Talk:Stʼatʼimc - Knowledge

1911:, about twenty-five miles from Whistler) or the Lower Stl'atl'imx from the now tiny-places down the Lillooet River from there, Skatin aka Skookumchuck Hot Springs, Semahquam (She-MAH-quam) and Port Douglas, also known as Xa'tsa (they use the x spelling down there, in Upper St' it would be with c's). St'at'imc means "people of Sat'", which is the area around the great fishing grounds on the Fraser. Fountain and Pavilion (the northeasternmost of the St'at'imc communities) have a lot of Secwepmec origins and ties. In 1860, ravaged and beleaguered by rapid change, all the chiefs had come to see Governor Douglas on his first visit to what was then Cayoosh Flat for a parlay (a wawa or waw-waw as Douglas' clerk Bushby spells it). The townspeople though the name Cayoosh was distasteful (I've always guessed because of the Cayuse Wars; many of the population were American who'd come through Wash Terr); they proposed the name Lillooet, a spelling already in use for the river and Port Lillooet, which was at the south end of Lillooet Lake and a route whose many names include the Lillooet Trail or the Douglas-Lillooet Trail (see 2996:

of Canadian English and the accepted norms." That sentence is completely and unambiguously and (one would have thought) uncontroversially true. These (except for perhaps Skwxwu7mesh, I don't specifically recall) were the correct spellings at the Vancouver Sun while I was covering aboriginal affairs more than 20 years ago for goodness sake. The Vancouver Sun isn't exactly a linguistics newsletter." The profoundly exotic line of argument he's referring to is the "it's not English because nobody knows how to pronounce it" and "we don't do official names" criticisms of the proposed version(s). Also received a note from my CBC reporter contact that the CBC's name/pronunciation system is an internal database and can't be linked/quoted easily. Still awaiting word from the Counsel-General (who's back at work today) and CTV. But between federal and provincial government citations and documents, two or three crown corps, munis/RDs and the

3577:"anglicize" the name was the poetic "Littlewhite"....interestingly the name now used by what had been the Lillooet Indian Band is T'itq'et (and no, I don't have those apostrophes in the right place; the older transliteration, the one that uses Stl'atl'imx, has that as Tlitlikt or Tl'itl'kt, something like that.....point is it means "white" as in the colour, referring to a particular cutbank's rock/clay colour. A "joke" folksy pronunciation, similar to what you'd hear for Cache Creek (Cash Crick) or Williams Lake (Billy's Puddle) is "Lillywet", usually used ironically or in reference to an "only in Lillooet" kind of matter going on.....mock names like that are somewhat common in BC; old-timers might refer to the Chilcotin is Chill-cOOten (interestingly close to the indigenous pronunciation of "Tsilhqot'in", natural enough since rancher English is very much the same arena as aboriginal English....in an area where most of the cowboys 959:(with an accent/diacritical on the "i", which is what the language is called in Semahquam/Douglas, at least officially; I've heard it in Seton, too, as a reference for the language, and that was from a langauge teacher who was actually from Fountain herself. But even Ucwalmicw isn't English orthography; that /c/ is something between an and ; in the older spelling system I guess that's Uxwalmixw - which looks like the Squamish version Uxwuimixw......I'm not professing by any means to know ma great deal ab out the language, I'm just concerned with how to spell/name it in English, and I have reservations about the "official" use now mandated from the St'at'imc Nation. It's as if all of a sudden we were supposed to spell Grand Forks in Russian characters 1920:

name as used for the whole of the speakers of St'at'imcets/Ucwalmicwts (which is what the Lower Stl'atl'imx use to call the language has its origins in a settler's request of the governor; as far as I know the peoples did it willingly, for mutual protection/support and because they all more or less spoke the same language, though I've heard some younger natives say that it was forced on them; that's how it's seen now by some; the historical record seems clear though I haven't heard elders talk about it (yet). It was a confusing name, especially because the town is not near the river or the lake or Lil'wat. Anyways that's why the two names and what they mean. Someone else put a collapse box on this please.

2324:). I am not actually saying the article shouldn't be moved back to the proposed title (I don't really care). But I can't allow it when the only arguments that have been presented are ad hominem attacks (you have called Kwami a "racist" at least once) and cherrypicked Google hits. The argument that because it is an indigenous group in what is now Canada means we should use "Canadian English" is weak, at best, and the claim that their own name for themselves is "Canadian English" rather than a word in the St'at'imc language, is flawed. Even if you had presented some Canadian government sources that proved "St'at'imc" and not "Lillooet" is their official name in Canada, your argument that this is a 1717:

pronunciation you continue to pretend doesn't exist, as also the older spelling of "Stlatliumh" which is how "St'at'imc" and "Stl'atl'imx" are pronounced, but is an older spelling that has been replaced for indigenous sensitivities and preferences (something which you hold in disdain, but man is that a minefield....). I don't like the van Eijk spelling (St'at'imc either) and prefer myself the funkier-looking and slightly more easy to pronounced "Stl'atl'imx" (once you realize the 'x' is like in Spanish, kinda, i.e. 'h'), but it's "St'at'imc' that is now in common and official use. You have a real problem with allegedly non-English words being used, huh? So what are you going to do about

3510:

or 30 friends in Lillooet, who are online in a history group, native and non-native, to record themselves and their friends saying both "Lillooet" and "St'at'imc", and since they use the other names like Nlaka'pamux and Secwepemc will get them to give those a whirl too......as noted before, the vowel is somewhere between a brief "oh" and a schwa; but with a schwa there's a Lill-uh-wet effect, don't know what the IPA is for the sound so didn't bother amending it yet; it's my hometown, I pronounce it regularly.......and depending on cadence in a phrase, the vowel may vary....but it's never "oo" certainly not a strong "oo" if at all; when people

2178: 3100:

their stories. The second point is missionaries were the ones to write down the language. They created the written form while sitting there and listening, and applied this method to all aboriginal languages . While this is not entirely accurate, I would suggest that phonetics sometimes had their place, as has Anglicization of words. The third point is that though some have adopted the international phonetic alphabet, there are many in British Columbia that have their own orthographies. There is an interesting description of “current” versus “other” names at this page:

2170: 2285: 2880:, in an article by the editor of the Canadian Oxford Dictionary. While she admits that "it remains to be seen how successful" Stl'atl'imx and other names will be in English, due to their "un-Englishness", she points out that the indigenous insistence on such "un-English" names is part of the whole point—that the former names are linked to colonial oppression and the new, "correct" names to the ongoing Aboriginal renaissance in Canada. I'd also note that this article was published in 2003, so her comment "it remains to be seen" is now a decade in the past. 2194: 2186: 82: 64: 257: 1161: 191: 1915:). Douglas, understanding the sensitivities of the native peoples and knew to ask permission of the Lil'wat. So the story goes they came out of a little huddle with Upper/Sat' chiefs, including those on the site, and said "we are all Lillooet now". There was some kind of exchange of gifts at the boundary between upper and lower, which is precise and is a certain boulder with a footprint like depression in it near a place called Poole Creek. Lil'wat and the 1157: 1563:

pronunciation guides from the networks have been requested; my inquiry at the BC government's office responsible for language usage won't be answered until the person in question gets back from holidays on the 21st. How much more legwork do you expect me to do to deal with your refusal to admit you were wrong in acting without consultation on moving these articles? Clearly controversial moves, which were not supposed to be done that way.

303: 285: 588:

existence of native law enforcxmeent agencdies that seems worth an article overall, but I wouldn't know where to start to look up dates of creation and rules/agreements involved, education and governane and so on) there's also individual First Nations-run schools; these could simply be named on their respective band and community pages; but I know there's an equivalent representation for "white government"-run schools (

2444:

most others seem reluctant to provide any valid sources. You insist that the current title is a basically racist name imposed on the people by outsiders, despite the evidence I have found that indicates the group themselves, while they might give prominence to St'at'imc, also have no problem with Lillooet. There also seems to be a tide in favour of "restoration" of this page to its previous title, as though Kwami's

1318:, which is that document's legal name and is obviously in English. How "hydro agreement" would be rendered in St'at'imcets/Ucwalmicwts I have no idea. "Lillooet Hydro Agreement" wouldn't work for what are obvious reasons to a local or anyone who recognizes "Lillooet" primarily as the name of the town. "St'at'imc Chiefs Council" is another English name using it, do you want more? Re the older spelling there's the 3005:

week....and since he works for them, i.e. the Upper St'at'imc Language Education and Services office, which is part of St'at'imc Nation operations, i doubt very much he'll agree with those who are using his book title to "prove" that "Lillooet people" is more common....quite the opposite. The same would doubtless be true of linguists working with or for the Secwepemc, Nlaka'pamux, Tsilhqot'in and Ktunaxa.

494: 181: 33: 154: 1045: 1997:

least as good as the book they copied from). Interesting that Chilcotin → Tsilhqot'in is simply a change in spelling, with the pronunciation staying the same. The AANDC guide is also a purely English transcription, without any of the "approximately as in X" descriptions that we use on our foreign IPA pages, or that the BCED guide uses. So that seems like a good source too.

667:

though I think the Secwepemctsin system is similar or it's the basis of the St'at'imcets/Van Eijk one. Even without them some words/names like Tslalh and Ohin look one way, sound quite different (Ohin - ooxwin, with that first oo maybe more like an o, but not). SFAIK there's no St'at'imcets linguist kicking around here, might not hurt to ask at

3065:

people themselves prefer" are discounted as they have been throughout these RMs. And though it will be interesting to see what Jan van Eijk has to say, why it is that a white linguist's opinion might carry more weight than that of a native person is a very curious notion in the context of current First Nations political and cultural realities.

2452:, indicating a clear contempt for Knowledge policy on the part of those in favour of the move. I have no problem whatsoever with using this ethnic group's endonym, as it does appear in reliable English sources, but the lack of any reasonable arguments presented in the move's favour made me suspicious. In your initial nomination you made an 369: 2416:. That it's also seen by some natives as a colonialist imposition is another big reason. What people in the "outside world" and outside Canada call them doesn't mean it's appropriate that Knowledge should ignored their own preferred usage, and that now standard in non-native governance and media, is ridiculous. Like saying that 1616:. I said these names are current in English and that's easily citable; yet you ignore all those cites and are zeroing in on the absence (supposedly) of any cites as me being "incapable". Oh, I'm very capable, and just wrote the news networks for their pronunciation guides for native names. Have you written the editor of the 3509:

has to use it as an occasion to pretend to some kind of intellectual authority on these matters. He's not. And if this is to be treated as "an English word" as he claimed, then he should have known how to pronounce it first if it's so "obvious". And actually, though it's OR, I'm going to ask my 20

2443:

parochial -- I'm a native English speaker who specializes in classical Japanese literature, a subject I doubt you know anything about because you are more interested in your own local, parochial interests -- but you continue to name-call. I would be perfectly happy to see this page moved, but you and

2347:

and indeed the whole "not English" rants that were going on here were very much what you'd hear from the "One Country, One People, One Law" folks, and that natives should behave like a conquered people and assimilate. If you're unaware of that, you're unaware of the political and cultural realities

1742:

In addition to my emails this morning to CBC and CTV newsrooms and a CBC radio host of my acquaintance, I just informed my contact at USLCES in Lillooet about this discussion and the demand for cites "in English"......she may join the discussion once she gets the message (I'm in a different time zone

1583:

Could you at least meet me half way and provide the pronunciation of "St'at'imc"? Ditto for all the other move requests you made. I'm not asking for a RS for any of them (though eventually ones would be needed), but it would be nice if you could provide a source for your claim that Canadian English

1517:

English this article and attendant category are about, not any other kind of English. I take it you have no satisfactory answer, since you never reply to that and keep on claiming it's not part of English because you say so. "It doesn't have a pronunciation in English" is hogwash; if you live in BC

