Talk:East Frisians

Related ethnic groups
I absolutely agree with you that all Germanic-speaking peoples (plural, please!) are not necessarily "related" beyond their linguistic affiliation. But why do you insist to have "Germanic people" in the infobox, when a) the singular doesn't make sense grammatically here (unless one is an adherent of Pan-Germanism), and b) the redirect Germanic people links to the Germanics of antiquity? I wanted to give the thing a more meaningful target, but actually I think it doesn't belong here at all. Can we agree just to throw out everything from the infobox that is not Frisian proper (as in West Frisians)? –Austronesier (talk) 09:44, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * For the record, I don't insist on that terminology per say; it is as you have correctly suggested, an incredibly flawed term to use. The only reason I've reverted to the previous was because that existing terminology had some editing consensus behind it. Alssa1 (talk) 12:32, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * In that case, I'll just remove the problematic part. Note that per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, there shouldn't be any information in the infobox that is not mentioned in the rest of the article, except for very hard technical facts such as ISO-codes or geographical coordinates (btw you can apply this rationale to other discussions as well). The final two sentences of the lede justify the inclusion of Saterland Frisians, West Frisians, North Frisians, but not Germanic people (or anything else similar to it). –Austronesier (talk) 12:46, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If that is what you're proposing, I will support it. Alssa1 (talk) 13:46, 27 December 2021 (UTC)