Talk:Duwamish people

Indigenous peoples of North America Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Washington Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Mid-importance).

Anthropology: Oral tradition

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce.

Archives

Archive 1

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 consenus. Editors are reminded that WP:UNDAB is an essay which may reflect the view of one or more editors, but is neither a policy nor a guideline. In this case, editors have not accepted the proposition that the article on tribe meets the criteria set out at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and the nominator's assertion multiple-word titles are not candidates for the primary topic is a misreading of the policy at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:07, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Duwamish tribe → Duwamish – target was created as redirect to "Duwamish (fireboat)" by Lukobe on July 26 2006, then converted into dab page by same author on same date. Then Duwamish (tribe) redirected to "Duwamish tribe" on Dec 13 2010 by Kwami. NB the Duwamish, whose name is the origin of that of the river and the fireboat, are not a federally-recognized tribe and so the "tribe" wording is not viable; simplest and cleanest is "Duwamish" by itself. PRIMARYTOPIC/MOSTCOMMON and the principles outlined in WP:UNDAB, all of which were taken into account when this article was first styled "Duwamish". Relisted. BDD (talk) 22:33, 10 April 2014 (UTC) Skookum1 (talk) 06:43, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose until the issue is addressed properly. These should be discussed at a centralized location.

There was a discussion once on whether the ethnicity should have precedence for the name, and it was decided it shouldn't. That could be revisited. But it really should be one discussion on the principle, not thousands of separate discussions at every ethnicity in the world over whether it should be at "X", "Xs", or "X people". — kwami (talk) 12:32, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support as per the policy Wikipedia:Article titles#Use commonly recognizable names and the guideline Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes). There is no need to redo any guideline as it already supports the un-disabiguated title. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 04:33, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose until there is a clear case that we have a primary topic. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:13, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply (copied over from the accidentally-parallel RM at Talk:Duwamish#Requested move:
  - The problem with either "tribe" dab is that this is not a federally-recognized tribe, so that dab is inherently flawed. The two-word Duwamish River title is not a valid candidate for PRIMARYTOPIC for the standalone term "Duwamish", but for sake of argument (and I'm sure someone will show up with the usual...) here are the view stats:
    - "Duwamish tribe" was viewed 2420 times in 201403
    - "Duwamish River" was viewed 1729 times in 201403
    - "Duwamish Head" was viewed 151 times in 201403
    - Duwamish (fireboat) was viewed 252 times in 201403

Despite the ongoing claims that items such as "FOO River" are PRIMARYTOPIC candidates, that is not according to guidelines; the only standalone use of Duwamish that is a PRIMARYTOPIC candidate is Duwamish tribe, whom the river was named for.Skookum1 (talk) 07:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Vague? Inevitably.

The sentence "The tribe is of moderate size with respect to moderately-sized federally-recognized Washington tribes" is marked as "vague", but it simply repeats what the source says. Since we have a ban on original research, I don't see how it can be made less vague. List_of_federally_recognized_tribes_by_state#Washington shows 29 recognized tribes, three of which have names that identify them as confederations of tribes. Besides being very laborious work, wouldn't it be impermissible synthesis under WP:NOR to look up the number of registered members of each of these & demonstrate that the Duwamish would fall somewhere near the median?

Therefore, I'd like to remove the "vague" tag. The vagueness is in the sources, not in the writing. - Jmabel | Talk 04:06, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Duwamish which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:29, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Duwamish people/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Currently contains small amount of history, and gives language group, needs full writeup. Plorimer - 10 June, 06 An excellent rewriting has taken place, and the article appears very solid now, with a great amount of references and bibliography. It could benefit from a little expansion on a few topics and it lacks images; otherwise it could merit submitting to GA soon. Phaedriel - 12 July, 06

Last edited at 01:34, 13 December 2010 (UTC). Substituted at 13:56, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 29 September 2017

The following is a closed 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: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 23:03, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Duwamish tribe → Duwamish people – This is the disambiguation recommended by WP:ETHNICGROUP; the "tribe" terminology is mostly deprecated. Most other articles on North American peoples have already been switched, but I'm putting this one through RM as it's been the subject of several in the past. Cúchullain ^t/c 17:19, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.

References

Too many comments about the existing references to include in the Edit Summary (and I freely admit I made terrible typos in the summaries). https://native-land.ca is crowd-sourced and riddled with errors. "Roxberger" should be Daniel L. Boxberger, and I've provided a proper citation and link to that book. I see the note: "Most of the following notes refer to sources listed in Bibliography for Duwamish (tribe), which also includes the sources referenced in Cheshiahud (Lake John) and History of Seattle before white settlement." That's definitely not okay. http://www.duwamishtribe.org is wp:self-published so can appear in external links but can't serve as a citation. Yuchitown (talk) 18:50, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

Yes, the citations around the city of seattle and the Duwamish and their history are notoriously bad. They've dissuaded me from working on this specific subject for ages. It seems one or a few people years and years ago did it in that style which is really frustrating to use for anyone. I agree that NativeLand should not be used as a primary source, although they have their own sources listed.

Why would the Duwamish website be struck as self-published? Are all materials from tribal governments WP:SELF? Or is it because they are an unrecognized organization? Just curious so I know what to avoid in the future since I cite tribal websites pretty often as a baseline source. Thanks once again for your contributions to this behemoth of a task!! PersusjCP (talk) 19:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Re: the Duwamish Tribe website, it's in the External Links section, but can't be used as a citation since it's WP:SELFPUBLISHED and pushing a WP:POV. Honestly, all the tribal websites should be replaced with WP:SECONDARY sources. I just have run out of time and energy for now. Yuchitown (talk) 21:07, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

Continuing: Continuing, also in the "Further reading" (the websites should be in the "External links" section), www.native-languages.org is crowdsourced and not a wp:reliable citation. The website coastsalishmap.org has been taken over by another organization. I tried to provide more cited content and place things in slightly more chronological order, but so much more needs to be done, especially with the non-citations. Yuchitown (talk) 21:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]