Talk:Umatilla Indian Reservation

	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.

Oregon Low‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon 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.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Res vs. tribal entity[edit]

What happened? My credit for this article disappeared. Backspace 17:42, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you had put your excellent census and location info into the article Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, which is the tribal entity of the people who live on the reservation, not the actual reservation, so I moved that info here. Sorry if you feel you lost credit--but it is still in the history of the tribal article. Katr67 18:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion[edit]

Oppose merge. This is part of a sadly incomplete effort to make separate articles for the reservations and the tribal governments that run them. Related discussions here, here, here, and here, some of which are about the difference between a tribe and a tribal entity, vs. this discussion about the difference between a tribal entity and a reservation. People don't understand that the tribal government and the reservation are different things, similarly to a recent discussion about whether State of Oregon means the government entity Government of Oregon or the physical territory Oregon. Granted, if this was an article about a state, there would not be enough material here to justify splitting off a "Government of" article. But I think an exception should be made in this case. First off, there's nothing wrong with stubs, and second when expanded, the scope of these articles would be totally different. Much like Bull Run River (Oregon) and Bull Run Watershed cover related topics in different ways. P.S. For the complete list, see List of federally recognized Native American tribes in Oregon and List of Indian reservations in Oregon. Katr67 (talk) 22:42, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support - combining the information would make it more accessible to the public. Both articles have stayed stubs for a substantial amount of time – five years, in fact – so are unlikely to be expanded to the point they would require separate articles anytime soon. I agree that it's good to have separate articles for an ethnic group (Umatilla (tribe)) and the specific federally recognized tribe (Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation), but the reservation and the tribal government are closely linked entities that merit a combined article. -Uyvsdi (talk) 19:51, 1 November 2009 (UTC)Uyvsdi[reply]

Oppose - See Also and certainly cross-wikification on both pages will help with accessibility if not already there. The Umatilla Indian Reservation is not the people, nor is the federal entity called the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, the ethnic group known as the Umatilla people. They are all three, different ideas meriting exploration. Support their separate interlinked development as time permits.Duff (talk) 01:10, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]