Talk:Gitxsan Nation

message: Greetings! As a member of the Gitxsan people, I am pleased to see this stub. I'd like to add to it, and perhaps to add to the definition of "micronation". There's a whole class of "First Nations" residing in Canada who enjoy the status called "Nation" for very good legal reasons.
But back to the Gitxsan Nation thing. I'll bone up on the protocols first, and then come back.
Regards,
Russell Collier
Hli Gyet Hl Sagayt Sagat
:Somewhere there's a whole other page, indexing articles on various Gitxsan people, but at the moment I can't find it; I'm not First Nations myself but have been an active contributor to the BC component of the WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America and well as WikiProject British Columbia.  Lately I've been going through various types of articles needed for both these projects, trying to make sure they're all integrated in format and categorizations; long story to explain but for a "quick" run-down on the what, wherefore, why and so on see Talk:Stó:lō, User talk:OldManRivers (OldManRivers is Skwxwu7mesh), Talk:Squamish Nation and its sister talkpages Talk:Skwxwu7mesh Uxwuimixw and Talk:Skwxwu7mesh Uxwumixw and also the talkpages and category/article listings at the Indigenous peoples' project, which you can get to through the template I've just placed above.  There's bits and pieces of this topic matter/guidelines discussions all over talkpages here and there, but you might find some others on my talkpage.  It's a complex web of often seemingly-parallel articles that results if all guidelines are applied; ranging from separate articles for Indian Act-governmental bodies to traditional-nation articles (such as your intent with this one) to ethnographic articles to separate articles for specific communities/reserves and so on.  The reasons for this are partly cross-Wiki standards more than any effort to "cut people up" into different categorizations; what the upshot comes out as is that the same content might be found in three different categories/articles.  Best to leave that whole discussion for now and let you read through the links and the range/content of the Indigenous peoples project; I'm going to try and research how many articles there are on Gitxsan topics, and probably will recommend the creation of a separate :Category:Gitxsan.  And while I'm here, let me ask if THAT is the preferred spelling over "Gitksan", so when the category is made we've got it right.  Also suggest you look over the articles in :Category:Nisga'a which show the range of potential article-coverage for any given nation, although that category hasn't yet been brought fully into line with the guidelines/standards of the Indigenous peoples' project parameters yet (I also write/edit on forty different other topics than FN stuff, so there's only so much I can do at once....).Skookum1 21:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: PS please sign your posts with four tildes ~~~~, which if you have an account will automatically add your username as well as the time and date; if you don't have a userID please create one - you can use "Hli Gyet Hl Sagayt Sagat" or whatever you want, suggest no spaces though that's not a rule.Skookum1 21:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: This is a note to the effect that, by emergent naming conventions for BC aboriginal peoples and governments, this should be a government page, but the name of the Gitxsan national government appears to be the Gitxsan Chiefs' Office, where this should maybe be a redirect to.  And note that the treaty body is Gitxsan Treaty Society Board of Directors Gaayuuhadayet 
(People in the helm of the canoe) and, though maybe (?) synonymous with the Chiefs' Office the treaty groups, such as Te'mexw and Maa-nulth, are a separate type of government article from band/tribal council governments.  Ultimately this article, or where it's redirect to, should be in :Category:First Nations governments in British Columbia, as is also the case with its subgovernments, i.e. village/band governments; the hereditary chieftaincy articles, once written (if not already) should be a subcategory of that; "traditional governments".Skookum1 (talk) 16:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: More on that - it appears the Office of the Hereditary Chiefs is the full name of the official body; but is it the Office of the Hereditary Chiefs of the Gitksan and Wet'suwet'en or separately as Office of the Hereditary Chiefs of the Gitksan and Office of the Hereditary Chiefs of the Wet'suwet'en?  And in that formation, is it the 'k' or 'x' spellign?Skookum1 (talk) 03:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Name/content of article

message: Substituted at 16:20, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment