans and Nehalems; but inland I don't know where to draw the line; some Klickitat are, I think, coastal, and some Kalapuya...or not? I mean, at Grand Ronde they are, for sure, being in the Oregon Coast Range and all (I've been there) but historically, that is....Skookum1 (talk) 04:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- It seems a lot easier to me to organize by either culture, like Coast Salish, which is defined by books and whatnot, or by clearly defined area like Canada, Washington, etc., instead of something vague like the Pacific Northwest Coast. I think plenty of people would lump in a large portion of the northern part of California, and how far inland does the "coast" go? It's too hard to define, and would run into problems with citing. Everyone is gonna have a different opinion about who belongs into a vague region, but Coast Salish or Washington is easily defined. Right? Murderbike (talk) 06:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- The Tillamook/Nehalem and Siletz, y'see, are south of the Columbia; and the Chinook have always been seen as part of the Pacific Northwest cultures. There were some reservations, as in cautions, about using linguistic groups as the defining parameter; doesn't work for the agencies/reservations, at least outside of Puget Sound it doesn't, because of the multiethnicities; so maybe we terminate the said template at the Columbia, plus Siletz/Nehalem? Have to have a look for Klickitat/Kalapuya turf; again, whree does "coast" begin and end south of the Columbia; best to avoid the issue ;-). Skookum1 (talk) 07:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- It seems a lot easier to me to organize by either culture, like Coast Salish, which is defined by books and whatnot, or by clearly defined area like Canada, Washington, etc., instead of something vague like the Pacific Northwest Coast. I think plenty of people would lump in a large portion of the northern part of California, and how far inland does the "coast" go? It's too hard to define, and would run into problems with citing. Everyone is gonna have a different opinion about who belongs into a vague region, but Coast Salish or Washington is easily defined. Right? Murderbike (talk) 06:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know; I've been explaining that to the other Canadian-side contributors here because I've become familiar with the scope of indigenous articles in WA/OR/ID/MT and have some knowledge of who all the peoples are, and more or less where they are. The tribal councils in BC are always of the same tribal affiliation, but groups of different bands of that tribe; although a few councils combine different groups, as with the Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council; Naut'sa Mawt Tribal Council is a bunch of variously different but neighbouring-across-the-waters Coast Salish; the Nicola Tribal Association combines a subgroup of the Syilx, the Spaxomin, with a subgroup of the Nlaka'pamux, the Scw'exmx (however that's spelled. But I know Colville and Grand Ronde and others are polyglot and polynational, and aren't quite the same thing as a tribal council in teh same way as in Canada, partly because, as I understand, people are of multiple heritages so there are no separate Spokan, Colville/Kettle, Sinixt, Okanagan bands within Colville; everybody's tangled up in each other's families, same at Grand Ronde, which is Chinookan, Kalapuya, Klickitat, Nehalem and more (even "French Canadian Algonquian", which probably should be Metis. Anyway, so long as there are tribal governments to put in that section that's fine; again I'm concerned about order/organization so for now either north to south or alphabetical, take your pick; I guess that puts the Siletz at the end of the list, or that's where they'll be, and the Nuxalk at the start; hard down Oregon Way to decide, for the full Indigenous template not so much this one, is where to draw the line southwards; for now Siletz and Grand Ronde; the Umpqua and such are more Plateau than Coast; but it seems, for example, that Grand Ronde will turn up on both {{Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast}} and {{Indigenous peoples of the Northwest Plateau}}, its counterpart, because of its mixed composition.....anyway, in closing this one post of potentially many, are the Coosans (Coos Bay) still Pacific Northwest in culture area....or isn't that getting into the California culture area; the Coast Salish template will take in the Nehalem and Siletz and so will have Grand Ronde in it....but are the peoples of the Williamette and others part of the Pacific Northwest Coast, or the inland peoples of the Plateau; it's not as clearcut as northwards where the Cascades and Coast Mountains seem to have made the cultural divide all the more clear; I'd venture, correct me if you will, that the Pacific Northwest Coast template should end at the Columbia plus a bit, i.e. including the Chinookans and Nehalems; but inland I don't know where to draw the line; some Klickitat are, I think, coastal, and some Kalapuya...or not? I mean, at Grand Ronde they are, for sure, being in the Oregon Coast Range and all (I've been there) but historically, that is....Skookum1 (talk) 04:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- Their are definitely tribal governments in Washington that encompass more than one tribe, if that's what you're asking. Many tribes never got their own reservation, but were sent to reservations of other tribes. Murderbike (talk) 00:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
- The title of that section could just be changed to "governments"; the format was cribbed from {{Kwakwaka'wakw}}; I should have revised the section heading but hadn't added any US-side governments, other than those in teh Okanagan and Ktunaxa organizations; the Canadian-side ones will be grouoped by trial council wherever possible, I don't think there's an equivalent in WA/OR (tribalcouncils are several different bandgovenrments in a metagovernment). anyway about the first nations thing I'll change it now....Skookum1 (talk) 22:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)