Talk:Tlingit/Archive 1

Expanding the article

The poor, pathetic article on the Tlingit with its broken image formatting made me so sad that I felt I had to fix it. But there's so much to say! So I've fixed the broken image which was my original intention, and filled out some outline on stuff that should be written. I'll get to writing the sections as time goes on, but for now I've got to sleep so I can go to the Alaska Federation of Natives conference tomorrow. I hope that the Germans and Japanese can keep up with the changes over time, I'd love to see some of this in other languages. — Jéiyoosh 09:52, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've finished adding most of the references I'm using for this article, besides personal communications and my own cultural knowledge. Hopefully that will lend some credence to the content. It's also probably a good time to consider separating sections out into their own articles, before this article gets too long. I'm considering doing so soon. Currently a paper I'm writing is taking up a good bit of what otherwise would be Wikipedia time, but I expect to finish it in the next week or two and then make some substantial additions to this article and its children. — Jéiyoosh 07:39, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Made a handful of major changes recently, filling in a lot of blank spots. It's slow going because there's a lot of referencing I need to do when I write something to make sure I'm not just saying it off the top of my head. But things are coming along. I'm uncertain now whether it's a good idea to start splitting off separate pages or wait until there's less gaps in the text. I think waiting won't hurt, anyway. There's certainly plenty of room for editing for flow that needs to be done as well, since a lot of my writing is pasting in paragraphs here and there without much regard to how they read against their neighbors. Also, I note that there is almost no reference even tangentially made to the Interior Tlingit who live around Teslin, Atlin, and along the Taku River in Canada. Some mention of them and how their lifestyle differs (e.g., less boats and fishing, more trapping and hunting) is needed, as well as the reasons why they migrated inland in the mid-19th century and how their history differs due to the Alcan Highway and the Canadian government (e.g. the Indian Act). I also need to do some serious study of the ANB and WWII years, which I don't know too much about and don't have much in the way of good references for. Also necessary is a section on modern tribal government organization, which is fairly complex; this may belong in a separate article on ANCSA since the Tlingit tribal orgs have a lot in common with other Alaskan tribes and village governments. — Jéiyoosh 08:17, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

hi. nice work! I added some sources listed in McClellan (1981) on the inland Tlingit. But it doesnt seem like all that much has been published. Keep up the good work. — ishwar  (SPEAK) 23:15, 2005 Jun 4 (UTC)

tytytytyty — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.185.133.107 (talk) 18:37, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

inland Tlingit & map

Hi again. Here is a bit from McClellan (1981:469):

The Inland Tlingit of the 20th cent. have mostly lived in Teslin village, which grew up around a trading post established 1903 on Teslin Lake in southeastern Yukon Territory, and in the mining town of Atlin founded in 1898 on Atlin Lake in extreme northern British Columbia. Some are also in Whitehorse and other settlements of Yukon Territory, or in Juneau, Alaska. In 1974 the Canadian government formally recognized the Teslin and Atlin bands, members of which usually refer to themselves as Tlingit, although the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development designates the Atlin band as Tahltan. The Inland Tlingit have never formed a cohesive tribe nor made a treaty with the government of Canada, either as a total group or severally.

Although their ancestors formerly lived along the upper Taku River, during the 19th and 20th centuries most of the Inland Tlingit moved permanently across the divide to the headwaters of the Yukon River, perhaps splitting the ancestors of the Athapaskan-speaking Tagish from those of the Athapaskan Tahltan. Some or all of the Inland Tlingit may themselves be descended from Athapaskan-speaking Indians that adopted Tlingit as their chief language owing to extensive trade and intermarriage with coastal Tlingits during the 19th cent. Specifically, they may be the descendants of the Athapaskans that Dawson and Emmons called Taku and described as speaking Tahltan or a closely related dialect and in fact the Tlingit they speak diverges somewhat from that of the Coastal Tlingit, who class them as ġunana· 'strangers'. By 1970, most Inland Tlingit children spoken only English.

Although both Tlingit and Athapaskan speakers may share common roots in interior northwestern America, Barbeau was probably wrong in describing the Inland Tlingit as remnants of a classic Tlingit society that was once widespread in Yukon Territory and British Columbia. Rather, they represent a late expansion of Coastal Tlingit, or of their influence, triggered by the growth of the Euro-American fur trade. The main impetus for the Inland Tlingit move to the Yukon headwaters was the availability of fine land furs for which demand swelled following the near destruction of the sea otter in the late 18th cent. The Klondike & Atlin gold rushes of 1898 led to the final concentration of the Inland Tlingit in the Yukon drainage.

Because the Inland Tlingit shifted their areas of exploitation, the size of their territory at any given time is difficult to estimate, but the whole of the Taku and Teslin-Nisutlin plateaus, which they intermittently occupied, comprises about 4000 sq. mi.

I am wondering if the reason that Goddard's maps do not show the inland people's area is because he is following this idea of the inland peoples being a more recent expansion or merger. I know that you much more knowledgeable than me: what do you think about this? (perhaps I could just try to ask Goddard himself...). thank you. — ishwar  (SPEAK) 01:29, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)

The Inland Tlingit are definitely included in the Tlingit people. They speak the same mutually intelligible language, although with some characteristic pronounciation differences and some different words. They have the same clans, the same moieties, and most of the same stories. If indeed they started out as Gunanaa, like the Kwashk'kwáan of Yakutat they have become purely Tlingit people. They come to Alaska to participate in a number of Tlingit conferences and gatherings, and represent themselves as the Tlingit in Canada.

There are a few groups of Inland Tlingit, more than McClellan seems to recognize. There is the T'aaku Kwáan which lives along the Taku River. There is the Áa Tlein Kwáan which lives around Atlin Lake. There is the Deisleen Kwáan which lives around Teslin. There is the Tagish Kwáan which lives around Carcross and Tagish. And finally there is the Gunaaxoo Kwáan which lived at Dry Bay and up the Alsek and Tatshenshini Rivers; this latter group has been mostly absorbed into Yakutat and no longer lives in Canada.

The Inland Tlingit were certainly a "recent" expansion, taking place from the late 18th century through the mid 19th century, and occasioned by the Euro-American fur trade. But connections and intermarriages between the Coastal Tlingit and the interior Athabascans had occurred long into prehistory, and there was plenty of commerce and travel between the two groups. The process was gradual, and only accelerated by the increased fur trade, not initiated by it. As far as the modern situation stands, these people consider themselves Tlingit today, and their elders speak Tlingit and are working towards revitalization of the Tlingit language rather than any of the neighboring Athabascan tongues. — Jéiyoosh 19:12, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Edit War of August 27–30, 2005

Can we please stop having this silly edit war? When I wrote that paragraph I specifically chose the word "obligated" because I meant that the father's clan has no formal obligations in this situation, but that sentimental reasons would often sway their behavior. The difference in the use of "oblige" versus "obligate" is an American-British distinction, and since this article is about an American ethnicity, and written mostly by Americans, I believe the American usage should hold. In any case, knock of this senseless edit war over a single word.

Sourcing - Angoon

Hello. This article is very well-written and detaied. My main concern lies with the Angoon section; primarily, the statement that "millions" died of starvation. I do not wish to downplay the seriousness of the incident, but that number seems dubious to me. Could someone provide a source for this, or correct it if it is indeed erroneous? In addition, the section as a whole seems slightly POV. For instance, there is no mention of the 1973 settlement worth $90k made by the US government to the community for the bombardment. This does not take the place of an apology, but is worth noting. SReynhout 11:52, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

The “millions of” is some anon wiseguy's idea of a joke. I never noticed that edit, so thank you for pointing that out. It's expunged. I also added mention of the settlement. As for the POV, it could be minimized a bit, but I am not the one to do that. If you would like, go ahead and make some edits to that section to reduce the POV a bit, and I'll ensure factual accuracy. I have not considered sources other than anthropological and historical ones which discuss the Tlingit experience, so a bias is somewhat unavoidable. If you have access to other sources which are not Tlingit-centric then that would help. Commander Merriman's diaries were available to Frederica de Laguna, but I have no idea where you would find them today. — Jéioosh 20:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Pronunciation

The current description of the pronunciation as "clink-it" is fairly inadequate. I'm assuming that the IPA is /tɬiŋɡit/ or something similar. Does anyone know what it is, so it can be added next to the current approximation? --Whimemsz 23:19, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

It may come as a surprise, but you're wrong. The pronounciation in English is actually /'klɪŋkʰɪt/ which the guide approximates fairly well. The vagaries of history have left us with a spelling that is inconsistent with the pronounciation, but this isn't exactly uncommon for English. The Tlingit name is completely different, spelled Lingít and pronounced ɬɪŋ'kɪ´tʰ, not used by speakers of English.

The difference here is that there is an English ethnonym which is different from the ethnonym in Tlingit, and the pronounciation guide is for the English name not the Tlingit one. Does that make sense? — Jéioosh 02:39, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

It does, yes. Thanks for explaining it for me! Take care, --Whimemsz 02:47, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I've added the IPA to the article. I've looked at two sources: The American Heritage Dictionary [1] lists (not in IPA): "tlĭng'gĭt, -kĭt, klĭng'kĭt". The OED lists "('klɪŋkɪt or 'klɪŋgɪt; also, incorrectly, tl-)". Since AHD prefers "tlĭng'gĭt" and OED deprecates it, and in the absence of a definitive source, I suggest a compromise of "/'klɪŋkɪt/ or /'tlɪŋkɪt/, also /-gɪt/". It isn't the first time two dictionaries contradict each other. --Dforest 06:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

The American Heritage Dictionary is flat out wrong, and the OED is correct in deprecating /tl-/. The English pronunciation is /'klɪŋkɪt/ and /'tlɪŋkɪt/ is an orthographically biased mistake. All Tlingit people say /kl-/, both the monolingual English speakers as well as the bilingual Tlingit speakers. This is true for both Alaskan and Canadian speakers, whose dialects of both English and Tlingit vary. Some Tlingit people do say /-gɪt/ rather than /kɪt/ although they are a small minority. In Alaska everyone who knows anything about the tribe says /kl-/, agreeing with the Tlingit themselves. One of our state senators who happens to be Tlingit, Albert Kookesh, would voice his offense if he heard a public figure make the /tl-/ mistake, it would be a ridiculous political gaffe. In Canada opinions are likewise. I will modify the article to deprecate the /tl-/ pronunciation.

I guess I should follow the above with the caveat that Tlingit people are inured to the constant mispronunciation of our name. The word is easily pronounced according to English phonology, despite the misleading spelling. We expect people to mispronounce it the first time. If a person persists in mispronouncing the name after being corrected then it could be considered an insult, à la calling US people “murrakins” as I've heard some Australians do, or it could be considered pretentiousness, trying to “correct” a naïve pronunciation. But for the uninitiated it's not an unexpected confusion. — Jéioosh 18:52, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I also just adjusted the incorrect pronunciation to /tə'lɪŋkɪt/ with an epenthetic vowel separating the /t/ and /l/ and the stress shifted forward. This is how most English speakers pronounce it, since /tl/ is an impermissible consonant cluster in initial position. This may be splitting hairs, and if someone else decides to go back to the /tl/ I won't complain. — Jéioosh 19:01, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

A few more sources: the Columbia Encyclopedia [2] gives "tlĭng`gĭt" only and Merriam-Webster [3] gives "'tli[ng]-k&t, -g&t also 'kli[ng]-". There are countless names of places and people that are spoken differently outside their population. Praha and Prague, Tōkyō and To·ky·o, etc. Many of these pronunciations come about because of "orthographically biased mistake(s)". I think we should stick to the dictionary sources per WP:NOR. I disagree about the epenthetic vowel; even if we say /'tlɪŋkɪt/ is 'wrong' (which I disagree with), then /tə'lɪŋkɪt/ is doubly wrong — a mispronunciation of a mispronunciation. --Dforest 01:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I really feel that you're wrong here. No, I know that you are wrong here. The examples you give like Praha and Prague are different languages. The term Tlingit is an English word, it's not some other language. The orthographic representation derives from American attempts at recording /ɬɪŋ'kɪ´tʰ/. It was historically spelled a number of ways, including "Hlingit", "Linquit", and "Qulinkit" for examples. Would you like to list a pronunciation based on one of those spellings? The current pronunciation is based on over a century of use both in and outside the region. It is used by the native English speaking people themselves, by scientists, by historians, by travel writers, and by nearly everyone else who has any knowledge of the people or culture. It is not a foreign, interpreted word, it is an English word as nativized as "Mexico", "German", or "Brazil". If you met someone who pronounced "Mexico" as /mɛks'iko/ would you not correct their pronunciation to /'mɛksɪko/? If they said /'ʒɛɹmən/ would you not correct them to /'dʒəɹmən/? How about Connecticut as /kə'nɛktɪkət/ or Illinois as /ɪlɪ'nwa/? There is a right way and there is an uninformed and wrong way to pronounce these names in English, and they are all English words.

