Talk:Yupik peoples/Archive 1

Comment
i'm considering getting a yupik audio language course.

i'm trying to learn everything i possibly can about the eskimos.

does anyone on here speak yupik?

Gringo300 19:16, 18 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Ee! Changachit unamik? [bitchakundedumpkin, asvitduten] Knowmoore 09:25, 5 June 2006 (UTC) (suktu-ya gu-chi-cuchk)

For starters try the Alaska Native Language Center, http://www.uaf.edu/anlc

Imarpik
Is it correct that Imarpik is the Yupik name of the Bering sea? See Talk:Bering Sea. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 21:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Why merged ???
Eskimo peoples are Yupik peoples and Inuit peoples. The page Yupik people is mixed page! This is not true! The page Yup'ik for only Central Alaskan Yup'ik language speaking people! But, the page Yupik for Central Alaskan Yup'ik language, Naukan Yupik language, Siberian Yupik language and Alutiiq language speaking peoples: Siberian Yupik people, Alutiiq people. Would you please look The pages Yup'ik (Central Alaskan Yup'ik language speaking people) and Yupik (Eskimo languages [excluded Inuit languages] speaking peoples). Not merged, not merged, not merged!!! --Kmoksy (talk) 23:13, 6 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I've unmerged, and move the articles to more obvious names. ("Yupik" and "Yup'ik" were just too close.) I've tagged it for expert attention, since there may be WP:content fork issues. Kmoksy, depending on how comfortable you are editing English, you can either straighten this out yourself, or explain here what needs to be done so that each article covers its proper subject. — kwami (talk) 01:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorting this article out
This article seems to move back and forth between discussing all Yupik peoples and then only the Central Alaskan Yup'ik people. Since the title is plural, it should probably be expanded and made to consistently cover all Yupik peoples. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:04, 20 July 2012 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus, not moved. See also discussion at Talk:Chipewyan people DavidLeighEllis (talk) 03:40, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

– See notes on Talk:Chipewyan. Skookum1 (talk) 09:23, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

* Yupik peoples → Yupik * Central Alaskan Yupik people → Central Alaskan Yupik * Klickitat people → Klickitat * Entiat tribe → Entiat * Walla Walla people → Walla Walla * Walla Walla → Walla Walla (disambiguation) * Snoqualmie people → Snoqualmie * Snohomish tribe → Snohomish – See notes on Talk:Chipewyan. Skookum1 (talk) 09:23, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * withdrawn both of these because of explanations by Kmosky below
 * target created as dab on Dec 24 2004 by Pedant. Current people article created Jan 27 2006 by Polylerus as Klickitat Tribe, moved to "Klickitat tribe" on Oct 27 2006 by Outriggr, then moved to current title by Uysvdi on Jan 3 2011, citing "simpler (no punctuation) and in keeping with other indigenous ethnic groups articles)"
 * target is dab page created by Gil Gamesh originally as redirect to "Entiat, Washington" on Aug 7 2006, then converted to dab page on Oct 5, 2007. Current article was moved from "Entiat (tribe)" to "Entiat tribe" on Oct 26 2010 by Kwami
 * Kathlamet people → Kathlamet
 * target is redirect to current title, created/moved by Kwami on Oct 30 2009
 * Quileute people → Quileute
 * target was moved to "Quinalt (tribe)" by JLippert on April 18 2007, then made into dab on Oct 2 2009 by Mdnavman, then moved to current title by Kwami on June 8 2010. This is a PRIMARYTOPIC and MOSTCOMMON issue, the people are by far the MOSTCOMMON and original/primary use of this term
 * Quinault people → Quinault
 * target is dab page originally created about the people on Sept 9 2003 by 67.75.229.84, then converted to dab page by same author on same day, then redirected to current title by Kwami on June 8 2010.
 * Palus people → Palus
 * current title is for "a tehsil Sangli district in the Indian state of Maharashtra", hardly MOSTCOMMON for the use of this term in English (even in India, where this place is obscure). That page created Feb 20 2007 by Shivap. Palus (tribe) redirected to "Palus tribe" on Oct 26 2010 by kwami.  moved to current title by myself on Jan 28 2011 citing "moving to generic "people" because of legal associations of "tribe" in the United States".  I submit that the district in India is not the PRIMARYTOPIC and that page shoudl be changed and Palus become for the people article.
 * Duwamish tribe → Duwamish
 * target was created as redirect to "Duwamish (fireboat)" by Lukobe on July 26 2006, then converted into dab page by same author on same date. Then Duwamish (tribe) redirected to "Duwamish tribe" on Dec 13 2010 by Kwami.  NB the Duwamish, whose name is the origin of that of the river and the fireboat, are not a federally-recognized tribe and so the "tribe" wording is not viable; simplest and cleanest is "Duwamish" by itself. PRIMARYTOPIC/MOSTCOMMON
 * Yakama people → Yakama
 * target is redirect to current title redirected by kwami on Jun 8 2010 to "Yakama Tribe", moved to current title by Usvdi on Sept 17 2013 citing "This article is about ethnic Yakama; the federally recognized Nation includes other ethnic groups". Then immediately redirected to Yakama Indian Reservation which is about the rez and not so much about the government. There is no reason why Yakama had to be fiddled with at all, because Yakima, Washington is spelled differently.  Yakima redirects there, there is a Yakima (disambiguation) which is have just amended to include the people and the rez, even though Yakama Nation there is a redirect to the rez article.
 * Willapa people → Willapa
 * target created as dab page on Sep 7 2010 by Babbage. Current title created by myself on Nov 24 2009
 * Swinomish people → Swinomish
 * target is redirect to current title, first created as a two-line dab with one item a redlink by 64.40.60.5 on Sept 24 2003 then converted to redirect to "Swinomish (tribe)" by Agent86 on Jan 3 2007, citing "no article ever created on the river and does not seem to be of any significance that an article will be made anytime soon)".  Not that Swinomish River will never exist, but as with many other cases, rivers named for a people are rarely, if ever, more of a primarytopic than their namesake. Then moved by Kwami to "Swinomish tribe" on Dec 13 2010, then moved by myself to current title Jan 6 2011 (I did not have the option of moving it to Swinomish because of the existing redirect.
 * Cowlitz people → Cowlitz
 * target is dab page created as "Cowlitz (disambiguation) by 67.75.225.201 on Sep 4 2003, then moved by Commander Keane on Jan 12 2006
 * Pend d'Oreilles people → Pend d'Oreilles
 * target moved to "Pend d'Oreilles (tribe)" by Uysvdi on March 30 2010, then redirected from "Pend d'Oreilles tribe" to current title also by Uysvdi on Aug 5, 2013.  Pend Oreille is a dab page; the Canadian spelling of the river name is the same as that of the people but because the greater portion of the river's name is in the US, the US spelling is used for that article.
 * Nez Perce people → Nez Perce
 * target is to large dab page where all items have the name of the people as their origin by direct association. moved to "Nez Perce (tribe)" on Sep 7 2007 by Mike Cline, in the course of creating Nez Perce (disambiguation) which was moved to "Nez Perce" by Kwami on Oct 18 2010 despite obvious PRIMARYTOPIC.
 * Nisqually people → Nisqually
 * target is dab page by 67.75.225.201 on Sep 4 2003 about the people and the river. Nisqually (tribe) created by same user on same date, then moved to current title by Uysvdi on Sept 20 2013 in process of disambiguating from Nisqually Indian Tribe
 * Makah people → Makah
 * target is redirect to current title, first created/moved by JorisV on June 8 2010, then reconverted by Usyvdi to Makah people citing "redirecting to WP:Primarytopic, as per WP:TWODABS (Saudi spelling of Mecca is different))", then reverted to dab page, claiming (wrongly) that "there is no primary topic with people vs. language", then [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Makah&diff=next&oldid=568112820 reverted to current title by Uysvdi on Aug 11, 2013, citing "redirecting to WP:Primarytopic as per WP:TWODABS, language article is but one aspect of Makah culture, language article gets only 8%-11% of the hits people article gets, has only 18% as many links to it"
 * Muckleshoot people → Muckleshoot
 * target is redirect to current title created/moved by Kwami on June 8 2010
 * Spokane people → Spokan
 * target is redirect to current title created by Fastifex on June 11 2006. People article was created as "Spokane (tribe)" by 216.178.56.251  on July 8 2005.  Then https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spokane_people&diff=333094973&oldid=330383548 moved from there to "Spokan tribe" by Samwb 123] then to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spokane_people&diff=333095173&oldid=333094973 "Spokan Tribe" by same author], then to Spokane people by Mark Shabazz on Nov 23 2009] then moved by Kwami to "Spokane tribe" on March 11 2011 by Kwami, then reverted by Maunus on March 12, 2011 citing "no nconsensus for move. Tribes and peoples are not necesarrily synonymous and moving requires discussion to decide what is the precise topic of this article)"
 * Stillaguamish people → Stillaguamish
 * target is small dab page with three items directly relating to the people, including the people article as Stillaguamish (tribe), and the river article. Originally created as a dab on Sep 4 2003 by 67.75.225.201 then redirected to current title by Uysvdi on Jan 3 2011
 * Suquamish tribe → Suquamish
 * target is redirect to current page, moved to "Suquamish tribe" by Kwami on Jan 1 2011, which was then redirected to "Suquamish (disambiguation)" by Mtsmallwood on Jun 15 2011, then moved back to obvious primary target by JaGa on June 22 201]. Suquamish (disambiguation) still exists and has three items, including the town and the ship
 * Mi'kmaq → Mi'kmaq (disambiguation)
 * See Mi'kmaq entry on Talk:Cayuga people
 * current title is dab page, created as redirect to "Walla Walla, Washington" on Sept 9 2001
 * withdrawing nomination because the town, like Squamish, is by far the most common use of the name.
 * Sanpoil tribe → Sanpoil
 * target is a redirect to current title, moved from "Sanpoil" to "Sanpoil (tribe)" by Rosiestep on Oct 5, 2007, then double redirect to Sanpoil tribe by XQBot on Oct 26 2011. Sanpoil (disambiguation) exists because of the river, a ship and two redlinks (one of them which pretty much might as well redirect to the river)
 * target is dab page, created Jun 6 2004 by Neal Finne, then expanded into dabpage by Wac on Aug 4 2004. Withdrawing name because of city name being MOSTCOMMON even though in that case the dab title should redirect to the city and there should be Snoqualmie (disambiguation)
 * Willapa people → Willapa
 * target is dab page, created as "Willapa (disambiguation)" by Babbage on Sep 14 2007, then moved to "Willapa" which was vacant at the time, by Mtsmallwood on Nov 5 2012. People article created by myself on Nov 24 2009 as "Willapa" was taken
 * Skokomish people → Skokomish
 * target is dab page created with two items by 67.75.229.103 on Sept 12 2003. People article began as Skokomish (tribe), then moved to "Spokane tribe" by Kwami on Dec 13 2010, then reverted by him as he'd missed talkpages, then reverted to "Skokomish tribe" by him on the same date, then moved to current title by Uysvdi on Dec 13 2013 citing "renaming to disambiguate ethnic group article from federally recognized Skokomish Indian Tribe)"
 * Sahaptin peoples → Sahaptin
 * target is redirect to current title, originally created as two-item dab titled "Sahaptin (disambiguation)" by Primetime on Feb 14 2006 then moved to "Sahaptin" by Commander Keane as "(disambiguation)" is superfluous". That title has been deleted and is now a redlink.  Then "redirected to PRIMARYTOPIC" (current title) by Uysvdi on Oct 20 2013
 * As with Walla Walla and Entiat and others, withdrawing nomination because of MOSTCOMMON being the city; nonetheless "Snohomish" as a title was originally for the group only. The "tribe" title is inappropriate as these are not a federally-recognized tribe
 * Note please centralize discussion on this group of articles at Talk:Chipewyan people. Other requested moves in the same large group are listed on Talk:Yaquina people and Talk:Cayuga people.Skookum1 (talk) 16:38, 13 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Procedural oppose any swapping of a page with a disambiguation page should be requested separately, for every swap instance, a separate discussion should occur. Any displacement of a disambiguation page and replacement of its location for some other use should also occur separately for each instance. These are all different primary topic discussions. Several of the targets are disambiguation pages, so overwriting a disambiguation page is a primary topic dispute, and should each be discussed separately. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:49, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Why are you repeating the same post on four different pages? Main discussion should be kept on Talk:Chipewyan people unless you have something to say about a particular title and its issues.Skookum1 (talk) 09:41, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You've opened four different discussions. Each response is for the particular discussion it appears in. You hadn't left any notice of a combined discussion area either, until your response to me. There's only the See notes on Talk:Chipewyan indicating that the rationale can be found at the other page. People have left these kind of notes referencing already closed discussions before, so it is not an obvious conclusion that you want a unified discussion area at that location from this page's rationale. Nor is the discussion at Talk:Chipewyan pointing to which other discussions were opened to companion it as part of the 30-page limit, and which are not part of it, but merely use that discussion's points as the rationale. (IOW, the discussion are not highly linked, so leaving a separate point at each discussion will mean the closing admin will definitely see it, as the discussion moved indication or similar has not been explicitly stated in the subsidiary nomination pages; nor even indicated at the "prime" discussion where the subsidiary nominations were located) Considering the fact that other users besides myself, have lodged opinions at several of your non-"prime" discussions, it's not very clear to several users that this is meant as a single discussion at a single location. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 15:21, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The limitations on bulk RMs I coped with as best I could; hundreds of articles are involved, 120 only so far have been posted, and all concern a central titling issue and what should be a convention. And you know what?  You claim "several" discussions have been opened, but I've watchlisted every single item now, and do not see "several" but only the main one at Talk:Chipewyan people and a brief one on Talk:Cayuga people; and your two on Yupik and Yaquina. That's all.  So please stop exaggerating; I did post notices on the talkpage at WP:IPNA and at CANTALK and, yes, should have thought to be more explicit on the mention of the Chipewyan people talkpage about the other three groups of RMs and links to them, and to make you happy I will now.  But complaining that *I* didn't centralize discussion when you repeated yourself on four different pages with the same post - and now making a case for decentralized discussion, is hardly "procedural".  Common sense would have told you, from the link to the rationale for the group on Talk:Chipewyan people, that that would be the place for centralized discussion, but I forgot the common sense is in short supply around Wikipedia, especially on matters of procedure.  The procedure that is at question here is how it was that so many articles got changed without discussion, and if the RM process weren't limited by number in such cases....it seems you just want to pick this apart procedurally without actually considering the overall issue....about a group of RMs which need to be addressed collectively......applying separate guidelines to over a hundred similar-topic articles is not workable; especially when the convention/guideline used to change them doesn't even exist except in the claims of the perpetrator.Skookum1 (talk) 16:21, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Re this "People have left these kind of notes referencing already closed discussions before" and then proceeded to attack me with "so it is not an obvious conclusion that you want a unified discussion area at that location from this page's rationale" as if I wanted a decentralized discussion, which is absurd. The closed discussions of relevance to this matter are at Talk:Dakelh (the most recent), Talk:St'at'imc, Talk:Tsilhqot'in, Talk:Secwepemc, Talk:Nlaka'pamux and Talk:Ktunaxa. Open ones are at Talk:Sechelt people, Talk:Owekeeno people and Talk:Okanagan people.  Of the closed ones, all went to the standalone "FOO" form, by the way.Skookum1 (talk) 16:58, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I wasn't referring to any moves of any of these aboriginal North American articles at all. This happens all over the place, like with album articles, which is the ones I most recently encountered. I can't see why you construed that as an attack. And since two of the other discussions have garnered opinions from people other than myself, I would say it is "several". That people keep posting to more than one of the open discussions after my "procedural oppose"s were lodged indicates that it is not clear where you wanted the discussion to occur. If it were clear where you wanted the unified discussion, there wouldn't be any opinions posted except my procedural opposes. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 08:24, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * You have seen by now, I hope, the addition to the comments, at the top of the comments on each of the ancillary pages (here, Yaquina, Cayuga) that the discussion should be centralized on Talk:Chipewyan people. And these are not album articles, these are indigenous peoples articles, many of them main articles for categories, and in their current state have a history of being moved, without any consultation or procedure whatsoever by mostly one editor, after he re-authored a guideline to suit himself, without reference to any other guideline of importance; including the naming conventions on indigenous peoples and tribes, and WP:TWODABS; with a few others following suit (see my annotations on the Chipewyan list, which I'll do here shortly, tracing the history of the article name and various redirects and dab creations, all with no reference to PRIMARYTOPIC other than once or twice returning a dab page to a redirect to the ethno article in question.  And yes, I'm used to being attacked by these people, at the same time as they complain about me attacking them (for criticizing their actions and the results, not engaging in personal attacks of WP:BAITing as happens to be the case).  Remember, various guidelines of importance apply here, and should be considered here, which have nothing at all to do with the guidelines concerning album titles.Skookum1 (talk) 14:22, 15 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment "Yupik peoples → Yupik" is "moveable", but "Central Alaskan Yupik people → Central Alaskan Yupik" is "not moveable". Because, common usage in Alaska: the Yup'ik (with apostrophe = pronunciation: Yuppik) for Central Alaskan Yup'ik people and language (also Yup'iks of Chevak town are Cup'ik [pronunciation: Chuppik] and Yup'iks of Nunivak island are Cup'ig [pronunciation: Chuppig]). the Yupik (not apostrophe = pronunciation: Yupik) for Siberian Yupik people and language on St. Lawrence Island. --Kmoksy (talk) 12:21, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * would "peoples" work better then, given that more than one group are involved; or are they a monolithic bloc, as the title indicates at present?Skookum1 (talk) 14:22, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Yupik peoples = non-Inuit Eskimos = Siberian Yupik people (Alaska & Russia) + Yup'ik people (of central Alaska, incl. Cup'ik & Cup'ig) + Alutiiq ~ Sugpiaq people of southern Alaska (Kodiak & Chugach).
 * Inuit peoples = non-Yupik Eskimos = Inupiat people (of northern Alaska) + Inuit people (Eastern & Western Canadian) + Greenlandic people. --Kmoksy (talk) 14:40, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting that Inuit should be disambiguated with "people"? We have other kinds of "Eskimos" in Canada, e.g. the Inuvaliut.  So far as I know both those groups self-identify as being the-whole-as-one.  Not, as many Canadians already know, and I'm sure you do too, that 'Inuit" is already a plural, as is "Inuvaliut".  And re Inuit language, a title created to replace Inuktitut, this was done against MOSTCOMMON as "Inuktitut" has been an established and regular term within Canadian English for decades now.  I note also there is a category Category:Eskimos which is of dubious utility given the derogatory sense of that name and exoynmic origin of that name as perceived by the Inuit et al. (at least in Canada) per the naming convention on indigenous peoples and tribes: ""How the group self-identifies should be considered.  If their autonym is commonly used in English, it would be the best article title. Any terms regarded as derogatory by members of the ethnic group in question should be avoided."  I'm grateful for the clarification re Yupik/Yup'ik however.  I had no idea that the Koniag (as that article was originally, or at least temporarily, titled) and Chugach were Eskimos/Yupik, you learn something new every day (I wish more people around here would).  I guess I thought they were Athapaskans...Skookum1 (talk) 15:47, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Turns out that Inuit language is a redirect to Inuit languages, plural, and Inuktitut is there; but MOSTCOMMON for "Inuit language" in Canada would definitely be Inuktitut, so that redirect seems wrong to me....on and that's only about Eastern Inuktitut, the Inuvialuktun title was redirected by Kwami (gee, huh?) on January 1, 2011...but the phrase "Inuvialuk language" is a wiki-coinage, and the term "Inuvialuktun" also well-established in Canadian English, especially of late as the distinctions between it and Inuktitut became more well-known to southern Canadians (thanks to the CBC and the Aboriginal People's Television Network, in no small part). Such artificial coinages are where the "FOO people" coinage came from, even though "FOO" is the MOSTCOMMON way almost all these terms are used. And gee, wouldncha know Inuvialuit was moved to Inuvialuk people on the same date (really implying "individuals who are Inuvailuk"), citing his self-authored change to WP:NCLANG....Inuvialuit is what is MOSTCOMMON in Canadian Engish, if "Inuvaliuk" IS heard it would be in reference to an individuals, and a reference to the people as a whole would invariably in "Inuvialuit" in English.....on New Years Day, I remember him doing scads of these while everyone else was not around Wikipedia.  When will the madness stop??Skookum1 (talk) 15:52, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised he didn't to the same to Inuit by making it Inuk people. Relieved is more like it.Skookum1 (talk) 05:59, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Given the "procedural opposition" about the bulk RM it looks like I may better file separate RMs on the above-named articles, likewise on Slavey people/Slavey language and others, as it's not just "people" articles that have been bulldozed (without any procedure) to archaic/in disfavour terms by that editor's activities.Skookum1 (talk) 04:49, 16 March 2014 (UTC) Skookum1 (talk) 15:52, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The page Yupik (with people or people-less simply) for all Yupik branch of Eskimos, but Yup'ik (with people or people-less simply) for only Central Alaskan Yup'ik (the apostrophed usage for only this people and language and most common in Alaska). In fact, Central Alaskan Yup'ik [people / language] → Yup'ik [people / language]. The Inuit people (of Canada) = Eastern Canadian Inuit (= Inuvialuk or Inuvialuit, Inuvialuktun-speaking Inuit) + Western Canadian Inuit (= Inuit proper or Inuktitut-speaking Inuit). Alutiiq ~ Sugpiaq (Aleutized Yupiks of southern Alaska) are two main groups: the Western group are Koniag Alutiiq (more) or Koniag Sugpiaq (less) of Kodiak Island and the Eastern group are Chugach Sugpiaq (more) or Chugach Alutiiq (less) of the Kenai Peninsula and Prince William Sound. Chugach are not Athabaskan. Also, Eyak Indians are not Athabaskan and not Eskimo or not Aleut (U.S. Census Bureau: Chugach and Eyak are "Aleut"!). Soon, I'll write Tanana Athabaskans new page. --Kmoksy (talk) 16:35, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Just by homonomy and the usual way that native names often get adapted into English, I'd thought that the De'naina (sp?) already had an article. Or are the Tanana Athapaskans. NB how they refer to themselves is of relevance to the title of a Tanana Athapaskans article...how do they refer to themselves (cf WP:ETHNICGROUPS.Skookum1 (talk) 03:05, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, just found out there's a Tanaina Athabaskans redirect.Skookum1 (talk) 06:02, 16 March 2014 (UTC)


 * comment on close. Thanks for all the extra work re-filing nearly all of these because of redirect/UNDAB issues, and many with Primarytopic obviousness.  WP:BATHWATER you should have read, maybe.Skookum1 (talk) 06:29, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

"Hieroglyphics"?
"The Alaskan Yupik and Inupiat are the only Northern indigenous peoples to have developed their own system of hieroglyphics, but this system that died with its creators.[11]"

The cited source doesn't support either of those statements, it tells a very different story. What gives? -- 213.148.146.130 (talk) 09:50, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Yupik peoples. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20090123172349/http://www.uaf.edu:80/anlc/index.html to http://www.uaf.edu/anlc/index.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100224195249/http://www.liu.edu:80/CWIS/CWP/library/workshop/citmla.htm to http://www.liu.edu/cwis/cwp/library/workshop/citmla.htm
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090123172349/http://www.uaf.edu:80/anlc/index.html to http://www.uaf.edu/anlc/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:17, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Ummm... There are no Yupik people in South Central Alaska
Unless they moved there recently? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.35.243.35 (talk) 03:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC)