Talk:Indian

Please add languages and tribes if you want to.

We will also need to make clear 1)American Indian tribes in history. 2)Tribes whose people still live in mostly-traditional ways today. 3)People whose ethnic group is a tibe, but who live a modern Western lifestyle today. (That is "modern" "Western" "lifestyle" -- you don't need to criticize me for saying it this way, I know there are other ways to say this. :-) ) -- RJ208104.user.veloxzone.com.br

We should avoid the word Indian for this purpose. An Indian lives in India.

No. American Heritage Dictionary 4th ed online gives two definitions. The second is "Of or relating to any of the Native American peoples except the Eskimos, Aleuts, and Inuits." http://www.bartleby.com/61/16/I0101600.html That is what I wrote. We need to be descriptive, not proscriptive (I think I'm saying this right), and inclusive, not exclusive. -- RJ208104.user.veloxzone.com.br

Then you must not use the American Heritage Dictionary. That dictionary was produced specifically as propaganda for specifically American categories and views. It is infamous for this. It should not be used here for any definition. Webster's Dictionary is much more neutral.

I'm sorry. You wish us to consider you as a better authority than this dictionary?

Almost anyone who is not an American is a better authority than this dictionary. And what does objecting to a source, have to do with claiming to be a source? These are two different things.

Re "Webster's", from the En Wikipedia: "Webster's dictionary was so popular that "Webster's" became synonymous with dictionary to many Americans. As a result, the Webster's name lost trademark protection and is now used by numerous publishers in the titles of their dictionaries. Among these, the Merriam-Webster's dictionary is considered to be the most direct descendent of Noah Webster's lexicographical tradition, the Merriam brothers having purchased the rights to revise the dictionary from Webster's heirs upon his death in 1843." Should we assume that you're talking about the Merriam-Webster's? -- RJ208104.user.veloxzone.com.br

That's the one I meant, yes, but, any of the ones named Websters are better than the American Heritage Dictionary. If you believe that Dictionary you will become a slave. That is the opinion of a great many people. Look up reviews of this dictionary.

You goof! *This* FROM the Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary --

indian

\In"di*an\ (?; 277), n. 1. A native or inhabitant of India.

2. One of the aboriginal inhabitants of America; -- so called originally from the supposed identity of America with India.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=indian&r=67 -- RJ208104.user.veloxzone.com.br

If Webster's says it's valid, fine, but I still think there should be no substance about aboriginal people here, just a link to another article on them. Leave this to discuss Indians from India. Where else would that go?

I should say -- I DO agree that we should disambiguate these. But we need a link from Indian. Sorry if I wasn't clear about this. -- -- RJ208104.user.veloxzone.com.br

The term aboriginal or first people or indigenous is much more neutral.

I included several terms on the page. I agree with you that the terms you give should be there also, and I'm adding them. -- RJ208104.user.veloxzone.com.br

Moved some text to American Indian for now. We might decide the name for this page needs to be a different one. We'll at least leave on Indian the mention that this word has two common meanings, with a link to American Indian or whatever we decide the name will be. OK with everyone?? -- RJ208104.user.veloxzone.com.br