User talk:Skookum1

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

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 Wikipedia's contributors, students, or anybody interested in contributing to Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia.

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

Hello, Skookum1. You have new messages at SounderBruce's talk page.
Message added 06:17, 23 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Skookum1. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--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

Hello, Skookum1. You have new messages at BrownHairedGirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

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 Wikipedia 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-Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia. 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 [sic]" 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^talk_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 Wikipedia, editors are all equal. gwickwire^talk_editing 04:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

By the way, it's at RSN now. gwickwire^talk_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^talk_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 pu[i]ssant 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 Wikipedia 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, Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia. 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^talk_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 Wikipedia' 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia'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^talk_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 Wikipedia? 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^talk_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. Cullen³²⁸ 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. Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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, [1]. 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 Wikipedia 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. Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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 ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 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. Cullen³²⁸ 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, Wikipedia 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 — Wikipedia 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

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

• 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.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 08:37, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia, 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia accepts or not, Wikipedia 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, Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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. Wikipedia 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. Wikipedia 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)

Indian reserve name
(Deadman's Island) Halkett Island No. 2
Aass 3
Abuntlet Lake 4
Agats Meadow 8
Aglakumna 4A
Aglakumna-La 2
Agwedin 3
Ahahswinis 1
Ahaminaquus 12
Ahmitsa 5
Ahnuhati 6
Ahous 16
Ahpokum 9
Ahpukto 3
Ahta 3
Ahuk 1
Ah-We-Cha-Ol-To 16
Aikwucks 15
Ain 6
Aitchelitch 9
Alalco 8
Alastair 80
Alastair 81
Alastair 82
Alberni 2
Albert Flat 5
Alder Creek 70
Alert Bay 1
Alert Bay 1A
Alexandria 1
Alexandria 10
Alexandria 11
Alexandria 12
Alexandria 1A
Alexandria 3
Alexandria 3A
Alexis 9
Alexis Creek 12
Alexis Creek 13
Alexis Creek 14
Alexis Creek 15
Alexis Creek 16
Alexis Creek 17
Alexis Creek 18
Alexis Creek 20
Alexis Creek 21
Alexis Creek 22
Alexis Creek 23
Alexis Creek 24
Alexis Creek 25
Alexis Creek 26
Alexis Creek 27
Alexis Creek 28
Alexis Creek 29
Alexis Creek 30
Alexis Creek 31
Alexis Creek 32
Alexis Creek 33
Alexis Creek 34
Alexis Creek 35
Alexis Creek 6
Alexis Thomas 1A
Alixton 5
Alkali Lake 1
Alkali Lake 4A
Alkhili 2
Alphonse Tommy 7
Anahim 10
Anahim 11
Anahim 12
Anahim 13
Anahim 14
Anahim 15
Anahim 16
Anahim 17
Anahim 18
Anahim 3
Anahim 4
Anahim 5
Anahim 6
Anahim 7
Anahim 8
Anahim 9
Anahim's Flat 1
Anahim's Meadow 2
Anahim's Meadow 2A
Andak 9
Anderson Lake 5
Andimaul 1
Andy Cahoose Meadow 16
Anlaw 4
Ann Island 7
Antko 21
Apsagayu 1A
Ar-Ce-Wy-Ee 4
Arctic Lake 10
Asahal Lake 2
Ashcroft 4
Ashnola 10
Atlin-Teslin Indian Cemetery 4
Augier Lake 22
Aupe 6
Aupe 6A
Austin's Flat 3
Avery Island 92
Aylechootlook 5
Aywawwis 15
Babine 16
Babine 17
Babine 18
Babine 25
Babine 26
Babine 6
Babine Lake 20
Babine Lake 21B
Babine River 21
Babine River 21A
Baezaeko River 25
Baezaeko River 26
Baezaeko River 27
Baptiste Louis 8
Baptiste Meadow 2
Bare Island 9
Barnston Island 3
Barriere River 3A
Bartlett Island 32
Bartlett Island 7
Basque 18
Bat-L-Ki 3
Bear Bay 8
Bear Lake 1A
Bear Lake 1B
Bear Lake 4
Bear River 3
Beaton River 204, South Half
Beaton River No. 204, North Half
Beaver Islands 8
Becher Bay 1
Becher Bay 2
Bees 6
Bella Bella 1
Bella Coola 1
Betty Creek 18
Big Joe's Meadow 7
Bihl' K' A 18
Bihl' K'A Chah 20
Bihlk'A 6
Bill Lake 37
Binche 10
Binche 12
Binche 2
Binche Bun 7
Binta Lake 2
Birnie Island 18
Bishop Bluffs 10
Bishop Bluffs 5
Bishop Bluffs 6
Black Slate 11
Blackwater Meadow 11
Blind Creek 6
Blind Creek 6A
Blue Lake 24
Blue River 1
Blueberry River No. 205
Bonaparte 3
Bootahnie 15
Boothroyd 13
Boothroyd 5A
Boothroyd 5B
Boothroyd 5C
Boothroyd 6A
Boothroyd 6B
Boothroyd 8A
Boston Bar 10
Boston Bar 11
Boston Bar 1A
Boston Bar 8
Boston Bar 9
Boulder Creek 5
Bridge River 1
Bridge River 2
Brigham Creek 3
Bucktum 4
Bulkley 1
Bulkley River 19
Bummers Flat 6
Burns Lake 18
Burnt Cliff Islands 20
Burrard Inlet 3
Cahoose 10
Cahoose 12
Cahoose 8
Cameron Bar 13
Campbell River 11
Camsell Lake 30
Canim Lake 1
Canim Lake 2
Canim Lake 3
Canim Lake 4
Canim Lake 5
Canim Lake 6
Canoe Creek 1
Canoe Creek 2
Canoe Creek 3
Canoona 2
Canyon Lake 7
Cape Mudge 10
Capilano 5
Carm Creek 38
Carmanah 6
Carp Lake 3
Carpenter Mountain 15
Carrier Lake 15
Carsoosat 17
Casdeded 8
Casimiel Meadows 15A
Cassimayooks 5
Cayilth 5
Cayoosh Creek 1
Cayuse 6
Challetkohum 5
Challetkohum 9
Channel Islands 33
Chanoodandidalch 14
Chapel Park 28
Chapman's Bar 10
Chapperon Creek 6
Chapperon Lake 5
Charles Creek 2
Charley Boy's Meadow 3
Chatham Islands 4
Chatscah 2
Chaumox 11
Chawathil 4
Cheakamus 11
Cheam 1
Cheesish 15
Cheetsum's Farm 1
Cheewat 4A
Chehalis 5
Chehalis 6
Chekwelp 26
Chekwelp 26A
Chemainus 13
Chenahkint 12
Ches-La-Kee 3
Cheslatta 1 (includes 11 parcels)
Chetarpe 17
Chezacut Cemetery 5
Cheztainya Lake 11
Chief Morris 13
Chig-In-Kaht 8
Chilco Lake 1
Chilco Lake 1A
Chilhil 6
Chimdimash 2
Chimdimash 2A
Chimney Creek 5
Chiseuquis 9
Chopaka 7 & 8
Chuchakacook 4
Chuchhriaschin 5
Chuchhriaschin 5A
Chuchummisapo 15
Chuchuwayha 2
Chuchuwayha 2C
Chuckchuck 8
Chukcheetso 7
Chum Creek 2
Chundoo Lh'Tan La 45
Chuz Ghun 8
Chuz Teeslee 41
Citeyats 9
Claoose 4
Classy Creek 8
Clatse 5
Clatux 9
Clayoqua 6
Cleho 6
Clesbaoneecheck 3
Clienna 14
Clinton 1
Cloolthpich 12
Clotalairquot 4
Clowel 13
Cluchuta Lake 10A
Cluchuta Lake 10B
Cludolicum 9
Cludolicum 9A
Clustalach 5
Cockmi 3
Coffin Island 3
Coglistiko River 29
Cohoe Point 20
Coldwater 1
Cole Bay 3
Columbia Lake 3
Comox 1
Compton Island 6
Coopte 9
Copper Johnny Meadow 8
Coquitlam 1
Coquitlam 2
Corkscrew Creek 10
Corkscrew Creek 9
Coryatsaqua 2
Cous 3
Cowichan 1
Cowichan 9
Cowichan Lake
Crab River 18
Creston 1
Cullite 3
Cumshewas 7
Dakiulis 7
Dalk-Ka-Gila-Quoeux 2
Daningay 12
Dashken 22
Davie Lake 28
Dead Point 5
Dease Lake 9
Dease River 1
Dease River 2 (Dease)
Dease River 2 (Liard)
Dease River 3 (Dease)
Dease River 3 (Liard)
Dease River 4
Dedagaus 8
Deena 3
Deep Creek 2
Deep Creek 5
Deep Valley 5
Defence Island 28
Dil-Ma-Sow 5
Discovery Island 3
Dlah Koh 31
Dog Creek 1
Dog Creek 2
Dog Creek 3
Dog Creek 4
Doig River 206
Dolphin Island 1
Doobah 10
Douglas 8
Douglas Lake 3
Dove Island 12
Dragon Lake 3
Drew Harbour 9
Driftwood River 1
Dry Salmon 7
Duck Lake 7
Dufferin 10
Dug-Da-Myse 12
Duncan Lake 2
Dundas Island 32B
Dzagayap 73
Dzagayap 74
Dzin Tl'At 46
Dzitline Lee 9
East Moberly Lake 169
East Saanich 2
Eastern Island 13
Echachis 2
Edye 93
Eelseuklis 10
Egeria Bay 19
Ehatis 11
Elcho 6
Enderby 2
Enhalt 11
Ensheshese 13
Ensheshese 53
Entlqwekkinh 19
Equis 8
Esowista 3
Esquimalt
Est-Patrolas 4
Etsekin 1
Euchinico Creek 17
Euchinico Creek 18
Euchinico Creek 19
Far West Point 34
Felix George 7
Finlay Bay 21
Finlayson Island 19
Fish Lake 5
Fish Lake 7
Fishpot Lake 24
Fishtrap 19
Five Mile 3
Five Mile Point 3
Fondeur 9
Fontas 1
Fort George 2
Fort George Cemetery 1A
Fort Nelson 2
Fort Rupert 1
Fort Ware 1
Fountain 1
Fountain 10
Fountain 11
Fountain 12
Fountain 1A
Fountain 1B
Fountain 1C
Fountain 1D
Fountain 2
Fountain 3
Fountain 3A
Fountain 4
Fountain 9
Fountain Creek 8
Four And One Half Mile 2
Foxy Creek 6
Francois Lake 7
Franks 10
Fraser Island 6
Fraser Lake 2
Freda Point 4
Freddie Charley Boy 7
Freddie's Meadow 8
Fulford Harbour 5
Gabriola Island 5
Gaichbin 8
Galiano Island 9
Gander Island 14
Garden 2
Garden 2A
Gill Island 2
Giltoyees 13
Gitandoiks 75
Gitandoiks 76
Gitanmaax 1
Gitanyow 1
Gitanyow 2
Gitanyow 3A
Gitsegukla 1
Gitsegukla Logging 3
Gitwangak 1
Gitwangak 2
Glazier Creek 12
Glen-Gla-Ouch 5
Gleyka 6
Goldstream 13
Goo-Ewe 8
Goose Spit 3
Gordon River 2
Grass 15
Grass Point 13
Grasslands 7
Grassy Island 17
Grassy Islet 2
Graveyard 5
Great Bear Lake 16
Greenwood Island 3
Gribble Island 10
Grief Island 2
Guhthe Tah 12
Gulada 3A
Gul-Mak 8
Gun-A-Chal 5
Guoyskun 22
Gwayasdums 1
Gwen Lake 3
Hagwilget 1
Halalt 2
Halalt Island 1
Halfway River 168
Halhalaeden 14
Halhalaeden 14A
Halowis 5
Hamilton Creek 2
Hamilton Creek 7
Hanatsa 6
Harris 3
Harwood Island 2
Hatch Point 12
Hay Meadow 1
Hay Ranch 2
Haylahte 3
Hecate 17
Henderson's Ranch 11
Hesquiat 1
Hesquis 10A
Hiellen 2
High Bar 1
High Bar 1A
High Bar 2
Hihium Lake 6
Hihium Lake 6A
Hihium Lake 6B
Hisnit 7
Hisnit Fishery 34
Hiusta's Meadow 2
Hleepte 14
Hoiss 8
Hoke Point 10B
Holachten 8
Holy Cross Lake 3
Homais 2
Homalco 1
Homalco 2
Homalco 2A
Homalco 9
Homayno 2
Hominka 11
Homitan 8
Hoonees 2
Hope 1
Hope Island 1
Hopetown 10A
Horse Ranch Pass 4
Howeet 8
Humhampt 6
Humhampt 6A
Hustalen 1
Iakgwas 69
Iakvas 68
Iakwulgyiyaps 78
Ihch'Az Uz Ta Tsoh 44
Ikshenigwolk 3
Iktuksasuk 7
Ilclo 12
Iltcoola Indian Reserve No. 7
Ilthpaya 8
Imkusiyan 65
Indian Island 30
Inkahtsaph 6
Inkluckcheen 21
Inkluckcheen 21B
Inklyuhkinatko 2
Inlailawatash 4
Inlailawatash 4A
Inzana Lake 12
Isaac 8
Isadore Harry 12
Isidore's Ranch 4
Iskut 6
Island 14A
Ja We Yah's 99
Jalun 14
James Louie 3A
Jean Baptiste 28
Jennings River 8
Joeyaska 2
Johny Sticks 2
Jugwees 5
Jus K'Ay Tl'Oh 32
Kadis 11
Kahas 7
Kahkaykay 6
Kahmoose 4
Kahntah 3
Kaikalahun 25
Kai-Too-Kwis 15
Kajustus 10
Kakalatza 6
Kakweken 4
Kamloops 1
Kamloops 2
Kamloops 3
Kamloops 4
Kamloops 5
Kanaka Bar 1A
Kanaka Bar 2
Karlukwees 1
Kasika 36
Kasika 71
Kasika 72
Kasiks River 29
Kaste 6
Kateen River 39
Katit 1
Katzie 1
Katzie 2
Kawages 4
Kawkawa Lake 16
K'Ay Noo 47
Kayel 8
Kaykaip 7
Kdad-Eesh 4
Keecekiltum 2
Keecha 11
Keith Island 7
Kelly Creek 3
Kemano 17
Kemsquit 1
Keogh 2
Keogh 3
Keogh 6
Keom Cho 38
Kequesta 1
Keremeos Forks 12 & 12A
Kerry Lake East 9
Kerry Lake West 8
Keswar 16
Ketai 28
Ketoneda 7
Keyarka 17
Khazisela 7
Khrana 4
Khtahda 10
Khutzemateen 49
Khyex 8
Kilchult 3
Kil-Pah-Las 3
Kiltala 2
Kinmakanksk 6
Kioosta 15
Kippase 2
Kisameet 7
Kis-An-Usko 7
Kisgegas
Kishnacous 29
Kispiox 1
Kitamaat 1
Kitamaat 2
Kitasa 7
Kitasoo 1
Kitkahta 1
Kitlawaoo 10
Kitlope 16
Kitselas 1
Kitsemenlagan 19
Kitsemenlagan 19A
Kitsilano 6
Kits-Ka-Haws 6
Kitsumkaylum 1
Kitzowit 20
Klagookchew 9
Klahkamich 17
Klahkowit 5
Klahoose 1
Klakelse 86
Klaklacum 12
Klapthlon 5
Klapthlon 5A
Klaskish 3
Kleetlekut 22
Kleetlekut 22A
Klehkoot 2
Klewaduska 6
Klickkumcheen 18
Klickseewy 7
Klitsis 16
Kloklowuck 7
Kloyadingli 2
Kluachon Lake 1
Kluemt 15
Kluskus 1
Kluskus 14
Knamadeek 52
Knames 45
Knames 46
Knapp Lake 6
Knokmolks 67
Ko-Kwi-Iss 14
Kokyet 1
Koonwats 7
Kooryet 12
Kootenay 1
Kootowis 4
Kopchitchin 2
Koqui 6
Kose 9
Kotsine 2
Kowtain 17
Ksabasn 50
Ksadagamks 43
Ksadsks 44
Ksagwisgwas 62
Ksagwisgwas 63
Ksames 85
Kshaoom 23
Kshish 4B
Kshish No 4 (includes Kshish 4A)
Ksoo-Gun-Ya 2A
Kstus 83
Kstus 84
Ksui-La-Das 6
Ktamgaodzen 51
Kuaste 8
Kukwapa 5
Kul 18
Kuldekduma 7
Kuldoe 1
Kulkayu 4
Kulkayu 4A
Kulspai 6
Kultah 4
Kumcheen 1
Kumowdah 3
Kung 11
Kunhunoan 13
Kunsoot 9
Kunstamis 2
Kunstamis 2A
Kupchynalth 1
Kupchynalth 2
Kushya Creek 12
Kushya Creek 7
Kutcous Point 33
Kuthlalth 3
Kuthlo 18
Kuz Che 5
Kwatlena 4
Kwa-Tsa-Lix 4
Kwatse 3
Kwawkwawapilt 6
Kwetahkis 9
Kwum Kwum
Kyarti 3
Kyex 64
Kye-Yaa-La 1
Kyidagwis 2
Kyimla 11
Kykinalko 2
La Tse Cho Diz I 33
Lachkul-Jeets 6
Lachmach 16
Lackaway 2
Lackzuswadda 9
Lagins 5
Lakahahmen 11
Lakelse 25
Laketown 3
Lakgeas 87
Lakway Cemetery 3
Lamb Island 5
Lanas 4
Langley 2
Langley 3
Langley 4
Langley 5
Lattkaloup 9
Lawanth 5
Lax Kw'Alaams 1
Lelachen 6
Leon 14
Leon Creek 2
Leon Creek 2A
Lezbye 6
Lhoh Cho 29
Liard River 3
Lillooet 1
Lillooet 1A
Lish-Leesh-Tum 17
Little Springs 18
Little Springs 8
Logan's 6
Lohbiee 3
Lokla 4
Long Neck Island 9
Long Tunnel 5
Long Tunnel 5A
Loon Lake 10
Loon Lake 4
Lorin Meadow 9
Loughborough 3
Louis Creek 4
Louis Squinas Ranch 14
Lower Fishpot Lake 24A
Lower Hat Creek 2
Lower Kootenay 1A
Lower Kootenay 1B
Lower Kootenay 1C
Lower Kootenay 2
Lower Kootenay 3
Lower Kootenay 4
Lower Kootenay 5
Lower Shawniken 4A
Lower Similkameen 2
Lukseetsissum 9
Lulu 5
Lyackson 3
Lytton 13A
Lytton 21A
Lytton 26A
Lytton 27B
Lytton 31
Lytton 32
Lytton 33
Lytton 3A
Lytton 4A
Lytton 4B
Lytton 4C
Lytton 4D
Lytton 4E
Lytton 4F
Lytton 5A
Lytton 9A
Lytton 9B
Maahpe 4
Mackenzie 19
Maganktoon 56
Ma-Guala 6
Magwekstala 10
Mahmalillikullah 1
Mahpahkum 4
Mah-Te-Nicht 8
Maka 8
Maklaksadagmaks 41
Maklaksadagmaks 42
Malachan 11
Malahat 11
Malcolm Island 8
Mammin River 25
Maple Point 11
Maquazneecht Island 17
Marble Canyon 3
Marktosis 15
Marshy Lake 1
Mary Cove 12
Masset 1
Matchlee 13
Matlaten 4
Matsayno 5
Matsqui 4
Matsqui Main 2
Mauvais Rocher 5
Maxan Creek 5
Maxan Lake 3
Maxan Lake 4
Mayne Island 6
McCartney's Flat 4
McDames Creek 2
McDonald Lake 1
McIntyre Lake 23
McKay Meadow 4
McLean's Lake 3
McLeod Lake 1
McLeod Lake 5
McMillan Island 6
Meadow Creek 3
Meagwan 8
Meanlaw 24
Medicine Creek 12
Medicine Hill 11
Meetup 2
Metso A Choot 23
Me-Yan-Law 47
Meyanlow 58
Michel Gardens 36
Michell Pierre 12
Michelle Creek 22
Michelle Creek 23
Misgatlee 14
Mission 1
Mission 5
Mission Creek 8
Mission Lands Indian Reserve No. 17
Moosh 4
Mooyah 16
Moricetown 1
Morteen 9
Mosquito Creek 5
Mount Currie 1
Mount Currie 10
Mount Currie 2
Mount Currie 6
Mount Currie 7
Mount Currie 8
Moutcha 5
Moyehai 23
Muddy River 1
Murray Lake 4
Mushkin 5
Mushkin 5A
Musqueam 2
Musqueam 4
Naden 10
Naden 23
Nahamanak 7
Nahlquonate 2
Nahwitti 4
Nak'A Lat 39
Nak'Azdli
Na-Kwockto 2
Nan Tl' At 13
Nanaimo River 2
Nanaimo River 3
Nanaimo River 4
Nanaimo Town 1
Nananahout 1
Nanoose
Narcisse's Farm 4
Natazutlooh 25
Nathlegalis 3
Nautley 1
Naykikoulth 13
Nazco 20
Nazco 21
Nazco Cemetery 20A
Ndakdolk 54
Necait 6
Necausley Creek 6
Nedoats 11
Nedoats 13
Neekas 4
Nehounlee Lake 13
Nekalliston 2
Nekite 2
Nekliptum 1
Nequatque 1
Nequatque 2
Nequatque 3
Nequatque 3A
Nequatque 4
Nesikep 6
Nesikep 6A
Neskonlith 1
Neskonlith 2
Nesuch 3
Nesuk 4
Ne-Tsaw-Greece 10
Nettle Island 5
New Clew 10
New Gitsegukla 2
New Songhees 1A
Ngwyu'Yemc 36
Nickel Palm 4
Nickeyeah 25
Nicoelton 6
Nicola Lake 1
Nicola Mameet 1
Nicomen 1
Nimpkish 2
Nine Mile Creek 4
Nishanocknawnak 35
Nkaih 10
Nocten 19
No-Cut 5
Nohomeen 23
Noo Kat 42
Nooaitch 10
Nooaitch Grass 9
Noonla 6
Nooseseck 2
Noota 4
North Bay 5
North Road 19
North Tacla Lake 10
North Tacla Lake 11A
North Tacla Lake 12
North Tacla Lake 7
North Tacla Lake 7A
North Tacla Lake 8
North Thompson 1
Nuchatl 1
Nuchatl 2
Nuuautin 2
Nuuautin 2A
Nuuautin 2B
O K'Ay Wha Cho 26
Oatswish 13
Occosh 8
Oclucje 7
Ohamil 1
Oinimitis 14
Okanagan 1
Oke 10
Okeamin 5
Old Clemens 16
Old Country Meadow 4
Omineca 1
Omoah 9
Onadsilth 9
One Hundred Five Mile Post 2
One Mile 6
One Mile Point 1
Opatseeah 13
Opemit 4
Open Bay 8
Openit 27
Opitsat 1
Oregon Jack Creek 2
Oregon Jack Creek 5
Orford Bay 4
Ormonde Creek 8
Oschawwinna 3
Osoyoos 1
Osoyoos 3
O-Tsaw-Las 5
Otter Lake 2
Ouchton 3
Ous 17
Owh-Wis-Too-A-Wan 10
Owossitsa 6
Owun 24
O-Ya-Kum-La 11
Oyees 9
Oyster Bay 12
Pa-Aat 6
Pa-Cat'L-Lin-Ne 3
Pacheena 1
Pack River 2
Pahas 3
Palling 1
Papekwatchin 4
Papsilqua 13
Papsilqua 2
Papsilqua 2A
Papsilqua 2B
Papyum 27
Papyum 27A
Papyum Graveyard 27C
Paqulh
Parsnips 5
Pashilqua 2
Pashilqua 2A
Paska Island 3
Paukeanum 3
Paul's 6
Paul's Basin 2
Pavilion 1
Pavilion 1A
Pavilion 3A
Pavilion 4
Pawala 5
Pegleg 3
Pegleg 3A
Pekw'Xe:Yles (Peckquaylis) Indian Reserve
Pel-Looth'L Kai 17
Pemynoos 9
Pender Island 8
Peneece 11
Peneetle 22
Penelakut Island Indian Reserve No. 7
Penticton 1
Penticton 2
Penticton 3A
Pentledge 2
Peq-Paq 22
Perrets 11
Pete Suckers 13
Peters 1
Peters 1A
Peters 2
Pinkut Lake 23
Pipseul 3
Pitt Island 27
Pitt Lake 4
Poison Creek 17
Poison Creek 17A
Pokheitsk 10
Pole Island 14
Police Meadow 2
Pooeyelth 3
Popkum 1
Popkum 2
Poquiosin & Skamain 13
Port Essington
Port Neville 4
Portier Pass 5
Potato Point 3
Poyam 9
Priest's Valley 6
Prince Leboo Island 32
Prophet River 4
Psacelay 77
Puckatholetchin 11
Pulcah 15
Puntzi Lake 2
Putkwa 14
Qôçöalatk├Ü7Em
Quaal 3
Quaal 3A
Quaaout 1
Quaee 7
Qualark 4
Qualicum
Quaniwsom 2
Quan-Skum-Ksin-Mich-Mich 4
Quartcha 3
Quatlenemo 5
Quatleyo 12
Quatsino Subdivision 18
Quattishe 1
Quaw Island 25
Quay 4
Quckwa 7
Queesidaquah 4
Quequa 6
Quesnel 1
Quinsam 12
Quortsowe 13
Range 13
Red Bluff 88
Redstone Cemetery 1B
Redstone Flat 1
Redstone Flat 1A
Redwater Creek 30
Refuge Cove 6
Rich Bar 4
Riley Creek 1B
Roper's Meadow 14
Ruby Creek 2
Rushton Island 90
S 1/2 Tsimpsean 2
Saagoombahlah 6
Saaiyouck 6
Sachteen 2
Sachteen 2A
Sackanitecla 2
Sackum 3
Saddle Horse 2
Saddle Rock 9
Sahhacum 1
Sahhaltkum 4
Salaquo 4
Salmon Bay 3
Salmon Creek 3
Salmon Lake 7
Salmon River 1 (Kôçö├Ômoks)
Salmon River 1 (Splatsin)
Salmon River Meadow 7
Salvus 26
Sam Adams 12
Samahquam 1
Sampson's Meadow 11
Sampson's Meadow 11A
San Jose 6
Sand Island 4
Sandy Harry 4
Saouchten 18
Saouk 16
Sarque 5
Sas Mighe 32
Satunquin 5
Saturna Island 7
Savey 15
Say-La-Quas 10
Scaucy 5
Schaltuuch 27
Schelowat 1
Schikaelton 16
Schkam 2
Scotch Creek 4
Scowlitz 1
Scuttsap 11
Scuttsap 11A
Sea Island 3
Seabird Island
Seah 5
Seaichem 16
Seaspunkut 4
Sechelt Band Lands (Bargain Harbour) No. 24
Sechelt Band Lands (Boulder Island) No 25
Sechelt Band Lands (Chelohsin) No 13
Sechelt Band Lands (Chickwat) No 9
Sechelt Band Lands (Cokqueneets) No 23
Sechelt Band Lands (Egmont) No 26
Sechelt Band Lands (Hunaechin) No 11
Sechelt Band Lands (Klaalth) No 5
Sechelt Band Lands (Klayekwim) No 6
Sechelt Band Lands (Klayekwim) No 6A
Sechelt Band Lands (Klayekwim) No 7
Sechelt Band Lands (Klayekwim) No 8
Sechelt Band Lands (Oalthkyim) No 4
Sechelt Band Lands (Paykulkum) No 14
Sechelt Band Lands (Sallahlus) No 20
Sechelt Band Lands (Sallahlus) No 20A
Sechelt Band Lands (Saughanaught) No 22
Sechelt Band Lands (Sawquamain) No 19A
Sechelt Band Lands (Sechelt) No 2
Sechelt Band Lands (Sekaleton) No 21
Sechelt Band Lands (Sekaleton) No 21A
Sechelt Band Lands (Shannon Creek) No 28
Sechelt Band Lands (Skookumchuck) No 27
Sechelt Band Lands (Skwawkweehm) No 17
Sechelt Band Lands (Slayathlum) No 16
Sechelt Band Lands (Smeshalin) No 18
Sechelt Band Lands (Suahbin) No 19
Sechelt Band Lands (Swaycalse) No 3
Sechelt Band Lands (Swaywelat) No 12
Sechelt Band Lands (Swaywelat) No 12A
Sechelt Band Lands (Tchahchelailthtenum) No 10
Sechelt Band Lands (Tsawcome) No 1
Sechelt Band Lands (Tsooahdie) No 15
Seektukis 24
Semach 2
Semiahmoo
Senanus Island 10
Seton Lake 5
Seton Lake 5A
Seymour Creek 2
Seymour Meadows 19
Shackan 11
Shas Dzuhl Koh 35
Shawniken 3
Shawniken 4B
Sheganny 14
Shell Island 3
Sheraton Creek 19
Shingle Point 4
Shoomart 5
Sho-Ook 5
Shoowahtlans 4
Shoskhost 7
Shpapzchinh 20
Shrypttahooks 7
Shuouchten 15
Shuswap
Siakin 4
Sicamous 3
Sidina 6
Sik-E-Dakh 2
Silicon 2
Silver Salmon Lake 5
Sim Creek 5
Sinkut Lake 8
Sinnce-Tah-Lah 2
Siska Flat 3
Siska Flat 5A
Siska Flat 5B
Siska Flat 8
Sisul Tl'O K'Ut 14
Sisul Tl'O K'Ut 21
Six Mile Meadow 6
Skaigha 2
Skawahlook 1
Skawahlum 10
Skaynaneichst 12
Skedance 8
Skeetchestn
Skeikut 9
Skhpowtz 4
Skidegate 1
Skilak 14
Skins Lake 15
Skins Lake 16A
Skins Lake 16B
Sklahhesten 5
Sklahhesten 5A
Sklahhesten 5B
Skooby Island 48
Skookumchuck 4
Skookumchuck 4A
Skoonkoon 2
Skowishin 7
Skowishin Graveyard 10
Skowkale 10
Skowkale 11
Skowquiltz River 3
Skuet 6
Skumalasph 16
Skuppah 1
Skuppah 2A
Skuppah 2B
Skuppah 3A
Skuppah 4
Skuppah 4A
Skutz 7
Skutz 8
Skwah 4
Skwahla 2
Skwali 3
Skway 5
Skwayaynope 26
Skweahm 10
Sleetsis 6
Sliammon 1
Slosh 1
Slosh 1A
Small Island 4
Snake 5
Soda Creek 1
Soldatquo 12
Soowahlie 14
Sophe 14
South Nepa 7
South Saanich 1
Sowchea 3
Sowchea 3A
Spahomin Creek 4
Spahomin Creek 8
Spakels 17
Spanaknok 57
Spatsum 11
Spatsum 11A
Spayaks 60
Spences Bridge 4
Spences Bridge 4C
Speous 8
Speyum 3
Spilmouse 4
Spintlum Flat 3
Spokwan 48
Spuzzum 1
Spuzzum 1A
Spuzzum 7
Squaam 2
Squaderee 91
Squaw-Hay-One 11
Squawkum Creek 3
Squeah 6
Squiaala 7
Squiaala 8
Squianny 10
Squinas 2
Squin-Lix-Stat 3
Squirrel Cove 8
St. Joe 10
St. Mary's 1A
Staiyahanny 8
Stawamus 24
Stellaquo 1
Stequmwhulpa 5
Stikine River 7
Stlakament 9
Stone 1
Stone 1A
Stone 4
Stony Creek 1
Stout 8
Stryen 9
Stuart Lake 10
Stuart Lake 9
Stullawheets 8
Sucker Lake 2
Sucwoa 6
Sumas Cemetery 12
Sundayman's Meadow 3
Susk 17
Sutaquis 18
Swahliseah 14
Swan 35
Swan Lake 3
Swan Lake 4
Sweeteen 3
Switsemalph 3
Switsemalph 6
Switsemalph 7
Ta Duhl' 36
Ta-A-Ack 5
Tache 1
Tacheeda Lake 14
Tacla Lake 9
Tadinlay 15
Tahla 4
Tahlo Lake 24
Tahltan 1
Tahltan 10
Tahltan Forks 5
Tahsis 11
Taku 6
Taleomy 3
Tanakut 4
Tanizul 43
Tankeah 5
Tanoo 9
Targe Creek 15
Tatcho Creek 11
Tatchu 13
Tatchu 13A
Tatelkus Lake 28
Tatense 16
Tatla West 11
Tatl'Ah Indian Reserve No. 13
Tatla'T East 2
Tatpo-Oose 10
Tatsadah Lake 14
Tatselawas 2
Tatuk Lake 7
Tcimotf 1A
Teahmit 3
Teequaloose 3
Teequaloose 3A
Teeslee 15
Teeta 7
Teh Noo'N Che 49
Telaise 1
Telegraph Creek 6
Telegraph Creek 6A
Tent Island 8
Tequa 21
Tes Gha La 7A
Teslin Lake 7
Teslin Lake 9
Theik 2
Thomas Point 5
Thomas Point 5A
Thomas Squinas Ranch 2A
Three Islands 3
Tiahn 27
Tilgatko 17
Tillion 4
Tin Wis 11
Tinmusket 5A
Tipella 7
Tlaa Gaa Aawtlaas 28
Tl'O Ba 22
Tobacco Plains 2
Toby Helenes Meadow 10
Toby Helenes Meadow 11
Toby Helenes Meadow 9
Toby Lake 6
Toby's Meadow 4
Toh-Quo-Eugh 2
Tokenatch 5
Toksee 4
Tom Cook 26
Toon 15
Toops 3
Toosey 1
Toosey 1A
Toosey 3
Tootoowiltena 28
Toowartz 8
Toquana 4
Tork 7
Tosehka 12
Towdystan Lake 3
Towinock 2
Trafalgar Flat 13
Trout Lake Alec 16
Trout Lake Jonny 15
Tsa Xana 18
Tsachla Lake 8
Tsahaheh 1
Tsai-Kwi-Ee 13
Tsak 9
Tsarksis 2
Tsaukan 12
Tsawawmuck 1
Tsawwati 1
Tsay Cho 4
Tsaytut Island 1C
Tsaz Chech 27
Tsaz Chech 28
Tsaz Cheh Koh 24
Tse Bay Ha Tine A 34
Tseatah 2
Tseetsum-Sawlasilah 6
Tsemknawalqan 79
Tseoowa 4
Tsichgass 10
Tsimlairen 15
Tsimtack 7
Tsinkahtl 8
Tsinstikeptum 10
Tsinstikeptum 9
Tsintahktl 2
Tsitsk 3
Ts'Kw'Aylaxw 5
T'Sou-Ke 1
T'Sou-Ke 2
Tsowenachs 2
Tsowwin 10
Tsulquate 4
Tsun Tine Ah 37
Tsunnia Lake 5
Tsupmeet 5
Tsuquanah 2
Tsussie 6
Tuck Inlet 89
Tuckkwiowhum 1
Tuckozap 24
Tugwell Island 21
Tum-Bah 5
Tunnel 6
Turtle Point 12
Tutu Creek 4
Twin Island 10
Two Mile Creek 16
Two Mile Creek 16A
Twoyqhalsht 16
Tymgowzan 12
Tzart-Lam 5
Tzeachten 13
Tzetzi Lake 11
Ucausley 16
Ulkatcho 1
Ulkatcho 13
Ulkatcho 14A
Ulkatcho 5
Ulkatcho 6
Ulthakoush 11
Uncha Lake 13A
Union Bay 31
Union Bay 4
Unnamed No. 10
Unpukpulquatum 8
Upper Hat Creek 1
Upper Kluskus Lake 9
Upper Nepa 6
Upper Sumas 6
Upper Tahltan 4
Upper Tsinkahtl 8A
Uzta 4
Uzta 7A
Vargas Island 31
Vermilion Forks 1
Village Bay 7
Village Island 7
Wahleach Island 2
Wahous 19
Wahous 20
Waiwakum 14
Wakems 6
Walden 9
Walth 3
Wappook 26
War Lake 4
Watta 25
Waulp 10
Waump 16
Wawwat'L 12
Wazulis 14
Webster Creek 5
Weedon Carp 6
Weedon Lake 27
Weeteeam 3
Weissener Lake 3
Wekellals 15
Werkinellek 11
West Moberly Lake 168A
Western Island 14
Weston Bay 20
Wha T'A Noo 40
Whale Island 8
Whispering Pines 4
Whitecap 1
Whonnock 1
Whyeek 4
Williams 2
Williams Lake 1
Williams Prairie Meadow 1A
Willow Meadow 9
Wilnaskancaud 3
Wilskaskammel 14
Winche 7
Windy Mouth 7
Wokitsas 14
Wolf Creek 3
Woyenne 27
Wudzimagon 61
Wyah 3
Wyclese 1
Wycott's Flat 6
Yaalstrick 1
Yagan 3
Yakweakwioose 12
Yaladelassla 4
Yale 18
Yale 19
Yale 20
Yale 21
Yale 22
Yale 23
Yale 24
Yale 25
Yale Town 1
Yan 7
Yarksis 11
Yasitkun 21
Yatze 13
Yawaucht 11
Ye Koo Che 3
Ye Koos Lee 11
Yekwaupsum 18
Yekwaupsum 19
Yelakin 4
Yelakin 4A
Yellertlee 12
Yensischuck 3
Yeo Island 13
Yookwitz 12
Yuquot 1
Zacht 5
Zaimoetz 5
Zaitscullachan 9
Zayas Island 32A
Zimagord 3
Zoht 14
Zoht 4
Zoht 5

