Talk:Australian Aboriginal religion and mythology

Australia Stub‑class Top‑importance

	Australia portal Australian Aboriginal religion and mythology is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

should be moved

This page should be moved. Aborigine is a noun: the adjective is Aboriginal. Saying Aborigine mythology in talking about the dreamtime is like saying Rome mythology when talking about Romulus and Remus.

Trouble is, I'm not sure what to change it to!

Aboriginal mythology is more grammatical
But perhaps it should be Australian Aboriginal mythology as there are Aboriginies in every continent but the entry is only about the Australian ones.
Koori mythology In general, the indigenous word "Koori" is prefered to the European term "Aborigine" which is, if not actually offensive, at least veers marginally in that direction. It's a bit like calling an Innuit an "Eskimo".

Koori is a word meaning "people" and comes from one of the many Aboriginal languages. Many of the communities in NSW and Victoria used either that word or else a rather similar one prior to the European arrival, and in recent years (satarting around about 1970) there has been a strong movement amongst the indigenous Australian community to use the term Koori instead of Aborigine. We should respect that.

However, Koori is a word from only some of the 250-odd Aboriginal languages: strictly it applies only to the people of NSW and perhaps Victoria. It has been adopted by other groups in other states, at least to a certain extent, but I'm not sure if it is considered appropriate to use it nationwide. Does anyone have up-to-date information on this? Tannin 08:41 Mar 19, 2003 (UTC)

As an Australian, I have to say that Koori isn't a word that's mainstream in the Australian vocabulary. Part of the problem with a native word for the Aboriginals becoming mainstream is that there are competing words from different Aboriginal languages. In Queensland they prefer Murri in some places, Bama in others. There are around ten competing terms. Although Aboriginals understandably dislike having to use the English name, it's still more universal, even among Aboriginals themselves. The only real alternative may be "Native Australians", but I haven't heard anyone endorsing that one. Carbon Copy Man 13:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Dreaming

Is it just me, or should this just thrown into Dreamtime (mythology). All Aboriginal mythos is Dreaming isn't it.

Comments?--ZZ 07:59, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

religion

the article seems to say that all the tribes have the SAME religion. anyone here know whether or not this is actually true or not? Gringo300 17:11, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's certainly not. --Ptcamn 16:43, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

then the next question logically is: does EACH tribe have it's OWN religion? Gringo300 05:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you can objectively draw lines where one religion ends and another begins, in Aboriginal Australia or anywhere. Traditions between tribes will be the same in some respects and different in others: just how different do they have to be before they stop being two sects of one religion and start being two religions? --Ptcamn 09:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mythology = POV?

Describing Dreamtime spirits and stories as 'mythology' is entirely subjective and POV. Can I suggest this article be renamed to Australian Aboriginal beliefs (or characters)? Sambo 16:23, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on your definition of "myth". It doesn't have to mean "false". Native American mythology uses the same term in its title. I think it's just the best term for referring to a group of disorganised religious systems. Perhaps this article should model itself after the Native American article? If only I knew where to begin. I know very little about specific Aboriginal cultural groups. Carbon Copy Man 13:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Figures and elements

Two things:

I've seen it explicitly said that Australian Aboriginal beliefs do not include gods. Labelling certain personalities "gods" seems like eurocentrism. Perhaps "spirit" would be more appropriate.
I really don't like the way random personalities from all different cultures are lumped together. It would be much better if they were moved to subpages for each group. --Ptcamn 19:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone with better knowledge than I should organize the terms according to group, but they should not be thrown out just because they need better organization. It's better to have some information on the various names in the Aboriginal cultures than none at all. Coyoty 18:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is true - there are no Gods as such in Aboriginal lore - there are Creation beings, Ancestor figures and so on. There is also a pantheon of creatures: Mimi; various types of Hairymen; beings malignant, friendly and indifferent, etc. Again, to say "an Aboriginal" anything is very misleading (see my remark in Koori). I've often seen "the Aboriginal word for..." but there's no such thing. Even to say the "NSW Aboriginal word for.." is wrong. An Aboriginal maybe but not the. It does need reorganising in Wikipedia, true, but it needs to be done by someone with authority - and most with authority or interest are strapped for time. I have a lot of knowledge but no formal qualifications and so no authority.

Requested move

The following pages should to be moved following this consensus.

—Mets501 (talk) 01:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Add * '''Support''' or * '''Oppose''' on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

Support

Support Zarbat 01:30, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - it will require some reworking of the articles but we need a consistent usage. (I think Premier means he opposes). Adam 12:24, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support for reasons of consistency. Has a disambig page been considered as an option to address the A/TSI issue? Orderinchaos78 ^(t|c) 14:37, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support for pages that are not intended to focus solely on Australian Aborigines.--cj | talk 12:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Oppose I think if you move it all to Indigenous you imply that those practices also apply to Torres Strait Island peoples, who seem to generally get overlooked in the discussion of Indigenous Australians. While Aboriginal culture varies from langauge group to language group, it has some fairly basic consistencies, while Torres Strait Islander culture is substantially different, being a Melanesian culture more closely linked to PNG. 138.25.252.110 02:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Aren't decendants of the colonial poulation indigenous as well? Her Majesty Elizabeth II, Queen of Australia uses the term "Australian aborignals" on the website of the Royal Family. Her Majesty's preference for this term means something - under International Law all Australian citizens are her legal property. Premier 07:34, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

These can't be dealt with en bloc. The main page, Indigenous Australians, covers all the indigenous peoples of Australia, including Aboriginal Australians and Torres Strait Islanders (and thus is properly located at that title). Some of these child articles however are only about Aboriginal Australians; Australian Aboriginal languages for example is distinct from Torres Strait Island languages. --bainer (talk) 01:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm looking at this article, and it looks like it's about all Indigenous Australians, not just the Aborigines. As for the languages, it looks like they can be grouped together under "Australian languages" or "Indigenous Australian languages". But let's see how things work out. I'm open to removing the language move for now if it's going to be problematic. Zarbat 03:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All the pages mooted for moving deal specifically with Aborigines and don't mention Torres Strait Island culture as far as I can see. Perhaps separate Torres Strait Island culture pages could be created in the future to correspond with these? I don't think changing to Indigenous does Torres Strait Island people and culture justice. For example, I don't know about TSI kinship, but I don't think they have skin system in the way Aboriginal groups do. DRyan 09:10, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A problem seems to be that the links here direct at "Indigenous Australian ..." but then redirect to "Australian Aboriginal ...". There seems to be some sort of a confusion as to whether the two groups (Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders) should be treated seperately or lumped together as "Indigenous Australians". The other move here seems to be passing pretty smoothly, so I don't really know what to think now. I guess it's better to do this on a case-by-case basis, but I don't really have the time, so I'm just going to accept the outcome of this survey. Zarbat 10:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It may be the case that we end up with some moving that are fairly uncontroversial or can be easily fixed to be entirely inclusive, while others will end up disambiguated so that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander customs/traditions/etc can be addressed in separate articles in cases where a notable article can be written about each fork in the divide. Orderinchaos78 ^(t|c) 18:17, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

To me the meaning of Aboriginal and Indigenous are very similar and dont propose a seriotype, they both refer to the native inhabitance or species of an area. Enlil Ninlil 12:49, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]