User talk:Cayleym

A first message for Cayley

Hi Cayley, I got your message fine! See you in class tomorrow. --Greentina (talk) 03:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Your first edit

Hi Cayley, I had a look at your first edit - thanks for letting me know. In terms of where to put the references, perhaps at the end of the sentences? If there is an existing reference there you can add to it. If you wish, why not contact one of our online ambassadors and ask for help? Other students have, and it's a good way to make contact with them! They have already been helping people so don't be shy! The only other thing you needed to have done was to put an internal link to the Bill Reid article in the message to me. You do that by putting two square brackets ( these: [ ] ) around the phrase you want to link to; e.g. Bill Reid. --Greentina (talk) 21:20, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Hey Cayley. I liked the biographical info you added to Bill Reid. Refs are a bit tricky. But in this situation, you should add the ref wherever you've added new info - it's okay to add them mid-sentence, or directly following an existing ref. Just think of it as a reader, i.e. if I wanted to verify his clan name, how would I find the cite? When using a ref more than once, try using the "named ref" template. It makes it easier, and avoids crowding the edit page with duplicated refs. Here's the how-to: WP:NAMEDREFS. Best, The Interior (Talk) 22:17, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

CRT Outline

Thanks for sending me your proposed outline. It looks like your group has big plans for the existing entry on the CRT, which is good because it really needs to be expanded. I think that overall your outline is very good, although it sounds like there are parts that are already covered fairly well in the existing entry, particularly the content of the treaty. I would say that, in addition to putting more in there about WAC Bennett's vision for the province, be sure to include AGL McNaughton as well. His "all Canada" plan for the valley caused much of the controversy in Canada and it was one that residents of the Arrow Lakes preferred, since it did not involve flooding them out (though it did involve flooding out other areas of Basin to an even greater extent). I also think you could add a section on the environmental impact of the treaty dams. Otherwise it looks like you're off to a great start. Cheers, Philvh (talk) 22:07, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to Vancouver meetup

Hello,

You are invited to an edit-a-thon at the Prophouse Café on Sunday March 25, as part of Women's History Month events all over the world. If you wish to attend, please see Wikipedia:Meetup/Vancouver WikiWomen's Edit-a-Thon and add your signature to the list.

Thank you! InverseHypercube (talk) 10:03, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Columbia River Treaty Outline

Introduction: Adding basic information such as: What is the river? Where is it? what are the dams? when was the treaty passed?

Background: Looking into the motivations of why BC and the US wanted to sign a treaty.

Treaty Provision: (This one is going to be left as is, but we wanted to add "Canadian Entitlement" into this section)

Implications (previously labeled "Controversy"): Social Impacts: Regionally (effects of relocation/ varying attitudes towards the dams) and Provincially (economic and political impacts) Environmental Impacts: Specifically looking at how the river was altered and ultimately how that changed salmon runs, spawning grounds, and health of the fish.

My focus will be on the Social Impacts of the dam, specifically looking at regional and local impacts. I will primarily be speaking about various attitudes towards the dam, and also touch on First Nations people and the river.

Here is what I wrote for our first entry... but I still cant figure out how to do in-text citations! --Cdmhume (talk) 23:54, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

The Columbia River has the greatest annual drainage as compared to all other rivers along the Pacific coast (Parr, 108). Before the introduction of dams on the river, the changes in water level rose and fell predictably with the seasons and a nine meter displacement existed between the spring snowmelt highs and fall lows (Parr, 122-123). After the dams were built, however, the river changed unpredictably and in some areas the previous maximum and minimum water levels were altered by several tens of meters (Parr, 124). No longer linked to the seasons, water conditions became subject to United States power demands (Parr, 124). After the damming, the water during high floods began to cover much of the valley’s arable land - carrying with it fertile soil when the water retreated and leaving agricultural land useless (Parr, 104, 132)

From 1965 to 1969, 27, 312 acres were logged along the Columbia River to remove timber from the new flood plain (Stanely, 163). The slashing of vegetation along the shoreline weakened soil stability and made the land susceptible to wind erosion, creating sandstorms. Conversely, in wet periods, the cleared areas turned into vast mud flats (Parr, 126).

ill try and clear them up now Wls33 (talk) 05:24, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

your sandbox

Cayleym, the button to your sandbox links to MY sandbox. This should be fixed! You should also be doing the drafting of your sections in your own sandbox, not on your user talk page. --Greentina (talk) 03:33, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Publicplanet has his sandbox set up correctly - he can help you. --Greentina (talk) 03:39, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Nix the above: Here's what you do. Replace the code you've written with the following: [[User:Example/sandbox]] As it stands, when your sandbox is clicked, it takes you to the sandbox of the person who is clicking it! --Greentina (talk) 04:28, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello. You have a new message at Greentina's talk page. The Interior (Talk) 02:23, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Your Social Impacts Paragraph

Hi Cayley. I took a look at the paragraph you posted on my talk page. You're right, it does sound too argumentative for a Wikipedia entry. One of the best ways to tackle this would be to introduce who is making the argument. So, for example, preface you first sentence with "According to J. W. Wilson, B.C. Hydro ..." That way you are writing about arguments that others have made without making one of your own. A fine distinction, but a distinction nonetheless. I would also add the fact that Wilson worked with B.C. Hydro and was involved in the buy-out process. Lastly, your paragraph is also a little repetitive in parts. You state that BC Hydro looked at land only in an economic fashion twice, for instance.

I hope that helps. Feel free to ask for more feedback whenever you like. Philvh (talk) 03:20, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Sam's Section: Provincial Impacts

Hey, I uploaded a draft of my section to my sandbox, I believe you can find it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SamShurts/sandbox. If anyone is still having problems with references or sandbox links I have them pretty much figured out.--SamShurts (talk) 06:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Billy's section is up and running have a read and a beer...PS its in my sandbox

yup the title pretty much says it all Wls33 (talk) 03:10, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

yeah i am going to fix that right now — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wls33 (talk • contribs) 03:30, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Crisis on the Columbia

Hello! No worries about the book, I'll bring it to class on tuesday. Thanks for lending it to me! I just gave your latest entries a read and they look really great! Also, thanks for the heads up on the sandbox... Im trying to fix that now... Ive written a bunch tonight that I will (try) post in my sandbox now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdmhume (talk • contribs) 04:31, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Word count

How long was my section supposed to be again? I just finished and my word count is around 1,200... It turns out the fish situation was very complicated! I'll try condense it before I post it tomorrow though. Cdmhume (talk) 07:01, 26 March 2012 (UTC)