Dictionaries are not the be all and end all of pronunciation, especially regarding words which are not in frequent use in the language. It's quite obvious that the dictionary editors who have listed /'tlɪŋkɪt/ have never heard the term themselves, they are simply guessing or copying an erroneous entry in a previous dictionary. Dictionary editors are not savants who intuitively know the pronunciation and definition of every word in a language, so they make mistakes through either research laziness, lack of oversight, or for many other reasons. The listing of incorrect entries is not a new or rare problem in dictionaries, see Lexicographic error for examples. Also, the fact that English speakers cannot ordinarily produce an initial /tl-/ consonant cluster is indicative that it is not an acceptable English word. The fact is that /tl-/ is a popular mistake based solely on the spelling of the word, produced by people who have never heard the term before. Anyone who has heard the term from a knowledgable speaker will without variation use the /kl-/ pronunciation because it is a more natural English word.

I am all for linguistic descriptivism, but there are still mistakes no matter how relativist the interpretation. I am listing the /tl-/ pronunciation as incorrect again, and until you find a source other than a dictionary which gives this as a standard pronunciation, please leave it. The fact that you are willing to accept the incorrect pronunciation purely on the basis of dictionary authority indicates to me that you have no authoritative knowledge of the word, the people, or the culture. I do. — Jéioosh 18:40, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

That's fine. I basically agree with you. I'm sure you are far more familiar with the Tlingit than I am. But I wouldn't be so fast to discredit the dictionaries. I am just trying to defend the WP:NOR and WP:V. You rejected my argument about Prague & Praha as two different languages. But English is not the same English everywhere. My point is that orthographic errors become part of the language. There are conflicting pronunciations shown in several dictionaries. If we are to discredit the dictionaries we need a more definitive verifiable source. I suggest that rather than prescribe which is correct & incorrect, it may be better to describe how the Tlingit pronounce their name in both English and their native tongue. Dforest 19:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to add my two Canadian cents' worth to what Jéioosh says. I live in the Yukon and when I first came here in 1989, I, like may newcomers, mispronounced it. I was soon corrected. All the Tlingit people I know (and I do know a fair number) as well as all other Yukoners (except for newcomers) pronounce it with the "kl" sound. So the dictionaries that say otherwise are wrong. Luigizanasi 01:05, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Also, it's interesting that you mention "murrakins", as "American" was once corrupted as meriken in Japan; a number of words from the Meiji Period still use this: meriken-ko (a kind of flour) meriken-hatoba (a harbor), and a contemporary example, Kobe's Meriken Park, "opened in 1987 to commemorate the 120th anniversary of the opening of the Port of Kobe." --Dforest 02:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

That is interesting. I wondered where it came from. But it's not germane to this argument, again it's a crosslinguistic phenomenon and what we are discussing is a purely English problem. — Jéioosh 18:40, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

The problem is there is no pure English. Dforest 19:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Witchcraft

The edit as of 7:00PM EST (-5 GMT) January 19th claims that "No witchcraft. Witchcraft is a European concept." While there may be no witchcraft common among the Tlingit, but I was quite certain that beliefs in magic (not the witch on a broom European/American stereotype, but witchcraft nonetheless) was very common especially among the Southwestern Indians. To the point of good shaman killed and butchering the purveyors of bad magic as to separate all essences. Could someone much more knowledgeable on the Tlingit provide some insight (or someone more knowledgeable on Indian/Native American cultures)?--152.23.202.29 00:05, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Dolphins

"Carbon dating techniques have recently shown (2001) that coastal people's bone structure closely resembled that of dolphins. This indicates that coastal people have lived on a seafood diet for at least hundreds of thousands of years, if not longer." Is this vandalism, or am I missing something? It's interesting enough that I don't want to erase it if it means something.

