Talk:Kwakwaka'wakw

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kwakwaka'wakw article.
Article policies
Map needed
 It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America or British Columbia may be able to help!
It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in British Columbia may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article is part of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which collaborates on Native American, First Nations, Inuit, Métis and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Suggested article edit guidelines:

This article has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it needs.
Canada Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
British Columbia
British Columbia Portal
This article is part of the British Columbia WikiProject (Discuss/Join).


Contents

[edit] "...pronounced Kwa-gyu-th"

Tsk tsk...nonstandard pronunciation guide. I would imagine "Kwaikiutl" is pronounced something like /kʷaikiutɬ/, but I don't really know. If anyone else does know, please do change it; ultimately, though, I guess it's not actually a big deal, in the scheme of things. And I don't want to edit it without knowing how it really is pronounced. --Whimemsz 05:35, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Don't even try your own IPA on that one; and actually I think it's closer to Kwagyulh as already in the article; Kwak'wala sounds are diabolical in their subtlety and the difficulty by which they translate to English-friendly transliterations; hence Laich-kwil-tach vs Yuculta or Euclataws, the historic-literature names for them; even though, oddly, Laich-kwil-tach looks remarkably Gaelic in flavour, as if by accident. I think I might have a source/ref on the proper IPA and somewhere in my mailboxes is an old correspondent who was a doc student who was Kwakwaka'wakw but living in Seattle; she or someone like her in my files should be able to help. And besides, it's not "Kwaikiutl" anyway; it's "Kwakiutl" and that happens to be preferred by the Fort Rupert people or someone else up that way; it gets complicated and I can never remember who's who.Skookum1 10:32, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for the info. (I keep misspelling it as "Kwaikiutl." Damn.) --Whimemsz 00:13, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Oweeykyala link? and Kwakiutl disambig

Um, I see there's a Wakashan language link; I'm always vague on the boundary bewtween Kwak'wala speaking peoples and their northern neighbours, who are also Wakashan and similar in language to Kwak'wala (moreso than Nuu-chah-nulth or Makah, which are also Wakashan); just figure they should be linked here somehow. Ultimately Kwakiutl has to become a disambiguation page because of the other flavours of Kwakiutl than the Kwakwaka'wakw group; who are the largest, but the term has strong political/organizational associations, which is why I created Laich-kwil-tach and will get around to Kwagyulh and others when I get the chance.Skookum1 10:32, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Haida Totem pole.jpg

I know that Image:Haida Totem pole.jpg features a Kwakwaka'wakw big house, but is the totel pole from the same nation? If so, the image could be featured here. -- TheMightyQuill 14:18, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

No, totally absolutely not. You'd offend the Kwakwaka'wakw majorly by doing that, too. Totem poles are badges of chiefly/noble lineage and community legacy, much like an escutcheon/coat-of-arms; it would be like putting the coat of arms of Bosnia on a Croat or Serb castle, or expecting an American household to be happy having a Union Jack on the lawn instead of the Stars and Stripes; although the old animosities on the Coast are long-gone. There's also a huge difference in the art style between Haida and Kwakiutl styles; Haida have deeper, almost 3-d bas reliefs and different tastes in colour; Kwakiutl still have some relief, and all the formality and fantastic design of the northern coastal styles (compare Nootka and southern Coast Salish artwork, which are more naturalistic, to Tsimshian or Haida or Tlingit or Bella Coola); the Kwakiutl tend also to have large elaborate house-front paintings; a picture of one of those at the great potlatches at Mameleliqula or Namgis or Alert Bay would be most appropriate maybe; but certainly nothing from Haida or Nootka or Tsimshian or Bella Coola. Tell ya what, somewhere around here I've got either/both a postcard of Alert Bay or/and amateur photos of people standing on Alert Bay's boardwalks, which were lined with houseposts and totems in the old days (my Mom worked there in 1946). That would at least by the art style, although I can think that one set of the pictures is rather unfortunate; Mom worked as girl's counsellor at the residential school (she's never said exactly what/why, but she quit the place after about six months in an argument over the way the girls under her care were being treated....) and there were a famous pair of thunderbird totems at its entrance ; I have a picture or two of a school parade marching through them; most of these students were not Kwakwa-ka'wakw but from other regions so it's not suitable for a Kwakwa-ka'wakw picture and it would be better to have a village-housefront picture, I think; or something from Curtis' collection if there's anything public domain there (?). NB by the way the article does mention Curtis' film, doesn't it?Skookum1 14:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

There's been some confusion over that image recently... it turns out that both the pole and the house are Kwakwaka'wakw and not Haida. An anon editor pointed this out on the Canada article. I looked into it, and ended up creating the Thunderbird Park article using official park refs. User:HighInBC took some higher res images at the park... check it out. He took a higher res image of the same scene (almost) where a Haida pole is visible on the edge - I'm going to add the original image to the article for now. heqs 16:40, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Going to wait til its correctly named before adding it. heqs 17:14, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, as far as naming it goes, if HighInBC can go ask the Thunderbird Park curator, he might even be able to get the proper name of the pole itself (they all have names, those big long hyphenated wordstrings of names, much like chiefly names).Skookum1 17:47, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Here's what it says on the official site of the park:
"Kwakwaka'wakw Heraldic Pole, 1953. Carvers: [Chief] Mungo Martin, David Martin and Mildred Hunt. The pole is in front of Wawadit'la, the bighouse built by Mungo Martin in Thunderbird Park and opened in 1953. Rather than display his own crests on the pole, which was customary, Martin chose to include crests representing the A'wa'etlala, Kwagu'l, 'Nak'waxda'xw and 'Namgis Nations. In this way, the pole represents and honours all the Kwakwaka'wakw people."
The house, on the other hand, "bears on its house-posts the hereditary crests of Martin's family." Continues to be used for ceremonies with the permission of Chief Oast'akalagalis 'Walas 'Namugwis (Peter Knox, Martin's grandson) and Mable Knox, including a large feast on the 50th anniversary of the house that was attended by many First Nations and non-First Nations dignitaries. heqs 18:19, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Those accreditations should be mentioned in a paragraph in the article, since they're too unwieldy for a caption.Skookum1 21:59, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:Haida Totem pole.jpg has been deleted and moved to Image:Kwakwaka'wakw house and pole at Thunderbird Park.jpg on commons. heqs 11:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Totem RMBC 2.jpg

This image is actually pretty good - there is only a sliver of a Haida pole over on the right. It seems like it would be okay to include this - the house and 3 Kwakwaka'wakw poles are very prominently displayed. But, we could crop out the Haida pole completely if necessary. heqs 18:30, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Image added with endnote per above discussion. heqs 12:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Origin of the name Kwakiutl

When I attended a Royal Roads University workshop offered in Alert Bay 2 years ago. The local Namgis (or 'Nimpkish') explained why they (at Alert Bay) were not 'Kwakiutl'. The tribe located further north at Fort Rupert (present day Port Hardy) are called the Kwakiutl. The British-Canadians that settled at Fort Rupert began to referring to all the First Nations people in the region as Kwakiutl after the name of the local tribe they had the most contact with. In the recent times the First Nations themselves began to revert back to the original names they had used for themselves.

Therefore, the current Kwakiutl tribe/region is a sub-group within the Kwakwaka'wakw territory. Wikipedia_V.I. 00:20, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Pasco, Juanita. The Living World: Plants and Animals of the Kwakwaka'wakw U'mista Cultural Society, 1998

Fine; but the issue is that the standard English for this group of peoples is Kwakiutl, not Kwakawkaw'wakw. And it wasn't "British-Canadians" who settled at Fort Rupert who coined/adopted the term, it was anthropologists (from Europe, not Britain or Canada). "British-Canadians" smacks of one of those ethnic-condemnnation terms like "Euro-American" and "European" (meaning Brits and all other white peoples as if they were all the same). And of course the Laich-kwil-tach use "Southern Kwakiutl"; and from what I gather the Fort Rupert/Port Hardy bunch aren't part of the Kwakwaka'wakw political organization; they may be a subroup of the Kwakwala speaking peoples, but from what I know/understand they're not part of the organization called Kwakwaka'wakw that includes Namgis, Mamelilaculla and other Queen Charlotte Strait "Kwakiutl"; if Kwakwaka'wakw weren't the name of a political organization and was an ethnolinguistic term only it would help in Kwakwaka'wakw becoming a standard English word; it's not, and if people look up the Namgis in places like NYC or LA they're mostly likely to search for "Kwakiutl", whether the folks in Alert Bay like it or not. Same as with "Lillooet" for the St'at'imc or Nuu-chah-nulth for the Nootka; misapprehensions of names, rather than proper names. But it's tit for tat; Straits/River Salish people call white people hwelitum in their language (hungry people), and St'at'imc call us sama7 - but that's not our name; it's our name in that language though.

