Talk:Indian reserve

message: I removed this because it needs to be fleshed out considerably:
:==Controversy==
:Many roads have undergone construction.  Freeway projects have been ruining land on Indian reserves.  The local planners have put many freeway projects on hiatus especially in Canada since Canada has Indian reserves in various places.
We need some detail about who protested and why, and some examples of projects that were suspended. Since the article is about Canadian reserves the inclusion of reserves elsewhere is irrelevant. John FitzGerald 01:29, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: How is the history of the development of "Indian reserves" in Canada markedly different from that of the "Indian reservations" in the United States as claimed in the article ? Please state the differences. 161.24.19.112 (talk) 20:34, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It involves more of a sense of smug superiority. 216.252.78.183 (talk) 04:09, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Reserves vs Reservations

message: The article is confusing. It is not clear for example who owns reserve land. Is it the Crown, the bands themselves or individual band members ? 187.34.69.140 (talk) 23:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Property Title

message: Why is the title of this article "Indian Reserve", when in the body of the article it states that is a former term? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.100.254.156  (talk • contribs) 22:34, 6 October 2013
:It was a falsehood and has been removed.Skookum1 (talk) 08:14, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled 2

message: After removing the SYNTH/OR from the lede as pointed out in the RM, and fixing some grammar and definitions/wording in sections following, I wound up reading the rest of the article, and wonder why so much of it does not have to do with reserves but instead talks about governance and issues relating to band governments, and not to the concept of reserves themselves.  It appears that many contributors to this article do not have a clear handle on the distinction between reserves as places, and bands as governments, and communities as communities. ALL of the following sections really do not belong in this article:
2 Governance on reserves
3 Constitution Act 1867
4 Post-Proclamation and pre-Confederation Treaties and reserves
5 Numbered treaties 1871-1921
6 The Indian Act 1876
7 Northern frontier, northern homeland
8 Terminology
8.1 Status Indian, Registered Indian
8.2 Canadian Federal Government policy regarding use of term "First Nations" instead of "Indian"
9 Indian Act
9.1 CMHC on First Nations reserves
10 Public policy
10.1 CEPA 1999
11 First Nations reserves and water quality
That last section, for example, speaks of water quality re Kashechewan "First Nations reserve" but is really meaning the government, i.e. "the First Nation" (band); while it is about the place, the context of the wording is about the government entity.  This type of confusion only abets the confusing current title ("First Nations reserve") and obscures the distinction between the different meanings and usages. It's only a Wiki convention, but "First Nation" in the singular is for band governments, not for peoples in general, nor is it a synonym for reserve; still, in many articles e.g. on Prairie region bands and in Ontario, the articles are written as though those terms are synonymous, but they are not.  As for the long exegesis on treaties and the Constitution Act, nothing there directly discusses Indian reserves, and goes on about status and rights and so on....there are other articles for that. I do not have the time or energy to work on all of this, but am disppointed to see so much energy put into justifying the name change (i.e. the deleted lede bits) and expanding other issues to do with First Nations peoples and governments, but so little about the concept of reserves and the various kinds of them out there; there are also Indian Settlements, Metis Communities, and Indian Villages and other designations in AADNC's listings which do not have articles and should be mentioned here, if nowhere else (as yet).Skookum1 (talk) 01:01, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Would someone else care to shop around and see where the sections above should be moved to?  To me, most of what's in them doesn't belong here at all.Skookum1 (talk) 19:46, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  So much dross 

message: here are most of the changes I put in after deleting the long SYNTH that came to dominate the lede after the name change in August. As in my previous section, I'm amazed at the amount of work that's been put into adding extraneous information into this article without even getting the facts and circumstances of the reserves listed in it straight or factual.....misleading names, thinking Musqueam was only one reserve and using "who" instead of "which" when it's governments and not people that are being mentioned.  Atikamekw I took out entirely as it's not the name of a First Nation, but of an ethnic grouping of three band governments and does not have a single reserve; "Blue Quills" was included as if that one's name wasn't a clear example of the use of the term "Indian Reserve", to whit Blue Quills First Nation Indian Reserve, the Blue Quills connection being the name of one of the chiefs whose band is one of those that formed the Saddle Lake Cree Nation.  It's not "Blue Quills First Nation First Nations Reserve", now, is it??  Tidied up about Musqueam, and already done more work than shoudl have been necessary.  So much energy put into changing names and justifying the change, and adding extraneous information that's already in other articles, so little research or clear writing on even the few reserves actually mentioned......as I've often said about Wikipedia, it's like people rearranging deck chairs on a sinking ship; fiddling with names, and thereby taking up their own energy, and that of others who have to argue things back to where they belong, and work at picking up the pieces and doing the repairs and cleanup the name-movers have either caused by damage, or never did much on other than changing names based on some specious logic/synth/or. Don't anyone dress me down for showing emotion, if that's what pointing out all this constitutes.  It would help if people would start understanding the subject matter before screwing around with name changes, let's just leave it at that for now.Skookum1 (talk) 08:13, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  cleanup partly done 

message: I removed the long jumbled bit about the Sto:lo, as only the bit about Peckquaylis was relevant to the topic; there are other shared Sto:lo reserves, Grass No. x, I'll have to look up x=? as I'm unsure of its number, it's near Greendale.   Mention of the Sto:lo Declaration and the two tribal councils and non-tribal council bands don't really belong here (and that story in this case would require a whole history of modern Sto:lo politics/divisions).  Similarly I pulled the stuff about Nlaka'pamux bands.  That paragraph also began with "some reserves choose to belong to tribal councils", which is a confusion-usage resulting from equating reserve=band which is not the case, though that is a common usage/misperception.  Same with equating "First Nations" as meaning a people vs meaning a government, and as often used as meaning a place (when singular); Some bands have only one reserve; many have several; and many reserves are shared between bands; some reserves are completely uninhabited, some are only cemeteries or fishing camps; and many of the latter are not reserves though "should" be.   A lot of this page had a lot of material that was far from the title topic; this page shouldn't be confused with First Nations government which I feel should be retitled band government because now there are post-band governments like the Nisga'a and the Sechelt and Tsawwassen and traditional governance has always been within the term "First Nations government" (e.g. the Council of Gitxsan Chiefs), while "band government" is exclusively a creature of the Indian Act; that should have an RM applied to it, even though it was me who long ago created the current title.  There's also cases where reserve lands are only part of governance/jurisdiction, as with the Council of the Haida Nation or the Taku Tlingit or.....well suffice to say there's a lot more to First Nations territory than reserves; but this article is about reserves, not governance or land claims or even terminology, hence all the stuff I've deleted .Skookum1 (talk) 07:14, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ongoing cleanup 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Indian reserve. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120302203119/http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/RVDetail.aspx?RESERVE_NUMBER=09657&lang=eng to http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/Search/RVDetail.aspx?RESERVE_NUMBER=09657&lang=eng
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120531065200/http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-1.html to http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-1.html
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140810164041/http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/const/const1867.html to http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/const/const1867.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720084637/http://www.solon.org/Constitutions/Canada/English/rlo_1870.html to http://www.solon.org/Constitutions/Canada/English/rlo_1870.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:09, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Indian reserve. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130114030734/http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100014642/1100100014643 to http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100014642/1100100014643
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121105184943/http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/FNP/Main/Index.aspx to http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/fnp/Main/index.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:32, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Indian reserve. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131202235045/http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/FNP/Main/Search/FNReserves.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=550&lang=eng to http://pse5-esd5.ainc-inac.gc.ca/FNP/Main/Search/FNReserves.aspx?BAND_NUMBER=550&lang=eng
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130929190608/http://sustainabilitynetwork.ca/Event%20Handouts/Workshop%2061%20100125_FN_Training_WordsFirst_Terminology.pdf to http://sustainabilitynetwork.ca/Event%20Handouts/Workshop%2061%20100125_FN_Training_WordsFirst_Terminology.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130928234929/http://www.rrj.ca//m3913/ to http://www.rrj.ca/m3913
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130927022736/http://www.diversitywatch.ryerson.ca/backgrounds/firstnations.htm to http://www.diversitywatch.ryerson.ca/backgrounds/firstnations.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130928035416/http://www.ontarioplaques.com/Plaques_STU/Plaque_Simcoe16.html to http://www.ontarioplaques.com/Plaques_STU/Plaque_Simcoe16.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:54, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the 2001 INAC publication, Words First: an Evolving Terminology Relating to Aboriginal Peoples in Canada, which described outdated terminology and suggested more respectful terms, noted that "Many First Nations now prefer the term "First Nation community," and no longer use "reserve". In Canada, the term First Nation began replacing Indian in the 1970s According to the Communications Branch of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada publication, published in 2001 and updated since, to "provide writers with background information and guidance on appropriate word usage and style issues, the term "Indian" is controversial and outdated. The Department, following "contemporary usage, typically uses the term "First Nation" instead of "Indian," except in the following cases: in direct quotations, when citing titles of books, works of art, etc., in discussions of history where necessary for clarity and accuracy, in discussions of some legal/constitutional matters requiring precision in terminology, in discussions of rights and benefits provided on the basis of "Indian" status and in statistical information collected using these categories (e.g., the Census)."
:No clue what your point is here. The article is predicated on the fact that an Indian reserve is a legally defined term by the white supremacist government. Unless that changes in the legislation, it should not be changed here. 76.69.155.96 (talk) 06:15, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: FYI: An Evolving Terminology Relating to Aboriginal Peoples in Canada

message: Indigenous namespaces are under attack daily. The idea that this has no protection from fascist "ninja" editors is, frankly, appalling. 76.69.155.96 (talk) 06:13, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Informal protection request 

message: Is there no plan showing the extent of the Indian reserves? McPhail (talk) 13:09, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plan 

message: I've noticed—here in Canada, at least—that many non-First-Nations people are now going to special trouble to acknowledge that they're living, working, or doing other things on "unceded land". This, of course, is a quick, guilt-minimizing way to say "land we took away from the people who used to live on it."
As my dad would've said, "That and a quarter will get you a cup of coffee." (Well, about 1/10th of a cup these days, but I digress.) Saying it doesn't change anything. In fact, I often wonder if saying it is worse than not saying it. By degrees, it seems compulsory, condescending, smug. But it's obviously something someone somewhere started doing, and it caught on.
It's so pervasive now, I was surprised to find no WP "Unceded Land Statement" article. Is this a reasonable place to suggest one? I'd start it myself—but as much editing as I've done here, I've no idea how to do that. – AndyFielding (talk) 21:40, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Land acknowledgement is the article you are looking for. Indefatigable (talk) 03:24, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Unceded land" statements