User talk:Skookum1/Archive 19

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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!
	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.

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.223.87 (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't have the patience to deal with it either. So I used a sledgehammer. The whole thing was unencyclopedic and some just incorrect. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 04:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't know the ideal place for your recent post, but WT:AN is almost certainly the wrong one. The admin noticeboards use the WP: namespace, not the talk pages. You might want to move it to WP:ANI. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:49, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Hey Skookum1, you know that I have often supported your ideas about article naming and such, but on this one, you need to ratchet down the drama a bit; I know you and Uyvsdi are spatting about category naming and some other issues, and I happen to consider BOTH of you to be valuable editors and hate to see you getting into the realm of making personal attacks on another user, which you know can't end well. The bottom line is that we all want to show respect to people by calling them what they prefer to be called, but when there is also a significant usage of an English-styled name, we can't just pretend it isn't there and erase it, we have to figure out a way to work it all in. (In my neck of the woods, Sioux and [{Crow people]] are good examples of this.) Categories help people find articles, so our naming conventions there, by necessity, may not be quite the same as in articles themselves. I'm a great fan of redirects and such. I hope you can stick just to the issues and try to back off on personalizing matters with you and Uyvsdi. Montanabw^(talk) 21:46, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

The most significant use of that "English-styled name" is of a very notable town, and it is by far and away the most notable topic on that name, using it undisambiguated in that form is a violation of PRIMARYTOPIC; the reason Squamish, British Columbia is disambiguated as such (unique Canadian placenames like Kamloops and Nanaimo carry no disambiguation) is because of the many uses of the name, and because of the conflict with the source aboriginal name; Squamish is a disambiguation page for the same reason that Lillooet and Chilcotin are. Drama? Drama lies in having to tell people over and over and over again, who keep on pretending it doesn't matter, the simple fact that "Squamish" by itself is confusing and most people are going to think of the town, not of the aboriginal people. Naming the category that is only going to cause confusion, including of the kind I pointed out re pages in Vancouver having a "Squamish" category on them. And as it happens now, given my recent google, "Skwxwu7mesh" gets more hits than "Squamish people", and guaranteed that the more recent the publication the more likely the native ethnonym is going to be used, especially when distinguishing between the people as a whole, their band government and/or the town. The other Canadian participants agree with this and understand it implicity as I do - that "Squamish" was never a viable category name and should never have been brought back from the dead, particularly by someone who has no idea of the town or the significance of its name as the by-far-and-away MOSTCOMMON use of the term. That this keeps on being shrugged off, and so many iffy quibbles posed, is a sign to me that the consensus process has no place in decisions required informed action; if this goes to "no consensus" and this category stays as is I'll have to seek ARBCOM or some other higher power; or just say fuck it, do what Uysvidi did and start my own fucking category with a name that's useful and clear. And then watch the chauvinists come out and say that it's not acceptable in global English, to hell with Canadian norms, unpronounceable non-English names aren't allowed in Wikipedia, and procedure has to be respected. Yeah uh-huh OK....go have a readc through the RM at Talk:Squamish people and check out some of the bias and narrow-mindedness, even the guy pontificating about the Suguamish without even knowing that the Skwxwu7mesh were in Canada, not Washington, or that the town of Squamish even existed or has any importance (15,000 may be small by US standards, it's quite large in Canada). such a person "voted" on that RM.... as did the person who damned Skxwu7mesh as a "meaningless string" or whatever...... that RM was closed in 7 days, with no effort to seek expert input, and was followed by a speedy CfD......thank god this didn't happen across the board in BC categories, or there'd be 10 or more parallel CfDs to this one, and no end of confusion with similar undisambiguated category names like Category:Lillooet, Category:Chilcotin and more....Skookum1 (talk) 03:05, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Looks like the issue is being handled well enough elsewhere. If the community has come around to Skxwu7mesh, that's going to help other names that use unusual diacritical markings. But I also know that there is a need to use dabs and redirects where needed to direct people to the articles they seek; otherwise, we wind up with "new" articles being recreated under the old names and then another round of drama. I would urge caution, though, with your work on USA tribal groups outside the Pacific Northwest; different legalities and such; many reservations and missions separate from tribes due to US Gov't policies and such. Montanabw^(talk) 02:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Other than that '7' glottal stop, it's the non-diacritical form of Skwxwu7mesh I'm advocating; OldManRivers would of course prefer it in full Skwxwu7mesh orthography; but as with St'at'imc and Sto:lo when these terms do get used in English publications, it's without all the bells and whistles (those [t'] in St'at'imc are a single special character in the original for example). As with St'at'imc and Sto:lo I want something that can be typed instead of copy-pasted. And re work on tribal groups outside the PacNW, and speaking of redirects, all I'm doing is making category contents match what the content is for; see Category:American Indian reservations in California and follow the italicked entries; the same in reverse should be done from the tribe categories, and in fact starting there yesterday I found a few things that weren't in the reservation category; this is making sense of the category tree how it's supposed to work....the Washington categories used to be jumbled like this, with tribe-names showing up in language categories, reservations showing up in tribe categories etc; the notion that people=goverment=land may mean that there should be only one article but there's no reason to abuse categories by having titles in them that don't make sense for what the category is....ease of navigation.....I don't wade into the nitty gritty of the actual content of most US articles because I don't know the legalities (very different from Canada; where traditional territories, far beyond IRs, are still considered unsurrendered and sovereign; vs the US where the reservations are considered sovereign and larger-territory rights have been abdicated). All this began from me trying to make sense of a very jumbled set of category trees.Skookum1 (talk) 03:01, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

"looks like the issue is being handled well enough elsewhere"....there's another discussion somewhere I'm not invited to? and re my discovery of Category:Chumash people, which is the ethno category not the "people who are Chumash" category, I found this very ironic.Skookum1 (talk) 03:15, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't think there is anything else other than the CfD, which is what I meant by "elsewhere." That's more than plenty for me. I've got other fish to fry... literally!. Montanabw^(talk) 01:04, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

I fixed the Chumash problem; I've said everything I can on the CfD, and have wound up looking around and finding other things that need fixing..that don't need consensus, though there's currently an RM at Talk:Carrier people and a CfDS, which might be passed by this morning, at Category:Dunneza. Naming standards for indigenous peoples' categories need to be codified though, and certain categories and articles "locked"......there will always be dabblers come along who start re-arranging things without realizing the implications or knowing the subject matter....Category:Mohawk tribe and Category:Blackfoot tribe need resolution though; both of those are in "American language" and the FOO tribe thing implies a government; and in both cases the majority of those populations is on the Canadian side of the border.....given the old discussions on Talk:Mohawk people about the complications of "tribe" and "nation" that's a thorny one.....and the Mohawk political map and cluster of articles is just about teh most complicated of all indigenous categories there is....Skookum1 (talk) 03:17, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Huh? Yes, just removed (non-redirect) categories from redirects. But since redirects are only encountered by people who type in the term somewhere, they can't really be duplicates. Either that person gets taken to what they're looking for, or told it doesn't exist. WilyD 13:11, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

The "FOO [number]" format for Canadian Indian reserves is a pain in the ass; originally only a form/shorthand in French, it got applied into English Canadian usages by some federal bureaucratic decision, and is used too readily by Wikipedians with no experience of what an Indian reserve is, or how they're commonly referred to. Not your problem of course, but quite oftne there's parallel "FOO [number]" items as well as "FOO Indian Reserve No. [number]" for the same item.Skookum1 (talk) 13:19, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

'Mi'kmaw' is actually a different word or part of speech from Mi'kmaq, in Mi'kmewey but is also used and it may just be that the pronunciation Migmaw is gaining in popularity in English over Migmaq recently. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 18:34, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

"Recently" would be the last 15-20 years of Canadian media usage and would be the new standard form in English; that the now-offensive and very archaic form English: /ˈmɪkˌmæk/ is given pride of place here speaks to the inefficacy of using out of date citations from academic/obsolete texts and not actually having a listen. see User_talk:Maunus#.22MIGmaw.22 and note that I'm consulting actual Mi'kmaq people of my acquaintance, and will look up the CBC and government style guides. The notion that "mikmaw" is only an adjectival form in Mi'kmaq may be technically true, but that's not the case in modern Canadian/Nova Scotian English where it is the ONLY form.Skookum1 (talk) 19:00, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

You trumpet "overcoming systemic bias" on your userpage, but here you are, retrenching a colonialist pronunciation on the one hand with a colonialist logic to back it up, and are including in systemic bias towards Canadian English usages and its adaptation of native endonyms, which is now the norm; and don't forget that Canadian English speakers include the Mi'kmaq people of today, and it is they who use "MIGmaw", as I hear it and have learned it, and who do not make a distinction in English between the adjectival and noun forms. Perhaps the systemic bias you should work on countering is your own....Skookum1 (talk) 19:09, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

As a helpful hint, I suggest you tune into APTN or find some aboriginal news on CBC or any of the Nova Scotian TV channels and have a listen....Skookum1 (talk) 19:10, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

My comment has nothing to do with systemnatic bias. As one familiar with Mi'kmewey language, I'm telling you they are two different words in that language. (noun v.adjective) If anyone wants to find the People's language "offensive" for whatever reason that is their problem but hopefully you can cite that someone is offended by it. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 19:35, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh so the line in the article saying that some Mi'kmaq find it (the Micmac spelling/pronunciation) "colonially tainted" doesn't register on you? Have you considered what they mean by that? that they find it parochial and disrespectful is what that means..... And this isn't about what the usage in their language is, it's about how the name is pronounced in Canadian English where it is in widespread and current use, irrespective of what references linguists and wikipedians want to point to about how it is in the native language. You can be familiar with the language in an academic sense, but have you lived in a Mi'kmaq community? Have you been in Canadian English media environments or Canadian social milieu where you might speak with (a) a Canadian or (b) a Mi'kmaq Canadian using the term in English? I have. Maunus calls that "original research", I call it "direct experience" = and am consulting my Mi'kmaq and other Scotian/Newfoundlander acquaintances for their input/citations. If you can't see your systemic bias against Canadian English, I suggest you adjust the dimensions of the shoebox you've chosen to put your brain into, and rather than tell this Canadian you know best, go look up parochialism. Systemic bias is all about misconceptions and misperceptions and a lack of perpective; and you should step back from your supposed "familiarity" with the Mi'kmaq language and consider that this is an English language article addressing a term used in English and t hat someone familiar with modern English usage in the country in question be given fair credit for their reporting that the current lede's pronunciatiosn are way out of whack with "how it is".Skookum1 (talk) 19:48, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I have lived in a Mi'kmaq community in Canada, yes, yes, yes. And you are talking about the older English term "Micmac" whereas I was not referring to that but to the form Mi'kmaq (/meeg-makh/) which is perfectly correct alongside Mi'kmaw. I wouldn't be surprised if "Mi'kmaw" is more favored than "Mi'kmaq" in Canadian English for the past 20 years though, I haven't been there lately. As for the obsolete "Micmac", it has some unsavoury meaning in French, according to some French dictionaries. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:01, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

English: /ˈmɪkˌmæk/ is what I'm talking about; the current English usage is "MIGmaw" not an unaspirated 'k' but distinctly a 'g' and there's sometimes a bit of shcwa between the G and the m but that's kind of the same thing is "nu-cue-lar" for nuclear.... and the vowel is not "ee" but "ih". In English that is; tune into the youtube recast of the Atlantic Television News or CBC Atlantic's news.....Skookum1 (talk) 20:12, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I think I heard that kind of pronunciation (Migamaw) from Crees and Ojibwes 25 years ago whereas Mi'kmaq would say Meeg-makh; it sounds like Canadian English has picked up the "Migamaw" form from that western influence since then, from what you are telling me!Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:24, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

There is in fact a talking dictionary of Mígmaq online. That would be the best reference for pronunciation. But we are not talking about a difference in pronunciation, but about two different words as we have been pointing out, and which all sources confirm. And several of those sources are written by linguists who are native speakers. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 20:27, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

the issue here is how the name Mi'kmaq is pronounced in contemporary English, what a linguistics book says about how it is pronounced in Mi'kmaq is NOT what I am talking about; I am talking about ONE word, not two, i.e. the same word/pronunciation that is the same whether noun or adjective (well, in English "the Mi'kmaq" implies the Mi'kmaq person/man/woman, so...and I can't think of a noun usage of the term in English come to think of it, given that would always be implied...adjectival it is; but it's with a 'g' not a 'k', very definitely so. I know from experience the tortured RMs of last year, from asking about it, that the CBC style guide is no longer a separate publication but is a database tied into the Holy Mother Corp's computer system and can't be shared. What other print sources there might be for the current English usage remains to be seen, I'm looking....the impression currently given in the lede that the "Micmac" pronunciation is still in use, when it is long obsolete, needs to be corrected. Unless you have a linguistics book on Canadian English including adaptations of native loan words/endonyms, we'll have to find another kind of publication. I will, anyway. What I do know from experience, also, is that how people say a word in English vs the same word when used in their language is not always the same; this is definitely the case with Sto:lo, though you hear both pronunciations (ow and oh for the [o:]). So even a native speaker of Mi'kmaq, when using the name of his people in English, is likely not going to pronounce it the same was as if speaking his/native tongue; I know my Conne River friend refers to himself, anyway, as being L'nu. Until I hear from him, I'll be sourcing video/broadcast examples and any written style guides or other material I can find. For the English usage, not what linguists say about the language itself. The lede as it stands right now encourages people to use the archaic pronunciation......and given that that pronunciation is not in current Canadian English, and articles about people or places are to be written in Canadian English and from a Canadian context.....it's the current Canadian English, not "linguists' English" that's the issue....Skookum1 (talk) 04:57, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Did you miss the part in Wahnapitae First Nation where it explicitly clarifies that the community of Wahnapitae in Nickel Centre is not the same thing? If you need extra clarification, here's a Google Map — the "162 Trans-Canada Highway" dot is the community, while the separate "West Bay Road" dot, over 50 km away by road, is the reserve. Bearcat (talk) 17:57, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry no didn't see that part.....so the Wanapitae redirect should maybe go to a dab page instead; noting the reserve names are spelled differently from that of the FN. Shoulda read closer, was in the middle of a blitz of adding Category:Ojibwe reserves and reservations (cross-border category NB, hence that title), in said process creating redirects from IR names to the bands associated with them, unless the redirect would better go to a place.....where that one redirect went confused me.Skookum1 (talk) 03:19, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

I added a "redirects here" hate note on Chemainus, British Columbia here, you may wish to check my wording. I am not 100% on the nomenclature for referring to First Nations.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 13:12, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

because "First Nations" has so many variable meanings "indigenous" or "aboriginal" would be better, especially if the link was to a people article (which doesn't exist yet); singular "First Nation" is a wiki convention for a band government. One thing emerging in the real world, not recognized by/applied in Wikipedia yet, is when "First Nations" is used as an adjective, it's lower-cased e.g. "first nations person".Skookum1 (talk) 03:21, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

I've started this article. Improvements welcome. Regards, Ground Zero | t 22:38, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

What's a common word with this vowel? [1] — Lfdder (talk) 21:41, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Trying to think of one....Shut maybe, or huh. Shuh-MAY-nus To me definitely more like a schwa than an "eh" like in debt - perhaps it's both depending on who you are; like how some people might say Nah-NAI-mo and some might say NE-NAI-mo (where E-schwa); I was going to use Mount Cheam as an example (of the latter sound but someone has made that /ˈʃiːæm/ and I really don't know who came up with that, it's wrong ("Shem") though maybe some people do say SHEE-em, but not "SHEE-am". I'm studying ESL and have had to do drills on IPA, and of course it being a British company I fail certain words because of the accent/vowels desired by the test.... The BC Names page says on some undated map that "She-am" is an approximation of the Halkomelem word for the lowland (Rosedale Prairie) beneath this mountain, but if so that's archaic; adaptation into English in the Valley by now (Fraser Valley), where I'm from, is decidedly "Shem" or if anything like the older pronunciation "She-em", -am wound sound really stilted and "newbie" (at least newbies don't say Tshee-am or I've never heard one, I imagine some might). Now about Chemainus the syllable breakdown is Sheh-May-nus or Shuh-MAY-nus, not "SHEM-ayn-us"; maybe both pronunciations should be there; not sure if that second example is to be a schwa or like in "cut"/"shut"..... the BC accents are generally fairly lazy about vowels i.e. "levelling" lots of things to a schwa. I'll make a recording later maybe. I'm not from the Island, and it's true people from Chemainus might be particular about either/or.... but I doubt it. I'd poll some friends I have on the Island - but none of them know IPA.Skookum1 (talk) 02:12, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

"Shah" comes to mind, but then I mean the Canadian way of saying that, not the British; I guess that example is the same as Sha-na-na.Skookum1 (talk) 02:14, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Well, I've changed it to the cut vowel in the meantime so that it won't throw an error. I know lots of Americans don't distinguish it from the schwa, might be the same for you. [2] — Lfdder (talk) 03:42, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah maybe, though there still is a discernible difference between Washingtonians and BCers.....though maybe not about that. Can you fix Mount Cheam too please? Though the pronunciation as given could be stated to be a reference to the Halqemeylem pronunciation of their term for Rosedale Prairie.Skookum1 (talk) 03:51, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Is it definitely pronounced with the cut vowel? Not bed or father? — Lfdder (talk) 04:14, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I definitely pronounce it with the cut vowel or maybe the schwa; using the vowel in "bed" or "get" would seem stilted to me but like I said probably best to include both; the one guy I know from Ladysmith (next door) is from Nova Scotia and has a thick Annapolis Valley country-boy accent, I have a few friends in Duncan but one's on holiday in Ecuador, the other might offer an opinion.... thing about BC is between the Island's cadre of ex-Britons and also the wide variety of German-background and other Euro-backgrounds, including in Chemainus itself, pronunciation may vary and the "bed" vowel may be just as much in use as the schwa; "father" a bad example because the 'a' in that varies from dialect to dialect. FAWther vs FAther vs F[ae]ther etc. (don't have the ipa 'ae' symbol handy).Skookum1 (talk) 04:50, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

As in the 'u' in "omnibus", or can we just use the 'a' of "comma"? — kwami (talk) 04:18, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Stalking my talkpage huh?Skookum1 (talk) 04:50, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

And for the record I don't know what your own accent is, but in mine there's little distinction between the two examples you're positing.Skookum1 (talk) 04:59, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

@Lfdder - um thanks, but no that's not right. The vowel is not as "cut" but as in "bed". Maybe sometimes with a very brief 'y' after the "sh" - but not as the previous version had it as a second syllable, more of a diphthong but we kinda do that with "shed" and "shit" too.Skookum1 (talk) 05:23, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Whoops -- I was asking about Cheam the 2nd time above, I guess you thought I meant Chemainus. — Lfdder (talk) 13:51, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

About Cheam, I'm not sure if the Halqemeylem given ( /ʃɛm/ and /ˈʃiːæm/ in English, [ˈʃiːəm] in Halqemeylem)is accurate because of what the BC Names cite says, that Shee-AM is "closer" to the original Halqemeylem, and so substituting "am" may still not be enough; myself I don't have a Halqemeylem dictionary handy.... the Sto:lo Atlas probably has particulars (incredible book btw); I may have asked for somewhere for an IPA for this page (I haven't looked all the way back into the file history, I might well have) but didn't look close at the results as not understanding IPA much then (slowly better now). I think what BC Names might be referring to also is that some people might assume that it's "Tsheem" or another Tsh sound on the start; and that it doesn't rhyme with "beam".Skookum1 (talk) 17:16, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

The name Slavey (derived from slave [its loan translation from Cree Awokànak (lit. «slaves»)], and the suffix -y cannot cover its bad meaning: they are not slave, also nobody is not slave) is very very racist. This is a snub. The "Slavey" proper is the South "Slavey" and formerly called as Etchaottine (nowadays as Echo Dene in the name of Echo Dene School, Fort Liard). Dene Tha (for people) and Dene Dháh (for language) [in Alberta] and Dehcho [in Northern Territories] for the South "Slavey" (tr:Denetalar for this people, and tr:Denetaca for their language). The North "Slavey" is the Sahtu people (en-wiki: separate page) and Sahtu language (en-wiki: not separate page). The Sahtu is tritypic (K’áshogot’ine ᑲᑊᗱᑯᑎᑊᓀ [lit. «people of hare (gahcho/gahsho)» or K’ahsho Got’ine «Big Willow People» formerly common name is Hare] Sahtúgot’ine ᓴᑋᕲᒼᑯᑎᑊᓀ [lit «people of Great Bear Lake (ᓴᑋᕲᒼ Sahtú)» formerly common name is Bearlake], Shihgot’ine ᗰᑋᑯᑎᑊᓀ [lit. «people of mountain (ᗰᑋ shih)» formerly common name is Mountain]) and most common in Canada, and in my opinion: likeable. The name Nahani (Nahanni, Nahane) for Central Cordillera [Tahltan-Tagish-Kaska] Athabaskan-speaking Kaska, Tahltan, and Tagish peoples, and not used for Southern Tutchone people (Kwäch’än) and Shihgot’ine (Mountain) bands of Sahtu people. --Kmoksy (talk) 15:44, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

AFAIK the Tahltan and the Kaska do not use it for themselves...maybe those closer to the Nahanni River? I was just noting the Nahane type names on the Slavey language page, and also noting the territorial overlap for BC..... per the racism of t he Slavey term, would a split between South and North into Sahtu and Deh Cho work; he was sloppy in that dab page, as Deh Cho are only South Slavey..... the racism of "Dogrib" (Tlicho) he was unconcerned about also, like various other terms where his nose is on his bookshelves and not in the real world, or the modern day.Skookum1 (talk) 15:58, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

the "we don't care what the people preferred to be called" line is grating every time I've heard it; it's surfaced in the Squamish RMS and CfDs repeatedly, with NOTCENSORED and RIGHTGREATWRONGS cited in response, as if avoiding inappropriate and/or derisive terms were "censorship".....WP:Naming conventions (ethnicities and tribes) never gets cited, only his precious self-authored WP:NCLANGSkookum1 (talk) 16:01, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I've had to reverse your deletion of my text in this subsection of the main Vancouver article, though I have retained the list title you added, and added a little more material myself. The reason for the reversal is that the subsection title specifically refers to films SET in Vancouver - where it appears as itself - not merely to those FILMED there. The list title you have added is useful, as it enables the reader to find out more about the city's use as a general location for filming (particularly as a stand-in for U.S. cities), but as I'm sure you can see, the subsection title refers to something quite different! Regards Tai kit (talk) 04:13, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

I could have some sympathy with this if what you say is the case, but Kwami is not an admin I think. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:44, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

He was at the time of most if not all, hence the overwrite power he had, which maunus and Uysvdi still have despite their contrarian and hostile and incivil behaviour. By now you've seen my comments to JorisV about their little club on various other RM response where he says "go ahead and change the guideline" almost as if he were saying "make my day" like Clint Eastwood..... wading into a bearpit is not what I'll do, let's put it that way. Note the file histories summarized on the closed bulk RMs, which I have repeated and fixed up on the individual RMs. This "cabal" of sandbox bullies made no effort to consult other guideline pages or any affected wikigroups, and have been relentlessly hostile and laager-like in their resistance to damn near anything I do; the hypocrisy of Uysvdi oppose "FOO people" -> "FOO" per her justification for re-making Category:Squamish is really quite breathtaking; and as an admin telling me to "get a life" by deleting my criticisms-cum-suggestions is beyond the pale. WPNCLANG needs a higher-level review, I'm not sure where to take that, RfC or ARBCOM or ??Skookum1 (talk) 11:07, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I was criticized for the bulk RMs and told I should file them separately; which I have, now to be taunted by JorisV for not abiding by "no consensus" as if those invoking that noxious guideline made any qualitative points; the close was on quantitative grounds only, not because of the merits on each one; "time constraints" and "backlog" were cited (that backlog now substantially expanded by my new individual RMs huh??). Can't do nothing right, it seems, and when I do try to do things right I have the same old crowd not just blocking me but baiting me.Skookum1 (talk) 11:11, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Please don't do any more of these! There's a tool to create AfC articles properly, with the templates being posted to creators' talk pages, etc., but it works to simply use the "move" tab. I've just had to do a fiddly bit of deletion and undeletion to merge page histories at Nakusp (disambiguation) and Kaslo (disambiguation), and even though I'm an admin, I find that kind of thing scary ... please just use the "move" tab next time, 'mkay? Yngvadottir (talk) 20:04, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

I have never done an AfC before; in the absence of a pre-existing article how was I supposed to use a "move" tab? If there'd been Nakusp and Kaslo pages that weren't redirects to those towns that would have been simple enough to move either.....so what page histories? I don't get it.....Skookum1 (talk) 00:17, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Instead of copying the content of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kaslo (disambiguation) into a new article named Kaslo (disambiguation), what you should have done is to move Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kaslo (disambiguation) to Kaslo (disambiguation) (by hitting the "move" tab at the top of the Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kaslo (disambiguation) page and typing in the new title). The reason that it's important to move an article using the "move" button is that that way, the history is preserved for attribution; if you copy and paste, the history is broken (the new page is brand new, with no trace of who originally generated what content) and an admin has to come along and fix it. Admittedly, most admins are more adept with this fiddly stuff than me, but it's still far better to avoid it. Here's the instruction page - at the start of it it says why this has to be fixed. Alternatively, for AfC, as I said there is a special tool that moves the article and also generates the template on the submitting editor's talk page, the RFC Helper Script; the reviewing instructions page starts off by talking about it and tells you how to install it, but it's not mandatory. Yngvadottir (talk) 12:49, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Comox people#Moving this article

Thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:41, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

That's right. The anglicized form Sathloot for θaɬaθtuxʷ (Comox people in the Sliammon dialect of Comox language). Kmoksy is not K'omoks; he is a semi-Yup'ikized and semi-Athabaskanized Meskhetian Turk. Thanks. --Kmoksy (talk) 13:43, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure the Sliammon name for them is the same as it is in their own dialect. Similar but may have slightly different phonemes. The bits about history and former territory and integrating into themselves the surviving Pentlatch (who they seem to consider part of their cultural collective, as they put it) was interesting to read. Even on the Island (we capitalize that when referring to Vancouver Island) they were not one people but several. Much like the Okanagan/Sinixt/Colville/Similkameen/Spayomin were and remain, though greatly weakened in numbers. The Lekwtiltok invaded and conquered that area a few hundred years ago - that name in English is most common historically as "Euclataws", also you'll see Yuculta; the wiki article is Laich-kwil-tach; they were kin of the Kwagyuilh (Kwakiutl proper) on northern Vancouver Island before escaping warfare there by coming down the Johnstone Strait and settling on K'omoks land; the K'omoks were enslaved, though they won't talk about that SFAIK, you'll notice a terse reference to it; they're now part of the Southern Kwakiutl, who still use that term unlike the Kwakwaka'wakw who have their own names and don't like that one; one 'Namgis I know (Alert Bay area people) said that the Kwagyulh were low down the social hierarchy of the various Kwakwaka'wakw peoples and the name is not suitable for the higher-caste groups, if caste is the right word. The Euclataws terrorized the Georgia Straight and up the Fraser to Yale and to the head of Harrison Lake, and like the Tlingit/Haida/Tsimshian raids into Puget Sound, raided there also; it was because of them that the chief of the Kwantlen moved the main village from near what is now New Westminster to Fort Langley once the HBC showed up with its guns and bastions; not just to control trade but for protection; Fort Langley repelled at least one Euclataws attack. But back to the K'omoks, in the wake of the b.s. over the name I'm thinking separate articles for Island and Mainland groups are needed partly because of the different history; and so Comox people becomes Comox peoples and there'd be a Sathloot page and a Tla A'min page (all three mainland groups were once one group, before colonization; the three names refer to where they lived (Homalco/Homathko the Klahoose in Toba Inlet, the Sliammon on the Malaspina Peninsula). There may be a battle to name those Island Comox and Mainland Comox, but we'll see. Somewhere on BC Archives I saw a really cool pic of the old K'omox Cemetery in Comox, I'll try to find it again; the style is a mix of Salishan/Georgia Straight/Fraser carving styles and the northern influences brought into the area by the Lekwiltok; very unusual and not typical of totem poles as you normally think of the style.Skookum1 (talk) 16:21, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

PS hope that wasn't TLDR which I hear a lot from people who can't stand reading lengthy passages, and who don't learn anything about the subject at hand because they won't listen; remedial reading for Wikipedians is called for; I speed type, and speed read, so given I obviously have a pool of knowledge I try and lay it out completely; this gets called a "rant" or a sign that I'm "irrational" and more. Quite tiresome LOL. Merhaba, good night.Skookum1 (talk) 16:21, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Lots from that history page of theirs could be put on the people(s) page; more later (into the article).Skookum1 (talk) 16:26, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Your talk page is around 300k and I'm having trouble loading it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:02, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll try, I've never done it myself before, others have done it for me.Skookum1 (talk) 02:04, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

And re Comox people and various others like it now at RM, please read at least the closer's comments on Talk:St'at'imc#Requested move if not the whole RM; the closers at the parallel at RMs made no comments, just "moved" (Ktunaxa, which Kwami had speedied to Kutenai people, Secwepemc, which he'd moved to Shuswap people, Nlaka'pamux which he'd moved to Thompson people, Tsilhqot'in, which he'd moved to Chilcotin people; Dakelh was only recently moved back to its original title, authored by the presiding expert in that field User:Billposer, Kwami had moved it to Carrier people which is ethnographically incorrect, which he should have known had he had actually researched the title and its prevalent usage and greater accuracy.Skookum1 (talk) 02:16, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Would you like auto archiving set up for this page? --_nonsense ferret 02:18, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes please; at this point I don't know in what time increments, maybe until 3 months ago for what is there now? Thanks.Skookum1 (talk) 02:27, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

I've set that up for you, it should archive anything older than 90 days, the archive bot doesn't run immediately, but it should happen in a number of hours. If you wish to change the parameters you can read more about the settings here --_nonsense ferret 02:37, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Skookum1, there's a few dabs being created, which aren't very conformant to the style guide WP:MOSDAB, including the primary topic. Not sure if this is from AfC, but may be worth fixing them at creation. Good to see new dabs being created, regards Widefox; talk 00:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Or just stop the editor who went and made huge numbers of them because he and NCL he wrote say that language is a primary topic equal to the people who speak it, which is rubbish to anybody but a linguistics groupie. Well, too late to stop him, he's already done thousands, and is now trying to use procedural complaints to shut down RMs to have debates on guidelines that already exists but which he and the club from NCL ignored. And redirects back to current title containing unnecessary title-additions to "distinguish" from the supposed primarytopic equivalence of the languages....even when there isn't one. In some cases "two and a half dabs" were created, e.g. Gitxsan people/Gitxsan Nation/Gitsxan language, or Mi'kmaq people/Mi'kmaq language/Mi'kmaq hieroglyphic writing .....TWODABS should be amended because of games like this (those were both originally titles Gitxsan and Mi'kmaq as the people are the primary topic in the real world. The interests of readers should come before those of specialists, says right in TITLE, but the specialists are claiming the volume of output in their field outweighs media and whatever other sources.... anyways 'tweren't me who made those.....maybe one or two long ago but no longer....and I strongly believe UNDAB should be RfC'd because it needs to become policy; the NCL crowd are trying to discredit citing it because it's only an essay.Skookum1 (talk) 02:05, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Skookum1,

You need a break. Take this as a gift. Enjoy a couple of days away from Wikipedia.

In technical terms, I've blocked you for 48 hours, but let's not put an officious label on it.

Best wishes – Fayenatic London 08:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Just wondering.... I wrote a lot of term papers in that cabin, back before it was hip. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:15, 27 March 2014 (UTC)