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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Nicola Mameet 1 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia'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. Wikipedia 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/wiki/Category:Travel_writers doesnt even have a project aligned (I'll fix it though)
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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 Wikipedia ;-). 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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) Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia, 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^(talk) 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^(talk) 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/wiki/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)

Hello, Skookum1. You have new messages at Djembayz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

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 [Hong Kong]? 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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. Wikipedia 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)

Sorry. Narssarssuaq (talk) 14:51, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Dabbing Rivers

S1, I'm filling in some of the Fraser tributary redlinks (Raush River, Goat River (Fraser River), and I'm wondering what the best dab setup is. Some appear to be "Foo (Fraser River)" and some "Foo" (Fraser). Which is more proper? (and although its none of my beeswax, the guy above apologized to you, and I think you should accept. Apologies are pretty rare around here!) The Interior (Talk) 19:25, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

"Fraser River". The guy did apologize, but only in an edit comment, which is not appropriate when an ANI is underway referencing his comments; if he wants to apologize, let him do it properly; and recant his position about his highly OR and SYNTH and PEACOCK article and its mis-use of images to advance conclusions. That article is a personal essay, advancing synthesis right and left, and does not belong on Wikipedia, nor does the attitude displayed by him, including in the ANI. And re {{Canadian colonies}}, if we included all "named territories" (Straumsford was a place, not a territory) there would be another fifty items on that template....which seriously needs renaming and weed-whacking.Skookum1 (talk) 01:59, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Second the form "Foo River (Fraser River)". WP:NCRIVER describes various disambigging (disambiging?) approaches. Personally, if I saw "Foo River (Bar)" and didn't recognize "Bar" as a river name I might think it was a geopolitical region. Although in Europe they don't tend to use the word "River" in their river names. Pfly (talk) 02:41, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I might think it was a beer parlour ;-). The primary dab for a Canadian river article, if there's no others of the same name in teh same province, is "([ province ])". Beyond that it's whatever it's tributary to.Skookum1 (talk) 02:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Of course there's lots of variation and weirdness out there wrt river dabbing. Sometimes you get a common name occurring more than once as tributaries to the same river. The Fraser has two Salmon River tributaries (and BC has at least four more). Salmon River lists one as Salmon River (Fraser River) and the other as a redlink, Salmon River (Langley). Another strange one I just found is Beaver River. There's two in BC with articles, dabbed by what they are tributaries of, but there's also Beaver River (Canada)...I guess the logic being that it's in more than one province... Pfly (talk) 02:56, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

That needs a hatnote on the Prairies one for sure because of the "Canada" dab which maybe should be the main dab page for all three (maybe there's more to the east?).....the Beaver River in the Rogers Pass is, I think, more notable; the other I'm not sure where it is just at the moment.....the Salmon River in Langley kinda has to be dabbed that way; the alternative would be "Lower Mainland" as "Fraser Valley" would be too confusing re "Fraser River". It's very minor, more like a slow-moving creek; it and the Serpentine and Nicomekl were used as canoe routes with short portages connecting Mud Bay/Boundary Bay to Fort Langley.Skookum1 (talk) 03:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

The Holmes River is also a Beaver. We got all varieties of dabbing going on in Category:Rivers of British Columbia. Central Kootenay? I'm going to change that one. And the lakes? Shouldn't those go to the river system? The Interior (Talk) 03:09, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Central Kootenay is a new usage, created by the government when re-aligning RDs and electoral districts; that's the West Kootenay geographically speaking. Not sure what you mean by the lakes, are there some in the rivers category? Those on the list page are not all italicized as some are; they should be, I think.Skookum1 (talk) 03:14, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Something else I just noticed. Perhaps Peace River should be Peace River (disambiguation) and Peace River (Canada) should just be Peace River. The one in Florida is quite minor. Pfly (talk) 04:03, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Makes sense to me, but would require discussion with the US and Geography WP folks, I'd say.....Skookum1 (talk) 04:07, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Northwest (disambiguation) 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) 01:57, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Deadmau(5/s) etc.

Hi Skookum, if you're curious about my rationale behind the close for Deadmaus (formerly Deadmau5), I replied to another user at User talk:BDD#deadmau5 move discussion closure. I can't speak to UJ3RK5, however. On the face of it, at least, it seems like a different case just because it's not as straightforward. With Deadmaus, the 5 clearly corresponds to S, what we might call a one-to-one relationship, like Ke$ha. So there's no doubt it's a stylization. UJ3RK5 would seem to be more like NOS4A2, which I think should not be renamed, as that's the book's actual title, and it's unlikely that reliable sources are calling it anything else. Do reliable sources refer to the band as "Ujerks" or something like it? If so, it may fall under MOS:TM as well. As for Esla7an and the like, this to me is very clearly not within MOS:TM, as the number represents an orthographic convention, not a stylization. An analogous case is !Kung language. --BDD (talk) 18:50, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Always as UJ3RK5, and near-invariably they will include "and the five is silent".Skookum1 (talk) 04:08, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Please see the CfD on Category:Squamish, which formerly was a diacriticalized Squamish-language Skwxwu7mesh, which in non-diacriticalized form is what I'd pfefer to see it back at.....because Squamish, British Columbia is the primary usage of Squamish...and other endonym-named articles have recently been succesfully RM'd back to their endonym forms from colonialist/anthropological usages; they are common in Canadian English now e.g. St'at'imc, Secwepemc etc....Skwxwu7mesh isn't accepted in English usage as much; guidelines on native endonyms are sorely needed to prevent such HASSLES and mistaken speedies, articles and cats both, in future...Skookum1 (talk) 04:12, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

You're probably right about the guideline. Regardless, I don't think RMs regarding artistic stylizations are useful precedents for cases of non-English orthography like that. If anyone tries to argue such, feel free to let me know and I'll fuss at them. --BDD (talk) 16:11, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Notability tags

Hi Skookum,

I was under the impression that any maintenance tags that do not have corresponding discussion on the talk page can simply be removed by anyone. I apologize if I have violated policy or guidelines and would be glad for you to point me to them.

Neelix (talk) 17:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

From what I understand, tags of any kind, from POV through the gamut to unreferenced and cleanup, are not to be wantonly (and rapidly) deleted. Your citations are only evetn listings and "so and so spoke here" sorts of things; they are not in any way establishing genuine notability......I'm pressed for time and so when I saw the initial item, which to me is nothing more than church-spam, I didn't even bother to place the wp:Canada template on them.....and was going to get to them in the morning (it's midnight here) or the next day anyway, as Five Stones I did that earlier; but have a real life outside of Wikipedia in need of tending to. You added them to the Columbia Street page as little more than directory listings; only as directory listings, in fact. These are not notable in any way other than to their congregation/pastor or owner/clientele......I know New Westminster very well; they do not deserve pride of place in a description of that street and its services/history/businesses.....not even close. They're well written and properly formatted as far as citations go; but what's on them is WP:TRIVIA and WP:UNDUE. And reek of WP:SPAM.Skookum1 (talk) 17:18, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Racialised Canadian demographics

Hi there. I just whacked a big chunk off the "Visible Minorities" section of Demographics of Canada. I think you and I agree on many of the aspects of this particular debate. I'm hoping you'll help me keep an eye on it to make sure it doesn't head off in some random direction (or at least, without securing consensus, first!) In reality, I have to do a bit more work there, because the bit about Aboriginal Canadians just shouldn't be in that section. However, I needed to get started on it - it hurt my brain to know that it was there. AshleyMorton (talk) 18:17, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, well it's not just the segregationalism that's implied, but that on many town articles where visible minorities are barely a blip that's all there is in the demographics sections, even if it's only zero fields. "Someone", I don't know who, has also been changing Census Canada definitions to "White" and "Black" and on the Abbotsford article changing "East Indian" to "Indian". As a mixed-ethnicity person, but not mixed-visible minority of aboriginal, it irks me that Census Canada doesn't provide ethnicity breakdowns like they do for only large centres and whole provinces; the "aboriginals are not visible minorities" equation comes from Census Canada itself though.....demographics is about so much more than race or ethnicity; US articles generally do a better job of it, though in any article to see 0.01% of something when it's, um, two or three people, is just asinine. Birth rates and average age, economic and work information, that's demographics; the Canadian demographics sections are almost always exclusively about race, and tub-thumping about how many of which are in, say, Terrace or Flin Flon. This is one of those cases, as in that terminology issue, where "White" has been substituted for "European", that someone has gone and done so much that it's a lot of work for someone else to clean up, item by item.....all the bot-freaks out there should spend their time coming up with a way to patrol such tables, and also to delete the zero fields/rows. There's so little work on actual content now, and so much quibbling over category/article names, how bots and things like conversion templates or infoboxes are designed, that the rate of inclusion of new, worthwhile content is decreasing; as a good writer and historian/geographer it's becoming less and less useful and worthwhile for me to continue here, and I do have the habit of engaging the meaningless agendas, partly because their meaninglessness has impacted important titles and content and categories and more......anyways, yes, we need a working group and some data hounds to redress all the obsession with featuring visible minorities above all other information; even when they're irrelevant. Do we really need to know there's no Koreans, for instance, in Blue River BC, or no "West Asians" in Clinton, BC? (there might be, but how relevant is it if there's only 3 or 10 of each?)Skookum1 (talk) 02:15, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fort Grahame Waterdrome

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.

A tag has been placed on Fort Grahame Waterdrome, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• 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, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. (See section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. 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 Wikipedia'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. Ï¿½ (talk) 17:14, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Haida villages in Alaska

If I understand the comment in your edit summary correctly: Hydaburg is most definitely a Haida village. I'm sure I've read a bunch of times over the years that it's where the village's name derives from. Not entirely sure of any others, though. Nearby, Klawock is most definitely a Tlingit village, but Craig appears to have become home for many Haida. In fact, arguably the most notable modern-day Alaskan Haida is Jerry Mackie, who is from Craig. Of course, they can also be found in abundance in larger cities such as Juneau and Ketchikan. RadioKAOS  – Talk to me, Billy 20:21, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Just added name origin info to the Hydaburg, Kasaan, and Klawock pages. They were all in Bright's Native American place name book. Pfly (talk) 22:52, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Please add them also to List of Haida villages and the associated category; which should have the Alaskan region/census-area categories added as parent(s) like Haida Gwaii's populated places category is. I got a reply from the Kaigani Haida about doing a proper pages on them, also, have to get back to her later (in point form, she asks LOL).Skookum1 (talk) 04:11, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Languages

I think Talk:Ji-Lu Mandarin#Requested move 3 shows the problem isn't just BC. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:46, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

yes, I know, I guess you just got my note; I just emended it, too....I need to go to bed, it's 1:49 am where I am....and I'm grating because between issues like this one, and some AfDs about a nest of articles created by a certain admin that just should never have been in Wikipedia at all, anything useful that I am planning to do within wikipedia, or my own writing activities outside of it (which are my only hope of survival now, having no safety net), may well wind up forcing me out of Wikipedia again out of sheer frustration...I have important articles to write, and to fix, and I'm finding myself picking up the garbage too often...and tracing things back in some cases like what I've posted about on your page, it comes back to the same person/renegade. I don't want to be an admin, no sirree no, but I do feel that my years of real-world experience and readings should qualify me to bypass changes made by ....well, not gonna bother choosing a word there, you get my drift....oh, but "everyone is equal" here, right? Meaning that the uninformed and shallow/narrow-minded can screw things up for those who are informed and deep-minded, and being articulate is made to sound like a "rant", "anger" or WP:TLDNR. Aaaaaaaaagh. Equality be damned, t here should be some non-admin role beyond "autoconfirmed" where I can fix these problems without having to find a friendly admin who understands and has the time......shit, it's 7 minutes later now since my last written time-stamp, I gotta go to bed. If you haven't gotten involved in those CfRs, could you please close them. And move Sto:lo people to Sto:lo in the process; the diacritical form was always POV to start with, for one thing....delicacies of intertribal politics completely lost on people who don't know anything about them, and who make it clear that they don't care, only what Wikipedia guidelines say counts......this place is becoming a "bearpit of mediocrity"...I'm grateful for those out there like yourself capable of hearing me out....g'nite from Lamai Beach, Koh Samui, Thailand.Skookum1 (talk) 18:58, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Supreme Court of British Columbia

All courts in BC use the UK Coat of Arms as the symbols, unlike other courts in Canada. For example, you will see the Coat of Appeal Annual Report prominently display the CoA in its first page. [2], in the Supreme Court direction [3] and in the Provincial Court [4]. This matter was long debated ago and it's a settled matter. I am not sure why this debate is being re-opened at this stage.--Cahk (talk) 05:54, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

That's news to me but I see your point e.g. here. Debates often get re-opened in Wikipedia as I've been experiencing lately with various article/category-name changes that fly in the face of existing conventions and previous RMs and CfDs......I suggest you post a notice somewhere on WP:CANTALK and WP:BC about this; quite often other Canadian editors than those in BC edit things about BC without regard to the BC context or BC's history and language usage etc......Skookum1 (talk) 06:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

I've actually sat in a SCBC courtroom (opening day of the BC Rail trial) and never noticed that; but I've been in a courtroom elsewhere in Canada, either. And I was really really jet-lagged too, kept on dozing off, hope I didn't snore before getting up to leave; there was a young sheriff seated to my right in the row behind looking at me wonderingly LOL.Skookum1 (talk) 07:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

BC is not alone in unique court symbols. Courts in Newfoundland also use a simplified version of the UK CoA. Other courts such as the ON Superior Court of Justice, Federal Court and CMAC have been granted their own CoA. In all other cases, provincial courts use provincial CoA while superior and appeal courts use the Canadian CoA.--Cahk (talk) 08:11, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Indian reserves in British Columbia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Haida (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) 11:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Indian reserves in Canada by population, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mi'kmaq (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) 11:12, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited North Bentinck Arm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Henry Cavendish Bentinck (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) 10:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

My edit summary error

Strike "or all" from this edit summary. Embarrassing error! Hwy43 (talk) 07:15, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

For tolerating my error, I've transferred the content to List of communities in British Columbia on your behalf. Hwy43 (talk) 07:22, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Those that became municipalities is why I'd included them.Skookum1 (talk) 07:29, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

How about embedding notes for the three entries indicating such? Hwy43 (talk) 07:37, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Busy right now; the mentions should be in the BC Names listing for each. Cassiar I vaguely remember has having been on the UBCM.....trying to remember others. A full list of company towns for BC alone would actually be quite large, especially when large mining camps and canneries are factored in.Skookum1 (talk) 07:43, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

BC Names confirms outright for Granisle. I'll add it. The two others not so much. I'll be at a conference in Vancouver until Tuesday. I'll spend some downtime researching. Hwy43 (talk) 07:47, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Tumbler Ridge may have been founded as a municipality, like Jumbo was, without having any population yet; I'd thought it was a company town...Wells I know who to ask, there was more than one mine there but at least part of what is now the District was company property for sure.....greater Bralorne had easements and outlying areas like Ogden that weren't company town. Camp McKinney, Copper Mountain/Allenby and others are "out there" too....some company towns like "Bridge River" where I'm from (part of Shalalth) were on IR and though all only company inhabitants, had no reason to be incorporated. Fraser Mills definitely was a village municipality until amalgamation with Coquitlam, but it was a company town (the CEO was the mayor, there were no elections), I t hink Hammond also was a company town, and maybe non-municipal before amalgamation.Skookum1 (talk) 08:04, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Found one for Tumbler Ridge and it is now added. Will look for Wells sometime in the next few days. Hwy43 (talk) 08:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Decided to quickly find one for Wells as well. Hwy43 (talk) 08:35, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I was just doing that but didn't feel like hunting through the District's website, which should have something more than BC Names would.Skookum1 (talk) 08:42, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

"North American Indian"

Thanks for the positive comments (in general) and the clarification (in specific) about the term "North American Indian". I grew up in Bella Coola so, of course, I too know many people who refer to themselves and others as "Indians", though I would suggest that that has a growing sense of I-know-it's-politically-incorrect-but-I'm-going-to-use-it-anyway. It's really tough to lump it together, because it seems to me that the Nuxalk and the Heiltsuk, for example, are as different as the Irish and the Scottish. That is to say they obviously share a number of key cultural indicators and traditions, but are different enough that you're silly to lump them together. That's my biggest problem with the "Ethnic Origin" questions. If the statistics are willing to break out Irish, Scottish (even Cornish, ffs), then it seems unreasonable to include Cree, Nuxalk, Dene and Mic'mac under one label. I think some structure like they do with British (You know "British, not otherwise specified") would be appropriate. In the meantime, I'm going to be slavisly adhere to the StatsCan usage, because I think that is actually the least political option.

I bounce back and forth between two impressions of these editors who are constantly adding what I'm calling "racialised" data into the articles. Sometimes I hypothesise that it's truly abhorrent white-supremacy stuff where the work is often an attempt to demonstrate either that "whites" are dominant or that "non-whites" are a threateningly large number (yeah, I know those two goals require contradictory numbers, but I didn't say they were smart). The other option is simply someone from the US who has grown up with an understanding of race that is just not matched by the Canadian experience, and certainly not by Canadian statistics. Historically, in so many places in the US, there really were only two definitions - "White" and "Black", and it was reasonably easy to keep such statistics, if one wished. Hence, if you're an American looking at a Canadian article, it's not *patently* unreasonable to wonder "Hey, where are their race stats?", because it's a fundamental part of so many demographic discussions in the US. If I'm in a saintly assume-good-faith headspace, then I assume it's just some of those folks trying to fill a gap that only they can see. The other option is really kinda scary. AshleyMorton (talk) 15:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, to me it's more about ethnicity than race; the difference between a St'at'imc and neighbouring Nlaka'pamux, Nicola, and others is indeed often visible as well as audible. "First Nations" creates a racial term - constitutional definition in fact - that is overtly racial ie. "pure" (status) Amerinds vs Metis and Inuit, plus the artificial demarcation by the US/Canada border. That such race tables are available for communities with almost no visible minorities, but ethnicity tables e.g. by country of origin of selves or ancestors, for the same towns are more relevant (e.g. Kitimat has a large Portugese contingent, Terrace and Prince Rupert have lots of Hungarians, Revelstoke and Trail are notably Italian in composition, and so on....so it's not just StatsCan that's racially-motivated with promoting availability of race breakdowns, it's also people who want to play, as we have seen, name games. The complicating issue is that primary sources are not supposed to be used, but census data is, even though it's primary source.Skookum1 (talk) 08:33, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Mayors

I have, for the record, already seen and done a bit of cleanup on both Sharon Gaetz and Tara Teng. While both articles might need some attention in the longer term, every article on Wikipedia is always still improvable, and thus being less than completely perfect articles is not a failing. They do both pass on the basic criterion of notability and includability — and while Kovalak's certainly more of an edge case, the AFD has already been initiated as you know, so Wikipedians will be able to decide one way or the other (and even though her notability might be questionable enough to warrant an AFD discussion, I certainly wouldn't have considered it either speediable or proddable in its existing form.)

Unlike some of the smaller towns whose mayors I targeted for prod, Chilliwack is large enough for its mayors to be considered notable in principle. The notability criterion for mayors is not nearly as restrictive as the one for city councillors — the only cutoff for mayors is that the city has to have at least "regional prominence", which is commonly understood at AFD as a population of around 50,000 or more, and thus Chilliwack clears the bar. (And even in a smaller place like Trail or Squamish or Kitimat, the mayor might still qualify if the article is well-written, genuinely informative and sourced really extensively — the ones I targeted for prod were either single-sourced or entirely unsourced stubs, but even then it was that fact, more than the size of the town itself, that constituted the difference between a prod and a pass.) But for a city the size of Chilliwack, a mayor is a valid article topic as long as the article is validly sourced and says more than just "Sharon Gaetz is the mayor of Chilliwack" — I removed one sentence from the article that was a bit of an NPOV issue, but the article as a whole is perfectly acceptable.

In a nutshell, I'm not particularly seeing a pattern of negligence on Neelix's part here that would require an administrator to step in and chastise him for anything. If his behaviour ever actually goes in that direction, you can be sure that it will get dealt with — but based on the evidence you've given I'm not seeing any substantial evidence that he's been editing in bad faith. He's been around here for a long time (first edit 2006) and has built up a pretty solid record as a contributor (I don't think I've ever seen a userpage with as many barnstars on it as he has), so I'm not seeing any reason at this point to believe he's suddenly gone rogue on us. Bearcat (talk) 21:31, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Rogue, no, but heedlessly bold and promotional for certain individuals, all of a certain religious persuasion/network. That you've edited Tara Teng surprises me, there's still scads of junk in that article, and I fail to see anything in Sharon Gaetz's article that distinguishes her from any other councillor or mayor, other than she was the first female mayor of that city. Cindy Kovalak is another such article, as is the "Mr World" one he's linked off the Tara Teng one. You may have been unaware of the Heritage Grill and Five Stones Church and the other church in Surrey, all of which got snowball deletes on AfD, other than his ongoing protests that he felt they were notable; and were all "nested" with the Tara Teng article and related evangelical "celebrities". What I see is a fan article, with endless small trivia and junk content, and a demonstration of over-cited garbage. Not encyclopedic, just done up in Wikipedia style....Tara Teng was at least a contest winner, Sharon Gaetz a first female mayor...but do we need to know what she voted on and spoke on? In re Cindy Kovalak, "not happened yet" applies to "scheduled to be the plenary speaker at yada yada"......why is a teenage Nova Scotian so hot on promoting obscure BC restaurants, churches, and people connected to them, is my question? To me, informal COI is the obvious answer.Skookum1 (talk) 11:18, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

And given your invocation of WP:POLITICIAN on another non-notable mayor/politician article, why is Sharon Gaetz exempt from that?Skookum1 (talk) 11:19, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Re Tara Teng and the "Mr World" ("male beauty pageant winner", not a bodybuilder as that name is usually for), since when does "encyclopedic content" mean that articles more suited to Sweet Sixteen are the result? I'd say People Magazine, but their articles are never even 1/10 as long as Teng's.Skookum1 (talk) 11:23, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

And yes, though it's not personal, if it wasn't for his edit-commenting "get a life" during the "template wars" on Heritage Grill and Five Stones Church, I wouldn't have taken an interest in what else he's been creating articles for; and seeing too much of a pattern for "negligence" to not be quite the right word; "promotional contrivance" is more like it.....making someone more notable than they are, as in Gaetz's case or Kovalak's or the "male beauty pageant winner".Skookum1 (talk) 11:30, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Just to address a couple of points: firstly, to meet WP:POLITICIAN, a mayor does not have to somehow be more distinguished or more "special" than most other mayors — if a given city meets or surpasses Wikipedia's standards of regional prominence, then any mayor that city has ever had is a perfectly valid article topic, no matter how uniquely "distinguished" you think they were or weren't, as long as the resulting article is properly sourced and says more than just "Sharon Gaetz is the mayor of Abbotsford." She doesn't have to have won a "best mayor in the world" award, or be the first mayor belonging to a certain underrepresented group, or anything else that would make her some sort of special standout among past mayors of Abbotsford — if a city is large enough, which Abbotsford is, then all a mayor of that city has to do to be notable enough for a Wikipedia article is to be a mayor.

Secondly, regarding your question about "how was it he even knew about the Burnaby Now newspaper, and why was he reading it, if not for some COI connection and someone sending him the material?", Burnaby Now is not even the least bit hard to find in the age of this nifty little thing called Google. It doesn't require a vast conspiracy of somebody sending him encrypted propaganda by carrier pigeon; all one has to do is type "Tara Teng" or "Sharon Gaetz", or whoever else you're searching for sources on, into a Google search bar and Burnaby Now coverage will come up in the search if there is any. I've cited stuff to Burnaby Now before. Welcome to 2013.

And finally, I cannot find any firm evidence that Neelix has any personal connection to any evangelical movement or fundamentalist church or whatever. It's certainly possible that he does, for all I know — and even if he does, so the hell what unless he starts violating Wikipedia's conduct policies because of it (which as of today I can't see any evidence that he has)? I've gone back over the past couple of weeks of his edit history and virtually all of his last several hundred edits involve copyediting and cleaning up lists of Billboard hit albums and singles — and when I do finally get back to ones that are directly connected to Tara Teng, many of them are connected to her via either the beauty pageant circuit or her human rights work, rather than being connected via the same church. So I still have yet to see any evidence at all that he's doing anything except writing new articles about topics that happen to cross his radar while he's working on related topics — and that's the way a lot of people roll on here, so I really can't see any concrete reason to jump to the conclusions that you're jumping to about his editing patterns. If he ever commits a serious wikisin, then it will get dealt with when it happens — but as things currently stand, he's done nothing that would require a sanction from an administrator. Bearcat (talk) 18:46, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

You missed my point about Burnaby Now......who did he even know to lookfor articles about the Heritage Grills and Five Stones in it, unless given a press kit listing the articles in some way? "Oh, I was reading this newspaper and this grill sounded like it needed an article because it had some screenings of a film on sex worker, and hey look there's this church right next door that's mentioned to....they must be really notable in New West, I better make the articles" was the logic he advanced, if not in so many words. That there is a 'nest' of articles based around a certain group of people and most of them are non-notable ("yes they are, no they're not etc"), I'm just too old to be innocent.....what I'm seeing is a bunch of junk-content bios that are sole-authored and ridiculously UNDUE....if Columbia Street and New West had more articles about genuinely notable establishments and buildings, I never would have noticed these...and never would have been told to get a life for putting a notability tag on the grill article, at whicvh point rather than edit war I took it to the adminship...and why is it that nobody around here can see the harm in encouraging/tolerating "junk" articles....non-notable bios and the places those non-notable people eat and pray at. Is that what an encyclopedia is? I guess it's because I'm involved in more serious/deeper/older topics I find trivia by trivial people so frustrating and a waste of time.....so much real content is needed, so few are out there who even have half a handle on things that need to be covered, so much junk (and often rank OR like Quadripoint on the one hand, someone else, another experienced editor, putting up major history articles for deletion as "fringe"...never mind, I know what the world is coming to.....has come to. Anyways, about Nlx, that he's lost three AfDs out of this nest, and another one is on the go, and the remaining articles are UNDUE in extremis....you mean to tell me you don't see a pattern? Because I do.....Skookum1 (talk) 19:20, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Commons spelling solution

See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Images_from_the_Canadian_Copyright_Collection_at_the_British_Library if you haven't already. We are simply making a list on the cat talk page.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:40, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Elk Valley (British Columbia) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *[[Sparwood, British Columbia]] (includes Michel and Natal, which were formerly separate communities

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:30, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia 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.

Nanaimo Harbour (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Protection Island

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

added a link pointing to Coast Salish

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Moose Canyon found

I think I found Moose Canyon near Jasper. Details are at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Canoe1967#While_I.27m_here..... The McBride one is still a puzzle.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:10, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

It kinda looks like Robson, but it's not. Lots of errors in titles there, though usually transcription errors, that name seems pretty clearly what was tagged on the image....maybe it is the one in the Premier Range....or a mountain near McBride, BC?Skookum1 (talk) 03:50, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Squamish people

Hi Skookum, you'll probably be disappointed at my closure of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 May 4#Category:Squamish. It required a considerable investment of time to read and weigh what you had written, and a little less for everybody else, so I hope some additional feedback will be helpful.

I've put my main reasons there and need not repeat them here, but in addition, IMHO you weaken your case – or at least make it less likely that the closer will find it persuasive – by going off in long essays. Feel free to write essays on sub-pages in your own user space, and linking to them in CfD discussions etc, but please try and stay on-topic there. Sometimes "Less is more."

It also seemed to me that you were sometimes taking offence where none was intended, and doing that at length too. See WP:AGF and meditate on it! (I learned more about that during my own RfA; see the discussion on the talk page, if you can be bothered.)

To me it's bizarre that you spend ages typing a long response and then leave redlinks within it, e.g.

"this is why there's Category:Tsuu T'ina, I think it is, for the Alberta Blackfeet...."

Well, there isn't, and never has been. You'd only have to type "category:tsuu" in the Search box, even while you're still typing, for the actual current category name to pop up.

I trust that you can see what I mean by "referring to forthcoming evidence that didn't materialise." Better not to mention it at all, than to say you are waiting to hear from someone or intend to look something up and then not deliver.

Hope this helps. Best wishes! – Fayenatic London 20:01, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

No it doesn't. We now have a category whose name's primary meaning is "people from the town of Squamish". As for Category:Tsuu T'ina Nation I didn't have the name complete and that one's an aberration; with hte "Nation" on in wiki convention it means their government, not the people. The arguments in the RM that led to this was that it wasn't English and so didn't belong in Wikipedia were clearly counter-evidenced by the series of non-English and atypical spellings I provided in my last post there. This isn't over, t he whole "FOO people" namespace collision has go to be resolved, and it was caused by someone ignoring the established IPNA-derived consensus that endonyms for the peoples vs anglicisms for their governments without "people" tagged on, as was imposed by Wiki-homogenizers who knew nothing about the subject or the context. Nobody in that CfD was making sense but me, other than saying "you write too much" which isn't a valid comeback. If people hadn't been asking the same stupid questions and repeating the same stupid notions over and over, I wouldn't have had to respond as I did; this category is now not "synchronized" with the other Category:First Nations in British Columbia components, and it's been decided by people (a) not from British Columbia and (b) not involved in any of these articles.Skookum1 (talk) 04:34, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

For all the talk about consistency, what I see is conflicting guidelines invoked without any over-arching view/understanding, resulting in these categories now being not consistent, because of imposed "standards". WP:There are no rules, but people treating guidelines and applying them willy-nilly without context or conssitency has put what had been a well organized series of article titles and categories into disarray; one reason they were orgnaized they were, as I said over and over again, is that in many cases, the anglicism is a well-known place name that is the primary usage. But noooooo, nobody acknowledged that; other than other people from the region who knew the truth, said so, and also were ignored..........

Skookum1 (talk) 04:41, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I get really tired of hearing that *I* am the reason things are decided against what is right. yes, I'm long-winded, but that's because of the repetitious non sequiturs that get fielded over and over in such discussions; Kwami even tried to bait me on the RMs so that they would be decided in favour of his own arbitrary and unjustified speedies.....TLNDR is insulting for those of us not raised in the point-form education system. Yes, I did say that about "I could live with Squamish people" that did not mean I endorsed that; I can see that working up the guidelines in sandbox that eluded me in searches of IPNA archives (many of those discussions took place on individual talkpages and on user talkpages), and once again, the notable lack of anyone in the discussion familiar with the topic and/or from British Columbia or familiar with BC placenames - other than those other people who agreed with me, who were also ignored, themselves deluged by rubbish from the uninformed and rule-happy........following such a consensus of fools (and that's what it is) we might as well roll back all the modern indigenous/authentic terms and call everybody what the Catholic Encyclopedia uses, and move aboriginal articles to "redskin" (still a common term)....sounds extreme, but that was the upshot of the RM debates against using the endonyms, that ti doesn't matter what the people call themselvs or what is culturally correct, it's Wikipedia's Tyranny of the Ignorant that prevailed. I don't include you in that, just think that the actual material should have been considered, instead of blaming it on me, the proponent of a simple attempt to rid a category of cumbersome-to-use diacriticals. Instead we now have a category that, just you want, "people from teh town of Squamish" will get added to....and yet another reason for indigenous contributors to turn their noses up at Wikipedia (which OldManRivers, who is Skwxwu7mesh, has done because of the disregard shown for the talkpage discussions long in advance of the RM; all of which that RM ignored, even saying "well those people aren't around anymore so we can do what we want". Why not just delete history altogether and just write some nice-sounding fiction that goes by "most common" terms from the last century?Skookum1 (talk) 09:40, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Just scanned your RfA and talkpage a bit; what I see and hear, all too much, everywhere, is Wikipedia's own internal policies and wiki-culture influencing content and article naming wrongly, and rather peremptorily, with the effect of Wikipedia influencing reality, rather than reflecting it. I have no interest in being an admin; the process strikes me as somewhat like the Spanish Inquisition's search for heretics. I see no reason to be conciliatory to those who are wrong and who pass judgements on subjects and topics that they have zero real interest, and are more interested in rule-flogging and wiki-careerism.Skookum1 (talk) 09:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

OK, well if you've given up on winning friends and influencing people, I honestly suggest you spend your time on content rather than naming. The naming can be changed again in the future, and your content will be there all along. Think how much improvement you could have achieved in the time spent bashing your head on the wall! – Fayenatic London 19:18, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

YOu don't get it. It was because I was working on content I started to see all kinds of text-changes resulting from the renamed articles, and also because I was going to create a lot of St'at'imc and Sto:lo articles and more that I ran into the diacriticalized categories and then discovered what the consequneces would be if Kwami's chauvinist imposition of anglicisms as supposedly "most common" and more led me to have to launch RMs and then found out the packthink that was going to make the categories renamed like Squamish has been and all of this would play over into article content as people by passed redirects and so on and so on and so on. A child came into the sandbox, moved the blocks to where he thought they should be, didn't give a shit what it affected, didn't even change the ledes, then a bunch of "I'm going to apply this rule across the board" groupies came along and without any regard for context or purpose etc etc etc. All I see is people moving and changing names, or opposing same, and few of them, if any, have even a tiny grasp of the content that they're affecting; those that did, familiar with BC or Canada, supported my moves. Those that did not were from beyond the place, one even denounced me for being locally parochial, when really what was going on and is going on is cultural colonialism/imperialism. "Wiki knows best" = no, it doesn't. Yes, it's taken up a lot of time I wanted to create an expand articles for. But creating those articles without resolving the nomenclature problem I was already encountering problems and "WTF?" material. Don't you get it? And what I saw was years of previous work and discussion thrown in the trash bin by a group of arrogant younglings; lazy ones, too, changing category names they don't even use by imposing standards created for other categories; Yes, unlike people who are here to become admins and otherwise use Wikipedia as social media and a coding club, I"m not here to make friends and influence people. I'm here to write geography and history, but find myself hobbled by the half-knowledge and rule-happiness of a bunch of half-educated children obsessed with guidelines.Skookum1 (talk) 01:48, 17 July 2013 (UTF

For example, all that stuff about Cree nations and my vociferous and culturally/politically clueless opponent there, He's done nothing in that topic area except stand in the way of an obviously correct move of a government category to a name that reflected that; I can't remember who the closer was, I let him know the problems once it was closed; i.e. that what was in the category were band governments specifically, and that's why the name change. But no action to change his mind, he's gone off to close other discussions he doesn't know f-all about either, and my opponnent has yet to show his face on a Cree-related article.Skookum1 (talk) 01:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Skookum1. You have new messages at Fayenatic london's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for July 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hiawatha First Nation, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Stony Lake, Pigeon Lake and Buckhorn Lake (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) 10:54, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Your reversion to British Columbia Highway 33

Are you saying that BC has no second-level administrative divisions whatsoever? Regional Districts are a very reliable way to establish a geographic position relative to the whole province. Sure, Environment and Forest Districts are not well known in BC, but that is not the case with Regional Districts. --  Denelson83  06:38, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean Environment Districts and Forest Districts are not well-known in BC? There's more signs for Forests Districts than there are for RDs, that's for sure (there's only RD signs at their boundaries, not throughout their regions). As far as tiers of power, second-level administrative divisions are things like the Mining Districts and Forest Regions, RDs have only scant power and while relevant/necessary for census divisions, they have nothing to do AT ALL with highways. The best way to described BC geography is by the historical geographic regions, whose names are what all the administrative divisions are largely built upon. Using RD names gives the false impression that, say, the Similkameen and Boundary are in the South Okanagan, which they are not, or that the West Kootenay's proper name is Central Kootenay. Interpolating which regional district something is in, when it's not citable as such, is in fact original research and there's far too much of that going on. Look up a lake or a mountain in scientific texts; they'll name the region or mountain range, or the Forest District. Mines of course are classified by mining district, and are far beyond the not-very-strong municipal zoning relevance of RDs. And the primary cites for all places names, whether in BC Names or in CGNDB, are Land Districts.Skookum1 (talk) 07:57, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

"a very reliable way to establish a geographic position" - a not so reliable way, and considering that Wikipedians have to research such things, as they are not ordinarily citable as just noted, means that presuming that they are "reliable geographic descriptors" is just not right, and it IS inherently original research. i.e. "who does that 'reliable establishing'? Certainly not any major sources (otehr than things that use Wikipedia's mistake classification as if it were relevant to British Columbians (e.g. Googlemaps has done that, and others, but nobody thinks of, say Revelstoke Canyon Dam as being in Columbia-Shuswap B or D or whatever.Skookum1 (talk) 07:59, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Do you think regular people care about "scientific texts"? Do you think regular people have been frequently exposed to "Environment", "Mining", "Land", or "Forest" districts? I've never even heard of Environment or Mining Districts. I am exposed much more to the Regional Districts. Besides, look at the exit lists in the articles for some of the other highways in BC, such as 19 or 1. Do they list the Environment, Mining or Land Districts that each highway passes through? No they don't; they list the Regional Districts. --  Denelson83  22:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Do those exit lists say that you're in such-and-so regional district? I see Forest District signs all the time, big honking ones, not those little 24" RD signs....in any case, if a citation doesn't have the regional district in it, then researching which one it's in is original research; knowing that it's in the Okanagan or Similkameen or Cariboo is a completely different, intuitive matter. The citations for geographic items invariably say LAND DISTRICTS. Research papers on geology and mineralogy for mountains talk about Forest Districts/Regions, for provincial parks, which aren't governed by RDs, it's Environment Regions, for tourism items it's Tourism Regions. Mines in BCMINFILE make no mention of regional districts but talk about mining districts, geographic things like ranges and terranes, and so on. Hospitals also are outside regional district government definition, and are classified by Health Region; schools by School Districts, and so on. Regional districts are used statistically, by StatsCan and BCStats, to define the boundaries of census subdivisions and things like the Development Regions (which are composites of three-five regional districts. They are not counties and should not be treated as if they were.Skookum1 (talk) 03:25, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Skookum1. You have new messages at Michaelzeng7's talk page.
Message added 03:50, 22 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Michaelzeng7 (talk) 03:50, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

WMF project

Have you got a decent camera? If not you may wish to keep an eye on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Cameras_for_Commons_photographers Your input seems to indicate that you could provide some good images depending on where you are. You may also know others that are worthy of a good camera.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:35, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Hm, interesting. I bought a Fuji Finepix HS30 in Bangkok which I've barely used so far, my old film Pentaxes are in storage in Nova Scotia and of course were expensive to use anyway (I used to do all my own black-and-white processing and printing...left my processing equipment in Burnaby years ago though)......if I ever get back to Lillooet and such, the thing to have, even as a digital, is a medium format at last....big scenics in that scale of country (monumental) need large negs/scans, partly so wide-angles don't have to be used to the same degree.....there's other things I'd appreciate wiki-grants for though LOL.Skookum1 (talk) 03:05, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I thought about upgrading to larger format DLSR but then I discovered Gigapan. A robotic mount that makes huge images from many smaller ones. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Created_with_Gigapan has examples. http://gigapan.com/gigapans/116906/ is one of the largest at almost 16 gigapixels. The unit only costs 299, 449, and 895 depending on how big your camera is: http://gigapan.com/cms/shop/store There are probably cheaper knock-offs though.--Canoe1967 (talk) 04:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Mine actually has a pan function....works best with a tripod probably, I haven't had much use for it. think I paid 10000 baht, that's about 333 dollars......mostly got it for the zoom and it has video too. Not sure of the megapixelage at the moment, it's decent....lens doesn't detach but it's a wide angle-to-telephoto anyway. Not much real scenery here, vegetation and building pics would be what it is. Here anyway; most snaps I take with my Samsung Galaxy Cooper (which is the local name for a Galaxy Ace, roughly equivalent to an iPhone 4 I think....my 4s got stolen in December, miss the two-way camera on that one...).Skookum1 (talk) 04:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia 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.

Montana Indian Reserve No. 139 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hobbema

Samson Cree Nation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hobbema

Samson Indian Reserve No. 137 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hobbema

Skihist Mountain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Anderson Lake

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 23:15, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

re:Cree "nations"

I respect your concern to have NPOV category names. If that's the problem, then I suggest we nominate the whole category, or help create clear inclusion criteria and put them on the category namespace, rather than removing individual articles from the category. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 14:56, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

What had been in there wasn't band governments only, it was a random category; I'd just seen enough band governments in it and had wanted to get the name to conform to the existing standards/conventions...and wound up in a catfight with someone over that term. It's not just "nations", if you've been following my discussions with CJLippert you know that the term in USian categories "tribe" has wound up used both for peoples and for federally-recognized tribes. The unrecorded consensus from years ago was that conventions on such usages needed to be established and respected; our bad for not codifying them. I think you probably see my point that "First Nations" is not generalized as "nations", and that that term has complicated meanings in Canada and not just to do with FN peoples or governments. Clarity is my aim; instead I'm thrown obfuscations with poeple who just don't know the material, or have bought into one side or the other...of many.Skookum1 (talk) 16:55, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion of article title of Whitebark pine

You are welcome to join the discussion at Talk:Whitebark pine#Requested move to scientific name. —hike395 (talk) 04:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Question

How did you find that recent edit by AnomeBot? Kirothereaper (talk) 02:02, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

In the page's history, easy enough.Skookum1 (talk) 02:06, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of place names in Canada of aboriginal origin, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Stoney and Haisla (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) 11:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Eulachon 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• [[Category:Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:09, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh BracketBot, go back to Robotland, if you can't robot-yourself to fix stuff like that, and aren't smart enough to pick up the unneeded categories there, don't expect me to do your work for you. I nkow you're not programmed to do any better, but your author should be the one fixing those little bits instead of bugging people....if he can program you to find them, he can program you to fix them. I wonder, does he /she even write any articles or is he just into writing code?Skookum1 (talk) 16:23, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

wikibreak - so much garbage, so much twaddle, such a waste of time

Skookum1 (talk) 03:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

And no, the boilerplate on that template says I'll be back soon; again, a robot putting words in my mouth. Have fun with the future, I'm glad I'll die before the rest of you have to live in the insanity you're creating around you.Skookum1 (talk) 03:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't know you sooner: what you say makes so much sense, - enjoy the future. I started the year with "letting go of past". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:26, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

• I am sorry to see you go as well. I have considered it myself a few times but decided to stick around and keep fighting the battles. Many we will lose but those can be fought again another day.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:21, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
• Logging in briefly to post this link which User:Pfly posted on FB. Some of what he says about how the place has become process driven rather than content focussed hits home with a hammer. Myself, I think he's been overly polite. It's not just OR/SYNTH that's bothered me, it's overt COI/POV issues and inane misapplication of MOS and more that I won't bother elaborating on, I'm only meaning to drop in to post that link.Skookum1 (talk) 08:08, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
• We've never talked but I've seen your work/contributions and I sincerely hope this is a well-deserved Wikibreak and you'll return one day when the time is right. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:48, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
• I got your email but my hard drive was recently lost due to a corporate attack. I will respond here because I lost your email. I agree that your break/retirement has valid reasoning. I may retire soon if I get cash from similar corporations that hacked me, or they just decide it is easier to simply drop a hammer.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I think I have a copy of what I sent you in my own email, I'll resend it. Been pondering adding a section here on the particular articles and issues that led to my frustration with this place....seems like a waste of energy, my writing powers should be applied to my survival and self-advancement, not hobbled by the rules and haters and defensive/passive-aggressive behaviours that infest this place. UNDUE, OR/SYNTH, COI/POV and more are so rife here it will always be a sisyphean battle with irrelevance and arrogance and ignorance and more. I may continue to help out with the Commons and WikiVoyage and the like. But yes, the corporate witch-hunters are out there in force, and here as I explained to you elsewhere. That alone is the subject of a book or a news article...but "we" are not allowed to discuss Wikipedia in the press are we? And why is that, exactly, I wonder? Hm? This place has been "played" by the pros, I see so much evidence of it it's beyond troublesome to me now, I'm very matter-of-fact about it, but know better than to waste my time fighting a dragon without a magic sword and a ring of invisibility......never mind more than one dragon.Skookum1 (talk) 05:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

time better spent

The following are the spaces I've been getting myself going on lately, which I should have spent much time on when labouring here with the pointlessly frustrating. Canoe1967 and Pfly already have these, might as well share them for those interested in who "the other skookum1 is". My choice to "out" myself, I was disastrously and meanly outed by User:Sunciviclee during the Talk:Adrian Dix affair anyway in the newspaper he works for (he should have been censured by the adminship but was not, and continues the pretense of his lies, including on scribd where his slanderous comments about me, and about Wikipedia, remain, and any effort to comment/criticize there is censored by teh Sun's editors, who did not report on the sabotage attempted on the BC Liberal Party article after that, either. Claims of neutrality from him were completely bogus.Skookum1 (talk) 06:12, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't know which of the following mainstream social media/musicians websites is blocked by Wikipedia, the nowiki I just added should solve that problem. I'm tired of being net-nannied, whether by bots or by guideline-crazed wikipedians.

*[http://www.reverbnation.com/mikecleven Reverbnation profile]

*[http://www.soundcloud.com/bigskookum SoundCloud profile]

*[http://www.fandalism.com/mikecleven Fandalism profile]

*[http://www.myspace.com/tamanassman Myspace profile] (one of seven myspace pages, none of them updated recently)

<p> twitter: @bigskookum

What you can't say in words is best said in music; so many of my songs are songs-without-words, or speaking in tongues. "What has not already been discussed here I must pass over in silence" - paraphrase of the conclusion of Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.Skookum1 (talk) 06:12, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Map

I thought you may appreciate this: http://maps.fphlcc.ca/ I think you may be able to find appropriate places to infuse this link into various appropriate articles. CJLippert (talk) 17:01, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Precious

indigenous common sense and knowledge
Thank you, hacker of Beethoven's 3rd concerto, for quality articles for projects British Columbia and Thailand, especially caring for indigenous peoples and their languages, for the factual moving story of Endre Johannes Cleven, for having picked "up the garbage too often", and for leaving us "Consensus does not mean that stupidity and ignorance be given equal weight to common sense and knowledge." - You are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:09, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Professionals - notice of discussion

You may be interested in the deletion proposal related to Category: Professionals. Regards, XOttawahitech (talk) 17:59, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Category:Nass Country

Category:Nass Country, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. BDD (talk) 18:21, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

• More at CfD, of course, but this largely hinges on there being no indication of what Nass Country is. If you feel up to making an article explaining that which could be linked to the category with a {{cat main}}, I'll likely withdraw. --BDD (talk) 18:25, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

I mean to have retired from this place, but all the BC historical geographic regions categories (which are far more relevant and current than subdividing the province by regional districts, whose names are often compounds of the traditional regions) were created by me. There's this funny thing on the internet called Google, so this and this and "nass+country"&start=10 some of these will get you started. "X Country", whether capitalized or not, is a common BC English term for a region. Category:Lillooet Country, Category:Similkameen Country, Category:Nicola Country, [[Category:Omineca Country......often seen in print with small-c, but always meaning region, sometimes (but not always) synonymous with "X Valley". The Lillooet and Omineca and [[:Cassiar Countries for example all span more than one river basin, as does the Boundary Country; others like the Nicola Country are more or less identical with the namesake river e.g. [[:Category:Nicola Valley is the main article's name (now) and note quite often the main article and category do not match nor shoudl they have to. the Category:West Kootenay and Category:East Kootenay categories are subcats of a category Category:Kootenay Country which is nearly synonymous with the Kootenay Land District though that also includes an area known as the Category:Columbia Country . The Category:Shuswap Country, though, is only the lower part of the Shuswap basin, the upper part is known as the Monashees (or Monashee Country, and once again that term includes areas south of the upper Shuswap River basin). This is breaking my vow of silence and my effort to break my addiction to this place, which has cost me some of my health. But rest assured "Nass Country" or "the Nass country" is a common term in BC historical and geographical and political writings; it is not quite synonymous with the Nisga'a Lisims, or the Nisga'a Lands (the former term is also that of their government) but means much the same thing "Land of the Nass (River)". I won't come to the CfD, I don't have the time or energy, nor to browse through more googles or various books....the fishing books by Rod Bell-Irving (or one of the Bell-Irvings) are often about this area, which is why oen of the Nass tributaries is t he Bell-Irving River.Skookum1 (talk) 10:35, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Note also that this category is a great-great-grandchild category of Category:Geographic regions of British Columbia in which you will find its "cousin" categories. Not all have categories yet, and some have no main article as of yet; the time-consuming nature of erratica in Wikipedia prevented me from completing or sourcing all this; not original research, and all documentable...one reason I've pulled out of Wikipedia is so as to get my own books published on things being lost to modernization and forgotten by newer generations.....and then y'all can cite me. I must stress thsi is not SYNTH or OR, but simply reporting on what I know to be the case from growing up in BC...See some of the Talk:Lower Mainland discussions....Skookum1 (talk) 10:49, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

I just really wanted express my gratitude for all you do. I don't know if a barnstar or a badge would even be appropriate to express my heart-felt gratitude, so I decided just to say "Thank you!!". CJLippert (talk) 15:15, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

High horses for your consideration

Here's a few more. --Pitke (talk) 20:14, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

• 
• 
• 
  I'll never not post this file.

Categories on redirects

All I can find about placing redirects into categories is this discussion: Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive AP#Redirects in categories. Whenever I find a redirect with categories, I remove them. Could you direct me to any WP protocols that encourage them? -Uyvsdi (talk) 04:31, 2 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

I'll have to remember where I first saw someone doing this, and why. It makes perfect sense to me to have the titles in a category match teh type of category it is. An organization being in a geography category, for example, makes no sense at all. It's also my opinion that a lot of what would be stubs if sections were moved right now, don't have to be in the long run, as they're about places that often have notable land history and other placename content that's just not been added yet. Where does it say that categories can include titles that don't have anything to do with the type of category that it is?Skookum1 (talk) 04:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

WP:There are no rules is the Fifth Pillar.Skookum1 (talk) 04:46, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

I still can't recall where I first saw this practice, after noticing some italicized titles in certain categories, but note Nae'blis' comments and the ensuing discussion in that six-year-old VP discussion, which underscore what I've been doing. starting at "While not all redirects should be categorized".Skookum1 (talk) 04:51, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea why you are doing this. There are so many crappy stubs that need fleshing out and plenty of redlinks at Classification of indigenous peoples of the Americas and elsewhere. The article has all the information; the category has no information. -Uyvsdi (talk) 05:05, 2 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Finally found the protocols at Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects. Geography cats are not maintenance cats. All the information about the reservations are in the articles not the redirects. -Uyvsdi (talk) 05:30, 2 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi]]

I know exactly why I'm doing this. Because something called a "tribe" (government) is not the same thing as a piece of land. Something called a reservation does not belong in a category called "tribes" or vice versa. Something that is a government is not a geographic object; and there are many reasons why one government may have many pieces of land, or why many governments may share one piece of land. The information can be all in one article if need be, or if there is no substantial reason for there to be a reserve/reservation article independent of the band/tribe article. But when e.g. the Dog Creek Indian Band has reserves that are nowhere near Dog Creek, British Columbia, or when multiple bands share a single reserve like Peckquaylist or there are multiple bands on the same reserve as is the case on many of the big reserves in Ontario, or there are multiple communities on one reservation as is the case with Colville or multiple reserves/communities within one band government, as with Seton Lake or Squamish or Nicola, it makes completely perfect sense either to use redirects in the appropriate categories; so that categories don't have titles that don't belong in those categories. Even in the Nevada categories which I guess maybe you have been seeing me active in, not all the tribe's communities are even in the same state; I don't see the reason for your objection to this, to me it makes complete sense from a classification and categorization system and reduces confusion about what belongs in which category. There are also compelling geographic and political realities in many cases, of which |I could provide a host of examples and show some benefits including the way Geogroup works even on redirected titles in various categories.Skookum1 (talk) 05:43, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Is the land of the state of Illinois separate from Illinois? No. The legal status of indigenous peoples is entirely based on our connection to our land. There is no information about reservations in the redirects; all the information about reservations is in the article. If there isn't enough about reservation lands in the articles for your liking, then why not contribute more cited information to them? Obviously, US tribal situations are very different than in Canada. It doesn't matter if tribal lands span states. If an article is named Yomba Shoshone Tribe of the Yomba Reservation, then yes, the reservation is part of the article's subject matter. Why not write an article? -05:50, 2 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

I don't see your reason for opposing the category redirects the way I've been applying them; and in the protocols you just sent me there's this section which underscores what I have been doing. And I note that many of the tribe-governments in question are those of the Shoshone people so there's a case where the government and people do not directly equate as they might in some cases like the Crow. There are multiple Shoshone governments just as one Shoshone government might have multiple communities. I note in many of these the latlong of the communities are given in the article; if I understand/remember GeoGroupTemplate correctly, and think I've used it this way for Tsilhqot'in bands, placing that template on the category for the reserves will display the reserve latlong markers even though they are on the target article not on the redirect. This would work with the Ta-Moak Tribe, whose reserves/colonies are about six, in two different counties and also in California, and not geographically contiguous. How all this began, by the way, is because sometimes a tribe/government would only be present in a language or reservation category, or a reservation would only show up in a tribe/government category or even only in a language category. Mostly the language articles have now all been split off, and for the most part so have the people articles from e.g. the Tulalip Reservation which has about six different peoples on it, though only one government...and some of those peoples also have other governments... clarity in the category system is all I am trying to accomplish..... and re the Yomba Reservation government....and your infobox issue, what should that have then "infobox country", "infobox reservation", "infobox community"?? And know from certain WAshington and Oregon and Montana situations, what I'm talking about re Canadian reserves/bands/peoples in'st just a question of native political geography in CAnada...and I'll note again that it was as much American indigenous editors that evolved all these concepts way back when....and that there was an effort to come up with a system that worked on both sides of the US/Canadian border.....Skookum1 (talk) 06:09, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

And on that same set of protocols if there weren't good reasons for categories to be used this way, it wouldn't have been set up so it was possible at all.Skookum1 (talk) 06:11, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

I really hope you two can find a way to chill out here; I think you are both good editors. We might not be able to work out a continent-wide solution, so let's each let the person with the on the ground knowledge take the lead in their areas... can that work? Montanabw^(talk) 08:09, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Geography is my area, as are political/organizational articles. It would make no sense at all to see Government of Canada in Category:Geography of Canada. It would make no sense at all to see Sto:lo Nation (a tribal council) in Category:Indian reserves in the Lower Mainland, nor to see Crow Tribal Administration in Geography of Montana. Putting government names in reservation and geographic categories makes no sense at all especially when the simple solution of properly-named redirects is available. Nevada categories cannot be treated in isolation, or they will be used by someone else for somewhere else. Consistency matters. And I'm offended, still, that my efforts to improve categorization for the easy use of other people not clued into Uysvidi's particular perspective were treated as though I had vandalized the articles or changed them in someway other than fixing categorization. The redirects exist, and it's perfectly legitimate to categorize redirects so that the categories have properly-named links in them, not POV-driven obscurantism which is what claiming that because the government is the reservat that any effort to use the existing reservation/colony redirects for category sorting is somehow a violation of native culture. That's pretentious rubbish, period. The protocols that Uysvidi himself raised agree with and mandate what I have done; his position is not even supported by the protocol he himself raised. Why not just merge all the reservation and tribe categories altogether then? For Nevada only maybe??Skookum1 (talk) 17:27, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Canada is a nation-state of 35,158,300 people. Of course it will have more articles than any tribes. I'm not a him, as I've occasionally pointed over the years, and my user name is "Uyvsdi." In Muscogean languages the "v" is a nasalized "uh." My sole interest here is getting basic and accurate information about Native peoples to the public. When people are clicking on links in categories, they are looking for more information, which is in not redirects. The protocol link I gave you absolutely backs up my view, because all the categories used pertain to the articles. Many comments you've made disparage our tribal governments and reveal that you aren't very familiar with the sociopolitical structures of Alaskan villages or our reservations, Indian colonies, rancherias, and tribal jurisdictional areas. -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:46, 2 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

Man you are reading things into my other comments in completely a reactionary, paranoid way. Disparaging? Um, I don't know what the F**K you're talking about; I helped straighten out the kwaan content in teh Tlingit article and made sure Tlingit content in BC-related articles like those pertaining to Russian America and the HBC was fair and complete; and though I haven't had time to continue the contact and develop the missing material on the Kaigani Haida, it's not like I've been out to "disparage" native content in any way; my only comment that was even half-disparaging is the point that in Alaskan terminology even a hamlet of 50 people is legally a "city", and that includes non-native settlements. I helped wikify the Chief Shakes article and have worked to make sure that the clan articles were not deleted because they have 'non-English' names, and undertook to make sure various BC chiefs have been included, and called for more, and penned the Nicola's War content and Fraser Canyon WAr and more.... I've worked sympathetically on nearly every BC first people's content and sorted out the confusing political geography and terminology of overlapping tribal councils and ethnic groups and edited the anti-native content or pejorative cowboy-attitude on a lot of articles; I came back to Wikipedia after a long hiatus because of the racist cant that had overtaken the Idle No More and Theresa Spence articles, and long before had made sure that various incidents in the history of white-native relations in BC got included; I also kept a Sinixt activist from removing Ktunaxa history and placenames and vandalizing the Ktunaxa articles, and more and more and more. So you can take your paranoid defensiveness and shove it.

Furthermore, this bit about there being nothing in the redirects is true because that's what redirects ARE. You claim that the protocol you cited mandates your reversion of my work but you're completely WRONG. The protocol says straight out that redirects can solve problems associated with titles in categories not matching the type of category. And a government, a sociopolitical organized body, is not the same thing as the territory it governs. An organization is NOT a geographic item. In your biased edit comments, yuou indicated that I had done something required the articles needed to be "restored" after, which is insulting and NUTS. The content had not been damaged; but you put those articles back in categories where they do not belong. A government, doesn't matter whether it's a tribe or band government, does not belong in a geographic category; something called a Tribe does not belong in a category called "Reservations". In BOTH the things you found, the Village Pump debate from 2007, and the Protocol from the guidelines, there is ample material underscoring and mandating what I did and that does NOT support your reversions, nor your invective against me as if I were some kind of racist pig out to undermine native content. Your views are ideological and not logical and not in accordance with the protocols you claim support you. You are talking backwards, like that character in Little Big Man who does everything backwards..... you are making no sense at all, and being an insulting prick in the process. I'm done with being painted as Big Bad Whitey. You sicken me, and have picked open a wound in my impatience with "people with agendas" on Wikipedia wide open over somethign so obvious, and then taken it upon yourself to attack my motives, and my whiteness, that I can only adjudge you back as you hvae judged me; that you are an ignorant racist who will not listen to reason, and who believes that ideology is more important than logic. Or civility. I'm done with being civil. I should have known better than to come back to Wikipedia. What a waste of Q@#$%Q@$#%Q$# time and good-spirited energy. Sickening.Skookum1 (talk) 04:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

OK folks, here's my thinking: if we take an article such as Montana, it covers both a geographic region AND a governmental entity as an overview, with many spinoffs later created for history governance, geographic features, etc. Same will be true of many tribes and tribal governments. So it isn't the end of the world if some articles will be categorized as BOTH a government and a geographical region. So let's all stop sniping at each other and if something is categorized in multiple areas, let's focus on navigation and helping people find related items, if that means some redirects, that's fine, and if it means we have multiple classes of categories in an article, that's fine. I'm normally kind of an anal-retentive person here, but both of you now have me so confused that I don't even really get WTF is going on any more. Montanabw^(talk) 21:36, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Ease of navigation was exactly what I was trying to do; instead I was fed obscurantism, insults and a denial that what a protocol says is what it says. I'm done, I thought this was all simple and obvious, but I've been painted as Big Bad Whitey and don't need any of this shit. I don't get what is going on here EITHER and it's clear to me that not-making-sense is now an unofficial Wikipedia credo. This isn't the first line of stubborn nonsense I've encountered around here, from all sides. I've done so much to defend and further native content and indigenous sensitivities across the board on countless articles, many of them not even in IPNA topics, that what I've just been calld and accused of is grossly out of line. And nobody ever gets MY name right either (it's Skookum-one, "Skookum1" not "Skookum"). You and I get along, you are obviously a thoughtful, tolerant person; this isn't the first time I've encountered knee-jerk anti-white/anti-anglo intolerance from ideologically/ethnic-pride-driven editors (certain Chinese and certain French-Candian "contributors" come to mind); but it sure as hell is going to be the last. Fewer and fewer logical, broad-minded people are to be had around here. People toss protocols and guidelines around without even knowing what they mean, to defend asinine stupidity. I'm too old for this shit, life is only so long. You're welcome to touch base with me outside of this charnel-house of the mind, I'm going back to the real world. I also note that Uvysdi or whatever also voiced an ideological agenda in the Indian reserve RM, completely opposite to the facts on the ground, and there also said that what is not actually the case is supposedly the case. That RM is why I came back, to make sure content was correct and not biased, same as I did because of Idle No More et al, and the same reasons I fought tooth and nail to keep the colonialist names from rewriting all the Canadian FN articles because of some amateur linguist in the southeastern US deciding that native people don't have the right to assert whta they want to be called. For that huge amount of energy I lost my livelihood and wound up stressed out to the point of the stroke you know I had, partly as result. I do have a short fuse for stupidity and ignorance, and with good reason. I don't like my time being wasted, or ideologically-rewritten content being present as the truth and the only truth. That for the simple act of trying to make the category system more sensible and navigable, I got portrayed as some kind of destructive racist is just such utter horseshit is just not tolerable for me. Try to do something constructive and sensible, get painted as the White Devil. Fuck it I've said my piece....and will try to resist the temptation to bring common sense into Wikipedia ever again....let the revisionists and the ideologues hvae their way, and all the people who want to make drama out of the guideline-spewing and wiki-lawyering all they want. Scholastic people who understand teh point of an encyclopedia and the need for inclusion for everyone, not using it as WP:SOAP which is implicitly U-person's motives here, more and more of us have left or are leaving....... hell the world isn't going to last all that long anyway, all this will be stray kilobytes on a few microchips rotting in the radioactive brine by the end of the century anyway....... yes I'm ranting but the ridiculousness of what has been thrown at me, directly at me here, requires more than a simple "I'm done".....it's clear to me that common sense isn't welcome in Wikipedia; rather the opposite. Over and over and over again. What could have been a great thing has now become maddeningly frustrating. Instead of telling me to write articles, why didn't U-person go and write some about Wells Colony and Campbell RAnch himself? If he knows so much more, why isn't he expanding that content instead of pissing off someone who wsas making sure those titles were represented in the right categories properly. Done, done, done....so much more to say, but why the f**k bother anymore?Skookum1 (talk) 04:56, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. -Uyvsdi (talk) 04:37, 3 December 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi

(Oy vey, man you are such piece or pretentious twaddle saying that to me, after ATTACKING ME'. Give your head a fucking shake. Accusing ME of what YOU just did to me in above is so fucking typical or your backwards thinking about who I am and why I'm here - and invoking a guideline as though it supports you when it's really somethnig you have violated yourself..... I'm so sick of this nonsense. You can take credit for pissing off Skookum1 once and for all. YOu accused me of so many nasty things above it nauseates me; that you would invoke these guidelines against me when you have violated and insulted my efforts in the most ridiculous ways that it underscores for me the passive-aggressive vulgarity and nastiness of Wikipedia in extremis. Go shove it, I'm gone. Forever. I'll try and stay out of your high and holy way in future, and Wikipedia can rot in hell.Skookum1 (talk)

OK. Both of you. Please drop the stick and back off from each other. Skookum, I don't see the attacks by Uyvsdi that you are claiming, but I don't know the history here, either. But if you two have been at it since 2007, I'm now officially getting into the middle here and suggest you both just get off the talk pages here and at the WP and try to ignore each other. Please. Run it by me on my talk page or something, I'm pretty neutral on this stuff, as I think you both know, and I'm willing to be fair. But COOL DOWN! NOW. Please. Montanabw^(talk) 05:54, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

this is an attack "Many comments you've made disparage our tribal governments " as was the imputation by "article restored" that I had somehow destroyed the articles. Insinuative racism is what it is, and every shot at me that she's made is of the same vein and I'm tired of it, and also of the resistance to logic here and elsewhere.Skookum1 (talk) 20:46, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

What would those comments BE. It's true that OMR regularly disses his own Squamish Nation band government, as Canadian natives often do of their governments, and they make a distinction between their people/identity and that of the federally-defined governments created by the Indian Act, which are contrary to traditional governance and very often corrupt as any white government. But I said nothing "disparaging" about any Nevadan or Montanan government and saying I did constitutes a definite personal attack, including the imputation that I'm somehow anti-native. Well if I was, I sure wouldn't have been doing all the work I have around here since I joined Wikipedia to try and make sure native content was included and cogent.Skookum1 (talk) 20:51, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

I think that you are imputing a little more than was intended. Maybe you are seeing an attack that I don't see, and maybe there was one. But I don't think anyone thinks you disparaged Nevada or Montana or their governments. But I DO think you both need to just declare a truce, drop the issue of who attacked who, and just go on your own business of fixing the actual articles you care about most. You two disagree on content details, I'm not saying one of you is right and the other is wrong; I think you are BOTH being a little touchy here and quick to take offense. But frankly, I don't see Uyvsdi accusing you of racism, just of not understanding certain issues, like USA tribal government structure - which is inconsistent and confusing; I also don't understand a lot of it and I live here! Also, she disagrees with you on some categorization issues and you two appear to disagree over whether certain spinoff articles are unnecessary content forks or necessary distinguishing of people from government from geography. None of these are accusations of racism or anything like that. I don't think you two will arrive at an agreement, so I think you need to create a DMZ where you each do your best to avoid the other's core areas. If you have to connect, use a neutral third party (like me, I think both of you are valued editors) to sort out the situation. Please.  ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 22:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Canadianisms

You made the news today...LOL :-) -- Moxy (talk) 19:36, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Skookum: Mainly heard in British Columbia, it means: strong, awesome, great, good, best, etc. Regional, with all of the 10 percent who use this term living in British Columbia.

For the complete definition of this term, based on Chinook Jargon, head on over to Wikipedia.

I was actually surprised by the number of non-British Columbians who are familiar with this term. Then, I remembered that “Skookum” has been used on SCTV and other Canadian television shows.

Of the three Americans who used this word, two of them live in the Pacific Northwest (Oregon and Washington), with one person from Minnesota.

The one person living in England who is familiar with this term, even though they don’t use it, noted that it was the result of seeing me use it. United States Commonwealth Canada Unfamiliar 90% 95% 61% Familiar but not used 7% 5% 29% Familiar and used 3% 0% 10%

If you head to the List of Chinook Jargon placenames you'll find there's three "Skookumchuck Creeks" in Quebec...and one in Vermont or New Hampshire or New York, can't remember which. My guess with usages that far afield is it had to do with people in the fur trade, or maybe coming home from logging etc. There was a minor debate in the CJ list as to whether or not words like "hooch" qualified, as it's not associated with "pure" Jargon, but apparently derives from the same idea as kickapoo joy juice, from the name of the Tlingit group the hoochenoo....another quasi-CJ usage is "sticks" as in "out in the sticks". "Stick" is used for "tree" and also for "forest" and a "Stick Indian" was one who still lived out in the bush, living the old way. Another derivation is, I believe, things like Letterman's "dumb-ass", derived from hyas (high-ass) and tenas (great/large and small). Using "house" to refer to a room, or any building of any kind, is also CJ. As far as "skookum" goes, and "saltchuck" also and certain other terms with roots in CJ culture, it helps to remember that a lot of the US entertainment and publishing/magazine industry have roots in CAnada, very often in BC...because people went south, not east, in their careers. I know for a fact that 'skookum' is known to Americans working in the film industry, it's part of the set lingo now..... I signed off from the CJ pages last night by the way, for reasons you can entertain yourself by reading the tirades I left behind in response the latest snotty edit from a certain US-side faction (and in the history of that user's talkpage, which I removed rather than face censure for too strong a WP:BITE); that on the heels of the long attempt to delete Skookum which has admirably grown beyond its original humble beginnings. I knew about skookum dolls, though have never seen one; and in on thing out there I saw recently that word is used similarly to tamanass, tamanas, or tamanous (spirit/ power) in referring to wilderness spirits..... that someone named a kitty-kat breed a skookum is kinda odd, but I understand that tehre's a subvariety of husky or malamute which also carries the name. From waht I gather, Albertans recognize the word but say that it marks someone using it as being British Columbian.... ergo rather than "Canadianisms" more like BC-isms maybe...though it's definitely used in the Yukon.Skookum1 (talk) 02:05, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Colony of British Columbia (1858–66), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Orr (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) 09:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Images

If the photogrpaher (your relative) is still alive, you need to get a release from them.

If they are deceased you need to confirm if you the heir to their estate( and thus able to release the copyright.) Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:02, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

This is ludicrous. My father died in 1972, I have two siblings and we are all heirs to his estate; I am "in charge" of the photo collection, which is vast. What do I need? A letter from a lawyer to confirm the donation of an image in my possession that is part of my family collection? Since when is Wikipedia so obsessed with legalities that they demand of a long-time editor proof that they are who they say they are? Used to be enough that the license said "I possess the copyright and have the right to releases it". What now? Get a notary to send something to OTRS? At whose expense? Wikipedia's??Skookum1 (talk) 20:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Procedure and process run amuck are becoming the bane of Wikipedia. It should be renamed I think because "wiki" is supposed to mean fast/quick i.e. easy. Endless niggling forms and minutiae and wikilawyering are the death of encouraging anyone to contribute content. Print or image.Skookum1 (talk) 20:42, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Upload over at commons, send them a notice that you might need OTRS permissions and ignore the trolls here on wiki. The admins at commons are more helpful. Montanabw^(talk) 01:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hudson's Bay Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yerba Buena (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) 09:00, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Category:Provincial parks in Canada by province or territory - ??

Just noticed this....how can a territory have a provincial park, since it's not a province? I'm not sure there even are "territorial parks" btw.Skookum1 (talk) 22:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

• Interesting dilemma Skookum1, there are territorial parks such as Chan Lake Territorial Park, I am unsure how to proceed. I would say rather than renaming the category for a few places just to include them in as they are already included in the List of Canadian provincial parks page. Thoughts??01:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year Skookum1!

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Skookum1: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 08:29, 1 January 2014 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2014}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia 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.

Charles A. Woodward (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to John Oliver and Gore District

Charles N. "Chunky" Woodward (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Woodward

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Closure of Canadian science libraries

By posting about this topic at four talk pages (Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Environment and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Libraries and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Science), I did hope to interest other editors in requesting digitization of whatever materials remain. As for mentioning the closure in the content of "Environmental policy of the Harper government", whose talk page you designated for centralized discussion, I am leaving that to other editors.
—Wavelength (talk) 00:27, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

I can't think of where else such content should be put, that's all. Definitely one of his/their policies.Skookum1 (talk) 01:34, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Vancouver City (provincial electoral district), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Woodward (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) 09:08, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sandon, British Columbia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kootenay (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) 09:06, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Coast Salish peoples, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Simon Fraser (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) 09:06, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Apologies

Glad you have a sense of humor. I hope that you caught the none-too-clever Simpsons reference and realize that I don't think you are worse than Hitler.