Talk:Mi'kmaq

message: I am reasonably certain that Mi'kmaq is now the more common spelling, at least in Canadian journalistic usage. It's the first spelling listed in my 1998 Canadian Oxford. I propose we move this. - Montréalais 16:56, 6 Oct 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: In the province of Quebec, the spelling is Mi'gmaq - the g replaces the k in this area's dialect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.134.215.177 (talk) 18:48, 21 July 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling

message: I put in the table, but on second thoughts, it looks rather busy, doesn't it? What do you others think? QuartierLatin1968 04:00, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In the table you've forgotten Red Bank, in Red Bank New Brunswick.  I don't have any numbers, however, or pronounciations for you.  I have more information on the Mi'kmaq, my family is from Eel Ground, so I will work on something to add to our article.  --Irina 02:11, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In the table, the spelling for Whycocomagh was incorrect (Whycomagh). However, the page for Whycocomagh has the correct spelling. So... I assumed that it was just a typo, rather than ignorance; seeing as you had to have typed the correct spelling in the source code for the page to link properly. All fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.222.159.1 (talk) 09:37, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Yeah that was me, thanks a bunch for setting that straight! Cheers, ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 04:22, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The table

message: Anonymous user 69.37.197.130 added the following paragraph to the Mi'kmaq subdivisions section that contains numerous problems:
: "As many Micmacs spoke Scottish Gaelic as French, since New Scotland had inhabitants who can trace their relationship back 1,000 years to the Irish/Scottish/Swedish immigrants who came with Eric the Red to Newfoundland and then crossed into Nova Scotia and into Martha's Vineyard. The Island of Cape Breton was predominantly French and Scottish Gaelic and English speaking natives. The people had no automobiles until around 1914 and no road to the mainland until 1954. They all fished and farmed. There were no rich people in Cape Breton other than a few well-known engineers in the Baddeck area, like Alexander Graham Bell. Almost all the people lived a basically subsistence lifestyle except for one or two refugees from the French and Scottish Revolutions which drove Catholics out of the Highlands and out of France in the 18th century and then the Catholics out of Russia in the early 20th century. My father's tribe of Micmacs in 1913 spoke mostly Scottish Gaelic or Scots English. If any Canadians spoke anything in the 20th century other than a European based language, they must have been living in the Northwest Territories of Ontario, known as the Hinterlands. All Nova Scotians from at least 1905 were required to go to English schools in Nova Scotia."
Some of the problems here:
# In first person, and apparently anecdotal.
# Factually incorrect.  Erik the Red never made it to Newfoundland for one, and the settlement party with Leif Eriksson would have been only Norse, including no Irish or Scots.  Nova Scotia was called that precisely because it was granted by Charles I to a colonizing group from Scotland in 1620.  However, the colony was short-lived due to politics between Britain and France at the time, and any Gaelic seen today is likely the result of large numbers of Gaelic-speaking Highland Scots emigrat[ing] to Cape Breton and the western portion of the mainland during the late 18th century and 19th century (from Nova Scotia#History). 
So my question to other Wikipedians is, can we use any of the added material?  I suspect that anecdotes don't cut the mustard, but I'm not sure, and thus I will not delete this section right away.  If no one has any comments in the next week or so, I'll remove the paragraph.  Cheers, Eiríkr Útlendi 18:56, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The first person narrative needs to go.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.153.96.40 (talk • contribs) 8 March 2006, 21:54 (UTC)
I disagree with this deletion.  Narratives like this are an important part of Mi'kmaq culture.  Davidzukovny 03:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

text: It may be an important part of their culture, but this is still supposed to resemble an encyclopedia. Gelston 15:04, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's fictional... Gaelic was certainly spoken in Mi'kmaq country, but I've never heard of any Mi'kmaq themselves speaking it... ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 15:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Mi'kmaq#Mi.27kmaq_subdivisions|Mi'kmaq subdivisions]] and POV 

message: Bob Newman appears to not belong on this page. His bio says nothing about him being a L'nu (Mi'kmaw). We'jitu 23:12, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bob Newman