967:

area, or start using the two-characters meaning "China" in English whenver we write Chinatown.....yet all over Knowledge there's things spelled in foreign orthography, particularly Polish, Hungarian, Turkish etc names/alphabets....it would make it easier in BC, given the sprachbund in these parts, if

3514:

try to say it that way, often newcomers, they tend to make a second stress on the last syllable i.e. Lill-oo-ETTE, almost as a primary stressed syllable rather than on the first as per normal, but that's not correct; on old maps for Mt Currie (Lil'wat) you'll see Liluet-ol but that's not an IPA "u",

3504:

who was making a big stink about pronunciation, but he doesn't even know them himself......nor anything about these peoples other than what he reads in ilnguistics. I have great respect for linguists...those who respect others that is. Kwami gives no respect, and deserves none on matters like this

3088:

I've received a reply about these matters from the BC Attorney General's ministry's Legislative Program Coordinator in the Office of the Counsel General, who is responsible for the government's style and usage guide. I'll quote it verbatim rather than try to summarize it, and she pretty much covers

2872:

I have found it tricky finding sources online that talk about the ongoing process of ethnonym change in British Columbia and Canada in general. This process has been developing for decades and shows no sign of abating. For many peoples the name changes were easy and quickly accepted in general, such

2629:

not the common modern usage" which is "First Nation". Imposition of definitions upon these people by outside academics and editors is much-resented across the board; you think you're not parochial because you deal with Japanese topics; but you're parochial about this, if you can't see that, I'm not

1156:– User:Kwamikagami was in error about COMMONNAME and ENGLISH. CANENGL applies on Canadian articles, and "St'at'imc" is the modern standard and accepted usage for this people...including by themselves. As for the COMMONNAME part, "St'at'imc" (without quotes, or else the result is 26,000,000) yields 3118:

The B.C. Government, through the Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation and the Ministry of Education, has recognized the rights of First Nations to develop and educate their children in traditional languages. A common goal in B.C. and other jurisdictions is promote self-government. Of

2995:

and is a very notable writer on First Nations and other aboriginal issues. This is a direct quote from his reply: "What a profoundly exotic line of argument, and against this? "The St'at'imc, Tshilqot'in, Secwepemc, Ktunaxa and Nlaka'pamux names, if not so much Skwxwu7mesh, are now a standard part

2784:

source throughout my entire discussion with you, you insist that I am probably too closed-minded to accept any hypothetical sources you might cite. I find your insinuation that those of us who do not regularly edit articles in WikiProject Canada should be banned from participating in RMs like this,

2130:

In the local area and in Canadian/BC media and government "St'at'imc" is used, and by in the local area I mean not just the people themselves but their neighbours. "Lillooet Indians" is no longer in common use...maybe where you are, wherever that is, but not in British Columbia; locally that phrase

1919:

and south of there are "the old Lillooet" (meaning the region, not just the site/community of Lil'wat). Surrounding the town /district of Lillooet on nearly all sides are the reserves of the T'itq'et (?), Sekwelwas and Xwisten FN's; the Lillooet, Cayoose Creek and Bridge River bands. The Lillooet

1409:

discusses the various spelling systems] and describes t he choice of "St'at'imc". Teit's usage from his writings gives the Secwepemctsin version semi-anglicized as "Slatlemuk" (the -muk is Secwepemtsin, though, not pronounced as -imc or -imx are). "Stlatliumh" as you should know by now is both an

3099:

As we know, orthography is a system used to standardize how a particular language is written. The problem with aboriginal languages has a lot to do with three things. The first is that the aboriginal peoples did not have a written language, it was all oral and their history was passed down through

3064:

I'm not the one who's been making "one-off arguments", that's your job. The UN Dec is only ancillary and has only moral suasion behind it; and guidelines on native names yes have to be developed, but not if all of government sources, native-governments sources, cultural institutions and "what the

2895:

it says "Stl'atl'imx (Lillooet)". Now I realize one source hardly proves a common name, but I find it telling that this is a book written to teach children, and plainly says it uses "the correct names". Further, I'm skeptical about attempts to determine "common name", especially Google searches of

2875:

Mi’kmaq. In British Columbia the names desired by the indigenous peoples tend to "seem impenetrable to anglophones" (as the page I link below puts it) and some have proven slower to become the norm than others. Stl'atl'imx (Lillooet), Secwepemc (Shuswap), and Nlaka'pamux (Thompson) are examples of

2642:

of St'at'imc from the St'at'imcets version that was there i.e. in the catname.......and now the linguistics crowd is tooth and fang out to stop me, and they don't care anything about thet impacts on content of other articles or on the categories problems...that's the problem with specialists, they

2235:

I just reviewed the first and second-page results for the Canada-only google, the first one of your links above, it includes quotations from Teit (writing a hundred years ago) and constructions such as " office location in Lillooet. "People" know where the offices are..." and "St'at'imc (Lillooet)

1996:

That's a good start, even with the injured attitude. The bced.gov guide makes it pretty clear that they're only approximations, not actually English, so that's not a supporting ref. But the ones on the BCED map do look like actual English pronunciations. So that seems like a decent source (or at

1906:

I'm not sure it's on this article or on the town's (district's, actually) but the story about how Cayoosh Flat came to be Lillooet in 1860 is partly about a union of the two peoples; really there were more like seven. The western group are the Lower St'at'imc; from D'Arcy/Nequatque up to Pavilion

946:

Yeah, that's a good idea. But re keeping the same word for the people & the language again Secewpemc/Shuswap language; Nlaka'pamux/Thompson language, Dakelh/Carrier language, Skwxwu7mesh/Squamish language.....I think the reason taht th ENglish name for the language is used is because the most

3004:

citation proving the other claim that the archaic/discredited names are "most common" or that "these terms don't belong in English-language Knowledge". I've also asked my contact at the St'at'imc language office who offered to have Jan van Eijk comment.....not yet, but it's just the start of the

2456:

disingenuous representation of Google hits as being 40:1, disregarding the fact that almost all of your "St'at'imc" results assumed you were misspelling the word "static", and then when asked to provide some kind of reliable source that indicates widespread acceptance of the endonym you cited one

587:

or something of some title might be an article, if there's not enough for particular agencies; I know Wiki's not supposed to be a directory so that's why I thought of individual articles; maybe there's not enough history for any one group or ogranizatoin, except in certain cases; it's the general

2935:

Van Eijk worked with Kinkade at UBC, was a visiting scholar at UVic, and has worked with the Mount Currie Community School and the Lillooet Tribal Council, so he should be aware of any issues associated with the name. (At least now we have a ref that St'at'imc has an English pronunciation, which

2377:

be the common name, but no longer is. "St'at'imc" without diacriticals is used in English all the time, and not just by the St'at'imc themselves....it's an accepted word/name in English now, and avoids the complications of saying "Lillooet Indians" which are too many to re-list again. That the

1721:? ("Fraser River Salish"? "Cowidgin", maybe, as all Halkomelem-speakers were once called? Or I guess you'd want that changed to "Cowichan" as that's an "English word".......you know what, you're starting to remind me of the types in BC and Alberta who complain about French on the cereal boxes. 604:

respectively and don't hold me to the spelling on the second one, even if it's in my home town. I know, it's all who puts what in, but like I said these are notes for later, either for myself when I have the time or for someone who finds something worth undertaking and wants to write them. The

1562:

and of google listings I've also enumerated is "dodging the issue" by honing on in the apparent fact that dictionaries don't have IPAs for these; dictionaries are not the whole of the English language, and take years to catch up to accepted usages for matters such as these and you know it. The

666:

I'm not sure which ones you mean; some of the spellings given are in St'at'imcets orthography, which differs from ours on various counts, even though it looks like the same characters (look at hte category name, it's got the full diacriticals, but it's not a system shared by any other language,

3357:

Where'd that IPA come from anyone? Ethnologue? A local source? Disdain for locals is already evident in the RM, but it's questionable to me that IPAs aren't cited.....as predicted the IPA specialist presiding doesn't know how this name is pronounced, despite making the silly claim that it's

1716:

the one you claim is "English". And you claim "Lillooet" is an English "word" even though it's native in origin......and its pronunciation also isn't obvious. And you as a linguist pretending you don't know that Teit called these people, per their Secwepemtsin name, Shuhkwapmuk, is a clue to

1478:

either, because, again, English doesn't have such a sound. Not all things have an English name, but when they do, that's the one we use. "Mistaken" in your quote just means not native. The fact that people mispronounce English words is irrelevant: the question is whether there even *is* an

1362:

correspondence/letterhead) and all groups and orgs use "St'at'imc" or, as noted, "Stl'atl'imx", including formerly the tribal council until the adoption of the van Eijk orthograpy as the main preference. For you to cherry-pick the name that seems "easiest" to you (and still isn't English, and

1114:

we give preference to the topic's national variety of English, in this case Canadian English. It appears that the native name "St'at'imc" has become standard in Canadian English-language sources; opposes that didn't account for the ENGVAR issue were given less consideration. In any event, the

1361:

called "Lillooet" is a story in itself; the Lillooet Tribal Council was named before the native-language revival began and though still in use, that tribal council (now St'at'imc Nation, which is "how they sign their cheques" and likely is what's on their bank accounts and certainly on their

498: 3576:

What's the /ɪ/....is it like "ih" or more like the dotless Turkish "i"...I'll make a few recordings of myself and ask a few people tonight to donate some for review; OR yes, but this by way of trying to figure out the most suitable IPA ... and variants maybe; one old frontier-era attempt to

880:

like apostrophes, they're not, for intance - /t'/ is the "tl" sound, and that c is really more like a closing-h although it usually comes is slat-LEE-um....the older spelling was Stl'atl'imx and the cloesst I've seen is the "primitive" inaccurate-lokoing one, concoted from Englishi spelling

1711:

Gee, I gave you a link where you could directly ask the editor of the paper in Lillooet if there's an English pronunciation; she uses the name "St'at'imc" all the time; and indicated you could poll CBC and CTV for their pronunciation guidelines too, since they regularly use this name and

2019:". It looks like we would probably want to take the AANDC as our principal pronunciation guide, because the intended pronunciations seem clear, with the BCED map as a (somewhat illegible) supporting ref, but that the BCED guide is basically useless, being neither English nor native. — 1620:

as I suggested you could do? She'd also be using "Nlaka'pamux" regularly, as that paper has circulation in Lytton and covers matters in that area. She probably also knows how to pronounced "Secwepemc". Stop demanding cites for things when you don't provide any for your many claims

905:, for much the same reason - Secwepemctsin and Nlaka'pamuctsn don't roll off the English tongue, or stick in an English head, any better than St'at'icmets does.....there's no consistency in that endonym/language paradigm, but it's been evolving. Do you want to try a move proposal to 605:

police agencies are all evolutions, IMO, ofr the post-Oka experience; the Seton Portage incident is covered, and Gustafsen Lake more or less (if contentiously), but not the Green Mountain blockade in the same period on the way to Apex from Penticton, and so on; no doubt there's a

2328:

issue would still be weak. I have already demonstrated that Canadian sources -- including First Nations groups and universities -- readily use both names interchangeably, so please make some better arguments, and stop calling those who disagree with you on this issue "racist".

2394:

source, likewise Ministry of Forests and other ministries and agencies, just doesn't seem to get through to you by what you're saying. Asking me for cites already provided is a tiresome game here. The complication of the meaning of "Lillooet" are the big issue here; there's

3180:

In addition, when my office is working with aboriginal names and naming, it is necessary to have the orthographic character as used by that aboriginal peoples. While my office works with Queen’s Printer for this, we do often refer to sites like this one to find what we need:

837:, and worth noting that the Lower Lillooet, especially down the lower Lillooet River, use "Ucwalmic" - which kinda of means "ours, to do with us", for the name of the language, since they're not "from Sat'". Discussing all this because of your change of this article from 2004:

are all accepted spellings according to the AANDC, and all three are pronounced "stat-lee-um". According to BCED, the first at least is pronounced "stat-liem". That looks like a rather incompetent equivalent of the AANDC pronunciation, what we would presumably render as

2690:

of the following: (1) "Lillooet" is considered offensive or otherwise unacceptable by the people themselves; (2) the endonym of an ethnic minority indigenous to a particular modern state that happens to have English as its official language actually qualifies as meeting

2606:

is beyond ridiculous and chauvinistic, wrap yourself in Wiki guidelines all you want; these articles were moved without consensus and the consensus in past discussions in other WikiProjects than your own (IPNA, WPCAN, WPOR and others) and were clearly controversial and

1696:

And yes, we are talking Munich versus München here. There are people who claim that "München" is correct and use it (or an approximation of it) when speaking English. If more people did that than not, then we would move the article to "München". Same goes here. —

1854:: This "it's not English" is about the stupidest argument I've ever heard on Knowledge; there are THOUSANDS of Native American/First Nation loan words in the English language, even "Lillooet" is clearly not an English word! So, shall we also eliminate words like 2185:. This is still a majority in favour of St'at'imc, but nowhere near the landslide claimed, clearly showing that "Canadian English" uses both names, and so this is not a regional varieties of English dispute. Therefore, by removing the Canada restriction, I got 3617:

Lfdder, you are NOT being cute, so far you have insulted several editors who have, in good faith, been trying to get these pronunciations correct, and in return, you address their sincere efforts by making flippant and snarky comments. Knock it off, please.

2535:

sources that specifically state that there is a problem (as you keep claiming) with the current title. Additionally, your argument a few sections above that "St'at'imc people" is redundant is just plain out-of-touch with Knowledge policy: it's redundant in

2891:, it says "We have made every attempt to use the correct names of the peoples, rather than the names given to them by others...At the start of each section we also show the names they were once called by others, like this: Nuu-chah-nulth (Nootka)." And on 2685:

by assuming I have some kind of racist motivation, you try citing sources that actually say the things you claim to say. I have now on multiple occasions expressed my willingness to change my !vote to support if you were to cite some source that indicated

1579:

You've become irrational: I'm racist because you're unable to support your argument. That's an idiotic characterization. All I ask is that you prove your point. It's not up to me to prove your point for you. If you're unable to prove it, then it's

2785:

even when you have not presented a single shred of evidence other than personal attacks against your opponents, offensive. I have nothing more to say here. My !vote stands, but I have no more intention to attempt to engage you in adult discussion.

800:

happen to converge, but consider the native name for the language is a lot different...I was gonna say Gitaanmax but that's a place...another example though would be Tsimshian vs Smalgyax, which is their name for their language; the article is

3026:

deals with language and culture issues and calls for respecting the wishes and such of indigenous peoples about those issues; I can find a direct quote if need be, but suffice to say there's an international standard about this that Knowledge

1200:"The Cariboo Chilcotin tourism region, where the St'at'imc live, is considered underdeveloped. ... This claim to fame has not been healing for race relations.20 Lillooet was the largest centre north of Chicago during the 1860s and beckoned.. " 136: 2933: 3519:

it has fallen into disuse for the people as a whole; the dialect in Van Eijk is the Fountain dialect (Cacli'p) and is very different from what's spoken in Mt Currie and the Lower Lillooet River, so his title is more than a bit ironic.

2570:, but your mind is clearly closed on the mountain primacy or native-endonym usages like that in our country; your argument about bracketed mentions of the old term "Lillooet people" after St'at'imc is specious and also evasive and it's 1418:

Craigellachie; both very notable placenames that people have to experience to know how to say right. I've heard "Nana-EEmo" for Nanaimo and "Co-KEET-lam" for Coquitlam. It's not like most people are going to get the guttural-q in

2465:, but you have made out-there claims that the current title is in some way racist/offensive/dated, without citing a single source to back up this claim. (Additionally, can I suggest you amend your proposed title in accordance with 2896:

various kinds. The shift from colonial to indigenous ethnonyms in Canada is an ongoing process, a "moving target". Most sources out there are not up to date. Some are dreadfully out of date. We want to use what the common name is

2509:. That you could even say that despite the plethora of resources I've already researched and linked says you have some bad perception problems, and the ongoing attitude that Canadian and local usages aren't "good enough" is 1164:. The other problem with the current title is it will cause complications if someone tries to move the category associated with these people to "Lillooet", as has already come up in a CfR opposing my contention it should be 2368:

at the government citations I took all that time to link while looking for the irrelevant pronunciation guide? All of you are sounding incredibly parochial about this, whether parochial about Canadian English or about what

3735: 3515:

that's an "uh"....and the -ol is "things pertaining to" like Skwxwu7mesh-ullh but I don't know the St'at'imcets spelling for that ending at the moment; think it's just -ulh but will check. "Lillooet" has too many meanings

2643:

only think their own way, and look askance on anyone who won't play their game. This whole RM is a travesty now, cite after cite provided, and yet this picayune quibbling over what's in common use by people who don't even

2145:

names are the norms in Canada now, and the older names are in disuse and/or discredited. So where is it that "Lillooet people" is the common name again? Anyone care to cite that or is "common knowledge" somehow a citation

130: 3646:

That was the fourth, the other three times you called me "high." That too is an insult. You might not "think" you are insulting people but you are. What you said to Skookumq was insulting and condescending. Get a clue.

968:

all the native linguists had chosen the same latinization/romanization system, but they didn't; in some cases, including this one, they specificially chose a different system, than the neighhbourhing people(s) in order to

703:

at least for someone to write to, to have those IPAs checked/cofirmed, or there might be resources on that site giving the pronunciation. my contact name at USLCES is Marilyn Napoleon, don't know if she still works there

1942:

has provided for the Shuswap/Secwepemc RM two of these links; the third I found for the Kutenai/Ktunaxa RM and it applies across the board and is also from the Ministry of Education like one of the two provided by Capmo:

972:

different. /t'/ menas someting different in Chilcotin than it does in Lillooet than it does in Shuswap than it does in Squamish; in Chinook and modern Chinook Jargon it's an ejective; sfaik only Lillooet uses it for the

1973:

That not enough for you? Any more irrelevant excuses to adjudge these words as not being part of English usage in BC (in education, forestry, health, parks and regional/municipal governance as well as media and common

2747:

a sovereign state and have never surrendered to the Crown that (if you don't know about Canadian Land Claims issues that's too long a tale to be told here); others like that are, notably, the Nuxalk. User:LiliCharlie

3243:

From that point on she lists park names that exist either in both languages (whichever language it is), legally and formally, and some that have only native names; it's a set of HTML boxes, most reflected already in

1473:

You seem to be missing the point that we speak English and that the names we use are supposed to be English. There's no /q/ in Iqaluit because English does not have a /q/. Most people don't "get" the guttural-r in

2680:

How about instead of posting long comments in which you refer to your fellow Wikipedians (who have made no personal remarks against you throughout this entire dispute, as far as I can see) "you people", and violate

3267:"St'at'imc" (ambient yard-noise around me right now, i.e. lawnmower) but note that the "Lillooet Declaration" of 1913, which this is the centenary celebration of, is now referred to as the "St'at'imc Declaration", 3629:

That wasn't an insult. What are you talking about? Did you think I was doubting his pronunciation or something? You've replied to me 3 times in total, and 3 times in total you've not made a tiny bit of sense. —

2771:

I don't frankly care what "Canadians here" say. Wikipedians are not reliable sources, and for all you know both myself and Kwami are Canadians, and for all I know you are lying about being Canadian. (Note: I do

1366:

doesn't have an obvious pronunciation) is grasping at straws while also being presumptuous that "Kwami knows best, it doesn't matter what these people prefer or what is used in the media or by any government".

2634:. No point in raising the impact on the FN categories of all these undiscussed changes, are you going to enjoy the CfDs that your support of Kwami's cause is going to bring? I write on these people's subjects 3049:

If you think we should, then you can organize drawing up a guideline to advise that. But it doesn't do much good as a one-off argument: It should be applied Wiki-wide if it's going to be applied at all. —

2819:

putting words in my mouth. I've answered all of your four points, Pfly has provided that excellent essay from the Translation Bureau about the ascendance and modern use of these terms, and all you can do is

3740: 3730: 1866:

and all other examples because something "isn't English?" Sheesh. Don't be a bunch of insensitive colonialist ignoramuses here, SHOW RESPECT and call people what they want to be called. End of story.

1825:

English. You know, us funny folks that say "aboot" and use "-re" on "centre" and "-our" on "labour" and such.....and we embrace, including officially, indigenous words all the time...have a look at

106: 2876:

this. Other, equally "impenetrable" names have definitively become standard, such as Nisga'a, Nuu-chah-nulth (Nootka), and Kwakwaka'wakw (formerly Kwakiutl). These points and the topic is discussed

3581:

Indians...Squamish is "Squeamish" or "Squish", the latter especially suitable because of the incredible raininess of the place (rainier than Lions Bay or even Whistler, in fact, which is amazing).

1239:"many people" is your claim, I have yet to see you cite a reference for that claim for any of these RMs......"hardly anyone" doesn't include people in the region, or who read dailies such as the 1479:

English pronunciation. If not, it's not an English name, and so not appropriate as a title for an English article. You keep dodging the issue, so I take it you have no satisfactory answer. —

1682:

versus München here, we are talking about an express decision by the people so labeled. (This is akin to proerly saying "African-Ameican" as opposed to something more archaic or offensive...)

583:, but I can't remember though that seems unwieldy); the Canadian law enforcement categories deserve some overlap with aboriginal categories; not sure how much information there is but at least 1558:

in use, and while English pronunciation isn't going to match, only approximate, the native-language pronunciation, it still exists whether you like it or not. Your constant evasions of the

752:

is called.....Note there's been a standard evolved of using the endonym for the main article, but NOT t he name name of the language for the language article, rather the most common one....

89: 69: 862:

Okay, moved back. Also move the lang article to avoid redundancy. Personally, I'd prefer both to be at Lillooet--probably more common, but also IMO more accessible to English speakers. —

2386:

fielded from popular histories or older ethnographies.....IMO van Eijk did a disservice to their linguistic cause by titling his book as he did. And again, the views dismissive of what

2087:. We are creating an encyclopedia the purpose of which is to educate and inform. That means using the accurate name per the people, and not perpetuating what is possibly an inaccuracy.( 3500:

assumptions about romanizations used for aboriginal names, of which this is one. I challenged him to pronounce it, like everything else I've posted he ignored the request....it was

1678:: An ethnic group should be called what THEY want to be called, not some basically racist name imposed upon them by outsiders. It isn't an WP:ENGLISH issue, we aren't talking about 3185:

The purpose, of course, is respect for the First Nations peoples language and sensitivities. This is often a negotiated thing, particularly with parks, conservancies and reserves.

2703:

of these criteria. Of course, I shouldn't be expected to take you seriously if you keep using insulting language like you have in your last several posts: cut that out as well.

3319:

Been there a long time, it's seems to be "St'at'imcets' per the van Eijk orthography, though I don't know what that is supposed to be, true.......where's this come from for a

452: 425: 415: 2877: 2695:

as far as that policy goes; (3) my above Google hits don't indicate that a significant portion of Canadians use the names interchangeably; or (4) "St'at'ic" is more common in

732:(which I've got to get around to uploading a picture of .... ) so "people" is already in it. Generally we only add the "people" ending when the name is not the endonym, e.g. 2105:

in wikipeida we use the common name, not the "correct name". The common name is Lilloot. This is how they are generally refered to. For the same reason we have an article

1554:

is all over the internet and in the cites provided; your insistence that they allegedly can't be pronounced and therefore aren't English flies in face of the facts that they

400: 2364:

proof that's the common name, instead they're a demonstration of the ongoing deprecation of the older and increasingly less-in-use term. Government cites? haven't you even

1379:; another is that many of them still alive remember being beaten and abused for speaking their own languages or using native names. Maybe you'd like to tell them that what 3775: 1065: 343: 3760: 2412:), Lillooet Lake/River and the Lower Lillooet peoples (who use "Lower Stl'atl'imx for their tribal council name), "Lillooet" is just not usable with any clarity anymore 430: 420: 2811:

of the points you're claiming I haven't provided cites for, as well as responses. You're not the one being adult, IMO, and once again we have the situation of someone

1194:, and another WP:TROUT for another undiscussed move counter/without Talk page discussion by Kwamikagami. Plus Google Books sources for the people. Alison M M Johnston 2356:

at all. And as for the LTC, they haven't changed their registration-name with Indian and Northern Affairs, but their choice of url is very obviously statimc.net and

2348:

that led to the evolution and adoption of the new names. And your contention that the Canadian English thing is trivial is very much a non-Canadian viewpoint, it's

1222:

if nothing else. Many people have heard of the "Lillooet". Hardly anyone has heard of the "St'at'imc", which AFAICT does not even have an English pronunciation. —

3750: 3023: 881:

conventions before the linguists started coming up with specialized latinizations - Slatliumh, which is pretty much how it's said. But the convention in BC now is

237: 951:

is the corresopnding item. "St'at'imc" still isn't in English orthography, though it looks latinized; but it's not; the aboriginal police for, for instance, uses

3755: 2627:

usage in modern usage because of that exact problem. Lillooet is cognate with "Lil'wat". "Indian Band" is also common, and still in use by some bands, but it's

349: 2919: 2390:

government sites use and what is now standard in Big Government-speak, including the St'at'imc Hydro agreement and any number of documents and reports from that

3245: 2206: 651:

Could someone check the pronunciations? I assume they were supposed to be English, and tried converting them, but have no way of knowing if I got them right. —

465: 2399:

about "St'at'imc".....between the District of Lillooet, region of the same name, the individual band (which no longer uses Lillooet Indian Band for itself and

3745: 1343:

Of course we'd use that name for the hydro agreement. It's its name. It's also irrelevant for the name of this article, as the people have *two* names. —

2922: 3780: 3770: 563:

It's late but wanted to jot down some stuff I'll try to get to, at least at stub level. This page needs a Government/s section, mirroring contents on the

2924:

There's also a lot of dual use, as you found in your children's book, suggesting that the endonym by itself is insufficient for a general audience. The

2135:, 60 miles away, who are "the real Lillooet". Where do you get this claim of "common name" from? Not borne out by Google, maybe you're thinking of the 410: 833:

hear "St'at'imcets language", though that's redundant; and of course in ethnography, at least outside of BC where St'at'imcets is standard, it's still

2214: 510: 1405:, there is this line: "We are also mistakenly known as the "Lillooet Tribe". Our language is a member of the Interior Salish Language Family." while 2306:

It is a member of the Lillooet Tribal Council, which is the largest grouping of band governments of the Stl'atl'imc people (aka the Lillooet people)

1826: 545: 461: 319: 1612:) is "obviously" pronounced "Ikaluit" and your FALSE CLAIM that I said there was a /q/ in English is yet another of the things you claim I've said 2131:

would mean "Indians in Lillooet" (i.e. the Lillooet/T'itq'et, Bridge River/Xwisten and Cayoose Creek/Sekwelwas bands) vs "Mt Currie Indians" (the

247: 2619:

name of these people. The Lillooet-as-colonial imposition citation you want is in st'at'imc.net or uslces.org sites somewhere; laughable that a

318:, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join 3478:

Your reaction to a mistake in the transcription is uncalled for, as is your apparent disdain for linguists, just cos kwami happens to be one. —

1410:

archaic anglicization though recognizably pronounceable; but "nativizations" of indigenous names are now (as I'll repeated again) the accepted

596:

points in a whole important direction; especially because some, like Alert Bay and Mission/St. Mary's, survive as native culture institutions (

266: 164: 3452:

YOU calling my detailed responses a "tantrum" is what's tiresome, and just more insults and snottiness from someone who moved all these pages

3765: 1398: 1123:

to the current title without discussion, despite previous discussions of the name. As the article was at "St'at'imc" or a close variant from

94: 1907:(Tskwylacw) it's Upper St'at'imc. It's the Upper St'at'imc dialect that van Eijk's book encompasses isn't the same as that in Lil'wat (of 1493:

Well, Kwami, Iqualuit figures in the nightly weather reports on any Canadian network, that it probably gets "Ikaloo-it" as a pronunciation

589: 2979:

and items on the two dialects of Secwepmectsin and also, of course, Ktunaxa. Their page on the Nlaka'pamux uses another spelling but also

2824:

and posture about my supposed immaturity, and have dismissed all notion of respecting all that has been said by way of posturing about my

1371:

is pretty clear about following "what the sources say". The further confusion with the town of Lillooet and the region of the same name,

1119:, though we didn't see much evidence that "Lillooet" is really that much more common in recent, quality sources. Finally, the article was 1097:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a

3342:

This ain't right - /ˈlɪluːɛt/ - it's no an "oo" sound at all, it's "oh", whatever the IPA is for that; short, yes, but not "ooh" at all.

2752:

pointed out the "strong national sentiment" item which is wherever. (4) your "interchangeable" cites include those which put St'at'imc

1070: 593: 373: 310: 290: 3201: 1323: 102: 1172:

the diacriticals, just those in the Halkomelem version of "Sto:lo" are omitted, other than the colon. What I'm saying, also is that

2011: 580: 213: 2854:, 2nd edition, 2004, Oxford University Press (which I can access online through the Seattle Library). Here is the entry they have: 2727:

at the time of the town's renaming in 1960. (2) According to other Canadians here (and montanabw who is not Canadian), such terms

1637:

Meet you halfway? Where are your cites proving "Lillooet people" is more widely used; the google results certainly don't say that.

955:

and it also seems more common in the Lower Lillooet (Mt Currie-Port Douglas), but I'm only speaking of visible signage; NB, again,

1243:. As far as YOU know it doesn't have an English pronunciation, but it is regularly used in English in the area and in BC media. 3248:

many titles. If anyone needs "proof" of this email or thinks I fictionalized it, "email this user" and I will gladly forward it.

1138: 3698:, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section. 3234:, where you will find names that identify parks, conservancies and reserves that are in both regional and aboriginal references. 2918:. Yes, but how do you determine what is the common name now? Limiting GBooks to 2000-2013, I get 6 hits for "St'at'imc people" 1292: 1244: 2531:

the proposed title -- often in conjunction with the current title, implying that "Lillooet" is the more recognized name -- but

2382:

native English speakers doesn't seem to penetrate any of your noggins, or that how they choose to call themselves should trump

1168:. "St'at'imc" is what you will find in media coverage, in academia, in the publications from the people themselves, generally 3231: 1908: 1340:

If you didn't forget, then you simply failed to support your claim. I can't find the pronunciation in either of those links.

497:

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available

3358:"English". True enough that "oo" might be heard from people looking at it who've never been there, and it may be somewhere 2310:

I did a research paper on James Alexander Teit, and the Lillooet people, and he is quoted quite a bit in the Yesterday book

2828:

failure to provide cites.......you're ridiculous and being pompous about things you refuse to read or acknowledge. Pffft.

1003:

So, why has this article not been moved from its unwieldy, apparently even incorrect or misleading, and, may I point out,

537: 2717:

tell that to Kwami about insulting language, and others here who have behaved just like him. As for (1) it's considered

1106:

The result of the move request was: There's much to consider from this lengthy discussion. First off, this is clearly an

729: 576: 204: 159: 98: 44: 3205: 2611:. But your mind is closed, any cite I will provide you'll tell me isn't good enough for you. But I have yet to see 3496:, given all the stink he's been making about pronunciation and how this name is "obvious" in pronunciation based on 2954: 2887:, is a Canadian book about Canadian indigenous people, written for kids, published in 2012. In the Introduction, on 3385: 2850: 1016: 3366:

and an "oh", but /u/ while you do hear it, isn't how it's said locally. An -ette stress on the last syllable you

3022:

Also very relevant to these matters, and though Knowledge is not bound by UN declarations, Article 31 of the UN's

2114: 2092: 1088: 2615:

proving that "Lillooet people" is the current most-common usage and that it somehow has a place supplanting the

2501:

pages and the Hydro cite and articles in media that use this term? And as for "local, parochial" this is about

584: 2141:? As for the Dineh, naming conventions for countries outside Canada do not apply on Canadian-topic articles. 1319: 1315: 1052: 952: 572: 3332: 1751:

the pronunciation in English orthographic terms, it's "out there" but you've completely ignored its existence.

876:

Yeah, I have an issue with using foreign orthography in English Knowledge, especially in titles. Those might

32: 3691: 897:

and also alternative media use the native-preferred form. As for the language, I'd say make it conform like

3705: 1206: 886: 564: 2073: 606: 387: 1368: 3461: 3443: 3424:

possible for you to admit mistakes without being patronizing and attacking the person pointing them out.

3411: 3305: 3055: 2941: 2790: 2777: 2708: 2591: 2553: 2541: 2482: 2466: 2334: 2226: 2137: 2024: 1702: 1589: 1523: 1484: 1348: 1282: 1227: 1219: 1116: 1098: 1012: 937: 867: 690: 656: 50: 3603:

t? Your replies are always so long I feel bad for not having nearly as enough to say in return. lol —

3406:

You know, when you find an error, it *is* possible to post a correction without throwing a tantrum. —

668: 2242:. Your own results are flawed for not considering these aspects of that search. The notion that the 2238: 1165: 2110: 2088: 1954: 1135: 781: 728:

Technically that's redundant, ilkewise on Secwepemc. "st'at'imc means "people of S'at", meaning the

3438:

I normally do. But your tantrum has been going on for nearly a week, and it's getting tiresome. —

3268: 1834: 629: 601: 2883:

Finally, as for these indigenous ethnonyms being "correct", here is a source I found interesting.

2848:, though perhaps to Stl'atl'imx rather than St'at'imc. This, Stl'atl'imx, is the name used by the 2743:

use. And in the St'at'imc Nation's view, and even moreso among radicals within their people, they

854: 212:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

105:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

81: 63: 3586: 3525: 3469: 3429: 3397: 3375: 3347: 3328: 3284: 3253: 3070: 3036: 3010: 2833: 2761: 2756:

and put Lillooet people/language in brackets and often will also say "formerly" instead of "aka".

2656: 2518: 2470: 2429: 2267: 2254:

usage, and the reliable sources for that are the media, particularly the local media such as the

2151: 1979: 1925: 1842: 1756: 1726: 1642: 1626: 1568: 1539: 1428: 1388: 1331: 1302: 1258: 1202: 1181: 1059: 978: 917: 882: 850: 842: 818: 709: 676: 637: 614: 568: 518: 2799:

Man, you got some kind of problem....nobody said non-Canadians should be banned from these RMs,

2739:

who have a power plant on Cayoosh Creek and have to deal with the bands on a regular basis what

2598:.....the way you people cherrypick apart and misinterpret/misrepesent citations without knowing 929:

I prefer Lillooet, but then I also like keeping the same word for the people & the language.

792:

have their own articles, partly because theyv'e become common uses in English, at least in BC.

2360:

lillooet.net or lillooet.ca. Those "St'at'imc/Stl'atl'imx (aka Lillooet people)" mentions are

2246:

are not a reliable source is highly questionable, also. Fact of the matter is, "St'at'imc" is

1946: 956: 745: 256: 2964: 2294:

Many ethnographers in the past have documented the history and culture of the Lillooet people.

2051: 1773: 1004: 948: 906: 902: 834: 765: 749: 2318:

decades of genocide and deceit, which continues to be perpetrated against the Lillooet people

2290:

Many ethnographers in the past have documented the history and culture of the Lillooet people

597: 3663: 3635: 3608: 3566: 3557: 3551: 3483: 3439: 3407: 3051: 2937: 2892: 2786: 2704: 2692: 2549: 2478: 2330: 2325: 2222: 2064: 2020: 2007: 1916: 1894: 1698: 1585: 1480: 1344: 1278: 1223: 1107: 933: 898: 863: 810: 797: 773: 686: 652: 3263:

For an example of current usage, and I didn't listen closely enough to see if they speaker

2888: 1885:

St'at'imc (own name in the own language) is better from Lillooet. But, who are the Líľwat (

3125:

First Peoples’ Cultural Council under Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation

2320:), Lillooet Indian Band (same text as T'it'q'et Administration above), and gordondick.ca ( 1863: 1149: 1132: 1008: 802: 757: 733: 441: 1806: 910: 826: 3648: 3619: 2905: 2862:

1. a member of an Aboriginal people living in southwestern BC, northeast of Vancouver.

2449: 2445: 2043: 1868: 1802: 1683: 3126: 1966:, and don't bitch that it's a map of native peoples with their native names; that's a 1743:

9 hours earlier than she is) and may have a citation for that.....but gee, Kwami, you

1115:

consensus here favors "St'at'imc". Arguments were made for "Lillooet people" based on

3724: 3709: 3695: 3582: 3521: 3465: 3425: 3393: 3371: 3343: 3324: 3280: 3249: 3066: 3032: 3006: 2829: 2757: 2682: 2652: 2514: 2425: 2263: 2169:

flawed. By limiting the results to English-language pages in Canadian domains, I got

2147: 2106: 1975: 1921: 1838: 1752: 1722: 1718: 1638: 1622: 1564: 1535: 1424: 1384: 1327: 1298: 1254: 1177: 974: 913: 846: 741: 705: 672: 633: 610: 550: 514: 502: 196: 2972: 1176:

English. Canadian English. CANENGL applies, and "strong national sentiment" also.

1127:

9 years ago until 6 months ago, the proposed title is the status quo. As such, I'll

17: 3595:

Well, it's an en transcription so it can't be the Turkish dotless i. It's like the

3295: 3149:

B.C. Language Initiative under Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation

2988: 2696: 2202: 2047: 1769: 1111: 814: 761: 533:

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all

315: 302: 284: 3150: 2461:

more article. Neither I nor anyone else has argued that the proposed title is not

2725:

St'at'imc regard it as offensive, mostly because "white people imposed it on them

2474: 2262:

and any number of government agencies and various organizations as already cited.

1311: 1153: 838: 822: 3659: 3631: 3604: 3562: 3479: 2563: 2545: 1912: 1890: 1550:"dodging the issue", no that's not me, Kwami, it's you. Proof that these words 493: 2967:(government/publicly-owned i.e. a government-type source) distinguishes in its 1357:

Three, actually, including the very-native Ucwalmicw. The history of how they

3667: 3653: 3639: 3624: 3612: 3590: 3570: 3529: 3487: 3473: 3447: 3433: 3415: 3401: 3379: 3351: 3304:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a

3288: 3257: 3074: 3059: 3040: 3014: 2945: 2909: 2837: 2803:, and that other Canadians here are well-familiar with these terms, and cites 2794: 2765: 2731:

now the accepted norm in official uses; ask the local MLA or MP or Mayor what

2712: 2660: 2638:....none of you do. This whole CfD was just to strip the diacriticals to the 2557: 2522: 2486: 2433: 2338: 2314:

aboriginal and treaty rights and to ensure continuation of the Lillooet People

2271: 2230: 2155: 2118: 2096: 2079: 2055: 2028: 1983: 1939: 1929: 1898: 1873: 1846: 1777: 1760: 1730: 1706: 1688: 1646: 1630: 1593: 1572: 1543: 1488: 1432: 1392: 1352: 1335: 1306: 1286: 1262: 1231: 1210: 1185: 1143: 1032: 1020: 982: 941: 921: 871: 789: 785: 713: 694: 680: 660: 641: 618: 553: 522: 186: 180: 153: 3101: 2780:

are frankly irrelevant here.) I also note that, despite your not giving me a

2258:

and the papers in Pemberton and Whistler where "St'at'imc" is used, plus the

1604:

inane as well as picayune. "Iqaluit" when used in English (as it constantly

1011:, which is actually even still completely unused? Have I missed something? -- 3213: 2971:

pages between (their term for their group is "Lil'wat7úl people") and and "

2901: 2736: 1859: 1406: 964: 769: 753: 407:

Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:

2623:

name that's too confusing to have remained current has been replaced by an

2308:), some guy's blog in which he researched ABOUT Teit, but not quoting him ( 2236:

people" and one that uses "Interior Salish or Lillooet people" is from the

1693:

Can you provide its English pronunciation? Skookum appears to be unable to.

1033:

CfR for St'at'imc category (removing diacriticals to make it easier to use)

947:

common use/reference (other than in BC) is in ethnology/linguistic - where

2976: 2408: 2132: 1830: 1810: 926:

I don't know about a proposal; probly not too many of us involved with it.

401:

Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups

3182: 2921:(not counting reprints of WP articles) and 25 hits for "Lillooet people". 2587: 1963: 1375:

the river and lake, is one reason they chose "St'at'imc" as more apt for

1249:

is an example from an article in today's British Columbia edition of the

314:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to 3089:

all the ground, including cites, I've already posted here and elsewhere.

2298:

The Fraser River Lillooet people refer to themselves as STLA'-tlei-mu-wh

3160: 1886: 1798: 1609: 1420: 793: 3230:

And if you’re looking for examples of usage of regionalism, go to the

2403:

that term to avoid confusion), the "Old Lillooet" of Mt Currie (which

368: 3555:

in casual speech, which sounds like a fairly reasonable reduction of

2457:

Huffington Post article that happens to use the name. You then found

2201:-- an even thinner margin. But Knowledge article titles are based on 1855: 1818: 1794: 1679: 845:. "Lillooet people", yeah, OK, but St'at'imc people is redundant.... 806: 777: 209: 3155:

The link on the this page doesn’t work, but here is a related link:

2473:

if some evidence were provided, but I will never support a move to

2600:

anything about the places in question or giving a s**t about what

1814: 1747:(or should) about the out-of-date anglicization "Statliumh" which 1475: 737: 2735:

use. Ask the regional district, ask the Ministry of Forests, or

1414:

norm in Canada. People can't pronounce Antigonish right either,

2421: 2417: 1584:

has a /q/. (The recent Canadian-English dictionary, maybe.) —

435: 3736:

Unknown-importance Indigenous peoples of North America articles

2477:, which should either be a disambiguation page or a redirect.) 1530:

and ask her what she uses in English-language articles and how

1383:

feel doesn't matter to you? I know I wouldn't think of it.....

2801:

only that Canadian English should prevail on Canadian articles

2284:

You looked at the LAST page of my results, not the first. The

1039: 26: 2928:

from 2009 has an entry for "Lillooet people", and Van Eijk's

3549:

It sounds like you're saying it's pronounced something like

3204:, see section 6. Under this Act is the establishment of the 1277:

You forgot the link to the actual example. I'm curious. —

255: 2721:

which is what St'at'imc has come to be used to replace it;

1964:

Pronunciation guide on map used by BC Ministry of Education

2649:

know anything about these people or the places in question

3704:

Needs thorough expansion/revision; government article is

3156: 2699:. Seriously. I will withdraw my oppose !vote if you meet 2424:

because that's "most common" even though it's a derisive.

2296:-- same as above, but still), The Canadian Encyclopedia ( 1793:

English and have been for a good twenty years and more.

1402: 700: 115:

Knowledge:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America

3741:

WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America articles

3731:

Start-Class Indigenous peoples of North America articles

1948:

Pronunciation Guide to First Nations in British Columbia

1608:, as noted (it's a well-known name, also the capital of 1087:

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a

118:

Template:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America

2957: 2586:

primary usage. Perhaps you'd care to support changing

1829:

and check it out. I suppose your position is that the

1399:

Upper St'at'imc Language, Culture and Education Society

1124: 1120: 3209: 2448:

move six months ago was inherently bad because it was

2063:- Per arguments on Canadian English, and in line with 1534:

pronounces it (she's white, her name is Wendy Fraser).

1196:

Is the Sacred for Sale: Tourism and Indigenous Peoples

821:('tin = people, qo = river, tsilh - red, red ochre). 3370:

hear, in a sort of old-fashioned kind of way, though.

3294:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a

2012: 488:

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

3212:, I think you will find this page most interesting: 2987:

I've just received a reply from author and reporter

2930:

The Lillooet Language: Phonology, Morphology, Syntax

1950:, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada 453:

Knowledge:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

426:

Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment

416:

Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action

208:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 93:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 3127:

