Talk:Luiseño

Proposed move
The problem with moving this article to Payomkowishum, is that contemporary Luiseño people have a wide range of spellings for their own tribe. James Luna spells it Pooyukitchum; Richard Bugbee spells it Payoomkawichum. All six recognized tribes use "Luiseño" in their name. As this is the English language wiki, the name most recognizable to English speakers would be preferable. Having the tilde over the "n" is probably against WP naming conventions, so that might be changed, but several people edit this article and a discussion and consensus should be achieved before moving. -Uyvsdi (talk) 05:03, 2 November 2010 (UTC)Uyvsdi


 * I agree about the spelling (I've always used "Payoomkawichum" since I learned it from Richard Bugbee). The choice of endonym or exonym for indigenous languages and people is never straightforward (see Talk:Sḵwx̱wú7mesh for an example), but stable orthography is always important for an encyclopedia. The important thing should be that all the alternative spellings (plus Luiseno without the tilde) redirect to this article.--Curtis Clark (talk) 13:39, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer to leave the article exactly where it is, but if people want to change it to Luiseno or Luiseno people, I could live with either one. I think the main reason to move a tribe's article away from the most commonly used term would be if the term was extremely offensive to the tribe (e.g. Papago, Digger Indians, etc.). Since "Luiseño" is found in the name of every single recognized Luiseño tribe, this isn't the case in this situation. Autonyms are very seldomly used for article titles – only in the case of specific bands within tribes that don't correspond to contemporary political tribal governments (e.g. Kadohadacho, Kucadikadi, etc.). -Uyvsdi (talk) 18:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Using Richard Bugbee and James Luna as a source for Native history should not be allowed. This individuals have not background to give lectures or back ground on native history as a whole — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8801:D100:4310:51EE:927A:FF29:B842 (talk) 22:20, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 22:36, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Luiseño. 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/20120321213213/http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/18/4346500/language-preservation-helps-american.html to http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/18/4346500/language-preservation-helps-american.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) 17:38, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2021
You are refusing to look at why they failed the FAP process and refusing to take rule 83.11(e) into consideration. This fake tribe failed the FAP process bc no one is native. No one could prove they had ancestors on the historical tribal rolls. You are not allowing the world to be educated as to why they failed the FAP process. 2600:8801:D100:4310:51EE:927A:FF29:B842 (talk) 22:13, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:53, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * And you, IP, are refusing to respect WP's rules concerning actual reliable sources for info you want to add to the article. You can't bully the unsourced content into it. Show us your particular reliable sources that support this information per WP:RELIABLE. Carlstak (talk) 00:45, 28 October 2021 (UTC)