message: What is the population information, is that status indians, or people of aboriginal descent, or self identified mi'kmaq?  I had thought that mi'kmaq population in Nova Scotia alone was 20K, slightly less than the 30k for Acadian and 30K for African Nova Scotian. WayeMason 00:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question.  Our population figures don't seem to agree with each other.  I added some figures for estimated pre-contact population.  I have never seen anything lower than 5,000, but that is definitely at the low end.  I know the Crown in the Marshall case acknowledged that it might have been as high as 10,000-20,000 (and we can guess that their figures would tend to be a lower-end estimate), and I have seen as high as 35,000.  But that does not seem to gibe with the numbers that someone put in the chart.  Any suggestions?  Also, someone has changed my population figures.  Is there any particular reason for this?Davidzukovny 01:34, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've changed the population to 40 000. I've also changed to population of Paq’tnkek First Nation to 500 (It was listed as 10 000 previously, which is far too large). If you add up the population of the Mi'kmaq communities listed you get well over 20 000; actually fairly close to 30 000. This population plus the numbers from the new Qalipu Band forming in Newfoundland means the population is likely well over 40 000 (Qalipu is going to be well over 10 000; rumours are suggesting overr 20 000 people have already applied). Matt White 12 October 2009 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattwhite05 (talk • contribs)  
Are the population figures given for the various reserves supposed to be the number of band members for that band, no matter where they live, or of the actual Mi'gmaw population living on the reserve in question? I think it should say.  Stats Canada population numbers are not accurate for reserves as -- at least I am told -- residents of reserves don't have to fill out census forms.  I assume however at INAC has accurate numbers of who is a member of any given band, although probably not necessarily where all those band members live.  The number for Listuguj seems higher than it should be to me, unless it is based on total number of band members because many live in neighbouring Campbellton NB, down the USA, etc.  In any event, I think it should be clarified what the number represents.  Tim from Canada  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.176.84.242 (talk) 02:32, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Population? 

message: I'm requesting discussion about moving from Mi'kmaq to Míkmaq for articles relating to this topic. Please see Talk:Mi'kmaq language and discuss there. Thanks! Evertype 19:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Míkmaq orthography 

message: We don't need two articles about the same nation.  A section on the various names used to designate the nation could easily fit in this article. Indefatigable 12:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from L'nu 

message: For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all  infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 20:45, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "related groups" info removed from infobox 

message: I have a strong suspicion that the Kevin Cloud linked to on this page is not the correct one.  Somebody more knowledgable than me can confirm this.  Ed Sanville 21:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kevin Cloud Mi,gmaq? 

message: The history section talks of Mi'kmaq expansion into the Gaspé, saying "they were expanding from their Maritime base westward along the Gaspé Peninsula /St. Lawrence River at the expense of Iroquioian Mohawk tribes". There is no cited reference and I have to question the accuracy of the claim that it was at the expense of Iroquoian Mohawk tribes. Heading southwest along the lower St. Lawrence, today's Mi'kmaq would first meet the Maliseet then the Abenaki, who are both Algonquin language linguistic family members. Where the river narrows near Quebec, the north shore would include the Huron-Wendat Iroquois people. Even looking at the Mohawk entry, historical maps show them to be located nowhere north of Montreal. I think this sentence should be changed unless someone can show a reliable reference. AnthroGael 15:18, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also the plain simple fact that 3 of the Nations you mentioned are part of Waponakiyik, the Wabanaki Confederacy (those being Maliseet, Mi'kmaq, and Abenaki). Further, that part of "Gaspé" is claimed as traditional territory, despite the "Quebec" government saying they don't have such a claim. Interjecting personal opinion here: personally, I don't see why a foreign government could say whether or not someone's land was theirs if said gov't has none on that land to begin with. KJI (talk) SR (talk) 06:59, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  History: Mohawk Contact 

message: That's the first time I've seen that theory. Rather amusing. I've seen the "Ancient Egyptian" one, because of a superficial resemblance of writing to hieroglyphics, but it's very superficial. We know where we came from ;). I wouldn't count that conjecture as being valid.
As for moving the article to Mìkmaq, I'd be in favour of it, since that's what the ' is for; however, leaving it as is is easier to type for some keyboard layouts.
SimonRaven (talk) 10:32, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: New paragraph in 'Other' on possible relation... 

message: I checked Sean McLaughlin's online bio and nowhere does it claim that he is Mi'kmaq. Why is his name listed? Ryan McLaughlin: there are no online references to a "Ryan McLaughlin" who is Mi'kmaq. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.202.119.246 (talk) 14:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sean McLaughlin, Ryan McLaughlin 

message: Codex, you say there needs to be discussion for the recent move you reverted. Well, how about it? You are apparently the only one who has a problem with it.--Cúchullain t/c 16:24, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I support the move. -- Evertype·✆ 20:23, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Seconded. kwami (talk) 22:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

text: AFAIK they're wrong. The Grand Council adopted "Míkmaq". "Mi'kmaq" is an orthographic shortcut. It's a bit like arguing whether the word is cœlum or coelum. I think we should stick with the official spelling. kwami (talk) 07:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

text: I've tried contacting the Grand Council, but I can't find a functional email address. kwami (talk) 07:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Union of Nova Scotia Indians uses 'Mi'kmaq' on their web page . So does the under construction site of the Grand Council at  - I presume you tried  macs@mikmaq-assoc.ca and it didn't work? Doug Weller (talk) 17:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it bounced immediately. kwami (talk) 18:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Move

message: *Favor since Micmac, whatever its derivation is English and does not contain an apostrophe, hard to find and spell in English. We will never know what the word sounded like in native form since it was mapped into a non-Micmac alphabet hundreds of years ago. We have hundreds of names in English that do not match what other languages use, Rome vs Roma, Florence vs Firenze, Venice vs Venizia, Germany vs Allemand, Austria vs Oesterreich, etc. etc. What is, is. Let's make this less about political correctness, elusive here because of orthography and time, and more about what makes sense and can be documented. Student7 (talk) 20:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it gets redirected from Micmac. Not the end of the world but still maybe desirable.Student7 (talk) 19:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You clearly haven't been paying attention to a single one of the RSS.  Look on Google books, where you can see the dates of publication.  You will find that most of the hits for "Micmac" are older, while hits for "Mi'kmaq" are far, far more common in anything written within the last 20 years.  This squares perfectly with what all the sources you've been ignoring, have been telling you pointblank, about how the spelling "Micmac" is severely outdated, and comparable to the term 'Eskimo" instead of Canadian Inuit, etc. etc. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 03:14, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move (2008)

message: Other than Northern Maine, is there any evidence of Mi'kmaq habitation in the rest of New England (i.e., Vermont, New Hampshire, Mass., Conn., NY)?  If so, this should be cited.  If not, the text should be changed "Northern Maine" in the interest of specificity. Ross Fraser (talk) 01:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I know of one who lives in Southern Maine but I can't say the name as he is under 13 years old  — Preceding unsigned comment added by A915 (talk • contribs) 22:14, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: New England?

message: For  THeir Religion It Is Not Christianity. I Believe It  Is Catholic. According To My School Book.,,173.178.93.250 (talk) 22:11, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Last I checked, Catholicism was a form of Christianity. Yworo (talk) 22:19, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

text: The Roman Catholic Church is by far the world's largest Christan denomination. About half the world's Christians are Catholics. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Why try to read between the lines? He said it is largest. While Jerry Garcia once asserted that "louder is better (where I come from)", neither that assertion nor the assertion that "bigger is better" is necessarily true. Bugs was just stating a fact. Yworo (talk) 22:31, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Yeah, that follows from Catholicism being a subset of Christianity, doesn't it? Yworo (talk) 22:42, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion  .. 

message: L'nui'sin ki'l Mi'kmaq ? Nikma'jtut apoqnmatultinej ! Mikmaq Wikipedia Wela'lin Amqui (talk) 03:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mígmewei Wikipedia 

message: To: Ncjones61
I see that you have done some editing and contributions to this article. Based on looking at this article, I feel that you should expand and add information in the Pre-culture contact section as well as the last section. Another thing you can do is explain what your contributing to this article. Other than that I think you are doing a good job on this article. Cheers! (Cmmetallic (talk) 04:02, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Environment & Society Peer Review 

