Talk:British Columbia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Canada / British Columbia / Geography (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Geography of Canada.
 
WikiProject Geography  
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.7 (Rated C-class)
WikiProject iconThis article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
Checklist icon
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article is within of subsequent release version of Geography.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.7 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.

French, why?[edit]

BC is not part of Francophone Canada and French is only spoken by a small number of people in BC. It also has no official status. Should it be removed?--92.40.253.176 (talk) 15:43, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Punjabi also appears. 92.40.253.176 does not mention Punjabi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.169.110.150 (talk) 11:38, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Removed it, clearly just qb nationalist silliness that has no place in the article. --60.255.0.19 (talk) 15:33, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

It's not Quebecois "nationalist silliness" to provide a province's name in both official languages. Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island all provide the French version of their names in their articles' respective introductory paragraphs - despite their small Francophone populations - because their names in English and French differ; British Columbia's article should match this precedent. Restored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.238.235.233 (talk) 05:10, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Technically, none of the Western provinces do because the spelling is the same in English and French. I'm not opposed to its inclusion though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:25, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on British Columbia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:14, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

2018 population numbers[edit]

Where is the population of 4,991,687 coming from? I do not see a WP:RS for this value. It would be good to know if it's an estimate or an actual count (not likely since it wasn't a census year). Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:51, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz and Alex of Canada: Alex of Canada has added estimated population numbers to the demographic sections of all the provinces, and the number appears to have been copied from the estimated population listed in the infobox. My concern is that the estimated population number has been added to charts intended for a non-estimated census number (for example, at Nova Scotia, one of the chart parameters is a "five year % change"). I have reverted the edits, noting in the edit summary that "population" and "estimated population" are not the same thing. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:09, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Magnolia677 is totally onside on this. We cannot mix actual population counts and estimates in the historical population charts. It is one or the other, not a mix of two populationmethodologies. I trust the above and this will discourage what is evolving to an edit war on several articles. Hwy43 (talk) 18:59, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Climate section written like advertisement[edit]

To Joeyconnick: I find it frustrating that a lot of the climate section is written like an advertisement. The advertisement-style language is not removed, but a couple parts I wrote was removed when you could have just fixed the citation, when in reality it just doesn't fit what you wanted to paint the climate as and you're just editing to push your own agenda. I can't help but think this is written not only for tourism, but to make it even harder to afford a home by increasing the amount of people moving to BC from other provinces. Thanks for not completely removing everything though, but I'm onto you. So are you in the tourism industry or real estate? Sorry if I'm assuming something that is wrong, which I hope I am. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctorchia87 (talkcontribs) 23:38, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

@Ctorchia87: Huh? I assume you mean this edit and this one? In both cases, you made changes either without explanation or without a source to back up those changes. It's not on me (or any other editor here) to find sources to back up your edits. That's ridiculous.
The rest of your comments aren't worthy of a response, other than to point you to WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL. —Joeyconnick (talk) 02:24, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
@Joeyconnick: You chose to delete it instead of adding a Citation Needed, implying you find the statement dubious or unhelpful. The second change, about towns with high elevation typically being colder, is much more reasonable from looking at the climate normals I cited than some other people's statements here that do not even have citations, for example the one about the coast wind chills being -17 "for a couple mornings" which you left intact. (For which I added a citation needed.) Plus the section sounds like an advertisement so that needs some serious attention. Readers deserve better. Ctorchia87 (talk) 02:00, 30 June 2019 (UTC)