Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:35, 2 June 2013

Archives

October 28, 2005 - October 31, 2006 November 1, 2006 - January 27, 2007 January 28, 2007 - March 27, 2007 March 28, 2007 - November 29, 2007 November 30, 2007 - April 23, 2008 April 24, 2008 - June 27, 2008 June 28, 2008 - October 12, 2008 October 13, 2008 - January 10, 2009 January 11, 2009 - June 3, 2009 June 4, 2009 - December 31, 2009 January 1, 2010 - June 30, 2010 July 1, 2010 - December 31, 2010 January 1, 2011 - December 31, 2011 January 1, 2012 - February 5, 2013

Tracking coverage of Canada and its provinces

Using the search results from the searches above, it's easy to spot items to add to outlines and tracking charts:

The above has too many redlinks for display in article space, but makes for a really good behind-the-scenes tool.

Feel free to add more entries. That's just the tip of the iceberg. Here's a link: User:The Transhumanist/Canada coverage.

The Transhumanist 03:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Jumbo Glacier, British Columbia

On 6 February 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jumbo Glacier, British Columbia, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the new municipality of Jumbo Glacier, British Columbia has a mayor and two councillors, but no residents? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jumbo Glacier, British Columbia. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

April - National Contribution Month

Good day Skookum1,

During the month of April, Wikimedia Canada is preparing the National Contribution Month, and we are looking for experienced contributors to organize a contribution day (or half-day) in their region.

Contribution days are activities where Misplaced Pages's contributors, students, or anybody interested in contributing to Misplaced Pages meets together to collectively improve a predetermined theme. This meetings generally take place in library where references are easy of access, but can be organized in any communal room. Beside improving articles, a goal of this participatory workshops is to initiate neophyte in the cooperative contribution of Misplaced Pages.

If you are interested in organizing or participating in a contribution day in your region, communicate witht he national team on the project's talk page. The exact agenda of each local event is left to the discretion of the organizer. Help is available for the organization from contributors who already organized these type of days, so don't be worried. If you have any questions or want more information, don't hesitate to contact us.

Benoit Rochon (talk) 23:17, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

History of Canada

Hi, just to say that I endorse your edit to "native allies". I am a Brit so am reluctant to do any controversial edits to a Canadian article. It's just that I gagged at the previous use of "the indians". This whole section seems to me to be written from a US-settler perspective. It doesn't even mention the Battle of York for example. How jolly unfair to supply the locals with weapons to defend their homelands from settler invasion. I don't think that their descendants will object as I doubt that any survived the subsequent ethnic cleansing :-( TerryE (talk) 17:52, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Quite the contrary, I don't have time to go into it a lot right now but it's why I was aware of the sensitivities of the language. For starters see Idle No More and the Oka Crisis. Natives are the most galvanized political group in the country; even in the areas around Toronto and Montreal and in the longer-settled areas of the Maritimes. More later. Skookum1 (talk) 01:54, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Just waking up now, so realized it's Ohio/Michigan/Illinois et al that you're referring to as ethnic cleansing; yes very very true, and British protection of natives (cf. Royal Proclamation of 1763) is one of the reasons for the American Revolution. Of those that survived, many fled west; the Sioux notably had been in that area, more in Wisconsin, before living on the Plains...Skookum1 (talk) 01:56, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the references. I read them with interest. TerryE (talk) 23:18, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Re: Abbotsford, BC re WSR 342

--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:52, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Hey

Good to see you active again :) -- œ 08:22, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

only to certain degree, have time commitments now......Skookum1 (talk) 09:01, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

BHG talkback

Ahahaha!!!!

You and the palm trees. How many times? You want rhododendron photos? I can gets some pretty quick... maybe not tomorrow, RAINFALL WARNING IN EFFECT. How's Koh Samui or wherever you're at. I went traipsing through there when I was fifteen. Betcha Koh Samui has changed. The Interior (Talk) 03:35, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely and totally; can't imagine what it must have been like when you were 15 LOL.....Lamai is not quite a mega-resort but Chaweng is fast getting there.....part of Lamai is a mini-Pattaya but then that was a lot different back then, too......As for the palm trees, whoever's pushing this has a "Vancouver is really tropical" fetish......the big rhodos I know of that could be used are in Stanley Park, between the Rose Garden and the old Zoo......there's big ones around the West Side, too....another picture could be of the cherry blossoms lining this or that street; I think it's William Street in the East Side, between Victoria and Nanaimo/Rupert, that could be used to illustrate those.....lots on the West Side, too, but I think it behooves us to give East Van equal time.....Skookum1 (talk) 03:58, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

While you're at it, try and get a monkey puzzle tree too - Peruvian pine - there's a fair sized one East 1st somewhere, and various ones around the West Side....not all that common but distinctive, and much more part of the urban forest-landscape than a palm tree is.Skookum1 (talk) 10:27, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Stephen Harper

Oh, believe me, I agree that it's ridiculous. For starters, somebody actually did try to write an article about his father, which made absolutely no claim of notability whatsoever besides being his father (that one got speedied, thankfully) — and the entry for his mother was linking to an existing article about somebody else entirely. I strongly suspect that somebody was just operating on an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS comparison to {{Pierre Trudeau}}, which does contain links to several relatives — who, of course, actually have independent notability in their own right and don't have articles just because they're family members of PET. Other than Laureen the rest of them really shouldn't be there at all, I agree — the only reason I didn't just remove it on sight is that I strongly suspected it would just get readded again, but I'm willing to do so if I know I've got backup. Bearcat (talk) 17:05, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I see you took it out, I'll back you up but I do have this rep about being anti-Harper here LOL........speaking of which, and re WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS shouldn't there someday be Economic policy of the Trudeau government, Foreign policy of the Joe Clark government (since there's more than one Clark e.g. Glen and Christy), Social policy of the Mulroney government, Environmental policy of the Chretien government? That that series of articles has been not just allowed to stand, but got a claque of cheerleaders who saw nothing wrong with them but don't know zip about Canadian politics or the context of the term "Harper government" only underscores the problem with supposedly NPOV admins deciding on things they know nothing about, or even admit to being partisan in favour of? The articles should be Canadian environmental policy or "history of" same, likewise Canadian social policy or Social policy of the Canadian government.......using Misplaced Pages as spam platforms is apparently OK if you've got enough moles, er, I mean, admins planted to permit the spamming....Skookum1 (talk) 02:34, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, as I've mentioned before, the United States has articles of that type for numerous presidents — there are, for instance, "Foreign policy of..." articles for Obama, Clinton, Reagan, Kennedy and Dubya. And comparable articles also exist for international leaders such as Evo Morales, François Mitterand, Hugo Chavez, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Mobutu Sese Seko, Ollanta Humala, Rafael Correa, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Vladimir Putin, too. The cross-Misplaced Pages consensus is pretty clear, therefore, that articles of that type are allowed and there's no really good reason to single Harper out as the only national leader on the entire planet who would be ineligible for that kind of analysis.

Government policy can change quite radically from one leader to the next, after all — I'm sure you're not going to suggest that Harper's policy positions are indistinguishable from Paul Martin's or Jean Chrétien's. Which is why it is generally more helpful to have a distinct splitout for each prime minister or president than it is to have just one article that lumps everything into the foreign or economic or social or environmental policy of the country as a whole. And while it's certainly problematic when Harper tries to brand the basic operations of government, the stuff that doesn't actually change from one PM's administration to the next, as his own, the phrase "the Harper government" is perfectly acceptable in the context of discussing policy aspects that are genuinely unique to Harper. For instance, it's the Government of Canada, not "the Harper government", that provides for the minting and distribution of Canadian currency in general — but it's the Harper government, rather than the generic Government of Canada, that specifically decided to stop minting the penny. The guy has a really bad habit of overusing it, yes — but it's not always an invalid usage, just one where we have to watch for context.

So to answer your question: yes, actually, articles like Economic policy of the Trudeau government, Foreign policy of the Joe Clark government, Social policy of the Mulroney government or Environmental policy of the Chretien government should exist. You really need to backburner your personal feelings about Harper (which I actually mostly agree with, for the record, but that's not relevant here), because he's not getting special treatment here — articles of this type are allowed to exist for any person who's ever led any national government in any country. If similar articles don't already exist for Chrétien or Trudeau or Mulroney or Louis St. Laurent or John A. Macdonald, it's only because nobody's actually started them yet, not because Harper's being given special privileges. (Admittedly you'd have a hard time actually writing much about Kim Campbell or John Turner or Arthur Meighen or Charles Tupper, given that their governments didn't last long enough to actually leave a discernible mark on much of anything, but they'd still be allowed to have the articles if you could actually source something.)

If you have concerns about POV editing, or questions about whether they're named appropriately, those should be raised via the processes that Misplaced Pages has in place for dealing with POV issues and article names, not by challenging the articles' mere existence. Bearcat (talk) 16:15, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

The problem with those articles is that they were written/based on a very POV beginning, for example in the opening ledes talking negatively about previous policy eras as per the Tory talking-points on same e.g. look at the early versions of the foreign policy one; and though many have tried to de-POVize them, the problem is that all edits/new input are "reactive" to the POV tone of the original; someone justifying their existence even went on to claim that he's the most important prime minister in Canadian history..... ahem. And that was before he won his majority. When these are really the only articles on Canadian policy in these areas, yes, it's up to someone to pen the alternates/others........"well I just thought that he's the most interesting etc" is what the author of them claimed.......indicating he saw no reason to write up the others.....lack of balance in input in Misplaced Pages content gets to be a pain, especially when someone is only interested in writing articles about their "most interesting prime minister"......Skookum1 (talk) 06:35, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

"Most interesting" is certainly a POV problem, but on the whole I think the more relevant issue is that by virtue of being the incumbent he's the easiest to write about, because relevant new sources get handed up by the news media on a regular, almost daily basis, whereas past prime ministers typically require physical trips to reference libraries to dig into old newspaper microfilms and history books and the like. I realize there's probably some biased editing going on, but to be frank the primary problem here is one of simple laziness: people just want to throw in a couple of sentences and a web URL (half the time not even properly formatted as a complete reference, thus creating more work for other people to fix), and don't want to bother doing the stuff that actually requires more active research. So yeah, it's a problem — and it's one I don't know how to solve — but the international precedent is well-established enough that if the Harper articles ever were actually deleted they'd probably just get recreated again from scratch.

As for Dan Stupich, while I've certainly heard the name I don't exactly know a lot about him — so I'll keep it in mind and see what I can do, but it's not something I feel qualified to tackle right away. Bearcat (talk) 04:41, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

User:Bobanny is up on left-history in BC, I'll throw it by him; he's dormant but I have him on FB under his real name.......there were various other BC pols on the old election pages with bios needed; many that are there are based on parliamentary history national pages, and lacking......also noting a lot of names that need shortening to their usual forms; I fixed Larry Giovando, there's others like Cyril Shelford that need similar treatment....though it would take an older British Columbian to know what the names in use were, I guess; hard to cite.......Skookum1 (talk) 05:18, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Oregon Country

I added a line in the intro to Columbia District regarding it's territory overlapping with what became the disputed Oregon Country. I think this is important because A) The two areas did coincide and B) The talk page for Columbia District is filled with a back-and-forth argument about merging the two articles.

I think they should be kept separate as they were not the same thing. But to not address the Oregon Country in the lead seems like a deliberate attempt to distance the two. It doesn't matter which existed first, the fact that they overalapped and there's much similarity between the two leads me to believe the Oregon Country should be mentioned in the lead.

I will re-add it barring no explanation as to why it shouldn't be there. 98.221.141.21 (talk) 20:32, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, fwiw, the term "Oregon" goes back to before the Columbia River was even discovered and named—it was one of the names of the mythological "River of the West". Pfly (talk) 23:54, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes but that term did not mean the region and certainly didn't refer to 54-40. As for IP address' complaint and the edit comment about my "personal agenda", that agenda is the historical truth. It's a fallacy that the Columbia District was identical in any way with the Oregon Country. As explained in Wade's The Thompson Country (online somewhere) it didn't include the Thompson Country and certainly not New Caledonia. The Columbia Department included the coastal forts to Fort Taku and was explicitly not the "District" which in true fur company form was defined by the watershed; Fort Langley was not spoken of as being in the Columbia District, but it was part of the Columbia Department, for example. The two terms "Oregon Country" and "Columbia District" are NOT interchangeable and should not be spoken of as if they were nearly identical; the map is wrong in that regard, as is the wording of your re-inserted text. I'll leave it to you to fix, but if you don't I will. My "personal agenda" is sorting out the confusing history of the Pacific Northwest so we have it right; loose equivocations blathered about in the lede of this article only confuse it more.Skookum1 (talk) 02:39, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to attack you personally. You seem offended. And I never said the two terms were interchangeable. I thought I specifically stated the two articles are different. But due to overlap, not addressing the Oregon Country (linked) in the lead seems like a deliberate omission. Since the two pages do indeed overlap in regards to a substantial portion of the territory being discussed, and the time frame in which they were discussed, it should be addressed.

And it's not just US vs. Canada. Suppose someone from some remote part of the world knew nothing about PNW history, but was interested in learning about it. It would seem very odd that a large article like Columbia District wouldn't address in its lead and link to a comparable, albeit different, large article about the Oregon Country. What exactly is your objection? 98.221.141.21 (talk) 05:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Because it's not true, that's why; it's a common misconception, yes, but given the wording "the disputed Oregon Country" it's an American POV: that's an American term, and which had a different meaning; the dispute is between the fact of the Columbia District on the one hand, the mythography of the Oregon Country on the other; the Columbia Department (once New Caledonia and the Thompson Country were integrated with it) also included areas far to the north of the Oregon Country claim, i.e. northern New Caledonia, also Forts Stikine and Taku. The wording should be more like "the British claim underlying the Columbia District was in dispute by American expansionists whose "Oregon Country" claim overlapped with some of the Columbia Department"......the two terms are the dispute. The Oregon Country article btw is as big as it is because of hte importance of the Oregon myth in the expansionist/Manifest Destiny mindset and the number of Oregonians who are up on it who wrote that article; the history of the Columbia District gets short shrift in Canadian education and there's not many histories that address it in toto, and largely Canadian historiography has written off anything now south of the line, even worse than they give BC in general short shrift. Wording has to be very careful; the wording you supplied entrenches the confusion; the Oregon Country-Columbia District terminology is a reflection of the dispute; "the disputed Oregon Country" glosses over that in the wrong way; the dispute was between the concept of the Oregon Country and the tenuous British claim in the same area (which was only a fur-trading license backed up by some coastal declarations/treaties e.g. the Nootka Convention). Again, the map is not that illustrative of the Columbia Department's boundaries/ components, and another is needed. Clarity is my goal, and truth. And yes, when you make an edit comment alleging personal agenda, how not to take it personally?Skookum1 (talk) 06:20, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

They're separate articles for the same reason Rupert's Land and Northwest Territories are separate, or rather that's a comparable case; also why Oregon Country and Oregon Territory are separate articles.....similarly Acadia and Maritime provinces or Quebec and Colony of Lower Canada etc.Skookum1 (talk) 09:14, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

The point I was getting at is REGARDLESS of how you feel about either article, or how anyone else feels about either article, both of these concepts exist. Both have articles on Misplaced Pages. Both overlap, for better or worse. So to fail to link the two articles does indeed seem like a deliberate omission.

I don't fully understand your gripe. Are you saying too much attention is paid to the Oregon Country at the expense of the Columbia District? What I'm saying is that it's somewhat irrelevant which should get more prominence. Because of the overlap in territory and the connection between the two -- right or wrong -- it seems too agenda-based to omit a reference to Oregon Country, regardless of what your personal feeling is on either concept. 98.221.141.21 (talk) 09:51, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Man you really like to read things into what you read, don't you? Yes, they are two separate concepts and that's why they have different articles (and should have different maps). The Oregon Country page mentions the Columbia District six times, some of those in section-links but always in the British context when appropriate; and very pointedly the wording is avoided which indicates these are distinct from each other and one is not the same as the other. The "agenda" you accuse me of is that of British sources, which do not refer to the Oregon Country at all except when discussing the boundary dispute. The addition you made had "bad wording" and made it sound like they were the same thing; and didn't fit into the lede paragraph in any kind of useful way. If that's the only instance of that term in the article, it's not my doing despite your accusations. I suggest you take a pill, read some British/Canadian accounts, and wrap your head around the idea that the term "Oregon Country" is part of the US agenda on this region and that's why British sources didn't acknowledge it; explaining the distinction should be in the article, but in no way should it be claimed that they "mostly overlap" with each other; one is a territorial vision and expansionist agenda, the other is the name of a fur district that that claim was set up and propagandized to challenge.Skookum1 (talk) 02:52, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Source

This page (the first cite note in that article) is most definitely not a reliable source. Your edit summary: "restoring that cite, it's accurate and reliable; I'm a chinookologist of sorts, it's valid; this cite was actually the start of this pag " A random .com website for a tools company with no editorial oversight nor any editors at all who claim that that is the origins/etymology of the term is not reliable. I assume you realize what the RS policy says, so I'm wondering if this is just an oversight. But if it's not, by saying "I'm a chinookologist of sorts, it's valid" you're engaging in WP:OR and attempted scaring by credentials, which I won't tolerate. I've removed the source again, anything further will result in either a WP:RSN discussion. Thank you. gwickwire_editing 22:35, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

YOu still don't get it that that was the first cite for this page when it began........and that in chinookology, popular usages of terms is part of the field of study; including that company's choice of name and its informative page about this special word. Thing is, it's a valid cite, what's on it is true (that's those credentials of mine you say I'm "scaring" you with), and it's also an example of a current usage of this famous word as a brand name. I think you should loosen your knickers, and fine, take it to Reliable Sources and discuss it rather than knee-jerk it away because you think it's not a valid source. It's true, what's on it, and the site itself is a demonstration of the pervasiveness of this term in local culture and commercial use.Skookum1 (talk) 03:52, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't care WHICH number source it is, if it's unreliable it's unreliable. We aren't here to be a chinookology journal. It's not a valid cite, because it's not a reliable source. You saying that it's true because you know it to be true has absolutely no bearing on Misplaced Pages, editors are all equal. gwickwire_editing 04:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

By the way, it's at RSN now. gwickwire_editing 04:13, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

All editors are equal in editing powers but they're not equal in knowledge; I've never tried a self-cite but may do so given this RSN you've done....what are you going to do about the skookum doll refs then? Because that's a brand name (like Skookum Tools)? The use of this word by a local manufacturer is not un-noteworthy.Skookum1 (talk) 06:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

You have a really bad understanding of what a reliable source. You can't use just any source and claim it's okay because you know something to be true. First of all, use by a local (looks pretty local to me) isn't really note-worthy, and even if it should be included (I don't object to it's inclusion) it needs a reliable source, not just a website with some background information. gwickwire_editing 17:41, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Even Harper and Shaw and Gibbs (primary sources in this field) aren't reliable sources, they're full of errors. Oh, they're in print (or out of print) from real publishers and are "real books" not websites, but they're still not reliable. The Anderson word-list is notoriously unreliable (Anderson disavowed it himself) but was widespread in the heyday....and it was a private publication promoting other products just like the Skookum Tools site; not reliable in the slightest, but still part of CJ sources. I think your concept of "reliable sources" doesn't mesh with reality; but then this is wikpedia, where the lies of the mainstream media can be repeated as if factual because the definition of "reliable sources" includes them and excludes non-mainstream media (independent news blogs, so-called "fringe" sources). Oh, I've heard it all, yes indeed-y; And it's pussant rulebook-followers who hold a hardline on subjects they don't even know anything about that makes wikipedia such a pain for people with actual content to input, vs those who are just there to police the format and the rules and otherwise move the deckchairs on the titanic....you're among hte reasons, the pointlessness and hostility of your edits here, that are having me consider leaving Misplaced Pages again as a frickin' waste of tome arguing over sillinesses with people obsessed with inflicting rules on things they don't understand....Skookum1 (talk) 02:00, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Make a personal attack like you did in that edit summary again and I'll consider asking someone to force you to leave for a while. Then again, Misplaced Pages operates on consensus, and the consensus at WP:RSN is that it's an unreliable source (and blatantly obviously so). You said it, blogs. Blogs are unreliable because they have no editorial oversight. If you think your credentials go to waste here, you're damn right they do. I could care less if you were a high school student or a PhD in the area, you are not a reliable source for yourself to cite. You can (rather others can) cite your papers in respected journals, but the fact that we "don't even know anything about" the subject holds no meaning here on Misplaced Pages. If you can't understand that, and the fact that we are a community who operates on consensus, I personally would like it if you left. Verifiability (in reliable sources), not truth. gwickwire_editing 02:08, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Look up "cupidity" in re "blogs are unreliable sources because they have no editorial oversight" is hogwash, because 'editorial oversight' at a major newspaper doesn't mean fact-checking, it means fact-spinning and advertorial for political agendas. "the fact that we (meaning you) doesn't even know anything about the subject holds no meaning here on Misplaced Pages' sums up the problem with this place; it has a skewed sense of values and an obsession with its own rule book. Your threat to have me blocked for responding frankly on my own talkpage when you, here yourself, alleged that I was "threatening you with my credentials" is pretty ironic. "I personally would like it if you left" will be repeated on the ANI that you seem ready to propose to get me blocked for..........getting me blocked for standing up to your personal attacks, oh man, you sum up the petty nature of this place all too well........why have you made this particular citation such a personal bandwagon; why not an article like Quadripoint, which is heavily OR and has survived successive AFDs, because "consensus" says it should stay. A consensus of fools s only foolishness.......why have you made this article so important to get rid of that you are attacking, and now threatening, one of its principal authors? Oh, no, I didn't make the article because of it being part of my username (which is pronounced skookum-one) but because it's an important part of NW culture/history/identity.....go ahead, have me blocked, have this article deleted, you can go brag to your friends you bullied someone off Misplaced Pages and are all proud of yourself now....Skookum1 (talk) 02:26, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

And you're not my equal, nowhere near it. Get 40,000+ edits and start as many articles as I have, then you might come halfway close. Editors are "equal" in their powers and "rights", but not in knowledge of experience. NowhereSkookum1 (talk) 02:29, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Not my skewed values, must be Misplaced Pages's values, because that's the policies. If you want to leave because you can't follow policies, go right ahead. You're expressing extreme unwillingness to follow our policies of consensus and community. If you continue expressing that, either please leave, or stop trying to disclaim consensus. Just because you don't like consensus doesn't mean it automatically stops being policy. gwickwire_editing 02:32, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Just because consensus winds up making idiot decisions is no reason to support it even if it is policy; and why don't you just leave my talkpage? Go find some other citation to war with.....rather than pick a fight with one of the most known-to-be-testy-but-knows-his-shit editors in Misplaced Pages? Or are you just here to cause trouble? Go fight the citations at Quadripoint, make yourself useful instead of picking a catfight in my own sandbox?Skookum1 (talk) 02:38, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Jeebus. Is this really worth arguing about? The Interior (Talk) 02:51, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Apparently so.....User:Huon and this qwickwire person launched an AfD just now....Skookum1 (talk) 03:00, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

And your failure to listen, attacky attitude, credential-mongering, etc. are now at WP:ANI. gwickwire_editing 03:07, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Little Mr Innocent, picking a fight so you have a reason to launch an ANI....tiresome....you were the one with the attacky attitude, mister, and all this happened on my talkpage not on n article talkpage. First an AfD, now this ANI....you on a witchhunt or something?Skookum1 (talk) 03:13, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

"Your failure to listen" is really an arrogant thing to say, given your own dismissive and from-on-high attitude.....and accusing me of credential mongering for pointing out I am a chinookologist is just pettty nonsense, as was your claim I was "threatening" you with my credentials. The ANI should be fun.....dozens of Wikipedians expressed support for me last time I was blocked (due to POV content on a certain prime minister being allowed to stand during an election campaign)....you picked a fight with a sasquatch and now are running crying to mommy....but it was you who attacked me and insulted my intelligence and said you felt "threatened" by my knowledge of this field. Complaining about personal attacks when that's what you did yourself is just so typical.Skookum1 (talk) 03:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Chinatowns templates

Hi there. Thanks for your feedback. I'll need to do some research on those Chinatowns. Even the ones I found in the USA took some time to find (i.e. Orlando). Notable information is usually difficult (i.e. "Atlanta Chinatown mall" which does not have a single news source talking about it - but probably should be mentioned if I can find notable sources, as it is one of the Chinatowns frequently talked about). --Mfwo3df (talk) 02:40, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

if it's frequently talked about, it should have citations out there........the too-loose definition of "Chinatown" is used promotionally such as on attempts to brand places like the San Gabriel Valley or Richmond BC as "Chinatowns" because of the dominance of Chinese commerce; the difference between "chinatown" as a marketing concept and places that are called Chinatowns and have actual history to them, not just promotional agendas.Skookum1 (talk) 02:44, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

New article

Your comments on Skookum doll would be appreciated. Cullen Let's discuss it 01:09, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Langley City

Hi Skookum,

Thank you for contacting me on this issue. When I switched the links on those templates, Langley, British Columbia (city) was located at Langley City, but it was moved back. You are welcome to switch the Langley City links back, but the Fort Langley links are correctly bolded on the templates.

Neelix (talk) 13:13, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Hudson's Bay Company (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Churchill River

Rutherford Creek (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to BCR

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:50, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

New sections

Hello. I thought I would stop by and leave a friendly tip about creating new sections on talk pages. When you are starting a new topic on a talk page (especially Misplaced Pages talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board which has lots of topics), instead of editing the last section, click the new section button on the top of the page. This will make your edit summary say that you are starting a new section, rather than having you appear to be commenting in the previous section, and avoid misleading edit summaries. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 03:47, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I usually put the new section title in the edit summary; and always try to be complete/not misleading....does it have to say "new section" at the start of an edit summary for you to realize it is one? I have been around for a while, y'know.Skookum1 (talk) 03:56, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

No. But why mention BC Railways when you want to talk about Adrian Dix? 117Avenue (talk) 04:08, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

not sure which edit you're talking about, and if you don't know BC politics, he's sworn to hold a full inquiry into how BC Rail was given to the BC Liberals' main backer (CN) via an infamously rigged bidding process; it's one of the main bones of contention in BC and one of the things that's most "on the front burner" when he takes office (and he will). BTW I'm not an NDPer.Skookum1 (talk) 05:08, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I think 117Avenue means this one, diff. For what it's worth I've noticed this before and been confused, especially when no additional comment is added to the edit summary, like this one from my talk page some time ago, . The edit summary says "Hungry Horse Dam spillway", but actually you had added a new section about regional district electoral areas in British Columbia. Right? Pfly (talk) 07:17, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but perhaps that was a bad example, since the two topics are somewhat tied. Here you edited a section on Quebecor, but started a section on Bud Smith (politician). 117Avenue (talk) 01:40, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll use "new section" from now on to make you happy.Skookum1 (talk) 01:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Your Biased Adrian Dix Edits

Hi. I have used Misplaced Pages for many, many years, and donated, and just thought to become a user. I noticed editing on the Adrian Dix page and am disappointed by how biased your editing is. After user 117Avenue's deletions you re-added the sections and take the time to cite them while adding snarky comments demeaning 117Avenue, but when other users put in any negative mentions of Dix you delete them instead of correcting the format. Your comments about the additions being POV are hypocritical as your edits themselves become POV when you correct the good but delete the bad. Misplaced Pages is supposed to have unbiased opinions and you are abusing power by spreading your pro NDP views.

I have no power here other than that that any other editors have (I am not an admin, who DO have powers), and I am NOT an NDP supporter, while you are clearly part of the BC Liberal propaganda machine wanting to hype this non-event into a major scandal (which it wasn't). Your inclusion of a cite directing readers to the BC Liberal attack ad is clear enough in intent....and is not acceptable. The Biographies of Living People noticeboard posting will be reviewed by admins around the world and a decision made about protecting this article from further IP and SPA politicizing of the kind you claim is NPOV but clearly isn't; in tone and in undue weight. That your additions are in lockstep with BC Liberal ads and hype is a clear demonstration that you are NOT NPOV.Skookum1 (talk) 04:32, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

And your claim to have used Misplaced Pages for "many, many years" is not borne out by your usercontributions, nor by your use of a Category link for a section heading here, which I've just fixed. Also by your failure to include your sig using four tildes. If you are a WP:Sock formerly posting under other usernames, this will also be examined at the BLP noticeboard.Skookum1 (talk) 04:36, 9 April 2013 (UTC

I'm following the editing wars on Adrian Dix and am wanting to talk to you, Skookum1. As a relatively new user, can you assist me in how I can contact you directly?Sunciviclee

♠I'm sympathetic for the problem, but I'm in no better position to do anything than you...

♠That said, & admitting total ignorance of the issue, it looks like the event deserves a mention (adequately cited), but the tone is clearly out of bounds. Nor am I equipped to judge the quality of the sources for the last re-add.

♠And FYI, I say that as a lifetime NDP supporter (non-member, not in BC).

♠This whole matter makes me hate politics even more.... TREKphiler 23:31, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Thinking of adjusting my username

I get tired of people addressing me as "Skookum" instead of Skookum1....should I just pipe my sig to say "SkookumOne" or "Skookum One", which seems easier and less evasive, as many might say it is, to changing the actual name of my account....Skookum1 (talk) 10:36, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

I recommend a signature that says "Skookum One" and the continuity of an ongoing account. In any case, be prepared for the likelihood that some folks will shorten it to "Skookum" in any event. Good luck, and sorry about the recent accusations. Cullen Let's discuss it 19:22, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Hm. When they shorten it, to me it has a different context, my use is meant as a CB handle but also in the context "that's a skookum one" or "he's a skookum one". "Skookum" by itself to me is a different sense, hm it's adjectival too; weird to me stand-alone, it's not how that word is used LOL.Skookum1 (talk) 01:44, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

For the record, Misplaced Pages does have a process (WP:CHU) by which you can change your username while taking all of your edit history with you to the new name — so it's not necessarily "evasive" to do so, because your history can still be kept associated with the new spelling of your username. (That said, Cullen does have a point that some people might still just call you Skookum anyway, but that's another story.) Bearcat (talk) 18:37, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

IP/SPAs

Unfortunately there isn't any active proposal that's available to contribute to. It's an idea that's certainly been raised from time to time, and given how much complete fracking nonsense I've had to clean up over the years it's one I would certainly support if a serious proposal came up for discussion — but there isn't any discussion currently underway. Bearcat (talk) 17:13, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments

I've fixed the Pass Creek issue per your request.

Regarding the Adrian Dix issue, I've already posted a comment to User:Sunciviclee's talk page to explain the situation as neutrally as possible, making it clear that from a disinterested administrator's perspective you weren't the problem. For the moment, though, I'd ask that you cool it with bringing me more and more examples of the problem — Misplaced Pages will deal with it as best we can, trust me, but at the moment it's better if you let the people who are more experienced at handling this kind of stuff take care of it. Bearcat (talk) 18:10, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

K, well like I said I know I'm not the one to take this to an ANI in any department, even though I'm the victim of the misconduct....I'll leave it from here, I just was looking at a search on the Sun's site and noticed those particulars and they are good examples of WP:NRS -not a reliable source. I'll desist, I see he's responded at your page just now, I'll read it but will keep my yap shut; I'm NOT doing that on the Suns comments section though q.v. (Brent Herman and Garth West have known me through writing circles for hmmmm 8 years now?)Skookum1 (talk) 18:36, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Geez,I thought that WP:NRS would come up as a redlink, didn't realize it directed to a section at WP:RS and by the look of it could use some expansion/elucidation.......Skookum1 (talk) 18:38, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

File:708px-South BC-NW USA-relief NorthCascades.png missing description details

• File:708px-South BC-NW USA-relief NorthCascades.png

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

Disambiguation link notification for April 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Canadian Northern Pacific Railway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Canora (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:52, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Glen Clark

I read through the Glavis article carefully enough to know that it's not a good source in and of itself — it mixes facts and commentary far too liberally, and makes far too many of its points via POV insinuation (e.g. drawing a suspicious link between two people by virtue of their names rhyming) instead of by demonstrating them factually. The Georgia Straight is certainly a usable source in many cases — trust me, I've cited it many times myself — but that particular article, as written, simply didn't cut it.

