Talk:Indigenous peoples in Canada
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Indigenous peoples in Canada article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 12 months |
| This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
| Indigenous peoples in Canada was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
| Current status: Delisted good article | ||||||||||||||||
| This It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Clarification under "Indian Act"
Under "Indian Act and Bill C-31" is the sentence "Those people accepted into band membership under band rules may not be status Indians."
Is that meant to mean "Those people accepted into band membership under band rules are not allowed to be status Indians." or "Those people accepted into band membership under band rules might not be status Indians." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.126.211.143 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 22 January 2016
Indigenous Peoples
The idea that there are only three indigenous peoples in Canada is a strange Canadianism. Every distinct indigenous people is an indigenous people in international law. Metis is also used in at least two different senses: some Metis believe it should only apply to red river metis, and some use the term in a sort of quaint 19th centutry scientific racism sense of people with "mixed breeding" or "mixed culture," as though that did not also apply to "Indian" peoples who use gasoline engines.
Inuit is perhaps an authentic autonym, but Metis and Indian are broad terms that will encompass many indigenous peoples. I don't know how this is reflected in primary sources, but Canada often does this in all sorts of legislation, where international norms are flat-out ignored, or half-implemented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:7D68:4700:C40F:10CE:DC38:D800 (talk) 19:21, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- Metis is an extremely undefined term in academics and wider society, and even by people who are themselves Metis. I would say that the use of Metis in this article is broadly appropriate and aligns with a wider understanding of who is and is not Metis, and short of not mentioning Metis people at all, which would be poor practice on the subject of Indigenous people in Canada, I cant see a way of making this more specific
- Referring to Indigenous peoples as a collective "Indian" group is not reflective of wider reality, however the very notion of Indigenous people within Canada proposed by this article also does not particularly work from an Indigenous perspective either, as the nation of Canada did not exist when many of thees cultures formed their territories, and therefore has no bearing on the distribution of individual Indigenous nations. Listing each individual culture of Indigenous people would be nigh on impossible within this article without adding a large amount of bloat, and as the article is a broad introduction to Indigenous culture in Canada, I feel it should probably be left alone for the time being HistVa (talk) 13:56, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
First Nations (North American Indian) n.o.s.
GA Reassessment
Indigenous peoples in Canada
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
- Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • • Most recent review
- Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
Brought this up to GA level way back in 2009 (I was Buzzzsherman back then) with User:Nikkimaria as the reviewer. Not only has GA level requirements improved since 2009, but the article has gone through substantial changes. There are many unsourced statements..... Use of puffery words...and overall layout and presentation is no longer accessible for many readers. I think delisting would be best as there is substantial work to be done. I do have plans in the future to revamp the page, however this will take an extensive amount of time. Moxy🍁 01:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
- While I typically prefer keeping GA status and working over time outside of egregious cases, I don't disagree that this article needs substantial improvements. Besides the layout, maybe go through and tag some of the uncited statements and poor wording and I might fix a couple things if I get around to it. PersusjCP (talk) 16:39, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Possible photograph

The photograph on the right might be appropriate for this article. It is a contemporary image. I prefer not to add my own work to Wikipedia directly when editorial decisions may be involved. Best, RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 12:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)













