Talk:Sentinelese

Name of People Living on North Sentinel Island

Good Day, Fellow Editors--

I got to thinking about the name of this article, and I think it could be problematic. The people who inhabit North Sentinel island surely do not call themselves "North Sentinelese" or even "Sentinelese" altogether.

Shouldn't this article's name instead refer to the people who inhabit the place, instead of naming the people after the place? Naming people after the place they inhabit reeks of colonialism. In the United States, for example, it is increasingly common to refer to indigenous peoples by the names they use, not the names assigned to them by colonial powers. (I.E., typing "Chippewa" into Wikipedia's search bar appropriately redirects to the article "Ojibwe".)

Obviously, the People inhabiting North Sentinel Island have not told the outside world what they call themselves--if they refer to themselves as any proper noun at all--but we still owe them respect in our academic circles by naming them in a respectful manner. This also has the peripheral benefit of increasing familiarity with contemporary naming conventions.

I therefore propose to rename this article: "Peoples of North Sentinel Island" and remove all references to "Sentinelese," "North Sentinelese," etc.

I don't ordinarily make substantive contributions to Wikipedia; please let me know your thoughts and be constructive in your critcism.

Best,

Jborgzz (talk) 22:35, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Referring to a people by their location with the common English suffix -ese is no different than referring to them with the much more unwieldly "People of X." They mean the same thing. It's not a failure to show respect, it's a failure to understand English. It's no more disrespectful than using SVO order or pluralizing with the suffix -s. 2601:1C2:4D00:C340:0:0:0:46CF (talk) 05:20, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

The fact that people do it doesn't mean it isn't offensive. The original post here is correct about proper and respectful practices, and reading the article I also felt that the name couldn't possibly the name the people had for themselves. It's both inaccurate and racist, and Wikipedia can do better. A good solution was proposed and should be adopted. 2.24.34.56 (talk) 19:35, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Exonyms are not necessarily racist, why would they be? Do you call Argentines argentinos or Argentines? 82.36.70.45 (talk) 19:37, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

It’s not inaccurate as inaccuracy is relative to definitions, not to good feelings. For example I’m fat and I don’t like it but it is exactly accurate. 82.36.70.45 (talk) 19:39, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME 85.164.238.72 (talk) 10:25, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

History of Contact Grammar

I added a cleanup header to the section for it to be rewritten. The misuse of pronouns makes the section very hard to read and some info just isn't explained very well, a lot of clarification needed tags. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NeutralASP (talk • contribs) 03:02, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Size of exclusion zone.

The exclusion zone around North Sentinel Island is given as 3 nautical miles in this article, and I suspect it could possibly be incorrect. Other sources I have seen, both in Wikipedia and outside of it, give it as 5 nautical miles.

Perhaps someone knowledgeable on the topic could confirm whether I am correct here, and, if so, alter the article accordingly.

Thanks.M.J.E. (talk) 01:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Biology

I've read that a human population needs to be about 60,000 individuals for it to be genetically viable. That is, to be large enough to be resilient to mutations and various other common lethal forces. I don't know what the current thinking is, but seems obvious to me that a population of 50, or even 200, is going to have genetic problems. Reproduction between close relatives isn't necessarily bad, but mutations are much more likely to be deleterious than beneficial, and so the "natural" (background) mutations will lead to extinction of fully genetically isolated small groups. I'd like to see some mention of this for these people. This suggests to me the possibility that there IS gene flow between the islanders and fishermen and near-by populations, but that idea is far outside my wheelhouse.98.17.181.251 (talk) 08:23, 3 June 2024 (UTC)