Talk:Indigenous peoples of the Northeastern Woodlands

Split/merge
Since there's an article for Southeastern tribes, could the southeastern information be transferred to that article, and the remaining northeastern information explanded. This article could then be renamed Indigenous peoples of the Northeastern Woodlands? There isn't an article for Indigenous peoples of the Great Lakes, so this article could include information about them or not. -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:44, 22 November 2010 (UTC)Uyvsdi


 * No one has voiced any opinions on this matter in seven months, so I'm going to go ahead move it. -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:55, 2 June 2011 (UTC)Uyvsdi


 * Kind of an issue, since right now and all research about the broader Eastern Woodlands group (which included both of Southeastern and Northeastern) redirect to the northeastern article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.21.135.18 (talk) 19:24, 7 May 2012 (UTC)


 * This article doesn't even mention "Northeastern Woodlands", so per the discussion above, I have moved it to "Eastern Woodlands". Hoppingalong (talk) 17:26, 13 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Now, I see what's going on, User:Hoppingalong made a unilateral move without consulting anyone. There is a comparatively well developed Indigenous peoples of the Southeastern Woodlands. This article should be restored to what is was and the Indigenous peoples of the Eastern Woodlands should be a disambiguation page with an additional link to Classification of indigenous peoples of the Americas. I can't move it myself and don't want to do a cut-and-paste move. We are slowly trying to develop broad articles for all cultural regions in the Americas; however, "Eastern Woodlands" is typically divided into North and South due to the large area and number of tribes covered.- Uyvsdi (talk) 19:36, 13 July 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi


 * Not exactly. See section below. This previously was the target of all Eastern Woodland redirect and only mentioned the larger group and then had a list of the northern part of the group. I thought the most straightforward way would be to move this to the broader title, then cut the list into a new article on NE Woodlands. Either way, three articles, with the top level being Eastern Woodlands (it should be a full article, not a disambiguation), and the next level being North- and Southeastern Woodlands gets the structure right. The move below would do this (albeit in a more roundabout way than I was thinking of). Hoppingalong (talk) 20:29, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * this is amazing oh and im 9 years old im a 4th grader right now im in soshuls studdeis and we are acsaly learning about the tribs my name is Aubrianna i was born in 2014. 164.83.64.240 (talk) 19:33, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 19:46, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Indigenous peoples of the Northeastern Eastern Woodlands → Indigenous peoples of the Northeastern Woodlands – Made a mistake in the naming, i.e. "Northeastern Eastern" instead of simply "Northeastern." Would like to restore article to stable name its had from late 2010 until today. This article fits in with other articles of cultural regions of Indigenous peoples of North America, i.e. Indigenous peoples of the Southeastern Woodlands, Indigenous peoples of California, Indigenous peoples of the Great Basin, Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, Indigenous peoples of the Northwest Plateau, Indigenous peoples of the Subarctic. The SE Woodlands article is comparatively well-developed; the NE article just needs to be developed as well. Uyvsdi (talk) 19:46, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Agree Until today the article, other than the list focused entirely on the Eastern Woodlands, a broader group. All of the Eastern Woodlands redirects pointed here, which was wrong. There is now a general stub Indigenous peoples of the Eastern Woodlands that in time can be a full article covering the broader group which has many books written on it, and two subregional articles that should be titled Indigenous peoples of the Southeastern Woodlands (as already is) and Indigenous peoples of the Northeastern Woodlands (now a redirect here, but would contain this article after this move). That seems to make the most sense. Hoppingalong (talk) 20:23, 13 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Support: A simple fix of terminology. "Northeastern Woodlands" is proper terminology and used across multiple sources, including most US History high school and college textbooks. People of the Southeast are quite culturally distinct in many ways, hence "Eastern woodlands" is a bit overbroad.   Montanabw (talk) 00:33, 14 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Support - This doesn't seem controversial, can it not just be speedy? Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 13:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

eastern subarctic forests
what do the eastern subarctic forests people eat please tell me food,dear,rats,mice, and other things — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.111.71.24 (talk) 14:16, 27 October 2015 (UTC)


 * they are verry popular. 164.83.64.240 (talk) 19:34, 9 November 2023 (UTC)