message: The wikipedia on the article on the "Mi'mkaq" states the following:
"Later the Mí'kmaq also settled Newfoundland, as the "unrelated" (quotes mine) Beothuk tribe became extinct."
Yet, in contradiction of this, the article on the "Beothuk" states:
"In 2007 DNA testing was conducted on material from the teeth of Demasduit and her husband Nonosabasut, two Beothuk individuals who had died in the 1820s. The results suggest the Beothuk were linked to the same ancestral people as the Mi'kmaq, either through mixing of the populations or through a common ancestor. It also demonstrated they were solely of First Nation indigenous ancestry, unlike some earlier studies that suggested European admixture.[5]"
The article on the Beothuk has the support of a recent scientific study....^ a b Kuch, M; et al (2007). "A preliminary analysis of the DNA and diet of the extinct Beothuk: A systematic approach to ancient human DNA" (pdf). American Journal of Physical Anthropology 132: 594–604. doi:10.1002/ajpa.20536
I propose the word "unrelated" be changed to "related"....It is very important distinction that has had real world consequences...The Mi'kmaq of Newfoundland have had their land claims strengthened by the acknowledgement of their Beothuk heritage...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.239.46.139 (talk) 04:34, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beothuk and Mi'kmaq common ancestors 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Chipewyan people which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 09:13, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: Since the article is making a legal claim of miqmak area to miqmak people (is that according to policy of wikipedia?) it would have been interesting to read if there are any conflicting claims other than Canada. It would also be of historic interest to mention if there are other cultures predecessing miqmak in the area. I wish as a christmas gift to myself that someone answer my questions. PLEASE?? 91.156.75.171 (talk) 15:00, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It is against wikipedia policy to use this page for a general discussion of the article topic or query for information, rather than to discuss content.  It is not against wikipedia policy to mention the fact that most Mi'kmaq sovereign land was simply seized without permission or payment whatsoever, unlike nearly all other other native nations, and in contradiction to the rule of law. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 15:12, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Legality claims and history

message: The Mi'kmaq are not a band government. You can say they are "Aboriginal group of First Nations indigenous to the Maritime Provinces and Gaspé Peninsula of Quebec." but not that they are a band government. The band governments are listed at Mi'kmaq#First Nation subdivisions. They are no more a band government than are the Tłı̨chǫ, Gwich'in, Chipewyan or any the Dene peoples in general or the Cree and so on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CambridgeBayWeather (talk • contribs) 13:48, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are going to go canvassing support for that pov on other boards, why didn't you go to the Indigenous peoples wikiproject where it belongs? 208.54.40.186 (talk) 16:01, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I forgot to post there. By the way there was no canvassing. I just asked people to take a look. They can comment any way they want. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 16:19, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: According to this and this the Mi'kmaq as a whole are not a band government. The term covers smaller groups that make up the entirety of the Mi'kmaq. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 09:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Band government? 

message: Last night I received a request to semi-protect the page as there was IP edit-warring going on. Now that I've had time to look over the contribs I think the disruption was due to a particular IP: 74.248.189.199, the same one who has been going through many First Nations articles, removing the words "First Nations," and adding "aboriginal" and "band government". I have warned the user, and if I'm not around and they resume this behaviour, please give them a final warning and, if they proceed, report them as a disruptive editor or vandal. Given that one user looks to me to be the problem here, I am going to unprotect the page. However, I would strongly suggest that those editing as an IP here register an account. That way, once you edit as a registered user for a little while, you won't be affected by these low-level page protections. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 15:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI I asked that the article be semi-protected due to edits made by IP: 74.248.189.199 Indigenous girl (talk) 16:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: About the page protection

message: Substituted at 23:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: The grammar here needs to be fixed. Whether we say "are a People" or "are Peoples", the way it is now is incorrect: "The Mi'kmaq are a First Nations peoples". I'm not going to edit as I semi'd the page to stop the edit warring, but it should either be: "The Mi'kmaq are a First Nations People, or "The Mi'kmaq are First Nations Peoples". I think the former is more correct. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 19:02, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted it to people. The Mi'kmaq are a people who are included in the group of indigenous peoples of Canada and the United States.Indigenous girl (talk) 19:12, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  People vs Peoples 

message: I have filed feedback with Ethnologue to change the preferred spelling that they use from Micmac to Mi’kmaq. I have also filed a ticket with unicode.org asking them to do the same. Based on their feedback so far it looks like they will change it which means we should update the reference in the Etymology section. Any thoughts on how to change this reference? Mic Mac Mall? Also, please let me or these organizations know if you feel that this is the wrong thing to do. Goodgodwin (talk) 14:56, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Micmac in Ethnologue 

message: Is there a general understanding or guidance on when to change use to Mi'kmaq vs when speaking of a historical name of an organization, book, etc that was called Micmac?  Specifically I just reverted Mi'kmaq Missionary Society to Micmac Missionary Society as the later was the historic name in the late 1800s, and Mi'kmaq is a contemporary use. WayeMason (talk) 00:20, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Policy on historic use of Micmac

message: Is the 'y' at the end a mistake? --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 02:23, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mi'kmaqy 

message: This: 
 ... Miꞌkmaq developed an independent prehistoric sequence in their territory. It emphasized maritime orientation...
and some passages below. Is it good English? Zezen (talk) 10:08, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The first sentence is specific to language development. The second is about location in proximity to the ocean as opposed to rivers. It is academic in nature and could use simplification for better understanding to a global population. Indigenous girl (talk) 15:42, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

text: I would be happy to help streamline the readability of the article. Could you please clarify how language development is ahistorical pseudoscience? There is consensus in the linguistics community that the Miꞌkmaw language developed initially out of Proto-Algic, then into Proto-Algonquian, then Proto-Eastern Algonquian and finally into Mi'kmaq. This evolution of language began in pre-history. Indigenous girl (talk) 17:40, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange language 

message: The ꞌ is Unicode A78C. Should this be an apostrophe ' (Unicode 0027)?
2600:1011:B02F:C51A:2D9E:490:1F3E:EC1D (talk) 21:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  In the case of Tahitian, for example, the Académie tahitienne has rules about how to write the glottal stop (they say it is an apostrophe, either straight " ' ", or curved " ' ", or tilted " ʻ "). In the case of writing Mi'kmaq (if it follows the Listuguj transcription, the orthography used for "Mi'kmaq"), I don't think an explicit apostrophe to represent a long vowel ought to be used. I would say that using the most common Unicode apostrophe (U+0027) is fine. 暁海 (talk) 04:25, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should that be an apostrophe? 

message: According to the 1917 Halifax Explosion article, some communities of Mi'kmaq around Tufts Cove were permanently destroyed by the blast, yet there does not appear to be any mention of this in the Mi'kmaq article itself. Is there a reason for this?
2600:6C67:5080:4E46:B4A8:BF0B:BE96:7660 (talk) 21:46, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It's possible because there aren't any good sources for this, it's not being excluded for any specific reason. I wasn't even aware of it until you mentioned it. Coryphantha Talk 23:03, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mention of the Halifax Explosion 

message: I wanted to learn more about Mi'kmaq history but I found the article very poorly written. it spends just an almost equivalent amount of space to the people who are describing their history. I have never come across this before on wikipedia and I use it daily. instead of telling us which academic stated what put it in the footnotes. 126.209.61.144 (talk) 05:20, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:FIXIT. DeCausa (talk) 08:47, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  use of the names of academics in the description of history of Mi'kmaq 

message: They spoke the langague English Russian and British in the past 20 years by studies. 199.243.187.226 (talk) 14:18, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Langauge they spoke 

message: It has always been my knowledge that the Mi'kmaq tribe was part of the Algonquin Nation. Also, that the Mi'kmaq tribe extended into the southern nation to the extent of Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Please tell me I am correct or incorrect as my Great Grandmother was 100% Mi'kmaq. 2600:8800:A109:5100:43A8:DEDF:67E2:321 (talk) 02:34, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Mi'kmaq people are culturally related to the Algonquin cultural group, but form their own nation. That might just be a semantic difference in "tribe" vs "nation" or "culture". In Massachusetts, I think you would be thinking of the Wabanaki Confederacy, which was an alliance of several nations including Mi'kma'ki. 47.54.197.16 (talk) 19:09, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geographical presence 

message: I copied the first sentence from 2020 Mi'kmaq lobster dispute lead added by User:CaffeinAddict on 2 November 2020 8:33 PM to the related section in this article.Oceanflynn (talk) 17:54, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: CaffeinAddict's content in 2020 Mi'kmaq lobster dispute also used in this article

message: There seems to be an alternating use of an apostrophe (Mi'kmaq) and the saltillo (Miꞌkmaq) in the spellings. Using the apostrophe can "cause problems in electronic files because the apostrophe is a punctuation mark, not a word-building character, and the ambiguous use of apostrophe for two different functions can make automated processing of the text difficult." Thus, I propose moving the page to Miꞌkmaq, and ensure that all Miꞌkmaq references and all Miꞌkmawiꞌsimk words use the saltillo. FUNgus guy (talk) 20:34, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mi'kmaq vs. Miꞌkmaq 

message: The Catholic faith and traditional Mi'kaq faiths are not compatible. In Catholicism there are no provisions for holding pagan beliefs as Part One, Section 2, Chapter 3, Article 9 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. First Nationer spiritualism is viewed as pagan by the Church and condemned. Request for editors to remove this part. Thanks NathanDubovitsky (talk) 00:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religion - request for edit