Talk:Indian princess

	Indigenous peoples of the Americas portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indigenous peoples of the Americas 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 the AmericasWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasIndigenous peoples of the Americas articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Discrimination Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination 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.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Gender studies Low‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : see Unassessed Gender studies articles and Unknown-importance Gender studies articles
Cleanup : edit to see
Collaborate : see /Collaboration
Copyedit : edit to see
Deletion sorting : see /Sexuality and gender
Expand : edit to see
Infobox : see Gender studies articles needing infoboxes
Merge : edit to see
Notability : edit to see
NPOV : edit to see
Orphans : Brannon Masculinity Scale · Holy Virility · Media and gender · Michael Kaufman (author) · Women's education in Saudi Arabia
Photo : see Wikipedia requested photographs of gender studies
Split : History of feminism
Stubs : see Gender studies stubs
Translate : see /translation
Update : edit to see
Verify : Riot grrrl
Needs attention : see Gender studies articles needing attention

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.

Wikipedians in the United States may be able to help!

The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

On 9 October 2021, it was proposed that this article be

Native American princess. The result of the discussion

was not moved.

Article is subjective and bias is strong, esp. in the intro

While I agree in the message of the article in how "indian princesses" push European culture onto Native Americans unnecessarily, this article is still enormously biased and almost accusatory in how it is written, especially the introduction. I think a major rewrite may help make this article become a bit more unbiased and neutral in its voice. Even if the evidence clearly states that Indian princesses are a Eurocentric artifact, I think it's important to still maintain a neutral and objective tone and voice in showing that evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.103.50.178 (talk) 20:30, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes agree with you..the person who has written the article about Indian Princess should read the history of Europe before 1400 A.D., there were only tribes..not royality. Indian history is more than 7500 years B.C., so in India we are getting a laugh over the precious knowledge of this donkey type writer.. Amkusalko (talk) 08:35, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity

The lead currently uses the phrase "

traditional indigenous religion

", and equates this statement to Eurocentrism.

Isn't this part of Christians' traditional ideas that their particular religion is superior to all others, and that it is based on some kind of revelation? That has much to do with religious intolerance, but is not actually unique to Europe. Dimadick (talk) 13:25, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disney asid

We should mention the TV series

NTDTV airs the show as simply American Indian Princess

and the TV guide doesn't even mention Pocahontas in the title. Here is evidence from the website:

"加拿大分台 - 新唐人电视台".
ca.ntdtv.com. Archived from the original on 17 May 2019. 18:00 动画片:美洲印第安公主 19 {{cite web}}: |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; 17 May 2018 suggested (help); horizontal tab character in |quote= at position 6 (help
)

The translation of the quote is "18:00 Animation: American Indian Princess 19" and it does air at 6pm tonight and the next. Besides that, AIP is what displays in TV guides. It's channel 727 via Bell, not sure for other distors. ScratchMarshall (talk) 06:26, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 9 October 2021

The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:16, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indian princess → Native American princess – The term Indian princess refers to Indian princesses of the Indian subcontinent, not a misunderstood stereotype of Native Americans. Far more historical and academic data support the term Indian princess to refer to female royalty in India. It was used since the Company Rule and Princely States in India to refer to princesses in India not Native Americans. Furthermore, it is important to not use dated terms and antiquated misconceptions to refer to a marginalized group. The ethnic group should be refered to as Native American, Indigenous Americans, or American Indian, to differentiate them from Indians and Indian Americans. Vajra Raja (talk) 18:14, 9 October 2021 (UTC) Vajra Raja (talk) 18:14, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: a review of the article's sources suggests that "Indian Princess" is the name used to refer to this stereotype, a topic that meets notability guidelines. We do not have an article about princesses of the Indian subcontinent, and this is therefore the best available article for the title. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 20:05, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per
WP:RGW. 162 etc. (talk) 17:21, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose. This article is about the actual, established term, "Indian Princess", not anything called "Native American Princess", which would be inventing content /
☼ 20:32, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose. Widely used term, widely published—referring to American Indian women, real and imagined. Yuchitown (talk) 23:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Yuchitown.[reply]
Weak Oppose I want to support some move; per the nom the title is confusing. However, discussion of the trope seems to commonly refer to "Indian princess" specifically, and Royalty in India is a red link. This shouldn't be moved at this time. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 23:54, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose If the trope is most commonly known by this misnomer, that's the best name for the article, particularly if there's no other article competing for the name. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 03:09, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per
WP:RGW. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:22, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Moved against consensus

As seen above, consensus is to stay at this title. A new user moved it anyway. Reverting. -

☼ 19:36, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply

]