Not meaning to put you down and I appreciate having someone who's been in Kwak'wala speaking country to maybe flesh out the many stubs in that area. But please be advised there should be a distinction between ethnographic articles, pure linguistics articles, political organizations, community articles and specific band/national government articles. So in the case of Namgis/Alert Bay there'd be an ethnography of the Namgis, a reference to the Kwakwala language/linguistics page (with any relevant notes on Namgis), Kwakwaka'wakw as an organization which Namgis belongs to, an article on the town of Alert Bay (including its non-native residents) and an article on the Namgis band/tribal government. See Wikipedia:Wikiproject Indigenous peoples of North America (talk page) for discussion of why and wherefore. And please contribute, period.Skookum1 04:13, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I can see you have a strong emotional attachment to this subject.
Interesting bit about who exactly came up with the name Kwakiutl/Kwagiulth. The representatives at the Umista centre felt it necessary to explain the origins of the label Kwakiutl. As to who? Perhaps I misunderstood them. Regardless, thanks for the clarification and “feedback”.
And I will endeavour to “contribute, period!” Cheers, Wikipedia_V.I. 07:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

What I meant by that is an exhortation to fellow BC Wikipedians to really try and document the place, and in cases like this one to engage in encylopedia-format categorization that will have a common struture with related articles elsewhere; whether it's geographic items, even stubs, on placenames and geographic features, towns, communities, sights of interest, or ethnic/national systems like the Indigenous peoples Wikiproject, and a startup (not yet official) Wikiproject BC, which if you're interested in checking out I'll get you the link (it's on someone's "sandbox" page), given the existence of parallel projects so far in Alaska and Oregon and, I think, Washington. The cross-border, multi-national nature of the Indigenous peoples Wikiproject is important because of the diversity and complexity of the subject matter, which to my knowledge has never before been set out before the public in such an extension fashion. Likewise BC history, my own pet area (although you'd think I was heart and soul on the Indigenous project by my previous post, but that's just natural thoroughness and trying to keep a slowly-established systematization of the articles going (within the Project/Encyclopedia). There's a lot of interesting work going on all over the place in that project; anything you have on archaeological or current village sites, clam gardens, a better write-up on the potlatch, and so on; the Americans have been fairly thorough with the Native American pages; it's surprising how much less there is in Canada, given that there's as many First Nations people as there are Native Americans, and the level of political organization and information in Canada. But as you know, it's a tangled web in BC both historically and currently, and Wiki is an interesting arena to sort out what's what and who's who and derive some common story for the place. That it's publicly written and edited makes it all the more interesting/exciting, doncha think?

So forgive the verbal passion, please; and it's more intellectually involved than emotionally involved, though I do confess to finding myself stoked on large projects I've worked on for a while (not just on Wiki, I mean in general); e.g. http://bivouac.com where I was an editor for quite a few years on next-to-no pay, near full-time; I write in musical mode or stream-of-consciousness or something like that (I'm typing as fast as I think for one thing, so volumes of text are not meant to be overbearing, more like extended narration/conversation).

Anyway, about this Kwakwaka'wakw thing, if YOU can help ME sort out the what and where, or help me find someone from the North Island who's interested in fleshing out Wiki's coverage of that area, even just the First Nations culture/political/community structure, that would be great. I revised what had been here originally going largely by what I knew from writings on general BC history and your usual coverage available in BC op-ed history/politics/whatever articles; I absorb everything I read, y'see....anyway I "winged it" when I rewrote the page, partly because I was intending on immediate inclusions of the Laich-kwil-tach and Kwagyulh references, i.e. Campbell River and Fort Rupert, which AFAIK were not included in the Kwakwa'wakw political organization, and historically were rivals, when not actual enemies. It's that kind of complexity, historical and modern, that's difficult to lay out clearly for the average reader; I run into the same thing with the fragmentation of the St'at'imc into three or more separate political bodies, their outermost sub-bands also members of adjoining nations (Pavilion to Secwepemc and Douglas to Sto:lo); and across the Secwepemc, Okanagan, Chilcotin and Carrier turf there's a complexity to which people are part of which band are part of which tribal/government organization are part of which community; that's why all the separate articles. Same as in the US, where there are multi-tribal agencies, and also different organizations for different groups of the same peoples (ethnographically and/or linguistically); then there's the extinct peoples/languages, mythologies, chiefly lineages (if any), governmental structure (the clan houses of this region, the Council of Women of the Haudenosaunee; or one government within the agency/community, another tribal organization of some component of that community/agency allied with other related peoples on other agencies. It's really a mess, which of course is a product of the history that was committed upon them; another factor, as I'm finding out in some areas of BC, is "western" ideas of "chiefs" and "bands" aren't quite equivalent to what the historic differences were; see Somena, although the writer of that page is more indulging in native politics than history; she raises the point that governmental/social structures outside the boundaries of English. Ditto with situation between Kwagyulh, Kwakwaka'wakw and Laich-kwil-tach; Kwakwaka'wakw as a one-word title should probably be the ethno article, as it means "speakers of Kwakw'ala") and some term like "nation" or "government" (small-case) should be appended for the Kwakwaka'wakw as a political organization and cultural/historical unit/group of units. I'm not sure that Kwagyulh are included; they weren't, and historically their ties are to the Laich-kwil-tach, who were their closest king (before migrating south the Southern Kwakiutl had lived up past Fort Rupert).

The "British-Canadians" who named/established Fort Rupert were Royal Navy, Hudson's Bay personnel (a handful), the mission (when there was one), any resident anthropologist, and not a few coal miners; there was a famous strike there in early colonial days; before the founding of the mainland colony as I recall. Between the valuable/strategic coal seams (which could not be left open to the Russians, theoretically under European law entitled also to colonize/trade along the coast until 1858 or so, and militarily the Royal Navy could not leave the upper approaches to the Johnstone Strait undefended; and some redoubt was needed in potentially hostile country in waters far away and isolated from Victoria/Esquimalt....

Sorry to blog; just trying to explain myself, and also encourage you to see the potential scope of contributions needed for BC material, or for whatever your own interests are. Historically Wikipedia is unique, I think; even more than the net itself, as it marks the coalescence of mutually-written history, politics, culture and more and is able to encompass whatever obscure and hopefully meaningful details of human history, culture and science there are. It's one huge document, but collectively written.....so please, add/discuss as you have time. I obviously have too much ;-)Skookum1 01:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't read everything that's been said, but calling this Indigenous nation Kwakiutl, for the entire group, is similar to hitting Nova Scotia first, then calling all Canadian's "Nova Scotians". Even if the southern nations in Campbell River and Cape Mudge have a difference in the language "dialect", they still consider themselves apart of the Kwakwaka'wake in generel. (Inless there is documentation to prove otherwise?...lol) OldManRivers 00:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kwakwaka'wakw big house

This image is currently a featured picture candidate. Due to a large influx of new candidates there are very few votes for this image. If you have an opinion on this image please go to Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Kwakwaka'wakw big house and cast your vote. HighInBC 13:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kwakwaka'wakw <=> Kwakiutl merge issues/poll

Since this merge tag has been posted here's some considerations:

  • Kwakwaka'wakw means "speakers of Kwak'wala"
  • Kwakwaka'wakw is used as an organizational name by the Kwakwaka'wakw (i.e. there would have to be at least two articles by that name).
  • Kwakiutl is used in ethography to describe the whole culture/language group/area; as such its name is based on that of the Kwagyuilh of Namgis (Fort Rupert), who are not part of the Kwakwaka'wakw pan-tribal organization. The Kwagyuilh/Namgis are historically linked to the Southern Kwakiutl of Campbell River and the Johnstone Strait and environs the Laich-kwil-tach which is the latest spelling of Euclataws or Yucultas), and both groups are speakers of Kwak'wala - small-k kwakwaka'wakw, as it were, but not part of the Kwakwaka'wakw tribal alliance/organization.
  • Kwakiutl in English usage has also been (incorrectly) used to include Oweekyala and Haisla and others as "Northern Kwakiutl"
  • the usual English name for these people is Kwakiutl, not Kwakwaka'wakw. In British Columbia if someone were to say in English "I'm Kwakwaka'wakw" they would be from the central organization (non-Laich-kwil-tach/non-Kwagyuilh) if they were to use it. Because they're speaking English they might more readily say Kwakiutl

There's other issues that'll come to mind, but there's an outline. I'd say merge so long as the title is Kwakiutl as a dab page; as there's gonna be Kwakiutl people, Kwakiutl language (exists and relays to Kwak'wala, Kwakiutl tribal organizations (including Kwakwaka'wakw, which the primary article for should be the organizaiton, with an italicized intro saying what it means and referring to the Kwakiutl page), other pages might be Kwakiutl art/culture etc; an explanation in the opening paragraph about how the adopted use from ethnography and government as "Kwakiutl" has become standard in English (like it or not) but was mistakenly a name for one group applied across the board (as with Nootka vs. Nuu-chah-nulth, historically the correct pan-name for them was "Aht", however). Kwakiutl itself seems to be most likely a dab page (see Chilcotin, Shuswap etc).Skookum1 07:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

In British Columbia if someone were to say in English "I'm Kwakwaka'wakw" they would be from the central organization (non-Laich-kwil-tach/non-Kwagyuilh)
I'm not sure about this line. Many who apart of the southren group still consider themselves apart of the Kwakwaka'wakw. Kwakwaka'wakw isn't a poliical organzation, but a cultural/social one having to do with the whole "Kwakiutl" mixup done by textbooks and Anthropologists. Even historicaly, the tribal potlaching ranks has all the nations in rank (Fort Rupert first, Village Island second, Nimpkish third, etc.) OldManRivers 00:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, actually it's discussed in detail in Chiefly Feasts, which is where I became aware of the difference. I think it's necessary at least, then, to have an ethno/people page for "Kwa'kwala speakers" (as translated) and a separate page for the organization using Kwakawkaw'akw in its name, with the distinction clearly stated in a dab line at the top of the page (one of those italicized things that says "this page is for xxxx; for yyyy go see zzzz"). BTW when you make a post here, use a colon for each indent; otherwise leaving a space undoes the word-wrap.Skookum1 01:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Getting the hang of thinigs, sorta. OldManRivers 05:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Because they're speaking English they might more readily say Kwakiutl - That hasn't been my experience at all; from the children and counselers at historic Camp Nor'wester (which has had extremely close ties with the Kwakwaka'wakw since the late 1930s and perform traditional dances, and potlatches and songs to this day) to native residents of the Pacific Northwest to University historians, I've only ever heard "Kwakwaka'wakw" (pronounced KWA KWA KYA WOWKW, the last syllable as a short exhaled breath). I believe the people themselves also much prefer it to

"Kwakiutl." Inkgod 11:17, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I think Kwakwaka'wakw is heard more. Maybe not in text books, but it is the now identified group of all the Kwak'wala speaking peoples. There are ties between all the Kwakwaka'wakw nations (The Kwagiutl, the Namgis, the Danaxwdaxw, etc.) This included the Cape Mudge and Campbell River nations. Kwagiutl should be the page for the people of Fort Rupert OldManRivers 08:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I still think that Kwakiutl should at least remain a disambiguation page because of the existence of the Kwakiutl District Council and also Kwakiutl First Nation government articles. See next for related tribal council question.Skookum1 22:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

To complicate matters, I just followed the Kwak'wala link while breaking up the various Haisla, Ooweykala and Heiltsuk content into their respective lang/gov/ethno articles....it redirects to Kwakiutl language. The page was authored by User:Bill Poser of the Yinka Dene Language Institute, who I don't think likes me '=| so doubtless any name change there might involve some crossed swords; Kwak'wala is gaining increasing currency in British Columbia English as the name for this language, I can't speak for outside of BC; so maybe to satisfy Kwakwaka'wakw objections to the use of Kwakiutl in the title of Kwakiutl language it should be renamed to Kwak'wala, with Kwakiutl language as the redirect. I'll leave it to one of the more diplomatically-tongued among us to approach Mr. Poser and give him a heads-up about the change and the why and the wherefore, and also to let him know of the ongoing break-out of separate language, nation/government, nation/ethnocultural and other categories of FN articles, from what are typically at present only one article, sometimes two...this is being applied BC-wide, which should be of interest to YDLI's languages links on their own pages, and hopefully is a useful tool for further expansion/coordination of both First Nations languages articles and the overall organization of BC First Nations articles. I'd also suggest that Category:Languages of British Columbia should come into being, as we've got at least 60% of the languages potentially in Category:Languages of Canada.....Skookum1 06:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Firstvoices.ca refers to the language as Kwak'wala, and presumably they're reliable and consultative on these matters. Based on what I've heard here and elsewhere, I'd opt to go with Kwak'wala for language with a Kwakiutl redirect page, and an ('also referred to as...') blurb in the first line of article. Quite simply, 'Kwakiutl' is becoming more obsolete among the people who use it most, from my experience.--Keefer4 04:50, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Disamig this page with all the related Kwagiutl related articles (Language, the people, the Kwakwaka'wakw, and government pages.) OldManRivers 21:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kwakwaka'wakw Tribal Councils?

Partly re the previous discussion, I'm wondering if there's a tribal council affiliation for non-Kwakiutl District Council Kwakwaka'wakw governments; here is a listing from the "Kwakwaka'wakw First Nations, Alert Bay" item in the External links section (which is actually adspam for a tour company and should probably be removed and replaced by a listing of all Kwakwaka'wakw governments. Redlinks following of course are not made yet, not even as stubs (which is all there is for the bluelinked ones....): spellings may not be right/appropriate here also as the preference of the government in question should be used, if different:

User:OldManRivers has also observed, and I concur that {{tl:First Nations on Vancouver Island}} should be broken up by nation, as in ethnic group, and that the various First Nations templates (see [[:Category:First Nations governments in British Columbia}} should not be derived from Indian Act-based governmental divisions incl. Tribal Councils and Treaty Councils, but defined again according to ethnic/nation grouping; otherwise some independent/unaffiliated bands/peoples/communities do not appear on the templates, including perhaps the non-Kwakiutl District Council bands/governments listed above. Note in all cases that the same title without "First Nation" or "Nation" or "Indian Band" attached should be history/culture articles, while those with "First Nation" etc. should be government articles (which is how I've written the stubs for the ones extant); actual village/reserver articles fall again in a different category...(see talkpage at Sto:lo and also Talk:Gitxsan.Skookum1 22:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

First, thanks for your work on this. It's all rather complicated, and clear information is hard to come by. I'm with you up until your idea of dropping "nation" from history/culture articles. In North America, we tend to see the words "country" and "nation" (and even government) as synonymous, but nation refers to a people as well. Why not leave nation on the articles about the people, and attach the word Council when you want to talk about the government. That would be the clearest, no? - TheMightyQuill 00:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to play the wikipeida card on that... Simply: it's not neutral (haha, been waiting to use that argument). At least, it doesn't seem neutral to me. We're talking about the people, and although this is a "English-language-wiki", the "Dzawada'enuxw" should be that. The article does not say "Canada Nation" or "Canada Colonial Government", although there are pages for "Canadian Senate with Senate of Canada at the top. Although technically "nation's" in it's sense of the word, we're talking about the people that exist and have existed for thousands of years. Although it's different between the nation-state of Canada and the Indigenous nations in BC, or otherwise, it's the cultural history, ethno article. Canadian, Canada are directed to the same page. 'Namgis, Skwxwu7mesh, or what ever is the same as "Canada", where the villages are like Provinces, and clans are like reigions, and families are like municipalities. ((I believe this makes Kwakwaka'wakw and Nuu-chan-nuth continents in this analogy) It's a very awful way to explain it. (It's like describing the potlatch are a big native garage sale....aw puke]], but you get the idea. I agree with you, they are nations, but in terms of encyclopedia format, and creating more legiable and comprehensive pages for the Indigenous people, with regards to social, economic, politics, art, intellectual and military (or warrior societies), it's should be treated similarly across the board. For me it makes sense, but, I like how User:Skookum1 one is going with it. OldManRivers 05:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
With OldManRivers here. I think the Nisga'a title model is a sound one, in that the tag of First Nation or 'Nation' shouldn't be used for the history/culture article titles. Like he says, we don't use 'Canada Nation' and anything less would indeed be unequal. The text within the article should properly convey the concept of the 'nation', without needing it in the title, same goes for settlements-- 'band' should never be in a settlement title, for example. Not sure if it actually is anywhere but if so, tsk tsk. As for the 'Band governments' or Councils articles, they should obviously include the appropriate/applicable reference to their status as an administrative entity.--Keefer4 05:05, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
There's an interesting exception to this dichotomy in the case of the Nisga'a Lisims, which is now both the constitutional/legal government of the Nisga'a as well as, from what I understand, the embodiment of the traditional government. It's like the distinction between Gingolx and Kincolith, sort of; or more between the former Kincolith First Nation and its IRs vs. the new Gingolx traditional-body (NB, Gingolx, British Columbia would still be a separate location article, under the schema...and Kincolith and the other IRs/band councils should still have articles as things that existed, rather than things that do exist....); so while there still should be an article on the now-historical Nisga'a Nation/Nisga'a First Nation, i.e. the Indian Act creation/embodiment, that's different from the Nisga'a Lisims, which is both the current government as well as the traditional one....??? There are "parallel" bodies like the K'omoks Laich-kwil-tach Council of Chiefs, which parallel traditional forms but are made up of Indian Act creations, but......damn it's complicated, huh? But worth sorting out, and this effort might be the first time there's a coordinated representation of the whole schmeer anywhere, once it's all done....Skookum1 05:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures

I humbly request if someone could help me out with pictures. I want to get a few more pictures, perhaps a black and white photo of something to do with the potlatch. I would also like to ask if someone could make a map of Kwakwaka'wakw territory? If you follow this link [www.moa.ubc.ca/pdf/resource_packages/MOA_Continuity_Change.pdf], on page 5 of the pdf, there is a map of the languages. It's most accurate for the Kwakwaka'wakw as a whole too. I would make it myself, but I don't know how. Thanks OldManRivers 18:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll pass that on to a mapmaker at the pacNW project; see near the bottom of my talkpage for a new BC basemap he's created.Skookum1 (talk) 15:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dzawadli

OMR knows what this is; an important and very ancient eulachon-fishing station on teh Klinaklini River; this is an article request re t'lina (the Kwakwaka'wakw version of Eulachon grease); a list of important community/fishing/other Kwakwaka'wwakw sites here would help, i.e to give an idea what's yet needed in t he way of articles; Dzawadli just seems particularly important....Skookum1 (talk) 15:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nobles, commoner and slaves

En route to the next section, just a quick note to suggest the kwak'wala worde for them. And PS about hte capitalization of Kwak'wala, which I know isn't preferred within Kwaki'wala, is a standard in English for proper names of languages; so for consistency cap'd that even though I realize, like Skwxwu7mesh placenames etc the caps aren't correct; in those languages, but they are in English, if words/names are used in English.Skookum1 (talk) 01:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rez schools

The use of Kwak'wala declined significantly in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, mainly due to the assimilationist policies of the Canadian government, and above all the mandatory attendance of Kwakwa'wakw children at residential schools.

A couple of ancillary points to pin onto that, but I don't have cites at the moment:

....where students were beaten if caught speaking Kwak'wala or other languages, including the Chinook Jargon, which had become a secret language in the schools linking children of different linguistic backgrounds, after originally being introduced and populated by the same churches who ran them (well, Catholic schools anyway, can't say for Anglican etc). The Jargon was once widely spoken as a second mother tongue within Kwakwaka'wakw territories - some of the only published recordings of British Columbia Chinook usage are of Mungo Martin - although it is largely forgotten now (though in some areas of BC it nearly supplanted the traditional languages altogether until its use was discouraged by language departmsnts.

That was all part of discussions at various Chinuk Lu?lu's and I think some might be found in Holton's book or in Glavin & Lillard; any more of what I might say would be OR (unless I ever publish, or someone does on certain topics). The addition about CJ in the schools doesn't have to be as lengthy as I've just laid out; but language suppression shoudl be mentioend, as well as the pressure from CJ use in teh schools and back home. Another suggested clause/idea:

....[sent to residential schools], often far outside Kwakwaka'wakw territory and among school populations of widely varied linguistic backgrounds.

A similar topic, maybe more succinct; the main point there rathert han language is the removal of them from their traditional territory and the distance from parents; maybe the two items can be combined without making the ssection too long. Also, one of the webpages out there somewhere has a list of which communities spoke which dialect, e.g. Li'kwala for hte Lekwiltok/Southern Kwakiutl and others; these should all be mentioned, and maybe listed in the tribes table.Skookum1 (talk) 01:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)