I DISSENT! where is the proof for the "dolphin resembelance"? I have never heard any such story, nor have I ever heard that my people came from Asia. Also, which culture in ASIA does the Tlingit/Haida/Tsimpshian art, culture, etc. RESEMBLE? If I get on a website and post that the Navajo and Apaches are descended from the Tlingit, I must have some kind of proof, right? The proof for that is in the LANGUAGE, or am I mistaken? Someone more educated than the author of this article needs to write about the Tlingit because there is no justification or proof for claiming Tlingit bone structure resembles dolphins. TlingitGal

circle justice

say about it

Cleanup

First off, this article is waaaay to long. It needs to be shortened, by making subarticles and writing abstracts of each topic. Also, it needs to be wikiformatted. I can see very few wikilinks throughout the entire article. Also, there's some weird thing going on at the bottom of the page, with the "=" topic. What's that about? I'm not capable of cleaning this article up, but at least I'm marking it up for you. /Grillo 00:58, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, the last four topics are weird, what about the text in brackets? Is that some kind of to do-list? In that case, it should be either here on the talk page or in hidden text. /Grillo 01:00, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

When I started writing this article I was unfamiliar with Wikipedia practices, hence the “to do” list incorporated into the article. Feel free to comment out that stuff, but it should be kept as a reminder of the proposed article structure until someone replaces it with content.

If you really want to separate the article into smaller subarticles, feel free to do so. I am focusing what little time I spend editing on Wikipedia almost entirely on the Tlingit language articles. If you do separate the article into subarticles, try to do so on the top sections and make sure that adequate in-article stubs remain to give the reader a lead-in.

Also, if you want to make content edits to this article, make sure you start by working from Emmonds and De Laguna’s works, not the older works of the Russians or Germans. The two major works by Emmonds (The Tlingit Indians) and De Laguna (Under Mount Saint Elias) are recognized by both anthropologists and Tlingits as being the most important and accurate sources for Tlingit ethnography. Both should be available in any good research library, or at least available through interlibrary loan. — Jéioosh 15:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I made some minor edits as I came across them. I also started compacting the fishing section but I believe it might be better to make it into a subarticle. Is the Tlingit method of harvesting and preserving fish notably unique? If so, perhaps it should be its own article. If not, the information could be merged into some other article on fish preservation techniques. For instance, the use of weirs as fishing traps could be merged into the Fishing Weir entry. The Bombing of Angoon could probably be its own article too. I can do this but thought I'd get your input first.

I also had some problems discerning past methods and practices from ones active today, and when they were adopted (ballpark would be nice, pre-European? after statehood?). For instance, the nutrition section mentions that certain foods are eaten to provide vitamins missing from the regular diet. I'm assuming that the Tlingit were unaware of vitamins along with the rest of the world before the 20th century so were these foods adopted early on after noticing the beneficial effects or is this some modern practice to counteract malnourishment? Either way, it should be clarified.

I appreciate you contributions Jéioosh, I'm just looking to help make this user friendly. It's currently a bit too text book for the casual reader. The heavy info (like harvesting techniques) should be available somewhere, just not up front with all the crucial tidbits. Keep up the good work. --Ando228 19:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

If you want to split stuff out into other articles, feel free to do so, as long as there are links to it from this article. In regards to the fish processing thing, I think it’s a pretty common sort of practice along the entire Northwest Coast and perhaps even into the riverine interior. Collecting this information into a separate article is a good idea, but you’d want to get input from some of the other groups on this. — Jéioosh 00:29, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

