Talk:Iñupiat

Comment

Inupiat Vs. Inupiaq "T" Vs. "Q" means ... All Vs. the Individual. I am the "Q" in Inupiaq, mean "one". Inupiaq in our language means... "I am real."

"Inupiat" means people. For me to say: "I am Inupiaq", is saying, "I am a real person." But by outsiders we are regarded as Eskimos "meat eaters". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.178.68.107 (talk • contribs) 08:52, 10 October 2005

"Eskimo" is actually from Athabaskan through French and most likely means "snowshoe maker." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.198.112.213 (talk) 18:53, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Weasel Words

Let's leave the 'exploration' vs. 'exploitation' arguments on the ANWR article page.

This is a page about the Inupiat Peoples. Let's keep the article about them.

72.82.219.138 (talk) 16:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

the escomse where living the lif —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.237.225.101 (talk) 00:11, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Category:Inupiat people and articles therein

Now that I've gone and populated the category in someone else's stead yet again, go take a look. I think it's a pretty poor representation of notable Inupiat people (see also List of American Inuit). The impression derived from initially discovering the category and seeing only one biography article included (Shirley Reilly) was one of giving undue weight to that one person by virtue of fleeting fame in news headlines.

Let me help with a few important names, if anyone has the time: Frank Ferguson, Willie Hensley, Eben Hopson, Percy Ipalook, Herbie Nayokpuk and Howard Rock. Simeon Oliver may be of similar historical significance, but I'm unclear as to whether or not he's Inupiaq. On a similar note, the vaugeness of easily available source material makes it uncertain whether Callan Chythlook-Sifsof is actually part Inupiaq or part Yupik. Of course, there are tons of lesser-known-but-still-notable people besides.RadioKAOS (talk) 05:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

In case anyone is hung up that the above list of names includes only men, here were some notable Inupiat women: Emily "Ticasuk" Ivanoff Brown, Della Keats and Sadie Brower Neakok. Cheers.RadioKAOS (talk) 01:59, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Chipewyan people which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:15, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Requested move

Inupiat people → Inupiat – current title was moved by Uysvdi on July 21 2011 to Inupiat (disambiguation) which has no reason to exist, then redirected to PRIMARYTOPIC by same editor on same day; addition of "people" in such cases is clearly unnecessary per PRIMARYTOPIC and also proscribed by UNDAB. --Relisted. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:34, 14 April 2014 (UTC) --Skookum1 (talk) 06:07, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Oppose. We have policy that the people should go at "XXX people" and the language at "XXX language", with "XXX" being a dab page, see WP:NCL. If you don't like that, try to change the policy. --JorisvS (talk) 09:17, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

• 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) 12:38, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

• Support per nom. An identified people should be the primary topic of a term absent something remarkable standing in the way. bd2412 T 02:35, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
• Support as per the policy Wikipedia:Article titles#Use commonly recognizable names and the guideline Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes). The section Wikipedia:Article titles#Precision also applies given that Inupiat is a redirect here. There is no need to redo any guideline as it already supports the un-disabiguated title.

User:JorisvS, there is no policy that says any such thing as articles must be at "foo people" or "foo language". There are two guidelines, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (languages) and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes). Both of those guides support the un-disambiguated terms as does a policy, Wikipedia:Article titles#Use commonly recognizable names and Wikipedia:Article titles#Precision. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:46, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

• Support per CambridgeBayWeather. In cases where the requested move simply eliminates the word "people", and the destination title is already a simple redirect to the current title, it is clear that guidelines favoring both precision and conciseness support the move. Xoloz (talk) 20:21, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

There was a discussion and a subsequent unanimous vote in favor of explicit disambiguation of people–language pairs. "Inupiat" can refer to both the people and the language, which means it falls under "Where a common name exists in English for both a people and their language, a title based on that term, with explicit disambiguation, is preferred for both articles". "Inupiat" was made a dab page in response to this guideline, only to be made a redirect later without discussion. --JorisvS (talk) 15:11, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Is that a template or just a copy-paste you're using to repeat your post across all these RMs? Hell I guess I'll copy paste to, since I'm replying to the same as-if-bot-generated comment. Here are view stats that debunk the premise that "people-language pairs" are a legitimate primarytopic equation, which is utter bunk:

• "Inupiat people" was viewed 4,578 times this month (March)
• "Inupiat language" was viewed 900 times this month

That's a more than 5:1 ratio....your premise that "people-language pairs" exist as equally primary topics is rubbish, and demonstrable over and over again; one of the many flawed in NCL. Next time your crew revises that guideline, you should learn some math first and actually look at stats and, oh, sources too....Skookum1 (talk) 16:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• Comment The common name for this people and language is Inupiaq ~ Iñupiaq in English. But, in own language, North Alaskan (North Slope and Malimiut) dialects: Iñupiaq (sg) Iñupiak (dual) Iñupiat (pl) Iñupiatun (language); Seward Peninsula (Qawiaraq) dialects: Inupiaq (sg) Inupiak (dual) Inupiat (pl) Inupiatun (language). Also see Alaska Native Language Center site (ANLC). --Kmoksy (talk) 16:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Well, if this is correct, then both the current name and the proposed name are incorrect. Maybe this should be closed and if need be relisted with a new target? No sense doing a wrong move. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:10, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Relisting comment: Apart from the question of whether to include the word "people" in the title, a consensus is also needed on choosing between the various permutations of the name.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:34, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

---