Talk:Indigenous peoples in Canada

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Indigenous peoples in Canada article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 12 months

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 in Canada was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 4, 2009	Good article nominee	Not listed
October 20, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
November 15, 2024	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Canada: Ontario / Quebec / Nova Scotia / New Brunswick / Manitoba / British Columbia / Prince Edward Island / Saskatchewan / Alberta / Newfoundland & Labrador / Northwest Territories / Yukon / Nunavut / History Top‑importance

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

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Quebec.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Nova Scotia.
	This article is supported by WikiProject New Brunswick.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Manitoba.
	This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Prince Edward Island.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Saskatchewan.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Alberta.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Newfoundland and Labrador.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian Territories.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian Territories.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian Territories.
	This article is supported by WikiProject History of Canada.

Indigenous peoples of North America Top‑importance

	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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ethnic groups High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities 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.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Indigenous peoples of the Americas Mid‑importance

	Indigenous peoples of the Americas portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indigenous peoples of the Americas 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 the AmericasWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasIndigenous peoples of the Americas articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Clarification under "Indian Act"

Under "Indian Act and Bill C-31" is the sentence "Those people accepted into band membership under band rules may not be status Indians."

Is that meant to mean "Those people accepted into band membership under band rules are not allowed to be status Indians." or "Those people accepted into band membership under band rules might not be status Indians." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.126.211.143 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 22 January 2016‎

Portal box border?

As of 1 December 2022, there are 305,746 uses of {{Portal}}, of which 261 have no border. What is the reasoning behind having <0.1% of the portal boxes be visually inconsistent with the other 99.9%? Why should the portal box on this article have no border? — hike395 (talk) 09:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There was a time that only "no border" was seen in mobile view.....but thats all over as all are seen in mobile view now. Moxy-

13:33, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hike395, it sounds like you disagree that the template should have this functionality. That's an argument better made before using AWB to mass-remove it. Where have you established the necessary consensus to change this styling in 200+ articles? Nikkimaria (talk) 15:08, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: I think there may be cases where the border should be off --- I want to keep the functionality in the template/module, just in case it is useful. So far, in scanning the articles that have |border=no, I have not yet seen any reason for borderless boxes. If there were some reason to keep one for an individual article, I certainly would retain it.

Moxy makes an excellent point that this is likely to be a holdover from an old decision to hide portals from mobile. Let me turn it around --- is there a reason (other than an historical accident) to keep the 0.1% of the boxes inconsistent with the rest? Is there some criterion I should use to keep an article borderless? Or even make more articles borderless? — hike395 (talk) 15:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: I can't tell if you're objecting to the edit itself (i.e., you think that borderless boxes should be retained in some articles)? I can't yet tell whether this is uncontroversial or not. — hike395 (talk) 15:41, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Both the edit itself and the approach. Aesthetically the no-border version looks fine, and doesn't look different enough that I think someone is likely to notice that other articles have borders (unless for some reason it's specifically pointed out). Process-wise, the no-border version AFAIK is an acceptable format - let me know if I've missed something to say it isn't, but if not, then WP:VAR applies. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:16, 18 December 2022 (UTC) Adding: I've just compared on mobile view and both versions look pretty horrible IMO (it might be worth doing some more mobile-specific styling), but the no-border version makes more sense in that context since it matches the image styling. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, mobile display of Portal boxes is broken (IMO). I've proposed a fix at Template talk:Portal#Odd layout in mobile (proposal implemented in the sandbox, see Template:Portal/testcases) — hike395 (talk) 03:38, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

btw, one case where border=no would clearly be helpful is in templates such as {{WikiProject Birds}}. Ideally, the link to the portal would have no border and no background. — hike395 (talk) 03:59, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I personaly think the no-border version looks better. That said for many longtimers removing the paramater all over look like someone is making the parameter unsed and thus subject to parameter removal down the road. As for WikiProject banner would need coding update at Template:WPBannerMeta for no-border to work. Moxy-

16:29, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indigenous Peoples

The idea that there are only three indigenous peoples in Canada is a strange Canadianism. Every distinct indigenous people is an indigenous people in international law. Metis is also used in at least two different senses: some Metis believe it should only apply to red river metis, and some use the term in a sort of quaint 19th centutry scientific racism sense of people with "mixed breeding" or "mixed culture," as though that did not also apply to "Indian" peoples who use gasoline engines.

Inuit is perhaps an authentic autonym, but Metis and Indian are broad terms that will encompass many indigenous peoples. I don't know how this is reflected in primary sources, but Canada often does this in all sorts of legislation, where international norms are flat-out ignored, or half-implemented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:7D68:4700:C40F:10CE:DC38:D800 (talk) 19:21, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First Nations (North American Indian) n.o.s.

Why there are so many First Nations (North American Indian) n.o.s. - 632 340 people. Why so many people does not no their tribes or they are fake indians? Kaiyr (talk) 10:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Indigenous peoples in Canada

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brought this up to GA level way back in 2009 (I was Buzzzsherman back then) with User:Nikkimaria as the reviewer. Not only has GA level requirements improved since 2009, but the article has gone through substantial changes. There are many unsourced statements..... Use of puffery words...and overall layout and presentation is no longer accessible for many readers. I think delisting would be best as there is substantial work to be done. I do have plans in the future to revamp the page, however this will take an extensive amount of time. Moxy🍁 01:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While I typically prefer keeping GA status and working over time outside of egregious cases, I don't disagree that this article needs substantial improvements. Besides the layout, maybe go through and tag some of the uncited statements and poor wording and I might fix a couple things if I get around to it. PersusjCP (talk) 16:39, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PersusjCP: I added cn tags to the article to statements that need to be resolved. I haven't evaluated the other concerns outlined by Moxy above. Z1720 (talk) 16:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.