Indigenous peoples of North America Unassessed

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 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Languages Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages 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.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Canada: British Columbia Unassessed

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 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.

I have changed "formerly known as Carrier" to "for whom Carrier is the usual English name". It is simply not true that "Carrier" is no longer used. In fact, "Carrier" is the term commonly used both by non-Carrier people and, in English, by Carrier people themselves. (Note, for example, the name of the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council.) The term "Carrier" is not pejorative, either etymologically or in actual use. Some Carrier people prefer to use "Dakelh" in English, but very few insist that people with no knowledge of the language should do so. There is a broad issue concerning the use of indigenous vs. non-indigenous names, which has arisen to a limited extent among Carrier people, but it is not accurate to say that there has been a shift from "Carrier" to "Dakelh". Bill

thank you for clarifying this. i think that many Wikipedian editors assume that all peoples are switching to "native" names. peace – ishwar  (speak) 19:22, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is a complicated issue. Some peoples do have strong feelings about what name is used for them, often where the common external name is pejorative. My impression is, however, that a lot of the impetus for use of native names by outsiders does not come from the people themselves but is a form of political correctness. Also, there is a difference between use of the native name in the territory and outside of it. For non-native people to use the native name in or near the territory is arguably a courtesy that acknowledges the association of the people with the territory. This motivation disappears away from the territory.

In the case of the languages of British Columbia, the one case that I can think of in which a native term has come to replace the earlier English name is that of Nuuchanulth, which seems to have pretty much replaced Nootka. I'm not quite sure why this is.

I have written a paper that discusses the ethical issues: The Names of the First Nations Languages of British Columbia Bill 07:37, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the characterization of the language teachers in SD91 as "certified", for two reasons. First, they are not always certified - I'm pretty sure that some of them are still teaching on letters of permission. Second, "certified" suggests that the language teachers are fully qualified teachers, which is not the case. No Carrier language teacher possesses a regular teaching certificate. The certificate that those who are certified possess is the "First Nations Interim Language Teacher Certificate". To obtain this certificate requires only that the person be proficient in the language and considered suitable by his or her community. It does not require any particular training, knowledge of language teaching methods, or analytic knowledge of the language. Bill 08:12, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wonderng why the Carrier are classed as subarctic and not plateau, in terms of regional groupings; this aren't phylal, right, I mean, Athapaskan is in both groups; and to me, as a geographer (if not a linguist) the plateau ends north of Prince George, i.e. including the Nechako/McGregor Plateau. The reason for this query is the idea of {{Peoples of the Northwest Plateau}} or {{Peoples of the North American Plateau}}, whatever terminology is crrect; see {{Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast}}. Is the division plateau/subarctic entirely arbitrary? If s, it should be revised, given the joint tribal councils and occasionally joint bands/communities of Tshilqt'in and Carrier...it would seem to me the Carrier are at least in both plateau and subarctic; I would have added Category:Languages of the North American Plateau but I suspect it would be removed.....but is the plateau/coast/subarctic division from ethnography or from linguistics, and what are its justifications? i.e. for why not all of BC's plateau is in the Plateau group.Skookum1 (talk) 15:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]