More on Pronunciation

Since this is the English language page, and in several English dictionaries which have some authority on the English language, we cannot say that the "tliNgit" is incorrect. The AHD lists it first with no note that it is not correct. While the OED is one authority on the English language, it is not the only one and since there is not an English language academy that all English speaking countries follow, then we as users cannot add such statements. Having "tliNgit" listed as incorrectly goes against several established dictionaries and wikipedia cannot be based on personal research. So I say that incorrectly be removed. If you want to put a note about the history of the pronunciation that is fine. If this keeps going back and forth then we need a vote on it. azalea_pomp

This is not based on personal research. Other linguistic work backs this up, feel free to do any sort of literature search starting with Franz Boas in 1892, and any of the popular or anthropological works on the Tlingit. English dictionaries are not an authoritative source here. A similar example is the ethnonym Slave which is often pronounced [slev] by English readers, however linguists working on the language (e.g. Keren Rice) have taken pains to point out in their work that the pronunciation used by the English-speaking people themselves is [slevi]. The problem is that English orthography for these names are based upon 19th century orthographic standards which were fairly loose at the time. Dictionary editors don’t usually bother to research this sort of thing, instead copying from other dictionaries. — Jéioosh 00:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, English dictionaries are an authority on the English language at least when it comes to Wikipedia. English speakers do not pronounce many words or proper names as they do in the native languages. For example, in American English the -r in Myanmar is pronounced although the -r is a convention for a long vowel, so while the country should be pronounced "Myanmah", it is not (in the United States). "tlINgIt" is an acceptable pronunciation, it may not be accurate by the native speakers standards, but it is has entered English as acceptable. Another example is the British intrusive r sound, British reporters will say "Shahr of Iran", while it may not be good Persian, that is the way the sound system in RP works so it is acceptable. There are a plethora of non-English city names in the United States that are not pronounced "correctly". No offense, but again it sounds to me that I hear personal research with your statements: "The problem is that English orthography for these names are based upon 19th century orthographic standards which were fairly loose at the time. Dictionary editors don’t usually bother to research this sort of thing, instead copying from other dictionaries." It is not that I do not agree that Tlingit should be pronounced this or that way, it is simply a matter of authority. As I stated before, American English does not have an academy and with your statement that says incorrectly "tlINgIt" will give users of this online encyclopedia a contradictory statement than in most English dictionaries. While anthropological sources can be used for support to change what is in major dictionaries now, they really cannot be used on the historic acceptable pronunciations for English. If we went by your thinking, a large number of pronunciations would have to be changed. Let us make a clear distinction between incorrect and inaccurate. It may be inaccurate for English speakers to say "tlINgIt" but it is not incorrect. The English language as a system has its own rules of pronunciation outside of whatever anthropological correctness constraint you want to put on it. azalea_pomp

I think that we can give weight to the more "correct" or "acceptable" pronunciation by saying something to the effect of "also pronounced /'tlɪŋkɪt/, although this is often considered inaccurate"

I'd suggest "anglicized" rather than "pronounced" but there's nothing English about a /tl/ onset cluster. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 06:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I am fine with inaccurate. I agree it is inaccurate, but to say incorrect is not correct due to weight of the authority of dictionaries. Until there is a consensus among many dictionaries, we as wikipedia users do not have authority over them. azalea_pomp

Making an article series

Wow, this is an incredible article; obviously a lot of work has gone into it. Congrats to all the editors who have done it. However, after just going through & replacing some of the outline notes with actual {{expand-section}} templates, it becomes ever more clear that this article, especially with such expansions, is getting very long, & is very deserving of being split into an article series. I'm so fully booked that I don't have a lot of time to devote to it, but as I have time I may at least break out some of the longer sections -- for example, food -- into related articles to begin that work. Again, congratulations for all those editors who've put a lot of fine work into this article. --Yksin 18:46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

If you could help break then into the appropriate sections, I could help out with them. This article is amazing. I looked to it a lot for inspiration for other articles on Indigenous. I kind of know where some separate articles could be, but I would like guidance to be sure. Here to help out. OldManRivers 03:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

ITS TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO LONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Shorten it. --76.180.239.3 22:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay. I'll work on this. Here is my suggestion for the follow break ups into separate articles:

• Culture of the Tlingit
• Food of the Tlingit
• Philosophy and religion of the Tlingit
• History of the Tlingit

Any other suggestions? That's what I'm going with. But I'm not sure if there is anything else. I'm not sure how much fixing with need to make sure the article will make sense with changed, but like mentioned before, a series could easily be created with this. Unfortunately, I do not have the skills yet to create the template for a series so if someone could help out, that would be great. Thanks and good job to the editors. OldManRivers 05:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Uh, perhaps the title-format should follow what you've established with Skwxwu7mesh art, Kwakwaka'wakw culture? Just a thought for cross-category consistency; or else revise the others to Art of the Kwakwaka'wakw etc.....also btw it's occurred to me that Category:Northwest Coast art and Northwest Coast art are too vague and can be subjected to reinterpretation, such that Jack Shadbolt and other non-indigenous artists would "belong" in them - it might be better to have Art of the indigenous peoples of the Northwest Coast (or "Pacific Northwest Coast") in order to be more specific.  ??? Skookum1 (talk) 13:48, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Issues with map

For the first time I've had a look at it, mostly bvecause my attention was drawn to it by the territory shown being coastal only; shouldnt' the territories claimed by the Inland Tlingit be shown, or at least the locations of major Inland Tlingit communities? It might be necesasry to have a dual-colour scheme because of course those territories overlap with the various Yukon and Northwestern BC Athapaskan peoples (not that any other territorial map shows such overlaps...at present). Also I'm not sure how relevant showing the Tsetsaut territory is; it's only speculative in history anyway; at the very least that region should say beneath their name "(extinct)" maybe with a date....as I recall the Tsetsaut were a slave-people brought into the area by the Nisga'a and I'm not sure at all that they had any villages, certainly no known territorial claims (like the Nicola Athapaskans they weren't around long enough to be able to make any such claim....). Also the labelling "Gitksan-Nisga'a" isn't suitable; they're two different peoples....the map appears to confused the Nass and Skeena rivers, also, rendering them into one, and the Iskut should be shown....also the Tsimshian should obvioiusly be visible on the map.....Skookum1 (talk) 13:48, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

B-rating assessement questioned

I take issue with this articles "B" rating by both Project:Alaska and Project:Canada. The first criteria listed on what makes an article a "B" article is that it is suitably referenced (Wikipedia grade assessments). Currently this article contains zero sources. If no discussion ensues on this, I move to reassess as a "C" or "start" article in a couple of days. I'll copy this post to both the Alaska and Canada projects discussion pages. --Ljmajer (talk) 21:01, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Good point, I concur, and there's lots missing from the article, cf. the see alsos I just added and watch for further reading/resources I'll be back with...this is barely a "C", more like a good "start".Skookum1 (talk) 02:59, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Per (Wikipedia grade assessments) I am changing the rating to C. A lot of great and dedicated work has been done on this article, but none of it is sourced. --Ljmajer (talk) 04:21, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

List of villages and kwaans

I've been reading various sources on the Russian period because of a parallel interest in treaty/claim history and international law issues connected with that and have founds all kinds of detailed articles on the tlingit; I've also struggled with how to edit/improve the Chief Shakes and Taku people and Auke people articles so the interlinkages with other peoples' articles, and with the non-indigenous history articles in teh same region/era, all make sense; I'm about to make a go at expanding Chief Shakes with material on him from a variety of sources (near as I can tell it's Chief Shakes I, and Shakes II and maybe III, that are the ones covered/concerned the my sources). There's a long list of historical chiefs up and down the coast who yet need articles, not just the Tlingit chiefs/chieftaincies and associated villages and clans and so on...what I think would be useful, and in line with other lists either within other NW Coast tribe articles ([[Haida, Kwakwaka'wakw, Skwxwu7mesh would be List of villages and kwaans of the Tlingit peoples....if I'm understanding kwaan as meaning something other than village, otherwise just List of Tlingit villages would do just fine. In the Chief Shakes article some version of "proper" Tlingit is used with the modern placename in brakcets e.t. "Aan Gun (Angoon)"; the list would be aplace to list/coordinate all variant spellings; there's a similar issue with clan names across the region,i.e. the clan names in Haida, Tsimshian, Gitxaan etc are different-but-similar. There's also an issue in Chief Shakes where the Tlingit account of an important battle names the inhabitants of Metlakatla and Kitkatla as "Nishga" when they would have had to be Tsimshian. Anyway Chief Shakes also has reference and other problems, if someone feels like helping out over there I'd appreciate some delineation into sections and other wikifications; much of my added content to come will be about his interaction with the fur companies and colonial/imperial governments, and notable events mentioned by non-indigenous sources involving him; I'll make further comments about that article on his talkpage when I get to it. This article, though, is totally absent of anything on slavery, warfare, relations with the Russians, with the British, with the Americans etc.....(we're not just "Euro-Americans" and there's three different histories of interaction there...).Skookum1 (talk) 02:59, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Note about Telengit People

There was a note added about not confusing Tlingit with the Telengit. It does seem notable as the spelling is similar, although I never made that mistake. However people continue to delete it. I'm going to reinstate it, and hopefully those people can explain their reasoning for why the note should not exist. Ando228 (talk) 23:17, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not similar at all. Most people don't even know who the Telengits are therefore the note is totally unneded, as none whould confuse these two, moreover, these two words aren't even that similar to be confused for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.210.193.24 (talk) 00:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Many people don't know who the Tlingit people are either. The two words are only different in Tele-(ngit) & Tli-(ngit) and the pronunciation of Tlingit can be confusing, given the variations listed at the entry's start. Ando228 (talk) 01:12, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Just to note that in the latest deletion of this dab line, the IP user has styled the line "spam". this is misrepresentative - and also getting very tiresome. Is it possible to block an IP address? i.e. if there's no user account attached to it?Skookum1 (talk) 05:03, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Now he/she is referring to it as "vandalism". I too am tired of this- it is very possible to block an IP, and I will report this to AIV if it continues. Lithoderm 18:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Anon rvv of 6 December 2008 reverted - 3 changes

An anonymous editor reverted not only my edit in the external links section, but two previous edits: the most recent prior to mone regarding the French transwiki and the next-most-recent regarding the hatnote, is the subject of an edit war and discussion.

I've undone the edit that removed these 3 items. If you want to have an edit war over the hatnote, fine, I'm going to stay out of that one. But please be careful with the collateral damage and be mindful of WP:3RR.

If you believe either the French transwiki change was incorrect, please contact that editor and work it out, or discuss it here.

If you believe my addition to the external links was incorrect, please contact me or we can work it out here. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 21:51, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

PS When making controversial edits, especially those that have been reverted in the past, please make an account OR use the same IP address consistently. It lets everyone know that it's really one person behind the changes. If you edit from two different places, it helps everyone if you use a named account. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 21:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Cape Fox Village

Just as a heads-up, I made Cape Fox Village but not Cape Fox people (Sanyas kwaan) because I'd found that Cape Fox was an article on the South African fox, so made Cape Fox (disambiguation), all of the non-South African entries on which are Alaskan. If there's anyone here with something to add to Cape Fox Village, or capable of starting Cape Fox people, please do so....I also made Tongass Island, though that's more US military history than indigenous, I'd think....Skookum1 (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Re Tongass people/Tongass Island

Hm I might be wrong in my .... guesswork...that the Cape Fox people were the same as teh Tongass people; see this:

At the beginning of the 20th century, this word was variously spelled Tomgas, Tont-a-quans, Tungass, Tungass-kon and Tanga'sh. "It's the name of a group of people," said anthropologist Rosita Worl.

Spin-offs: Port Tongass, Tongass Island, Tongass Narrows, Tongass National Forest (created by presidential proclamation Sept. 10, 1907), Tongass Passage, Tongass Reef. Fort Tongass was established in June 1868 at the former Tlingit Indian village named for the island, and maintained until September 1870. The village was on the east coast of Tongass Island.

Which is from this Sealaskaheritage.org page....I'll take this to Talk:Tlingit, where maybe somebody can cast some light on it for me...now I'm curious........Skookum1 (talk) 02:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

In which case, if the Tongass and Cape Fox tribes were different, what was the name of the kwaan....tongass kwaan??Skookum1 (talk) 02:50, 18 February 2009 (UTC)