http://www.gov.bc.ca/arr/cultural/fcf/language.html

3000:sites of the peoples themselves, I have yet to see 2776:mean that as a personal insult -- I just mean that 2540:, but not in English, and so is in accordance with 1101:. No further edits should be made to this section. 3308:. No further edits should be made to this section. 3200:There is a statute that guides British Columbia: 2932:from 2011 speaks of the "Lillooet people" as well. 2292:-- obviously recent and Canadian), St'at'imc.com ( 594:List of Canadian First Nations residential schools 348:This article has not yet received a rating on the 135:This article has not yet received a rating on the 3202:First Peoples’ Heritage, Language and Culture Act 2497:???? WTF? What the hell then are these peoples' 431:Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention 421:Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes 3456:and with obvious disdain for other peoples, and 2439:You don't seem to have learnt your lesson: I am 932:Either way, add /slætˈliːəm/ as the Eng pron? — 3694:, and are posted here for posterity. Following 3151:http://www.gov.bc.ca/arr/cultural/fcf/bcli.html 3024:Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 90:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America 3246:Category:Provincial parks of British Columbias 2165:The nominator's raw Google search results are 1785:"Not English" is totally wrong, it may not be 1501:names in Canada with a (if not a /q/). It's 963:(I mention Grand Forks because it's a heavily 581:Upper St'at'imc Language and Culture Authority 3690:The comment(s) below were originally left at 3314: 2885:The Kids Book of Aboriginal Peoples in Canada 2199:"st'at'imc people" -static -"lillooet people" 2183:"st'at'imc people" -static -"lillooet people" 1789:English, but these names are the new norm in 397:of articles within the scope of this project. 8: 3119:interest to this issue would be these pages— 121:Indigenous peoples of North America articles 1513:part of Canadian English, and that this is 1291:I didn't forget it, you didn't notice it. 30: 3102:http://maps.fphlcc.ca/language_index_other 529:"related groups" info removed from infobox 411:Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles 357: 279: 148: 58: 3776:Unknown-importance Ethnic groups articles 3214:http://www.fpcc.ca/about-us/Publications/ 3208:. The website for the Crown Corporation: 2864:2. the Salishan language of this people. 2288:includes the In-SHUCK-ch Nation website ( 1958:, BC Ministry of Education, resource docs 1600:YOU are the one being irrational, Kwami, 609:article by now...or not? OK, g'nite..... 511:Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment 3761:Mid-importance British Columbia articles 3718:Substituted at 05:16, 13 May 2016 (UTC) 1827:List of aboriginal place names in Canada 1526:, why don't you write the editor of the 3232:Protected Areas of British Columbia Act 2495:"Reluctant to provide reliable sources" 2205:, not random Google hits: GScholar had 1833:article should be moved to the archaic 1801:aren't "normal" English either, nor is 543:infoboxes. Comments may be left on the 509:Above undated message substituted from 281: 150: 60: 3751:Mid-importance Canada-related articles 3183:http://www.languagegeek.com/index.html 2815:acknowledging cites already presented 2778:the opinions of individual Wikipedians 2544:and similarly "redundant" titles like 2304:), First Nations Employment Security ( 2302:the St'át'imc or Upper Lillooet people 3756:Start-Class British Columbia articles 3556: 3550: 3315:where'd this come from? = Sƛ’aƛ’imxǝc 2505:usage, not about Lillooet-area usage 2219:"st'at'imc people" -"lillooet people" 2211:"lillooet people" -"st'at'imc people" 2191:"lillooet people" -"st'at'imc people" 2175:"lillooet people" -"st'at'imc people" 2006: 361:WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: 7: 3458:for the peoples described themselves 3161:http://maps.fphlcc.ca/language_index 2414:and that's why the change came about 1970:in English-language education in BC. 1887:http://www.firstvoices.com/en/Lilwat 590:List of Canadian residential schools 308:This article is within the scope of 202:This article is within the scope of 87:This article is within the scope of 3746:Start-Class Canada-related articles 2548:(literally "human beings people"). 2002:Stl'atl'imc, Stl'atl'imx, St'át'imc 760:are an exception to paradimgs like 328:Knowledge:WikiProject Ethnic groups 112:Indigenous peoples of North America 103:indigenous peoples of North America 70:Indigenous peoples of North America 49:It is of interest to the following 3781:WikiProject Ethnic groups articles 3771:Start-Class Ethnic groups articles 3599:in wit. Do you mean it's like in w 3505:when he can't admit a mistake and 2562:There's good reason articles like 1518:and follow the news you'd know it 744:vs Nk'walamx or whatever it is in 577:Upper St'at'imc Language Authority 331:Template:WikiProject Ethnic groups 25: 3696:several discussions in past years 2868:usage: Formerly called Lillooet. 2312:), the T'it'q'et Administration ( 723: 571:redirects, and agencies like the 2926:Dictionary of Upriver Halkomelem 1324:Lower Stl'atl'imx Tribal Council 1160:, "Lillooet people" yields only 1043: 748:or whatever that dialect of the 559:notes for later; needed articles 492: 367: 301: 283: 189: 179: 152: 80: 62: 31: 3275:today (on FB) and NB the signs 3206:First Peoples’ Cultural Council 1253:, which is not "hardly anyone". 1063:You are encouraged to join the 805:, the English usage. Likewise 242:This article has been rated as 2955:First Peoples Cultural Council 1909:Mount Currie, British Columbia 1821:, yet these are all common in 1058:deletion, merging, or renaming 1: 2042:- Concurring strongly with 1495:doesn't mean it's not English 1131:the article to "St'at'imc".. 1021:18:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC) 1007:title to the reader-friendly 983:17:41, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 942:10:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 922:09:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 872:09:18, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 855:07:10, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 714:20:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 695:09:09, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 681:07:10, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 661:01:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 619:07:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC) 322:and see a list of open tasks. 264:This article is supported by 216:and see a list of open tasks. 109:and see a list of open tasks. 3766:All WikiProject Canada pages 2991:, who used to write for the 2469:? I might support a move to 730:Bridge River Fishing Grounds 642:16:43, 3 November 2008 (UTC) 523:10:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC) 267:WikiProject British Columbia 222:Knowledge:WikiProject Canada 99:Indigenous peoples in Canada 3460:. Give it a rest, troll. 3159:and specific to languages: 2378:natives alone using it are 2322:St'at'imc (Lillooet people) 1397:On one of the pages at the 1314:, and note it mentions the 825:'s language counterpart is 624:Diacriticals in FN catnames 225:Template:WikiProject Canada 3797: 3386:Lillooet, British Columbia 3273:Bridge River-Lillooet News 2851:Canadian Oxford Dictionary 2651:. Give your head a shake. 2590:to its "most common" form 2300:-- nuff said), UBC Press ( 2256:Bridge River-Lillooet News 1618:Bridge River-Lillooet News 1528:Bridge River-Lillooet News 1505:who continue to evade the 585:Aboriginal law enforcement 350:project's importance scale 248:project's importance scale 137:project's importance scale 3703: 3492:It's not uncalled-for at 2858:Stl'atl'imx /ˈstatliːəm/ 1320:Stl'atl'imx Tribal Police 1316:St'at'imc Hydro Agreement 1110:issue, so per ENGVAR and 1071:Categories for discussion 1053:Category:Category:Sťáťimc 953:Stl'at'limx Tribal Police 630:this on the CFD talklpage 573:Stl'atl'imx Tribal Police 374:WikiProject Ethnic groups 356: 347: 311:WikiProject Ethnic groups 296: 263: 241: 174: 134: 75: 57: 3668:00:03, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 3654:23:59, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3640:18:40, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3625:18:36, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3613:15:32, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3591:14:09, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3571:12:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3530:12:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3488:11:52, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3474:07:02, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3448:05:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3434:05:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3416:05:07, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 3402:08:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC) 3380:08:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC) 3352:08:11, 15 May 2013 (UTC) 3333:08:09, 15 May 2013 (UTC) 3301:Please do not modify it. 3289:03:05, 24 May 2013 (UTC) 3258:06:44, 22 May 2013 (UTC) 3075:09:41, 21 May 2013 (UTC) 3060:06:38, 21 May 2013 (UTC) 3041:06:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC) 3015:06:12, 21 May 2013 (UTC) 2946:15:59, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 2910:10:01, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 2838:07:09, 18 May 2013 (UTC) 2795:23:56, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 2766:08:52, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 2713:08:24, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 2661:08:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 2574:that St'at'imc is given 2558:07:40, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 2523:07:32, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 2487:07:19, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 2434:05:10, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 2339:04:24, 17 May 2013 (UTC) 2272:04:45, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 2231:04:21, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 2156:03:10, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 2119:02:46, 16 May 2013 (UTC) 2097:17:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2080:17:26, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2056:11:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 2029:11:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 1984:09:41, 14 May 2013 (UTC) 1930:19:12, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1899:17:13, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1874:17:05, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1847:10:02, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1778:09:44, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1761:05:15, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1731:00:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1707:22:39, 12 May 2013 (UTC) 1689:23:51, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 1647:00:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1631:04:45, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1594:22:33, 12 May 2013 (UTC) 1573:04:53, 13 May 2013 (UTC) 1544:10:14, 12 May 2013 (UTC) 1489:09:41, 12 May 2013 (UTC) 1433:08:54, 12 May 2013 (UTC) 1393:08:43, 12 May 2013 (UTC) 1353:06:43, 12 May 2013 (UTC) 1336:09:23, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 1307:08:12, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 1287:07:39, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 1263:06:55, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 1232:06:01, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 1211:01:49, 11 May 2013 (UTC) 1186:13:03, 10 May 2013 (UTC) 1144:20:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC) 1094:Please do not modify it. 554:21:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC) 3706:Lillooet Tribal Council 3692:Talk:Stʼatʼimc/Comments 1676:Support move to restore 1509:point that these terms 1056:has been nominated for 887:Lillooet Tribal Council 565:Lillooet Tribal Council 546:Ethnic groups talk page 228:Canada-related articles 3157:http://maps.fphlcc.ca/ 2975:". The same site has 2870: 2630:the only one here who 2343:What I said was Kwami 1968:fact of the curriculum 607:Mohawk Warrior Society 334:Ethnic groups articles 260: 39:This article is rated 2856: 2420:should be changed to 2345:sounded like a racist 2138:Catholic Encyclopedia 501:. Student editor(s): 259: 3454:without consultation 2538:a different language 782:Bella Coola language 592:(or to be specific, 538:Infobox Ethnic group 18:Talk:Lillooet people 3517:which is one reason 3210:http://www.fpcc.ca/ 2874:Inuit, Micmac-: --> 2609:highly questionable 2527:I see sources that 2511:extremely parochial 2397:no vagueness at ALL 1956:Pronunciation Guide 1552:are used in English 1312:here is another one 685:I meant the IPA. — 466:discuss these tasks 372:Here are some open 3686:Assessment comment 3392:IPA - /ˈlɪloʊ.ɛt/. 3279:using "St'at'imc". 3271:was posted by the 2973:Northern St'at'imc 2809:each and every one 2807:been provided for 2592:Bella Bella people 2000:For this article, 1166:Category:St'at'imc 819:Chilcotin language 724:"St'at'imc people" 499:on the course page 449:Start an article: 261: 205:WikiProject Canada 45:content assessment 3716: 3715: 2965:crown corporation 2244:people themselves 2111:John Pack Lambert 1768:. Not English. -- 1141: 1077: 1076: 949:Lillooet language 907:Lillooet language 903:Thompson language 835:Lillooet language 766:Thompson language 750:Thompson language 669:Talk:St'at'imcets 485: 484: 481: 480: 477: 476: 473: 472: 278: 277: 274: 273: 147: 146: 143: 142: 16:(Redirected from 3788: 3712:(20 February 06) 3701: 3700: 3651: 3622: 3560: 3554: 3323:name? Citation? 3303: 2981: 2980: 2697:reliable sources 2596:thirty years ago 2594:?? Most common 2542:Knowledge policy 2471:St'at'imc people 2239:St'at'imc Runner 2203:reliable sources 2015: 2010: 1917:Pemberton Valley 1871: 1686: 1497:....and there's 1139: 1096: 1047: 1046: 1040: 1037:Please note/see 1013:Florian Blaschke 899:Shuswap language 883:St'at'imc Nation 843:St'at'imc people 811:Carrier language 798:Gitxsan language 774:Shuswap language 569:St'at'imc Nation 542: 536: 525: 496: 395:on the talk page 392: 386: 371: 358: 336: 335: 332: 329: 326: 305: 298: 297: 287: 280: 230: 229: 226: 223: 220: 199: 194: 193: 192: 183: 176: 175: 170: 167: 165:British Columbia 156: 149: 123: 122: 119: 116: 113: 95:Native Americans 84: 77: 76: 66: 59: 42: 36: 35: 27: 21: 3796: 3795: 3791: 3790: 3789: 3787: 3786: 3785: 3721: 3720: 3688: 3649: 3620: 3340: 3317: 3312: 3299: 2873:as Eskimo-: --> 2316:), Saul Terry ( 2126:Referred to by 2077: 2048:Kudpung กุดผึ้ง 2013: 1869: 1864:Lake Okeechobee 1684: 1614:which I did not 1560:pertinent point 1251:Huffington Post 1192:Support restore 1158:200,000 results 1150:Lillooet people 1092: 1082: 1044: 1035: 1009:Lillooet people 803:Coast Tsimshian 758:Coast Tsimshian 734:Okanagan people 726: 649: 626: 561: 540: 534: 531: 508: 490: 442:Peruvian people 390: 384: 333: 330: 327: 324: 323: 227: 224: 221: 218: 217: 195: 190: 188: 168: 162: 120: 117: 114: 111: 110: 43:on Knowledge's 40: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 3794: 3792: 3784: 3783: 3778: 3773: 3768: 3763: 3758: 3753: 3748: 3743: 3738: 3733: 3723: 3722: 3714: 3713: 3687: 3684: 3683: 3682: 3681: 3680: 3679: 3678: 3677: 3676: 3675: 3674: 3673: 3672: 3671: 3670: 3547: 3546: 3545: 3544: 3543: 3542: 3541: 3540: 3539: 3538: 3537: 3536: 3535: 3534: 3533: 3532: 3339: 3336: 3316: 3313: 3311: 3310: 3296:requested move 3291: 3241: 3240: 3239: 3238: 3237: 3236: 3222: 3221: 3220: 3219: 3218: 3217: 3192: 3191: 3190: 3189: 3188: 3187: 3172: 3171: 3170: 3169: 3168: 3167: 3166: 3165: 3164: 3163: 3153: 3138: 3137: 3136: 3135: 3134: 3133: 3132: 3131: 3130: 3129: 3110: 3109: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3105: 3091: 3090: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3044: 3043: 3017: 2982: 2948: 2865: 2863: 2859: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2840: 2797: 2679: 2678: 2677: 2676: 2675: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2671: 2670: 2669: 2668: 2667: 2666: 2665: 2664: 2467:WP:ETHNICGROUP 2277: 2276: 2275: 2274: 2160: 2159: 2158: 2100: 2082: 2071: 2058: 2044:User:Montanabw 2036: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2032: 2031: 1998: 1989: 1988: 1987: 1986: 1971: 1961: 1952: 1934: 1933: 1932: 1880: 1879: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1803:Nuu-chah-nulth 1763: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1694: 1674: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1657: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1652: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1635: 1634: 1633: 1581: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1436: 1435: 1341: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1265: 1220:WP:COMMONALITY 1213: 1147: 1117:WP:COMMONALITY 1104: 1103: 1089:requested move 1083: 1081: 1080:Requested move 1078: 1075: 1074: 1048: 1034: 1031: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 994: 993: 992: 991: 990: 989: 988: 987: 986: 985: 930: 927: 725: 722: 721: 720: 719: 718: 717: 716: 699:You might try 648: 647:pronunciations 645: 625: 622: 560: 557: 530: 527: 489: 486: 483: 482: 479: 478: 475: 474: 471: 470: 462:edit this list 458: 457: 456: 455: 447: 446: 445: 438: 433: 428: 423: 418: 413: 405: 404: 403: 398: 363: 362: 354: 353: 346: 340: 339: 337: 320:the discussion 306: 294: 293: 288: 276: 275: 272: 271: 262: 252: 251: 244:Mid-importance 240: 234: 233: 231: 214:the discussion 201: 200: 184: 172: 171: 169:Mid‑importance 157: 145: 144: 141: 140: 133: 127: 126: 124: 107:the discussion 101:, and related 85: 73: 72: 67: 55: 54: 48: 37: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3793: 3782: 3779: 3777: 3774: 3772: 3769: 3767: 3764: 3762: 3759: 3757: 3754: 3752: 3749: 3747: 3744: 3742: 3739: 3737: 3734: 3732: 3729: 3728: 3726: 3719: 3711: 3707: 3702: 3699: 3697: 3693: 3685: 3669: 3665: 3661: 3657: 3656: 3655: 3652: 3645: 3644: 3643: 3642: 3641: 3637: 3633: 3628: 3627: 3626: 3623: 3616: 3615: 3614: 3610: 3606: 3602: 3598: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3588: 3584: 3580: 3575: 3574: 3573: 3572: 3568: 3564: 3559: 3553: 3531: 3527: 3523: 3518: 3513: 3508: 3503: 3499: 3495: 3491: 3490: 3489: 3485: 3481: 3477: 3476: 3475: 3471: 3467: 3463: 3459: 3455: 3451: 3450: 3449: 3445: 3441: 3437: 3436: 3435: 3431: 3427: 3423: 3420:You know, it 3419: 3418: 3417: 3413: 3409: 3405: 3404: 3403: 3399: 3395: 3391: 3388:page has the 3387: 3383: 3382: 3381: 3377: 3373: 3369: 3365: 3361: 3356: 3355: 3354: 3353: 3349: 3345: 3337: 3335: 3334: 3330: 3326: 3322: 3309: 3307: 3302: 3297: 3292: 3290: 3286: 3282: 3278: 3274: 3270: 3266: 3262: 3261: 3260: 3259: 3255: 3251: 3247: 3235: 3233: 3228: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3224: 3223: 3216: 3215: 3211: 3207: 3203: 3198: 3197: 3196: 3195: 3194: 3193: 3186: 3184: 3178: 3177: 3176: 3175: 3174: 3173: 3162: 3158: 3154: 3152: 3148: 3147: 3146: 3145: 3144: 3143: 3142: 3141: 3140: 3139: 3128: 3124: 3123: 3122: 3121: 3120: 3116: 3115: 3114: 3113: 3112: 3111: 3104: 3103: 3097: 3096: 3095: 3094: 3093: 3092: 3087: 3084: 3083: 3076: 3072: 3068: 3063: 3062: 3061: 3057: 3053: 3048: 3047: 3046: 3045: 3042: 3038: 3034: 3030: 3025: 3021: 3018: 3016: 3012: 3008: 3003: 2999: 2994: 2993:Vancouver Sun 2990: 2986: 2983: 2978: 2974: 2970: 2966: 2963:, which is a 2962: 2961: 2956: 2952: 2949: 2947: 2943: 2939: 2934: 2931: 2927: 2923: 2920: 2917: 2914: 2913: 2912: 2911: 2907: 2903: 2899: 2894: 2890: 2886: 2881: 2879: 2869: 2866: 2860: 2855: 2853: 2852: 2847: 2839: 2835: 2831: 2827: 2823: 2818: 2814: 2810: 2806: 2802: 2798: 2796: 2792: 2788: 2783: 2779: 2775: 2770: 2769: 2768: 2767: 2763: 2759: 2753: 2749: 2744: 2740: 2738: 2732: 2728: 2724: 2720: 2716: 2715: 2714: 2710: 2706: 2702: 2698: 2694: 2689: 2684: 2663: 2662: 2658: 2654: 2648: 2644: 2640:English usage 2639: 2635: 2631: 2626: 2622: 2618: 2614: 2610: 2605: 2601: 2597: 2593: 2589: 2585: 2581: 2577: 2573: 2569: 2568:don't have it 2565: 2561: 2560: 2559: 2555: 2551: 2547: 2543: 2539: 2534: 2530: 2526: 2525: 2524: 2520: 2516: 2512: 2508: 2504: 2500: 2496: 2493: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2484: 2480: 2476: 2472: 2468: 2464: 2460: 2455: 2451: 2447: 2442: 2438: 2437: 2436: 2435: 2431: 2427: 2423: 2419: 2413: 2410: 2406: 2402: 2398: 2393: 2389: 2385: 2381: 2376: 2372: 2367: 2363: 2359: 2355: 2351: 2346: 2342: 2341: 2340: 2336: 2332: 2327: 2323: 2319: 2315: 2311: 2307: 2303: 2299: 2295: 2291: 2287: 2283: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2279: 2278: 2273: 2269: 2265: 2261: 2260:Vancouver Sun 2257: 2253: 2249: 2245: 2241: 2240: 2234: 2233: 2232: 2228: 2224: 2220: 2216: 2212: 2208: 2204: 2200: 2196: 2192: 2188: 2184: 2180: 2176: 2172: 2168: 2164: 2161: 2157: 2153: 2149: 2144: 2140: 2139: 2134: 2129: 2125: 2122: 2121: 2120: 2116: 2112: 2108: 2107:Navajo people 2104: 2103:Strong oppose 2101: 2098: 2094: 2090: 2086: 2083: 2081: 2075: 2070: 2066: 2062: 2059: 2057: 2053: 2049: 2045: 2041: 2038: 2037: 2030: 2026: 2022: 2018: 2017: 2009: 2003: 1999: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1992: 1991: 1990: 1985: 1981: 1977: 1972: 1969: 1965: 1962: 1959: 1957: 1953: 1951: 1949: 1945: 1944: 1941: 1938: 1935: 1931: 1927: 1923: 1918: 1914: 1910: 1905: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1896: 1892: 1888: 1884: 1881: 1875: 1872: 1865: 1861: 1857: 1853: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1844: 1840: 1836: 1835:Nishga people 1832: 1828: 1824: 1820: 1816: 1812: 1808: 1807:Kwakwaka'wakw 1804: 1800: 1796: 1792: 1788: 1784: 1781: 1780: 1779: 1775: 1771: 1767: 1764: 1762: 1758: 1754: 1750: 1746: 1741: 1738: 1737: 1732: 1728: 1724: 1720: 1719:Sto:lo people 1715: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1704: 1700: 1695: 1692: 1691: 1690: 1687: 1681: 1677: 1648: 1644: 1640: 1636: 1632: 1628: 1624: 1619: 1615: 1611: 1607: 1603: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1596: 1595: 1591: 1587: 1582: 1578: 1574: 1570: 1566: 1561: 1557: 1553: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1545: 1541: 1537: 1533: 1529: 1525: 1521: 1516: 1512: 1511:are very much 1508: 1504: 1500: 1496: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1486: 1482: 1477: 1472: 1471: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1463: 1462: 1461: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1453: 1434: 1430: 1426: 1422: 1417: 1413: 1408: 1404: 1400: 1396: 1395: 1394: 1390: 1386: 1382: 1378: 1374: 1370: 1365: 1360: 1356: 1355: 1354: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1339: 1338: 1337: 1333: 1329: 1325: 1321: 1317: 1313: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1304: 1300: 1296: 1295: 1290: 1289: 1288: 1284: 1280: 1276: 1275: 1274: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1270: 1269: 1264: 1260: 1256: 1252: 1248: 1247: 1242: 1241:Vancouver Sun 1238: 1235: 1234: 1233: 1229: 1225: 1221: 1217: 1214: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1203:In ictu oculi 1201: 1197: 1193: 1190: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1183: 1179: 1175: 1171: 1167: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1146: 1145: 1142: 1136: 1134: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1118: 1113: 1109: 1102: 1100: 1095: 1090: 1085: 1084: 1079: 1072: 1068: 1067: 1062: 1061: 1055: 1054: 1049: 1042: 1041: 1038: 1022: 1018: 1014: 1010: 1006: 1002: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 995: 984: 980: 976: 971: 966: 962: 958: 954: 950: 945: 944: 943: 939: 935: 931: 928: 925: 924: 923: 919: 915: 912: 908: 904: 900: 896: 892: 888: 884: 879: 875: 874: 873: 869: 865: 861: 860: 859: 858: 857: 856: 852: 848: 844: 840: 836: 832: 828: 824: 820: 816: 812: 808: 804: 799: 795: 791: 787: 783: 779: 775: 771: 767: 763: 759: 755: 751: 747: 743: 742:Nicola people 739: 735: 731: 715: 711: 707: 702: 698: 697: 696: 692: 688: 684: 683: 682: 678: 674: 670: 665: 664: 663: 662: 658: 654: 646: 644: 643: 639: 635: 631: 623: 621: 620: 616: 612: 608: 603: 602:T'oti:ihl'tet 599: 595: 591: 586: 582: 578: 574: 570: 566: 558: 556: 555: 552: 548: 547: 539: 528: 526: 524: 520: 516: 512: 506: 504: 500: 495: 487: 469: 467: 463: 460:Feel free to 454: 451: 450: 448: 444: 443: 439: 437: 434: 432: 429: 427: 424: 422: 419: 417: 414: 412: 409: 408: 406: 402: 399: 396: 389: 388:Ethnic groups 382: 381: 379: 378: 377: 375: 370: 365: 364: 360: 359: 355: 351: 345: 342: 341: 338: 325:Ethnic groups 321: 317: 316:ethnic groups 313: 312: 307: 304: 300: 299: 295: 292: 291:Ethnic groups 289: 286: 282: 269: 268: 258: 254: 253: 249: 245: 239: 236: 235: 232: 215: 211: 207: 206: 198: 197:Canada portal 187: 185: 182: 178: 177: 173: 166: 161: 158: 155: 151: 138: 132: 129: 128: 125: 108: 104: 100: 96: 92: 91: 86: 83: 79: 78: 74: 71: 68: 65: 61: 56: 52: 46: 38: 34: 29: 28: 19: 3717: 3689: 3600: 3596: 3578: 3548: 3516: 3511: 3506: 3501: 3497: 3493: 3457: 3453: 3421: 3389: 3367: 3363: 3359: 3341: 3338:IPA is wrong 3320: 3318: 3300: 3293: 3276: 3272: 3264: 3242: 3229: 3199: 3179: 3117: 3098: 3085: 3028: 3019: 3001: 2997: 2992: 2989:Terry Glavin 2984: 2969:First Voices 2968: 2959: 2950: 2929: 2925: 2915: 2897: 2884: 2882: 2871: 2867: 2861: 2857: 2849: 2846:Support move 2845: 2844: 2825: 2821: 2816: 2812: 2808: 2804: 2800: 2781: 2773: 2755: 2751: 2746: 2742: 2734: 2730: 2726: 2722: 2718: 2700: 2687: 2650: 2646: 2645:use the term 2641: 2637: 2636:all the time 2633: 2628: 2624: 2620: 2616: 2612: 2608: 2603: 2599: 2595: 2583: 2579: 2575: 2571: 2567: 2537: 2532: 2528: 2510: 2506: 2502: 2498: 2494: 2491: 2462: 2458: 2453: 2440: 2415: 2411: 2404: 2400: 2396: 2391: 2387: 2383: 2379: 2374: 2370: 2365: 2361: 2357: 2353: 2349: 2344: 2321: 2317: 2313: 2309: 2305: 2301: 2297: 2293: 2289: 2259: 2255: 2251: 2250:the current 2247: 2243: 2237: 2218: 2210: 2198: 2190: 2182: 2174: 2167:dramatically 2166: 2162: 2142: 2136: 2127: 2123: 2102: 2084: 2068: 2061:Support move 2060: 2040:Support move 2039: 2008:/ˈstætli.əm/ 2001: 1967: 1955: 1947: 1936: 1903: 1882: 1851: 1822: 1790: 1786: 1782: 1765: 1748: 1744: 1739: 1713: 1675: 1617: 1613: 1605: 1601: 1559: 1555: 1551: 1531: 1527: 1519: 1514: 1510: 1506: 1502: 1498: 1494: 1415: 1412:and expected 1411: 1380: 1376: 1372: 1369:WP:MOSFOLLOW 1363: 1358: 1297:it is again. 1293: 1250: 1245: 1240: 1236: 1215: 1199: 1195: 1191: 1173: 1169: 1148: 1128: 1125:its creation 1105: 1093: 1086: 1064: 1057: 1051: 1050:The related 1036: 969: 960: 911:St'at'imcets 894: 890: 885:rather than 877: 830: 827:St'at'imcets 727: 650: 627: 567:page (where 562: 544: 532: 507: 491: 459: 440: 394: 380:Meta-tasks: 366: 309: 265: 243: 203: 88: 51:WikiProjects 3558:/ˈlɪloʊ.ɛt/ 3462:WP:Crow pie 3306:move review 3031:heed....... 2787:Hitomaro742 2705:Hitomaro742 2578:because it 2566:and others 2564:Anishinaabe 2550:Hitomaro742 2546:Ainu people 2479:Hitomaro742 2352:trivial to 2331:Hitomaro742 2223:Hitomaro742 2213:, and only 2109:, not Dine. 2069:OwainDavies 1913:Lakes Route 1837:, too, huh? 1377:all of them 1099:move review 1005:non-English 815:Tsilhqot'in 762:Nlaka'pamux 628:Please see 579:(it may be 41:Start-class 3725:Categories 3658:Jaysus. — 3552:/ˈlɪlɵwɪt/ 3277:in English 3269:this video 2998:government 2936:helps.) — 2719:inaccurate 2392:government 2286:FIRST page 2078:edited at 1940:User:Capmo 1133:Cúchullain 1066:discussion 961:in English 909:? ie. for 889:, and the 790:Halkomelem 704:though.... 383:Place the 3650:Montanabw 3621:Montanabw 2977:Secwepemc 2822:ignore it 2737:Fortis BC 2693:WP:ENGVAR 2625:authentic 2475:St'at'imc 2454:obviously 2326:WP:ENGVAR 2181:hits for 2173:hits for 2065:WP:ENGVAR 1870:Montanabw 1860:Minnesota 1685:Montanabw 1621:yourself. 1580:unproven. 1507:very real 1423:, either. 1407:this page 1154:St'at'imc 1108:WP:ENGVAR 965:Doukhobor 957:Ucwalmicw 839:St'at'imc 823:St'at'imc 786:Kwak'wala 784:; though 770:Secwepemc 754:Tsimshian 746:Scwex'emx 393:template 3710:Skookum1 3583:Skookum1 3522:Skookum1 3466:Skookum1 3426:Skookum1 3394:Skookum1 3372:Skookum1 3344:Skookum1 3325:Skookum1 3281:Skookum1 3250:Skookum1 3067:Skookum1 3033:Skookum1 3007:Skookum1 2958:website 2830:Skookum1 2826:SUPPOSED 2758:Skookum1 2653:Skookum1 2613:anything 2588:Heiltsuk 2515:Skookum1 2503:Canadian 2426:Skookum1 2384:anything 2264:Skookum1 2148:Skookum1 1976:Skookum1 1974:speech)? 1922:Skookum1 1839:Skookum1 1823:Canadian 1791:Canadian 1753:Skookum1 1723:Skookum1 1639:Skookum1 1623:Skookum1 1565:Skookum1 1536:Skookum1 1515:Canadian 1425:Skookum1 1385:Skookum1 1328:Skookum1 1322:and the 1299:Skookum1 1255:Skookum1 1178:Skookum1 975:Skookum1 914:Skookum1 895:Provicne 847:Skookum1 829:and you 706:Skookum1 673:Skookum1 634:Skookum1 611:Skookum1 551:Ling.Nut 515:PrimeBOT 503:Lisannet 3390:correct 3360:between 3086:Comment 3020:Comment 2985:Comment 2951:Comment 2916:Comment 2893:page 13 2617:correct 2572:obvious 2450:WP:BOLD 2446:WP:BOLD 2409:Lil'wat 2252:correct 2143:Correct 2133:Lil'wat 2124:Comment 2085:Support 2016:-lee-əm 1937:Comment 1883:Support 1852:Comment 1831:Nisga'a 1811:Mi'kmaq 1799:Gingolx 1783:Comment 1770:JorisvS 1740:Comment 1610:Nunavut 1522:. But 1421:Iqaluit 1403:website 1174:this IS 1170:without 1069:on the 794:Gitxsan 598:U'mista 376:tasks: 246:on the 3660:Lfdder 3632:Lfdder 3605:Lfdder 3563:Lfdder 3480:Lfdder 3321:people 3029:should 2889:page 5 2782:single 2683:WP:AGF 2621:native 2584:MODERN 2492:Reply' 2401:avoids 2375:should 2366:looked 2163:Oppose 2128:whom?? 1891:Kmoksy 1856:caucus 1819:Sto:lo 1766:Oppose 1680:Munich 1359:became 1216:Oppose 973:sound. 807:Dakelh 778:Nuxalk 219:Canada 210:Canada 160:Canada 47:scale. 3507:still 3440:kwami 3408:kwami 3364:schwa 3052:kwami 2938:kwami 2754:first 2576:first 2507:alone 2388:their 2089:olive 2021:kwami 1904:Reply 1889:)? -- 1815:Inuit 1795:'Ksan 1699:kwami 1586:kwami 1499:other 1481:kwami 1476:Paris 1345:kwami 1279:kwami 1237:Reply 1224:kwami 1198:2012 1162:5,130 1121:moved 1112:WP:AT 1073:page. 934:kwami 864:kwami 740:) or 738:Syilx 687:kwami 653:kwami 3664:talk 3636:talk 3609:talk 3587:talk 3567:talk 3561:. — 3526:talk 3484:talk 3470:talk 3444:talk 3430:talk 3412:talk 3398:talk 3384:The 3376:talk 3348:talk 3329:talk 3285:talk 3265:says 3254:talk 3071:talk 3056:talk 3037:talk 3011:talk 2960:HERE 2953:The 2942:talk 2906:talk 2902:Pfly 2878:here 2834:talk 2805:have 2791:talk 2762:talk 2750:also 2741:they 2733:they 2723:some 2709:talk 2657:talk 2632:does 2602:they 2582:the 2554:talk 2519:talk 2483:talk 2463:used 2430:talk 2422:Lapp 2418:Sami 2373:say 2335:talk 2268:talk 2227:talk 2217:for 2209:for 2197:for 2193:and 2189:for 2177:and 2152:talk 2146:now? 2115:talk 2093:talk 2074:talk 2052:talk 2025:talk 2014:STAT 1980:talk 1926:talk 1895:talk 1843:talk 1797:and 1787:your 1774:talk 1757:talk 1745:know 1727:talk 1703:talk 1643:talk 1627:talk 1590:talk 1569:talk 1540:talk 1524:here 1520:does 1485:talk 1429:talk 1389:talk 1381:they 1364:also 1349:talk 1332:talk 1303:talk 1294:Here 1283:talk 1259:talk 1246:Here 1228:talk 1218:per 1207:talk 1182:talk 1129:move 1017:talk 979:talk 938:talk 918:talk 901:and 893:and 878:look 868:talk 851:talk 813:and 796:and 788:and 756:and 736:(vs 710:talk 701:here 691:talk 677:talk 657:talk 638:talk 615:talk 600:and 575:and 519:talk 436:Iyer 3579:are 3502:him 3498:his 3494:all 3298:. 3002:any 2898:now 2817:and 2813:not 2774:not 2745:are 2729:are 2701:any 2688:any 2647:or 2604:use 2529:use 2499:own 2459:one 2441:not 2380:ALL 2371:you 2362:not 2358:not 2350:not 2248:now 2195:186 2187:160 2179:136 1817:or 1813:or 1809:or 1805:or 1714:not 1602:and 1556:are 1532:she 1503:YOU 1401:'s 1373:and 891:Sun 841:to 817:vs 776:or 671:. 513:by 464:or 344:??? 238:Mid 131:??? 3727:: 3708:-- 3666:) 3638:) 3611:) 3589:) 3569:) 3528:) 3512:do 3486:) 3472:) 3446:) 3432:) 3422:is 3414:) 3400:) 3378:) 3368:do 3362:a 3350:) 3331:) 3287:) 3256:) 3073:) 3058:) 3039:) 3013:) 2944:) 2908:) 2900:. 2836:) 2793:) 2764:) 2711:) 2659:) 2580:is 2556:) 2533:no 2521:) 2485:) 2432:) 2405:is 2354:us 2337:) 2270:) 2229:) 2221:. 2215:16 2207:60 2171:97 2154:) 2117:) 2095:) 2067:. 2054:) 2046:. 2027:) 1982:) 1928:) 1897:) 1862:, 1858:, 1845:) 1776:) 1759:) 1749:is 1729:) 1705:) 1645:) 1629:) 1606:is 1592:) 1571:) 1542:) 1487:) 1431:) 1416:or 1391:) 1351:) 1334:) 1305:) 1285:) 1261:) 1230:) 1209:) 1184:) 1152:→ 1091:. 1019:) 981:) 970:be 940:) 920:) 870:) 853:) 831:do 768:, 712:) 693:) 679:) 659:) 640:) 617:) 549:. 541:}} 535:{{ 521:) 505:. 468:. 391:}} 385:{{ 163:: 97:, 3662:( 3634:( 3607:( 3601:e 3597:i 3585:( 3565:( 3524:( 3482:( 3468:( 3464:. 3442:( 3428:( 3410:( 3396:( 3374:( 3346:( 3327:( 3283:( 3252:( 3069:( 3054:( 3035:( 3009:( 2940:( 2904:( 2832:( 2789:( 2760:( 2707:( 2655:( 2552:( 2517:( 2513:. 2481:( 2428:( 2407:" 2333:( 2266:( 2225:( 2150:( 2113:( 2099:) 2091:( 2076:) 2072:( 2050:( 2023:( 2005:" 1978:( 1960:. 1924:( 1893:( 1841:( 1772:( 1755:( 1725:( 1701:( 1641:( 1625:( 1588:( 1567:( 1538:( 1483:( 1427:( 1387:( 1347:( 1330:( 1326:. 1301:( 1281:( 1257:( 1226:( 1205:( 1180:( 1140:c 1137:/ 1060:. 1015:( 977:( 936:( 916:( 866:( 849:( 809:/ 780:/ 772:/ 764:/ 708:( 689:( 675:( 655:( 636:( 632:. 613:( 517:( 352:. 270:. 250:. 139:. 53:: 20:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index