Talk:Tempe Downs Station

Capitalisation of the term Traditional Owners

Hello,

According to the following guide, and a number of other guides that I am happy to share, it is most appropriate and correct to refer to the Traditional Owners of Country using proper nouns:

First Nations Vocabulary – using culturally appropriate language and terminology - Australian Public Service Commission.

There is more detailed information about this in the Australian Government Style Manual.

Aliceinthealice (talk) 05:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

"Traditional owners" is not a proper noun.

• First Nations Vocabulary – using culturally appropriate language and terminology - Australian Public Service Commission does not say it is a proper noun - it says "it's a noun".
• Australian Government Style Manual does not capitalise "traditional owners".

Mitch Ames (talk) 12:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Mitch,

In the text box in the link it does say that it is a noun but it also says specifically that the term Traditional Owner should be capitalised and apologies that the Australian Government Style Manual doesn't also say this; but it should.

The capitisalisation issue is, however, also specifically addressed by:

Reconcilliation Australia: in this guide

The Queensland Government: in this guide (page 19 of the PDF)

(The Queensland Government in particular sums up the issue quite perfectly: "A great deal of respect is afforded to Traditional Owners and as such, the words must be capitalised."

I understand that this may not match the English Wikipedia MOS but, in our Australian context I do think it is incredibly important to be as respectful as possible when referring to First Nations communities and their rights/roles and responsibilities as they relate to land.

Aliceinthealice (talk) 01:42, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

MOS:SIGNIFCAPS is quite clear in its mention of not using "... over-capitalization for signification, i.e. to try to impress upon the reader the importance or specialness of something in a particular context" - where "importance or specialness" here is equivalent to "respect". We can be respectful without having discard basic rules of English writing (capitalisation is for new sentences and proper nouns) and our own style guide. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Mitch,

I do think it is respectful to capitalise the term and that is what a wide range of resources say. I also believe this is technically correct in the MOS as seen in: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography#Titles of people.

Traditional Owner and the use of capitals does vary but I believe this is something that is becoming more and more recognised and that Wikipedia should be ahead on this issue and not behind; as you will see the Cambridge Dictionary accepts and acknowledges both uses (although unfortuantely does not clarify).

Some of the variation only comes from what people groups are formally recognised by Native Title and the Aboriginal Land Rights groups and those that aren't. If formally recognised and Native/Land Title is achieved then capitalisation is the most correct.

The following significant Australian orgnaisations acknowledge Traditional Owners using capitalisation on each page of their websites:

National Library of Australia; https://www.nla.gov.au/

Reconciliation Australia; https://www.reconciliation.org.au/

NIAA / Indigenous.gov.au; https://www.indigenous.gov.au/

The capitalsiation is also in use for the Australian Human Rights Commission; https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-social-justice/indigenous-rights-voice

Cheers

Alice Aliceinthealice (talk) 03:37, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

I do think it is respectful to capitalise the term — You are entitled to your opinion, but generally when editing Wikipedia, the consensus of Wikipedia editors - as documented in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style - takes precedence over our personal opinions.

... to capitalise the term ... this is technically correct in the MOS as seen in: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography#Titles of people. — Titles of people says "... capitalized when attached to an individual's name, or where the position/office is a globally unique title that is the subject itself, ...". There is no individual's name attached to the term in Tempe Downs Station, and the position denoted is not globally unique (if nothing else the term is plural, so necessarily not unique).

Traditional Owner and the use of capitals does vary... — MOS:CAPS says "only words and phrases that are consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources are capitalized in Wikipedia."

Wikipedia should be ahead on this issue and not behind — It is not Wikipedia's job to redefine the meaning of "proper noun", nor the English language rules for capitalisation.

Mitch Ames (talk) 08:33, 14 September 2024 (UTC)