And as has already been pointed out to you, stuff cannot generally be referenced to independent blogs — because, again, whatever you may presume to know about Tsakumis' reliability, it's not general knowledge that can be demonstrated by any real evidence of editorial oversight (which is one of the criteria that define a source's reliability or unreliability on here.) And you also definitely cannot source stuff to the comments posted by individual people in the discussion threads of newspaper articles under any circumstances, either. The National Post source may not be ideal, and if you can find a better one that's actually appropriate under WP:RS then by all means go right ahead, but the Glavis and Tsakumis sources are not appropriate at all. Bearcat (talk) 02:25, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Glavin's article is from a reliable source, though relayed through a blog reprint; Terry says he doesn't now why it's not in the Straights online archive....lots isn't. And that Post piece is really op-ed (like so much MSM "analysis") and has COI connections to the same organization whose appearance with cameras blazing on Clark's porch before the RCMP got there had to do with more than ideology........Tsakumis' piece is new, as usual he's a latecomer (as with BC Rail though he did provide evidence - actual evidence, posted online - that remains unreported in the ideologically/partisan-aligned Postmedia). Challenging blogs just because they are blogs doesn't work in BC, as many are more highly regarded as sources of truth than the mainstream media are; WP:RS needs revision to reflect situations where the mainstream media's credibility is in dispute and where its POV/COI ties are well-known, vs bloggers and independent journalists (Glavin falls in the latter category, and used to be a Sun staffer himself) who provide the news and facts that the mainstream media makes a point of obstructing or misrepresenting or ignoring altogether. The Post is a COI/POV source here........so you tell me, why didn't it explain the details of the alleged "conspiracy"? Interesting they'd use that word, it's the hallmark of the Pratt House school of propaganda used to dismiss hotly critical facts.....Skookum1 (talk) 02:36, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Glavin is a reputable and well-established reporter and author, he's not just an "independent blogger", and there are facts in that article e.g. re Dmitri Vrahnos, that are relevant to the story.....he knows all the journalists he's making fun of, as in that bit about rhyming. And yes, the Gutstein article I included before I realized the use of "media circus" usage was deep in the comments; "Allan" I think is in fact Allan Fotheringham, I could ask him (we're sometimes in touch); point with "media circus" is it should never have been challenged; this matter and other things like the Pickton case and lots that goes on in BC is regularly described as such; I don't see why Lee found the need to take it out other than it makes him uncomfortable as a journalist; what's the other wording that someone wanted "out" recently, it'll come to me.....common English challenged with a cite .... oh yeah "attack ads". The Post article is "washed", a credible newspaper would have explored the allegations, not sought to downplay them.....in many cases in BC, the real news does first get revealed in the blogs, e.g. Laila Yuile's exposes on "shadow tolls" and construction contracts, where the news is broken on her blog first....because she does the investigations that MSM reporters are paid to avoid. Investigative reporting is rarely done in BC; unless it's to trump up an anti-NDP scandal like Casinogate or the Fast Ferries......oh, did you note the IP person complaining about me not being blocked yet on Talk:Adrian Dix??Skookum1 (talk) 02:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Terry's originally published column was titled, as I remember well, "Glen Clark is guilty as hell"......of letting his kids play with the neighbour kids etc. So tell me, how is it that op-ed in a corporate outlet with notable political ties and a well-known partisan agenda different from op-ed from a reporter who won't work for them anymore because of their political censorship policies and hiring/firing practices??Skookum1 (talk) 02:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say Glavin was being sourced to a blog; I said Tsakumis was.

I need to remind you here that my ideological affiliations are very NDP (and sometimes even further left), and while I may not be as intimately familiar with all the sordid details and shady personalities involved in the affair as you are I most certainly do know enough to be fully aware that the whole thing was clearly a shameful smear job. But contributing to Misplaced Pages demands that I evaluate the situation by something other than my own personal opinions — even if I agree with them in principle, the sources you were adding simply weren't cutting it.

And again: determining the reliability or unreliability of a source on Misplaced Pages is not a matter of applying ideological litmus tests or personal background knowledge about the writer's career choices. What made Glavin's article problematic was not who he is, nor was it where he published it — it was that the article itself was not cutting it on quality grounds when I actually read it. And what makes Tsakumis problematic is not him or his background, but the fact that it's a self-published website with no particular evidence of editorial oversight or legal review or fact-checking (i.e. no mechanism by which anybody who isn't already familiar him can evaluate his trustworthiness one way or the other.) If he published the exact same content in a newspaper or magazine, or on a blog endorsed and hosted by a real media outlet of some kind or other, it might be different — but Misplaced Pages, again, has very specific rules about not referencing things to self-published sources.

People can and do quite regularly self-publish blatant lies on blogs or in print-on-demand books with no significant library or bookstore distribution — you can still find sources out there which explicitly assert that Obama has never released his real birth certificate, or any number of other easily disproven falsehoods or unverifiable claims — so Misplaced Pages has to have some criterion to distinguish good sources from bad ones besides the mere fact that a source exists. Whether you like the ideological slant of a particular media source or not is not the criterion, nor is insider information about how much you trust a particular person; the criteria are things like "not self-published", "subject to editorial oversight", and other criteria that simply exclude people's own personal blogs — whether you trust them more than the sources Misplaced Pages accepts or not, Misplaced Pages as an institution has no way of being able to know what you presume to know about their reliability. Bearcat (talk) 03:06, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

"editorial review" at Postmedia means "political oversight"....the main point I see re Tsakumis is the self-published thing.....I'll re-search for "Peter Montague"+Casinogate also "Dmitri Vrahnos"+Casinogate then......and see what comes up, "the truth is out there", but it's not truth that Postmedia or the party/parties it backs want to admit to. Did you ever see Rollerball? There's a scene where James Caan's character visits the archive, where the presiding official/librarian comments that history is made out of what is recorded, what's deleted is no longer history, what's unreported never was. Then he comments "we deleted the entire 13th Century by accident....no great loss, some corrupt popes...."Skookum1 (talk) 03:23, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

"editorial review" at Postmedia means "political oversight"? Doesn't matter, it's still more editorial review than Tsakumis has got. Again, Misplaced Pages does not apply an ideological litmus test: as I've already mentioned to you, there is not a single media outlet on the planet that has never been accused of being biased in favour of one political agenda and against another one. So anything you could possibly say about why Postmedia should be disqualified could be immediately turned around by a conservative to disqualify The Georgia Straight and the CBC and The Tyee too — and then where would that leave us? With absolutely no sources we could ever cite for anything, that's where. Bearcat (talk) 03:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm looking around for any related coverage of this in BC's independent newspapers, e.g. the Terrace Daily and the Gulf Island News and others..........there may be a media citation or two on the BC Mary blog, which is really a compendium of links and cited facts, with commentary; Mary, like Laila and Alex, had all her stuff vetted by a lawyer...who Tsakumis' is I don't know (I know who Mary's was); "self-published" rules out a lot of the sources of truth in BC....but Misplaced Pages is not about truth, is it?. My issue re COI and the Post here is the ties with BC's media establishment, which there are articles out there about the political alliance in question; it's interesting that it took a Toronto paper to make even the slightest mention of a fact never mentioned in the Sun itself.....never. Now why would that be?? Much the same as how for a long time the Globe and Mail was the only publication circulated in VAncouver that covered any of the pre-trial proceedings.....because Gary Mason was not under the editorial control of local news offices, though eventually he joined in the defamation campaign against Dave Basi following the illegal plea bargain..........Skookum1 (talk) 04:00, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Re Vrahnos, I did find the conflict of interest commissioner's report which also includes details of the precise conflict of interest for which Clark was scolded, but charges set aside of dropped or whatever technical term applies......Vrahnos notified Campbell's office and the Sun, the Sun was the print arm of the same chain as BCTV....Montague being involved in the second casino application is of course not mentioned.Skookum1 (talk) 03:41, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Watch out for the danger of drawing original research conclusions from a primary source. Just because a source supports facts A, B, C and D doesn't necessarily mean it supports the inference that you want to draw to connect those four facts. Bearcat (talk) 03:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Speaking of the Globe, just found this article re the senior investigator's ties to the Liberals as a candidate.....Skookum1 (talk) 04:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

BC communities

If this is going to be your stance on adding citations, consider concentrating on wikilinking localities D-Z rather than continuing with the observations on the talk page. I intend to continue on with where I left off this weekend now that the work week is over and I have a reprieve from other commitments. Hwy43 (talk) 06:37, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

K, I just don't see the point in citing each one when they're part of a municipality, that's in the target articles and the muni articles.....Skookum1 (talk) 06:41, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll let you handle the description on Pitt Meadows which of course is also a muni (city?) now; the locality in question is Harris Road, south of Highway 7, "downtown" Pitt Meadows now.Skookum1 (talk) 06:43, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Do not try to hide your reversion of my edits by rolling in a bunch of other edits here. It has been noticed and such action is disruptive to this collaborative process. Hwy43 (talk) 04:42, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry there was an edit conflict, I bulk copy-pasted and forgot to include your two changes; I'd done like fifty insertions in one edit. Will watch out next time....most of that bulk linking is done now, some of these have target articles that may need redirects; others need articles. Really a mixed bag, whether or not including things that are now in munis; a table would be bette-r IMO so it could show where these places are, and what they were. Just curious; when did it become required practice to cite list entries?Skookum1 (talk) 04:49, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

My bad. Should have known it was an edit conflict. Sorry for the accusation. A table would be nice, but let's not go there yet. I have a method for building long tables outside of WP that we should collaborate on at a later date. Let's tackle the observations on the talk page first.

Crap, now I lost some of yours in an edit conflict. I'll return your edits. Hwy43 (talk) 06:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

And you beat me to returning the edits. Thanks. Hwy43 (talk) 06:18, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

When was it that content within list entries were exceptions to WP:V? Hwy43 (talk) 04:59, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

On some other lists I've seen editors strip cites as unneeded because they were lists, given that the target articles are all cited (or should be?).Skookum1 (talk) 06:19, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

That's an unfortunate utopian stance. Confirming all target articles are cited would be more exhaustive than what we are doing now, and not every entry on this list article has an article for that matter. Creating articles for all to achieve this would be exponentially exhaustive. We can't rely on this methodology. Hwy43 (talk) 07:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Utopian? Do you have any idea how many BC placename and locality/settlement articles I've created? This has nothing to do with "methodology", it has to do with thoroughness. Many of those redlinked deserve to have articles, some because as with Caribou Hide (which isn't in the Gazetteer though it is in BC Names) they are the only thing around for miles. That the Gazetteer lists things as uninhabited or abandoned which aren't suggests that it's not the core source to be using, also. Not the first time a government publication isn't up to date or accurate.Skookum1 (talk) 07:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

You do realize I'm referring to the other "editors stripping cites as unneeded because they were lists" as being utopian and not you. Hwy43 (talk) 07:20, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

That wasn't clear at all from your post/reply.Skookum1 (talk) 07:33, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

LOL the BC Gov't isn't very verifiable, period. But it seems that the Gazetteer is years out of date; I happen to be in regular contact with BC Names/BCGNIS, it's one person with a small budget, she's got filing cabinets full of material for each place and no staff/money to get it all fixed up with; I'll inline-comment on various items on each section, and/or bring some of them here.Skookum1 (talk) 05:03, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

That is your opinion on BC Govt's verifibility. Consensus is that government sources are reliable. And if something is questionable, there are sometimes other reliable sources, often other levels of government, to lean on in these cases. Hwy43 (talk) 07:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

My "opinion"? It's clear the Gazetteer is NOT complete by any means, nor is its classification system cogent or consistent or accurate; even my contact at BC Names would admit that, as she does about the BC Names listings......."sometimes there are other reliable sources" is a truism in BC, where sites like britishcolumbia.com, though a commercial site, include town descriptions/names that you'll never find on a government source. HelloBC.com (Ministry of Tourism's portal) is full of major errors. When is a reliable source not reliable? When it's incomplete, and doesn't even get things sorted by its own classification system properly. This is not an "opinion", it's demonstrable FACT.Skookum1 (talk) 07:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Given the number of them just in BC a List of Gaelic placenames in Canada or List of Celtic placenames in Canada almost seems called for.....Skookum1 (talk) 06:27, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Can you delete those recently added observations that are already addressed? For example, I already noted that Arbutus Ridge is in Vancouver in the article. Haven't looked at all the others you added. No point adding observations that have already been addressed, only to have to strike them out. Let's keep the size of the talk page to a minimum. Hwy43 (talk) 16:39, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I found some time in my lunch hour to delete those that were already addressed. Please cross-reference with the article when considering adding more observations to prevent unnecessary additions. Hwy43 (talk) 18:41, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I didn't have the mainpage open while doing the notations here, so missed things like Hazelmere already being done; I was going by your "done" templates on the talkpage......I'll confine myself to making some of the articles needed. Most of those, if not all, of the ones in munis are already notated. BTW see what I mean about "official communities" not being the only citable ones within munis. i.e. Cassin, Forest Knolls, the two Aberdeens etc?Skookum1 (talk) 03:08, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Actually I don't get what you're talking about....Forest Knolls I annotated on the talkpage, it's not "done" on the article page as your comment would suggest....not sure which others you mean. Please try to avoid accusations; I'm following your rulebook here, not trying to change it, and letting you work on the page directly while I just annotate here......Skookum1 (talk) 04:38, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

First, I see no accusations in my above two posts.

Second, I appreciate your willingness to collaborate. A lot of effort went into converting this list from its prior primitive state, with only one reference, to its current much improved, expanded and more complete state. A whole bunch of unreferenced additions would have undermined its current state. I hope you can appreciate these past efforts and the desire to make this article as good as possible. You'll also notice that the article prior to the recent improvements was nothing more than a bulk list with municipal statues indicated where applicable. There was no previous indication of the parent municipalities of those communities that aren't independent municipalities themselves. Your desire to indicate such even further improves the article and is appreciated. All I ask is that it be referenced to not undermine and compromise the state of the article. You have started including references with your most recent observations added to the talk page. If you have references, feel free to bypass the talk page and enter them directly into the article (e.g., 3 of the 4 I am about to refer to below).

Third, look again at the talk page history. You added 15 observations. I deleted 11 of the 15 you added as they had already been addressed through past efforts. I in fact left your new Forest Knolls observation up there, as well as your new Fernwood, Garnet Valley and Goldstream observations. No where did I indicate that Forest Knolls was "done on the article page" (as you've asserted above that I suggested somewhere). Hwy43 (talk) 07:04, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

CFD re the Chilcotin

Please see Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Speedy#Opposed_nominations.

Also, I suggest that this talk page is long enough to archive it again. – Fayenatic London 21:07, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

yeah friends of mine used to archive it when I was away, those template deletion notices have been stacking up. As for this category, it had recently been CfD'd and was supposed to be with the "the".....either I didn't notice it had been left out or am responsible for the mistaken title anyway; it has to do with the name of the region and wehther or not the region page is the primary usage; in that spelling it certainly is see the Chilcotin dab page....which pretty much could be the main article for the category, even as it is even though it's a regional dab.....hmmm. The last catchange before that one came as a speedy based on the old Chilcotin District page title, the problem there being capital-D District in BC has other implications/connotations but some earnest cat-changer did a speedy based on it, now i'm faced with CfD's trying to fix the problem with a hard-a$$ application of the catname/primary article name 'rule'......it's all this stuff that keeps me from having the time to write more actual articles. Sigh.Skookum1 (talk) 02:02, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I archived a couple more years for you. As for The Chilcotin, the wise elders of CFD like category names to be unambiguous, so the "primary meaning" rule for article names doesn't apply. I suggest you'd do best to put up with the clumsy new name and work on articles instead. Kind regards – Fayenatic London 12:34, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, geez, ain't that sumpin'. Because the rationale for changing Category:Chilcotin Country, the old name, was to make it match the old Chilcotin District article title. So subcategories don't have to be derived from a strict form of the name? So my problem is now that pesky "the" that's missing. Old-timers will refer to "Chilcotin" as a standalone placename, as is also supposed to be done with Yukon (though 95% of Canadians will say "the Yukon"). The change in question was done by a speedy I wasn't around to oppose at the time....I often seem to be having to do full processes to try to get things right, after someone else has invoked a "rule" (apparently non-existent) and steamrolled something without even knowing about the place the category is about (when not a category, sometimes an article etc).Skookum1 (talk) 02:13, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I woke up feeling different about it, and have proposed it at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 April 23; I pasted your original comments, but please join in! – Fayenatic London 08:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Gitsegukla

I have done the move you requested. That leaves a number of double-redirects, but don't worry about them - there is a bot which will fix them within a few hours. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:35, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

List of communities in British Columbia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Hanceville and Keats Island

Brownsville, British Columbia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Simon Fraser

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:11, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Eastgate, British Columbia

Hello - About your edit on Eastgate, British Columbia: we own a cabin in Eastgate, and we are very familiar with Eastgate itself. I removed the restaurant information as it has been closed as the owners moved away. I cannot find a source to prove this, but simply not including the information is a viable solution. I am currently searching for a source for the Tower Ranch, hang in there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjstepney (talk • contribs) 16:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Your most recent request

Lac la Hache moved.

You're right that Category:Candidates in British Columbia provincial elections (2013) is just overkill. "Candidate" categories are never applied to incumbent MLAs who are running for reelection, meaning that the vast majority of those people should never have been added to it in the first place — and for the five or six people for whom it is actually a valid category, the more general Category:Candidates in British Columbia provincial elections should suffice anyway. CFD here we come. Bearcat (talk) 15:42, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Closed resort

I don't think it will be a hurdle to re-create it with new content. "If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below." Is the message you get when re-creating a deleted page.--Canoe1967 (talk) 02:42, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Finding a cite for it, maybe the old Railways Act license for its tows (they're governed by the Railways Act, as are lifts at Whistler etc), or something in the Archives......nothing easily findable online that's for sure.Skookum1 (talk) 02:53, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Columbia River (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Arrow Lake

Lemon Creek, British Columbia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Sandon

Lillooet Museum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Melodeon

Native American name controversy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Haida

Rolla, British Columbia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Peace River

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Hotel Europe edit

Hi User Skookum1, thanks! Should the description in the file be removed too ? Lotje (talk) 09:56, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

I just did, content like that should never be on image files, cited or not. And the addition you made has to have a citation. The CPR mainline ran that diagonal bit that's now all filled in with buildings and "park", on Powell Street was the old Powell Street street railway; neither one was underground. The basement of the Europe was an old barbership, tile floored like the beer parlour (the poster shop today) and extending out under the sidewalks with bottle-bass skylights, the areaways are filled in now, not sure what's in the basement; and that's the only basement......hard to say what might be lower down; when the Bombay Bicycle Club was a going concern their dance floors were downstairs, one half=lower than the other; could be more down there. But beneath Gastown doesn't go far, you'd be below water line....Skookum1 (talk) 14:25, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, you did a great job. :-) Lotje (talk) 15:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

NTS topo link on maps page obsolete

I was reminded that the Atlas of Canada link on GeoTemplate is not working when I reverted your edit to Sturgeon Lake 154, and I recalled someone bringing that up on WT:CANADA. I see by the archive, that was you! Has there been any progress on this matter? 117Avenue (talk) 05:14, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

{{BCGNIS}} is also obsolete, yields 404 errors now....after all the shit that the change to {{cite bcgnis}} caused it's now also obsolete......and no, no progress updating on the Atlas of Canada matter....federal government sites are constantly being shuffled around, lots of other cites show up as 404 now too including Digital Collections and many othersSkookum1 (talk) 05:30, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Yea, the BCGNIS links were changed a while ago. The old search page was at http://www.ilmb.gov.bc.ca/bcnames/g2_search_by_name.htm ...now it is at http://geobc.gov.bc.ca/bcnames/ (although its database is not working as I type this!). Shouldn't be hard to fix the templates. Perhaps I'll take a shot at it once the website is working again. Pfly (talk) 05:37, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

the item numbers are the same, might be tweakable....but will need a TfD to change the template name, of course.Skookum1 (talk) 05:47, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

This is the advanced search form.Skookum1 (talk) 05:52, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Right, forgot about that. I rather like the improved query options, location maps, etc. Not sure I see why the template needs to be renamed. Pfly (talk) 06:13, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

So that article with the bcgnis template will bot bot-updated to replace them....there's scads that use it. And "BCGNIS" now doesn't exist as a name of a government body, also.Skookum1 (talk) 06:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, hmm, yea, I suppose it isn't called "BCGNIS" anymore but simply "BC Geographical Names". I don't understand the bot bot-updating bit. {{BCGNIS}} redirects to {{Cite bcgnis}} and functions fine when used like the old BCGNIS template (eg, {{BCGNIS|38638}}; and {{BCGNIS|38638|Fairweather Mountain}} gives "Skookum1". BC Geographical Names.; and "Fairweather Mountain". BC Geographical Names. (with non-working links at the moment since the template needs fixing)). Or maybe you just meant renaming the template would require all articles using it to be bot updated with the new name. Pfly (talk) 06:32, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I meant....it would be too laborious to have to go replace each template by hand, especially on articles like List of peaks on the British Columbia-Alberta border.Skookum1 (talk) 06:51, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

On the other hand, this page, http://geobc.gov.bc.ca/bcnames/gaz.html , seems to say the "BC Geographical Names Information System (BCGNIS), the master database of British Columbia place names", as if that is still the name of the underlying database. Pfly (talk) 06:34, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't be misled by an out-of-date bit of information....the Gazetteer has its out of date bits, as Hwy43 and I have discovered re many items on List of communities in British Columbia. The name of the search page now is http://geobc.gov.bc.ca/bcnames/ BC Geographical Names], there's no mention of the "information systems" part; I could ask my contact there about the survival of BCGNIS as a term, not sure what her answer will be.Skookum1 (talk) 06:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK there are 1,577 IRs in BC?

Seeing that you are working on List of Indian reserves in British Columbia. Not sure if you have a complete list of IRs in BC, so I thought I'd drop this below for you to do what you'd please with it. This listing comes from GeoBase's ESRI shapefile, and I should qualify this list isn't just IRs but are IRs, land claim settlements and other Indian lands. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 06:55, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm all too aware the list is incomplete....note the "expand" notice at the bottom. I've added many that weren't there, and also been making articles/stubs/redirects where appropriate. It's a huge list, and a work in progress, yes.Skookum1 (talk) 07:02, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I know, just thought you might appreciate something to work off of if your plans was to complete it someday! Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 07:08, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I've wondered about breaking it up by region, or maybe by people/tribal council; note Category:Indian Reserves in the Lower Mainland re regional breakdown, though there are ethnonym-based "reserves" categories too, can't think of 'em right now, most of those Lower Mainland ones can be Category:Sto:lo reserves or Category:Indian Reserves of the Sto:lo people once the CfR on the Sto:lo category is done. NB I remain strongly of the opinion that "Indian reserve/Reserve" is the correct usage and that "First Nations reserves" is original research. BC Names uses "Indian Reserve" in its description btw.Skookum1 (talk) 07:05, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

BIG difference between "reserve" in the sense of a residential community or other "loose" usage and the land-designation which is properly titled all-caps "Indian Reserve" in all sources.Skookum1 (talk) 07:08, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Nuxalk people

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Nuxalk people, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://nativeamericanencyclopedia.com/bella-coola-indian-tribe-of-british-columbia/.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Misplaced Pages:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)Template:Z119 MadmanBot (talk) 13:16, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: I don't know how to tag this

I would remove everybody but the chief and councillors. Things like the election could stay but the sections below need to be gone. You could also add a note about not adding people until they have read things like not a directory and notability. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 15:14, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Nicola Mameet 1

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Nicola Mameet 1 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Misplaced Pages:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here.  Tentinator  08:22, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Um, hahaha! Pfly (talk) 09:19, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Clayoquot, British Columbia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Canton

Lindell Beach, British Columbia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Chilliwack

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Question

Why was I mentioned here, how am I even remotely related to your discussion or agrument? I don't know how that could be confused as myself. TBrandley (T • C • B) 00:29, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd been working late on seven or more articles at once/ it was a brain-fart; you'd edited that article a few edits earlier. That's all. That is an article whose discussion you should pay attention to, it has to do with the non-native population of the Westbank reserves.......new census figures come out tomorrow that can be a cite for what to me is obvious, but which is being made for a "wrong comparison" to an all-native reserve in Ontario.Skookum1 (talk) 06:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Kitsault

• read Tyee story mentioning obscure town of Kitsault; wondered if article existed on wikipedia; Yes; wondered if created by Skookum1; Of course it was!! Your legacy of BC geographic articles is remarkable. Canuckle (talk) 22:26, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm boggled at times by how many BC articles I've created/worked on......and still am. So many of my 70,000+ edits are talkpage or, grr, CfDs and TfDs and other procedural time-wasters that there's not as many articles than there would have been otherwise......List of communities in British Columbia User:Hwy43 and I have been working on lately, and I've made even more obscure town/locality articles these last couple of weeks. Thanks for the encouragement.....so nice to get instead of the defensive/whining complaints/attacks....Skookum1 (talk) 01:42, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Cree

Dont want to get involved because of whos there...but been watching for a couple of days and cant hold back anymore.Moxy (talk) 15:14, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

• Frank Cassidy; Robert L. Bish (1989). Indian Government: Its Meaning in Practice. IRPP. p. 146. ISBN 978-0-88982-095-1. Retrieved 9 May 2013. Each of these has representation from Cree governments

• Even children books use the term Janet Riehecky (1 January 2003). The Cree Tribe. Capstone. pp. 17–. ISBN 978-0-7368-1366-2. Retrieved 9 May 2013.

"because of who's there" is very telling, not that I need to be told by now...sometime today I'm going to write a "non-response" by way of a series of points for whoever closes it tomorrow to consider; all points already made but separated from all the hobble-gobble, i.e. there are no other "FOO nations" categories, there are a bunch of "FOO governments" categories....isn't there a CANSTYLE page somewhere on how to use "First Nations" also; if not, there should be. Also while I've seen reference to "the Cree Nation" (meaning all Cree, as on the Grand Council of the Cree article, or as heard from Wab Kinew explaining about his people. Dividing peoples into bands is something "we" did; juxtaposing lower-case 'n' "nations" by a loosey-goosey and to me very POV agenda is just "not on". I really wish User:Phaedriel were still with us when stuff like this goes down, same with the Squamish CfD. Where User:LiliCharlie made a good point about "strong national sentiment" but that's been ignored.Skookum1 (talk) 01:04, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

User:OldManRivers is about as Skwxwu7mesh as you can get; he's the main language-revival teacher of the Skwxwu7mesh people and a critic of the band government - "Indian Act government" as he calls it. Big difference between "Squamish Nation" and the Skwxwu7mesh people, though all of the latter are members of the Squamish Nation; by law imposed on them. That's an opposite case, where the many chieftaincies of the Skwxwu7mesh were placed under one government, instead of several as with the Nlaka'pamux and others.Skookum1 (talk) 01:08, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Travel writers

I suggest that the travel project is dormant - however if you were interested in doing things about them - it would be a component of the project - but I'd (its a personal bias)

• http://en.wikipedia.org/Category:Travel_writers doesnt even have a project aligned (I'll fix it though)
• http://en.wikipedia.org/Category_talk:Travel_writing does have the project aligned

I suggest a way to help the travel and tourism project recover from its fatal condition/dormancy would be to include things within the way the travel writers/travel writing works... as to what could be included (ie your question about guidelines - would be nationality of writer first, then subject area, then publication history - at a guess... sats 07:02, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Who I'm asking on behalf of is another guest at my guesthouse here in Thailand......and wow, her creds include Nat'l Geographic and HuffPo and more......decidedly qualifies under WP:N...gave her the lowdown on WikiTravel vs WikiVoyage, she was shocked.....I said I'd help her write an article, though am backed up with writing assignments and my habit of putting out fires I've started here on Misplaced Pages ;-). Thanks for the category links, I'll have a look and see how other articles are put together.Skookum1 (talk) 07:35, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Sovereign(t)ist

Hi Skookum1 - unless I'm mistaken, you've contradicted yourself at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Speedy... you might want to have a look at what you've written... Grutness...wha? 01:42, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Warning

Don't edit war on my talk page, or I will ask to have you blocked.

It's not up to me to disprove your claims, it's up to you to prove them. That's one of the most basic principals here. — kwami (talk) 08:30, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Gee, I'd have thought a linguist would know how to spell "principles"....but YOU have to prove YOUR claims, boyo, and you have yet to do that....I know you're not trying, because you've ignored the cites I've already provided, and also the input of KootenayVolcano and montanabw and others.......you go swaggering around, making false claims about me, and about these peoples, but have yet to produce CITE ONE to back up ANYTHING you've claimed. It's not up to me to disprove them, it's up to you to PROVE THEM. And you can't/won't and behave as though Canadian English norms are not worthy of your respect, anymore than indigenous sensitivities are.Skookum1 (talk) 09:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

oh, so it's OK for you to attack me but delete my response so that you keep your nose from having dirt on it? Then when I get my post through post-edit conflict you call it an edit war? I'm not the one who's "idiotic" mister......your claims are groundless and uncited there and on the RMs and since this is my page I'll tell you I think you're a coward (a) for deleting my response to your lies/accusation and (b) for not going RMs on these in the first place, as you knew you'd lose even if I and OldManRivers weren't around. What a waste of my fucking valuable time Misplaced Pages is turning out to be once again because of the unqualified passing judgement and invoking rules on subjects they're not qualified to talk about...and you, boyo, are definitely not in touch with Canadian English norms NOR with indigenous realities of the modern era. "I will ask to have you blocked" is another coward's move. You don't have to write articles about places in the Chilcotin where there's a need to distinguish the people mentioned when they are vs. the placenames derived from them....there's a reason for those article-names and it's not just because that's the name THEY use (they could care less about an amateur linguist in some "foreign" country such as you are) but because the complications of saying "the Chilcotin people have lived in teh Chilcotin for a long time" or "the Chilcotin people lived in the Chilcotin Ranges" and so on.......DUH. your pretense that these terms don't exist in English and are not possible or citable to pronounce is complete and utter hogwash. You're the one that needs blocking Kwami, not me. Tons of people begged me to come back after I boycotted this often-absurd place after the Harper article fiasco/block in 2011......you're reminding me why it's a good idea to just say "fuck it, it's run by pretentious idiots who like to argue on non-points, I have a lift to lead"....you haven't provided any cites, or even tried for the things you've claimed, and you've made FALSE STATEMENTS about what I've said (like that thing about /k/), in the meantime I've gone finding those press manuals that you probably will say aren't valid cites, and I point you to existing known pronunciations (Statliumh, Shekwapmuk and Kitunaha, which have "new and proper" spellings "St'at'imc, Secwepemc, and Ktunaxa). But you just ignore anything I say and start making false claims about me. Get a grip buddy, and if you don't want to have someone respond to lies you tell about them on your talkpage, don't tell lies.........it's a given that these names are current in Canadian English, and the ones you prefer are outdated and looked at askance now, that you dont' know how to pronounce them is your problem; that I can find cites (=in the process of locating them) for the pronunciation and point to the historical record to prove that it's already known how to pronounce them even though you're demaning cites is just rubbish. I can't find a cite for Sheshatshiu's English pronunciation, either, but that doesn't mean it shouldn've have a Misplaced Pages article or should have an "English: title suitable to your prejudices and hard-headed cite-happiness; what would you want, a title that goes "some Indian reserve north of North West River, Labrador"?? I'm waiting for your attempt to unilaterally move Anishinaabe or Mi'kmaq, that should be entertaining.Skookum1 (talk) 08:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

For those wondering what prompted this exchange here is the material that Kwami deleted/censored from his page, on both edits call "rv idiotic comments" They are anything but idiotic and respond to his misrepresentations about the articles in question he lists, and his accusatory and misleading comments about me and my position:

For those who are interested, the proposed moves are at:

Talk:Lillooet people#Requested move

Talk:Kutenai people#Requested move 2

Talk:Thompson people#Requested move

Talk:Shuswap people#Requested move

Talk:Chilcotin people#Requested move

For all I know, all of the proposed names are assimilated into English and have established English pronunciations. But Skookum has not provided any evidence of that. Using a foreign name in print is not uncommon, nor is code switching for people who know the language, but I suspect that does not make it accessible to many of our readers. IMO "authenticity" takes a back seat to accessibility, commonality, etc., but maybe that's not the consensus on WP. — kwami (talk) 07:50, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

You have provided no support for your claims that there isn't an English pronunciation, and you know well (though maybe when you collapsed my post it was just a way to avoid answering to it) that I've gone to the extent of writing CBC and CTV to see if they have pronunciation guides and have to wait until the 21st for my contact with the government's orfficial-uses person in Victoria to get back from holidays. What I've provided evidence of, which you IGNORE over and over, is the use of all of these words by such as the Royal British Columbia Museum and UBC Museum of Anthropology in their displays and web publications in English and you presume to say that because there's no "established pronunciation" for them (which you claim while never having been here) that that somehow invalidates them as (a) English words and (b) Misplaced Pages titles. Accessibility to our readers is indeed the issue, and so if someone who reads about "Ktunaxa" in a BC newspaper or government report, when they come here they'll find the archaic and Montana-specific "Kutenai" and wonder WTF...or will take it that THAT is correct, as if it were more valid. Which you claim it is but have yet to provide a cite for any such claim. These are not "foreign names"....which makes it sound like they're in Russian or Urdu. These are national languages and part of the Canadian social and cultural reality, not titles on some old books on some shelf in some linguist's office somewhere. They are not foreign in Canada in the slightest. You are, however, for sure.....unless you live back east somewhere; you're clearly not from BC or know much about the Ktunaxa people in-person or see them regularly in print as i and others around here do. Because you are ignorant of the "established English pronunciation" doesn't mean it doesn't exist; like with St'at'imc/Stlatliumh an older anglicization exists which you prefer to ignore (Kitunahan for the language, Tunaha or Kitunaha for the people). Your pretension about this and your constantly trying to defame me for not producing cites you don't bother trying to find yourself is more than irritating; it's insulting. And highly ignorant of native cultural realities in Canada and in linguistics (your field, no?). Are you going to insist that WikiProject Anishinaabe change its name to something suitable to your frame of reference, also? "have established English pronunciations" is true also of Tshilqot'in, St'at'imc, Nlaka'pamux and Ktunaxa; that you claim these don't exist because I can't give you a citation while refusing to prove that they ("X people") are indeed known by "more people worldwide" is just hypocrisy and deflection, pure and simple. No doubt you will tell me once CBC and CTV provide me their pronunciation guides that you don't consider them valid citations.....well, you know what? You're not a valid citation, either, and have made a series of false claims and accusations in all of these that are very, very, very out of line. Speaking of /q/, are you going to unilaterally move Mi'kmaq to Micmac people "because there is no q in English"?? Canadian English has accepted these terms at the official and informal level....people learn new things every day, Kwami, you should try it sometime.....Skookum1 (talk) 08:13, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Quesnel isn't pronounced right in English, either.....have you figured that one out yet? Yes, it has an established pronunciation.....so do St'at'imc, Secwepemc and Tshilqot'in. That you are ignorant of them and I don't have a jim-dandy-off-the-shelf pronunciation guide yet doesn't mean they don't. That they are obviously in common use means that they DO. Instead of trying to wipe thjem off Misplaced Pages, without any concern for the category structures or other article-texts they will impact, is high-handedness and unilateral arrogance of the first order. Your unwarranted RMs are being challenged, and you don't like it, fine, obviously you were in the wrong in moving them the way you did; probably because you wanted to avoid having to justify yourself, which you continue to fail to do while saying I'm not. As if I'm not trying, and taking the time to research WHICH YOU ARE NOT.Skookum1 (talk) 08:18, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

It's not a matter of being pronounced "right". As a linguist, I'm only interested in *how* it's pronounced, not whether that pronunciation is correct according to some self-appointed judge. You are making the claim that these names have assimilated English pronunciations, and they very well might, but it's up to you to provide evidence for your claim. It doesn't have to be this minute, but you should provide some evidence that what you say is true. Claiming that you know they have English pronunciations when you don't even know what they are is not very convincing. — kwami (talk) 20:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Rubbish, I use them all the time, so do KootenayVolcano and The Interior and anyone else who lives in BC, including BC Hydro officials and engineers, regional district and municipal staff, Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Health personnel, and school district management and teachers. Your claim that "I don't even know what they are" is just more rubbish; I know well what they are, so do other speakers of English in BC who use them regularly. "As a linguist, I'm only interested in how they're pronounced" is irrelevant to the issue of their being the common and accepted use, and your narrow perspective and WP:OWN issue with ethno-linguistics content/articles is tiresome and has made most language articles a dry read for casual readers, "impenetrable", like your thick skull. Now stay off my talkpage with your lies and misrepresentations and posturing.Skookum1 (talk) 02:37, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Chillin?

Kwami, please stop your WP:BAITing of Skookum1. Skookum happens to be correct and you are beginning to act like a troll. That said, Skookum, remember WP:DFTT! You are beginning to rant, which is understandable under the circumstances, but you will probably have better luck winning allies if you stay cool. I hate it when people point me to WP:NAM, but we probably both need that pointer sometimes. You are in the right, Skookum1, just stay cool. Montanabw 17:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not "baiting" him. I'm asking him to provide evidence for his claims, and he says I'm the one who should do that. He seems to find it outrageous that people don't accept his claims without evidence, but that's how things work around here. He has said that he expects some sources to get back to him today, so hopefully that will clarify things. — kwami (talk) 20:36, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Pffft. Your latest post on the Kutenai one, about your cites, says "I've already posted them above". Nope, not one link or even written cite in any of your posts, either up and down. You're a bag of hot air with nothing to back up your claims; and you ignore KootenayVolcano and montanabw, and like I said in that one edit comment last night, you're sounding more and more like a Knight who says "Ni" demanding another shrubbery. Or the Demon of Useless Tasks in The Phantom Tollbooth. Stay off my talkpage with your lies and condescension and general nuisance-ness. You're boring.Skookum1 (talk) 01:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Skook, I've suffered as much as you have from Kwami's editing and the claims he makes, but answering PA with PA won't help your cause. Take Montana's advice and cool down. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:00, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Hugs Skook, looks like word is getting out about this situation... sit back and enjoy the show  ;) Montanabw 21:45, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Between that and the results of today's BC election, the results of which I'll start seeing in....eleven minutes, this might prove to be an entertaining day....Skookum1 (talk) 02:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Trust BC to one-up the rest of the country when it comes to utterly unexpected results. At least there was an obvious reason why the pollsters got Alberta so wrong. Will be interesting to see how they rationalize BC. Resolute 13:21, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, call me bitter and suspicious. The Interior (Talk) 14:36, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm long past the bitter, inanity by voters I've come to take for granted; I'm not completely surprised, and there were whiffs a few days ago, and some weird comments on HuffPo from the trollkind like "talk to you wednesday" as though they knew they had it in the bag. Bitter is not a useful emotion when dealing with a party that I believe deliberately alienates the voting public so they stay away from the polls altogether; the antipathetic folks who they know will vote against the government in power. The more outrage, the lest interest.......and I'm also far past suspicion into the realm of assumption. This reminds me all too much of 1983, which was another drowned-cat-out-of-the-bag situation in fact just like this one. Skelly also played nice. Bad mistake. I've heard reports of no scrutineers at quiet polling places....no scrutineers? From any party? You'd think the NDP would have that together; that the Liberals didn't bother says a lot to me, because they have all the money and mobilization in the world. This election was won by money and lies and manipulation, part of which I was used for (that second or third article said "Dix behind it", even though he wasn't.....wtf?). Dirty tricks are nothing new in BC, it's how 2001 one was one, it's how Campbell came to power, it went on under Vander Zalm and Miniwac; this time it's a question of how dirty. And about those Harper staffers that were sent in to help (get this) Patrick Kinsella, Mark Marrissen, Mike McDonald and other other nat'l level Grit inner circle gathered around her since Day One. Lots of people I know are saying - or just assuming - electoral fraud and/or rigging and box-stuffing. Even if there was, as we have seen with the federal situation, we have no mechanisms to deal with, and the same public who stayed home today are the ones who won't care that the election was a cheat; they assume it is anyway. But yes, Resolute, BC does have a way of standing itself on the head in curious ways; at least Weaver got in and Huntington kept her seat; Weaver will be like May is in the Commons, a one-man opposition unto himself, like Joy and Jenny were once-upon-a-time. Seeing Christy lose her own seat, but then she was never a Point Grey girl, not from that crowd; they never did like her, she's not one of them. And that riding also has a lot of educated folks in it i.e. the UEL and, gee, UBC students are still around too. Not gonna say nothing about policy, just commenting on the results....that the biggest voting bloc was 52% against the whole system is one of its biggest stories; it's interesting, it occurred to me that 30 years ago almost to the day was the Vancouver-Point Grey nomination for the Green Party by Adrienne Carr that prompted me to join and work my heart off for most of 1983; I remember it was April, I'd come down from Whistler out of curiosity...it was the attempt by the NDP to swamp the meeting with people trying to block any nomination that caused me to speak, and got them to leave so they would respect our democratic right to organize (as the unionite mantra goes). That was a very strange election too, about which much could be said but not meaning to blog here, just responding to what people have said.Skookum1 (talk) 14:52, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

hm, maybe April was the election or was it May? About a month before; main gist is that it took thirty years but the BCGP is now in the Leg....and yes, cost the NDP quite a few seats. But the one thing they never had was the environmental movement fully behind them in the first place, and their ties to the big industrial unions always meant industry would be catered to first, in those days the forest industry especially...it was in that same era where that same resource workbase began to shift sides away from the NDP, just because other elements in the NDP were embracing the green agenda; and trying to WP:OWN it. They never did, and that's why there were Green candidates that cost them those seats; they could have also seen the wisdom in not splitting the vote against the Liberals against their former cohort Bob Simpson, but split his vote. It's interesting that there were enough splinter votes on the North Saanich and the Island vote that were the same as the margin between the at least the top two, if not the top three maybe. Cons cost the Liberals one or two ridings here and there, too. the NDP shouldn't bitch too loudly about losing seats; they blocked the first proportional vote referendum's outcome/recommendation which would have seen three Greens gets seats today, and two Tories. Probably more if people hadn't been swayed by the either/or thing that prevails in BC, the famous polarity that typifies the place; schizo that it is to the core. i.e. higher percentages for the splinter parties because people would know those aren't "wasted votes".....the wasted votes today, though, were the ones that weren't used.Skookum1 (talk) 15:13, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hope

'30 miles beyond Hope' wouldn't match the T-shirts, bumper-stickers, and other stuff that Spuzzum probably sells for income. I am okay leaving it out of the article though. If you know anyone in that area can you see if they can take a picture of the sign that says "You are now leaving Spuzzum" on both sides of the same sign? I couldn't find any free ones on the net. I assume they still have one and it may help their article. A good graphics artist on commons may be able to do some animation or something to show both sides. A video may work as well or just side by side images of the same sign.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

That sign is long-gone, though I and others remember it well. Maybe there's something in the museum in Yale, or maybe the Spuzzum Band might have some old pics, they're pretty friendly I'll try and take the time to write them, unless you'd care to first. The sign outlived the store, I think.Skookum1 (talk) 04:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

there's no retail outlet of any kind in Spuzzum anymore; there's only the reserve (across the tracks from the highway) and it doesn't look inhabited there, still has a few hundred residents I think, or a hundred anyway, including a few non-natives on some non-IR lands. The nearest store to there would be in Yale, which of course is just at the other end of the Yale Tunnel on the TC....the museum in Hope might have something.....and the souvenir rack in the truck stop at Dogwood Valley. Canyon town articles we need more of; I've been putting off starting Boothroyd's, Chapman's, and Canyon Alpine for a while because of lack of materials other than what's on BC Names and what can be found in old travel writeups and gold rush/wagon road histories.....even Alexandria had a store back in my day.....Skookum1 (talk) 04:46, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

They may make another sign if we promise to put it in their article. If we make it really nice and humourous they may become a popular place to visit. Just erect it off the highway and tourists would probably stop there more. Any retail on the horizon for them? I may get a graphics friend at commons to do a few mock-ups that they can choose from. I have brothers in the Kootenays and Jasper that could make and paint it if they want to hire it out. Fred Curatolo does humourous signs locally and may take it on as well if they want a famous creator.--Canoe1967 (talk) 09:11, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't know the story on who has the property where the store is now. Thing is any retail/restaurant there would have to be special to get people to stop; Yale is full of half-out-of-business places and anyone going north is gonna fill up and chow there if they need to, or already did at Dogwood Valley or in Hope.......it's not like the old days, when the highway was slower-going. The band might want to do it though....a way to get T'sama to understand there's nowhere to stop and hang around in, other than the ice cream and postcard and carvings stand they could put up......if they want to. A sign south of Dogwood Valley saying "you are now nearing Hope" and one in the opposite direction "you have left Hope behind" though could make a splash...until vandalized LOL. Dante it's not (liasciatare all'esperenza, tutti chi entrata chi....).Skookum1 (talk) 09:28, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

• Btw, do you know anyone near Chilliwack that can take a picture of the James Cleland Richardson statue by John Weaver (artist) in front of the museum? Elek Imredy and Charles Marega have some works in the lower mainland as well. --Canoe1967 (talk) 18:50, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I don't know who's around the Lower Mainland...I'm not. User:The Interior is in, I think, Vernon. You might try asking at {{WikiProject British Columbia}} or {{WikiProject Vancouver}} or have a look at the users/members within those projects. Or write the museum and ask them to upload one....Skookum1 (talk) 11:57, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I keep getting you two mixed up, sorry. I thought you were both in the Lower Rainland. I grew up there but I haven't got any connections left. What I should to is email the foundry in Calgary. I think they do most of Western Canada and the NW US. They may have some very nice images or know who to contact. I also created http://commons.wikimedia.org/User:Canoe1967/Sculptors that may get us more images. Victoria has one that I would like for an article so I may just spam the Christy Clark and see if she is willing to take one. It would be cute to have photos by famous folk to help our articles. There are hundreds of statues here in Edmonton and that may be why I haven't gotten many shots yet, just too daunting. I should just get all of our MLAs to take them for us to get glory votes. I guess spamming the party whips would be the best route. I have been helping a subject with her article images and she has some nice ones on her twitter. She travels a lot so I should make a list of needed images for her and create a sub-category in her commons category to host them all. Her fans may enjoy looking through all her of wiki-travel shots there.--Canoe1967 (talk) 12:48, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Tarzan

The comic strips you remember are by Russ Manning, and are being reprinted in Comics Revue magazine (which I edit). Rick Norwood (talk) 11:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

03:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC)}}

Any chance you'll be at Wikimania HK?

Hiya Skookum, I've been running into some of the Wikimedia Canada folks at various meetings ... a few of them have met you, others not. If you're off in that neck of the woods, any chance you'll be able to swing by ? You can get a lot of synergy going by meeting folks in person ... (I have to pass this one up, but hoping for 2014!) Djembayz (talk) 23:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Provided I make some money between now and August, it's a possibility...I passed up the chance to win one of the scholarships but didn't bring my name forward, I was just back in Misplaced Pages and assumed, maybe wrongly, I wouldn't have the necessary support from other WPCAN editors....it would be very interesting, true, and if all goes well I'll still be either here on Samui or somewhere in the Phils......so maybe.Skookum1 (talk) 03:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't be shy-- the first Misplaced Pages editor I met in RL was Ottava Rima :) It's really way more fun to meet other Wikipedians in person! Djembayz (talk) 20:29, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

It won't be about being shy, it's about money LOL. HK's one of the most expensive places in Asia, though I can get there easy enough; there's even direct flights from Samui.Skookum1 (talk) 03:10, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Powell River-Sunshine Coast

It's listed as a Vancouver Island riding on {{British Columbia provincial electoral districts 2009-}}. If that's wrong, it needs to be fixed there too, because that's what I was going by. Bearcat (talk) 02:03, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

K, yes it's wrong for sure; I'll remove it from that template; it adjoins the Lower Mainland to the northwest on the other side of Howe Sound and is part of the Mainland/Southwest Development Region, which is the SCRD, GVRD, SLRD and FVRDs combined (StatsCan has a "Lower Mainland - Southwest" grouping which is the same....but has different stats, I don't know why). One VI ridings e.g. North Island, whatever it's called now, includes the sparsely populated mainland opposite it (mostly IRs); the Mt Waddington RD does the same,and I think one other, I'd have to look at the map; the original Comox riding was the whole Coast, and including the Skeena/Nass/Stikine right up to the Yukon boundary.Skookum1 (talk) 02:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Hm the regional breakdown names are part of the problem, not sure where they came from, maybe Elections BC itself, or from the Sun maybe...."Vancouver Island/South Coast" is a misnomer, as "South Coast" includes Greater Vancouver and North Island's grasp on the Mainland is the Central Coast, not South Coast. And the North Coast riding is usually grouped, and "culturally" part of, the other coastal ridings; North/Central as a grouping is awkward; other than North Coast they're all Interior ridings (even Stikine); people in PG and Williams Lake consider that to be Central Interior, ditto the Ft St James/Omineca/Nechako area folks. The Fraser Valley-South LM and Vancouver-North LM groupings also don't work for me; the Chilliwack riding includes parts of Mission and also Agassiz/Kent, which are northern Lower Mainland; I see previous templates of this kind have the same breakdown; someone may revert my changes to the template; under the title "Vancouver Island-South Coast" Powell River was "ok".."Vancouver Island-Coast" would be better because of North Island, but then North Coast would belong in it too.Skookum1 (talk) 02:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Comment style

Hi Skookum - I appreciate the knowledge you have of this space, I just have a request - when you comment at CFD and elsewhere, your sentences are run-on sentences punctuated with semicolons and jumping from topic to topic. While it may make sense to you, when I read your comments, which are often quite long as well (I'm guilty of that too), I often have trouble parsing them. Just a friendly suggestion to consider the style of your comments.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 05:29, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

"run-on mind" compounded by speed-typing and, yes, a very tangential mind and very complicated subjects. I'm starting to realize bullet-pointing things may work out better, but so many points are interconnected it's hard to do; that TLNDR thing for me, when someone uses it, is just a way of admitting to a short attention span and/or lack of real interest in the matters at hand. Skookum1 (talk) 06:05, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Sometimes. But really, the past few comments you've posted, I've had real trouble parsing. Just saying, in a friendly way, perhaps consider formatting differently or making shorter, punchier sentences - your point will come across better, which is what you want anyway.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 06:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Old habit are hard to break LOL but I'll try. One thing I've found extremely frustrating is people not reading cites they've asked for, and then asking for them again, and so I have to repeat myself when I'd rather not have to......plus the many non sequitur or bad-example responses. It ain't just that certain someone; there's one case (Hitomaro) where I responded succinctly to the four queries, then was insulted about not responding, as if I hadn't, and saying I wasn't capable of "adult communication"...what I'm seeing is not a lot of adult thinking and people reading emotions into things that aren't emotional....just involved/voluble.Skookum1 (talk) 06:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Categorisation Barnstar
		For continuing work on keeping categories sensible, especially recently, and ongoing, with regard to indigenous peoples, such as Secwepemc and Category:Secwepemc, Nlaka'pamux and Category:Nlaka'pamux, Tsilhqot'in and Category:Tsilhqot'in, etc. (And because I can't find a decent barnstar for work on indigenous peoples!) Pfly (talk) 23:43, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Pemberton, British Columbia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Marcus Smith and Seymour River

Skeena-Queen Charlotte Regional District (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Metlakatla

We Said Go Travel (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Jewish Journal

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Seton River may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:19, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

PacifiCat categories

You asked for someone to look into PacifiCat categories. I found Template:PacifiCat ferries and Category:PacifiCat-class ferries and put them both up for deletion as unnecessary. Please comment on these proposals. Gwsk55970 (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Get a life

You seriously need to get a life. Narssarssuaq (talk) 14:06, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I hate ANIs, but here we go. Your illicit removal of the very valid OR and SYNTH templates another user replaced before I had a chance to.Skookum1 (talk) 14:16, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is a collaborative effort, and I don't want to collaborate with the likes of you. Narssarssuaq (talk) 14:35, 2 June 2013 (UTC)