This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Brazil and
related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Indigenous peoples of the Americas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of the AmericasWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasIndigenous peoples of the Americas articles
It has been suggested that this page be merged. I would recommend that it be kept independent in that it would make a merged simple too big. What really needs to be done is to create pages for all the dead links! Would it be possible to form some sort of group to do so? I am a student studying anthropology and would be glad to help with an organized effort. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any suggestions.
I removed the list from the article because it was redundant to the table. I added all the bluelinks into the table. Here are the redlinks from the list.
This was added as per the survey of indigenous peoples in Brazil from 2009. None of the entries in this article are cited. I'm happy for you to remove any article that isn't notable or verifiable, but why have you singled out my edit? The vast majority of the results listed have no citations and very little (if anything) shows up about them on Google. The general policy is to
WP:AGF, but I'm not sure how far that extends on a list that has zero citations. I suggest we go through each entry and cite it or delete it. In terms of
Wikipedia:Notability, I'm not sure what standard to apply that with in terms of tribes. Should we delete tribes that have little written about them or that have less than a dozen people? -
User:OutreachService—Preceding
undated comment added
16:34, 1 February 2013 (UTC)reply
Someone pretty much lifted the list of indigenous peoples from the
Instituto Socioambiental. I've tried to add individual references and move away from potential
COPYVIO. All ethnic groups, regardless of size, are automatically considered notable. There are two tribes in the US that only have 5 and 8 members; however, it's extremely notable historically why these tribes are so small today. However,
WP:Verifiability is important, and I can't find any published resource on the web discussing the Asundria people (Wiki mirror sites don't count).
Ethnologue and
Instituto Socioambiental are good sources for lesser known ethnic groups. -
Uyvsdi (
talk)
19:15, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdireply
I just added the Ethnologue Languages of Brazil (ref name=brazil) and ISA's Table of the Indigenous peoples (ref name=pib), so between those two almost every listing on the table can be referenced. -
Uyvsdi (
talk)
19:53, 3 February 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdireply