Talk:Indian

Misnomer

Referring to the term "Indian" as a misnomer when applied to Indigenous peoples in the Americans is self-evident. They were misnamed as such due to confusion by early European explorers about whether or not they'd found a new route to India and Columbus's mistaken belief that he had reached the Indian Ocean. See Native_American_name_controversy#.22Indian.22_and_.22American_Indian.22_.28since_1492.29. Hence the term is a misnomer. Electoralist (talk) 16:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Using that rationale, you might argue that the name of the country "India" is a misnomer. The country name comes from the name of the Indus River -- which flows mostly through Pakistan -- not India. You might also argue that the terms West Indies and East Indies are misnomers as they have little to do with India. Moreover, if "Indian" is a "misnomer", so is the name "America."

The term "Indian" applied to the original inhabitants of the Americas has 500 years of history. Moreover, many American Indians, especially in the United States, call themselves "Indians" -- and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. It is likewise a well-established tenet of international practice that an ethnic group has the right to call itself what it wishes to call itself. Smallchief (talk 17:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Naming India after the Indus River isn't a minomer as India existed for thousands of years prior to the 1947 partition. It's more a historical anomaly. West Indies is a misnomer as is the term American Indian, by definition, as American Indians are not from India. (Similarly, the name West Bengal is not a misnomer, it is an historical anomaly ever since the term East Bengal ceased to be used in what is now Bangladesh. The name America isn't a misnomer per se, it derives from Amerigo Vespucci as a name for the New World (ie the Americas) - arguably using the term American to apply to citizens of the USA to the exclusion of others in the hemisphere is a misappropriation of the word. Electoralist (talk) 20:10, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

References don't go on disambiguation pages and whether the term is a misnomer or not is largely irrelevant for the purposes of disambiguation. The Indigenous peoples of the Americas and Native Americans in the United States both describe the issues around naming. older ≠ wiser 16:55, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

One, two or even a group of people do not speak for an entire ethnicity. There are just as many if not more indigenous Americans who are intensely opposed to being referred to as Indians. Particularly native Americans from outside of North America where the word Indian/indio eventually became a bigoted epithet implying primitiveness, savagery. It’d be like insisting that all African Americans should just accept being called the N word, or Italians/Mediterraneans referred to as Guineas, Dagos, Wogs, Wops, etc… just because some African Americans/Italians don’t have a problem with it or have come to accept it. Regardless it is simply wrong, rude and arrogant and it is akin to someone named John being called Ted by an acquaintance and never having the courtesy of admitting his mistake. On the contrary the acquaintance insists that John should just learn to accept being called Ted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:388:6080:10E:FC8A:5AEE:C6DA:3456 (talk) 08:20, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Indian English

@Arjayay: I'm not sure I get your point here. I reverted the addition of this entry because it doesn't belong in the body of the dab page. Indian English is never called either just "Indian" or anything like "Indian language". – Uanfala (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Uanfala (talk) - I didn't understand your deletion, and I don't understand your objection to my reinstatement either.
I don't see that Anglo-Indians, East Indians, Indigenous languages of the Americas or many of the other entries on this DaB page are called "just" Indian? - It is difficult to imagine someone unfamiliar with the term "Indian", but someone visiting this page should see Indian English as one of our articles that may overcome their confusion, as it may be what they are looking for - Arjayay (talk) 19:43, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

This dab page needs some serious trimming down. The Christian community of the so called East Indians doesn't belong here (although there should be a link to the much broader East Indies). Anglo-Indians is a valid entry as these people were historically sometimes referred to as "Indians". The entry for the Amerindian languages is a valid one too – these languages are sometimes called "Indian languages". The point of a disambiguation page is to resolve the ambiguity of the title, not to be a topical index and not to list all articles with the given term in the title (see WP:PTM). – Uanfala (talk) 20:33, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Divide the page into three pages

Indian page,

American Indian page,

Aboriginals page. FlyingNinja1 (talk) 06:25, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

"Indians" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Indians and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 29#Indians until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Privybst (talk) 11:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Indian people which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:33, 18 October 2025 (UTC)