Talk:Sanpoil

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America 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 North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States: Washington Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Low-importance).

Below Big Bend[edit]

I trimmed a bit from this sentence: The Sanpoil flourished with a large number of villages along the Sanpoil River and Nespelem River, tributaries of the Upper Columbia River below Big Bend since the 1600's. The footnote given goes to http://www.indigenouspeople.net/sanpoil.htm which says basically the same thing, except specifying "Big Bend, Oregon". This doesn't make much sense. There is no "Big Bend, Oregon" and unless I'm mistaken the Sanpoil didn't live near Oregon. My best guess is it's suppose to say something like "...and along the Columbia River above the Big Bend of the Columbia". The "Big Bend" being the reach of the river approx. between Hanford and Grand Coulee. But rather than guess, I just trimmed the sentence down a little. Pfly (talk) 21:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Chipewyan people which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 09:13, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Yupik peoples which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:44, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

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, so by default the page is not moved. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:42, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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). Skookum1 (talk) 07:07, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose until the issue is addressed properly. These should be discussed at a centralized location.

There was a discussion once on whether the ethnicity should have precedence for the name, and it was decided it shouldn't. That could be revisited. But it really should be one discussion on the principle, not thousands of separate discussions at every ethnicity in the world over whether it should be at "X", "Xs", or "X people". — kwami (talk) 12:29, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support as per the policy Wikipedia:Article titles#Use commonly recognizable names and the guideline Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes). The section Wikipedia:Article titles#Precision also applies given that Sanpoil is a redirect here. There is no need to redo any guideline as it already supports the un-disabiguated title. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 04:16, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support per CambridgeBayWeather. In cases where the requested move simply eliminates the word "people", and the destination title is already a simple redirect to the current title, it is clear that guidelines favoring both precision and conciseness support the move. Xoloz (talk) 17:13, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Hurts recognizability with no advantage to any reader. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sanpoil tribe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060901154142/http://www.wellpinit.wednet.edu/sal-hist/reading.php?iinclude=../sal-hist/visionquest.txt to http://www.wellpinit.wednet.edu/sal-hist/reading.php?iinclude=../sal-hist/visionquest.txt

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:44, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]