Template:VP Participate

This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Vancouver This page is within the scope of WikiProject Vancouver, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada and the surrounding metropolitan area 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.VancouverWikipedia:WikiProject VancouverTemplate:WikiProject VancouverVancouver Canada: British Columbia / Communities Canada portal WikiProject Canada Canada notice board This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada articles 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related This page is supported by WikiProject British Columbia. This page is supported by WikiProject Canadian communities.

Template:Werdnabot

Archives

2006– Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov Feb 2007 Mar 2007– Current

Talk:List of Vancouver SkyTrain stations.Thx.--Keefer4 07:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I just noticed above User:Selmo's merge proposal to one list, which I assume was this one. I actually think the articles are, for the most part well-written and relevant. And there's precedent such as the individual station articles linked from: List of London Underground stations and List of New York City Subway stations as well as in Canada: List of Toronto Transit Commission stations. Based on this, therefore I oppose the merge and advocate the simplification of the incomplete list as it currently stands. Thx--Keefer4 07:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per request here is the link for the You know you're a Vancouverite when... essay I wrote. Mkdw^talk 09:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has been proposed to change 'Category:Vancouver streets' to 'Category:Vancouver streets and squares'. If anyone's interested in weighing in on the matter, the discussion will probably be closed soon, and can be found here. Bobanny 00:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The change has been approved, albeit narrowly and without regard to North American precedent on the matter. Some of the same types now want to merge the subcategory Category:Streets in Vancouver which falls under Category:Streets and squares in Vancouver, which seems plain silly. You can provide feedback, here.--Keefer4 02:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I came across this orphaned article. I'm generally more of an inclusionist than deletionist, but besides being a very stubby orphan, I don't buy the premise of the article, that these two places are beginning to form a larger metropolitan area. Anyone else have thoughts? My instinct is to nominate it for deletion. Bobanny 01:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can't argue with some of the sentiment in this article. However, I've only heard this type of association made in a vague context or reference to the growth of the respective regions in contemporary literature. Even with population growth perhaps spurring a select few people to call it an urban area, the title of the article implies the entire island and Lower Mainland as being two urban areas, which is preposterous. Yup, all those latte swilling commuters from Holberg to Chilliwack ;)... As it stands, a definite delete.--Keefer4 02:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Almost forgot about this. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lower Mainland-Vancouver Island. bobanny 07:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Qxz created this animated ad banner for wikiproject Vancouver.

--Canadianshoper 01:16, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hah! Where should we put it. Probably can't put it here :p AQu01rius (User • Talk) 03:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The userpage is the purpose! --Canadianshoper 04:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or Kitsilano Boys Band, I'm not sure of the official spelling.

Oh! OK, great! post follows anyway.Skookum1 08:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC) OK, just had a look at it and added the Vancouver project template to it; needs expansion, nominate for move to expansion list overleaf.Skookum1 08:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(original post continues:) I didn't see an article requests section here like on the BC project so am placing this here; this occurred to me while pondering a Kitsilano disambig page, because of the native name Qhahtsahlano-as-Kitsilano, with Kitsilano Beach, Kitsilano High School, and other institutional or infrastructure items. I see the Kitsilano Showboat has a section on the Kitsilano page, but I think there's enough there for that to be its own article; who built it, famous names that have played there, "institutions" that have played there (the Boys Band, but it's notable for all the local dance and theatre groups from within the community); same idea as Malkin Bowl having a page, which I hope it does by now. The Boys Band have a long history and the bio of its founder/leader is interesting, though I've forgotten the details of what I'd heard. There's also the British Columbia Beefeater Band ( originally called the Vancouver Junior Band which was formed in the early 1950's by Gordon Olsen) another major brass-band institution, in a city which once had many, but these were the best (other than HMS Naden, who are still around though a shadow of their one-time marching strength; not sure of the quality of the police brass band these days...think they're more into pipes...). Just outside the GVRD there used to be the St. Mary' Indian Drum and Bugle Corps wich was an amazing show, and there might have been another such unit in Chilliwack; now defunct both of them but once long-time musical institutions, and the pride of the native kids of the time; the sound of massed glockenspeils and cornets is a totally unique experience, makes bagpipes seem tame by comparison and way more fun, too. There's another couple of youth outfits that are notable in Vancouver/regional history; I'll see what I can remember another time; in the meantime:

• New Westminster Philharmonic Orchestra; or is the Vancouver Philharmonic Orchestra and the New Westminster Symphony Orchestra; there used to be two, something tells me they merged; I'll look into it; this and other regional orchestras in BC (Prince George Symphony Orchestra, Kelowna, Kamloops have their own too, I believe, as also Comox/Courtenay maybe, eg.) should probably get articles, no?
• Vancouver Youth Orchestra - I think that's what it's called, the local branch plant of the National Youth Orchestra (or National Youth Orchestra of Canada as the titlehas to be because the main one is the National Youth Orchestra of Great Britain). Either that or an article of Regional Orchestras in British Columbia or List of symphony orchestras in British Columbia maybe, but the list implies separate articles where the not-list title isn't meant to, if not desired. Most are modern inventions so there's not a lot of history there; not so with the Vancouver Philharmonic and the New West Orchestra (as also the Royal City Musical Society), they've been around a long time and have article-weighty stuff behind them, even though they're still amateur orchestras and not funded, or even with full roster, as with the VSO an the CBC orch and other chamber orchs. It's a pity, i.e. that New West - which prides itself on its high-society past - doesn't have an orchestra, or a venue for it, as I'm pretty sure they've had an orchestra for longer than Vancouver has; the VSO used to be the house orchestra in the old Capitol Theatre (Vancouver), in the '20s; but when a formal orchestra was first organized, i.e. not as a pack of sidemen for opera, vaudeville or theatre/dance, I'm not sure; when New West's was in its heyday I'm also not sure, but as with other things to do with the Royal City there's a whole lost time/world and urbane sophistication in New West - almost more like Victoria than Vancouver; the Philharmonic, as its name implies ("love of music"), is a volunteer/amateur orchestra and may not be connected to that history, however.Skookum1 08:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although I am not a member of WikiProject Vancouver (and have no affliliation with Vancouver), I would like to state a problem universial to all Skytrain station articles.

The section regarding neighbouring stations in all those articles are called "The next station is...". This is very strange. According to WP:HEAD, "heading titles should be nouns or noun phrases". See:

• Burrard Station
• Lougheed Town Centre Station
• Commercial Drive Station
• New Westminster Station
• Waterfront Station

I think it would be better for that section to be renamed something else. --:Raphaelmak: [talk] [contribs] 14:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can explain why that would be happening on the articles. That's the phrase used on the SkyTrain when approaching a new station. Kaiser matias 20:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see, but it probably puts other people who visit those articles and do not know this fact in doubt.--:Raphaelmak: [talk] [contribs] 03:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't for you, or anyone else that I know of, yet. I do see your point, though. --Keefer | Talk 03:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any meet ups for WikiProject Vancouver? AQu01rius (User • Talk) 03:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I heard one was held last year, but nothing else has popped up.--Canadianshoper 05:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the closest anyone has come lately were some interviews done by a Courier journalist. Mkdw^talk 06:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was gonna talk to that journalist but then I had no time. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 17:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was an email list set up for that purpose somewhere, but it was before the project was renovated and I'm not sure it still exists. bobanny 18:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note that this article has been subject to POV-warring and concerns over biography of living persons issues have come-up. Currently it's protected and being addressed at biography of living persons noticeboard. Perhaps if more people add it to their watchlist, the subject's concerns over libelous content could be alleviated and it could be unprotected. bobanny 18:21, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I spent part of today shooting a few pictures out at Deas Island, which is one of the areas that are on the requested photos list to flesh out the Commons gallery. So, once I've downloaded and processed them, does anyone know where the best place to put them would be? Are there some up on Commons already I could add these ones to? I just started an account over there, so I'm good on that end, just need some ideas on where to put things. Thanks! Tony Fox (arf!) 01:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just be sure to add them to the Category:Vancouver, or whatever relevant sub-cat so others can find them. The photo collection over there is growing pretty large, definitely a good thing. bobanny 01:17, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bigger by five now! I should add a couple of others that I uploaded here, now that I know what I'm doing. Tony Fox (arf!) 02:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I proposed the merger there and want you guys to know so that I won't damage someone's work. Thanks. --Futurano 20:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested to know that the AfD gang is going after Richmond elementary schools, and others in BC. People voting for deletion naturally have no connection with Canada. There is currently a process on at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Anderson Elementary School, and several others have been deleted without warning. One of them managed to amend Template:RichmondBCSchools to remove all elementary schools, thus concealing his efforts. Hope you can help. Eclecticology 22:45, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well the WikiProject Vancouver made the front page of the Vancouver Courier on Wednesday, May 30, 2007 in an article named, The Wiki Way. Thought I'd post it for you all. Mkdw^talk 21:53, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Portal:Vancouver is undergoing a featured portal review. Unless someone decides to update the portal, this month and next month, it will lose its featured status. Mkdw^talk 22:26, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! The article for the Sam Kee Building both makes a claim which is dubious (that it is the narrowest commercial building in the world) and provides a statistic which is clearly contradicted by the photo associated with the article. It appears that someone is claiming that at its narrowest the Sam Kee Building is only 4' 11" wide while it appears to be appx. 20' wide in the photo.

Is there anybody on the ground in VC who can (a) clarify the building's claim to fame and (b) clarify the actual stats associated with it and (c) possibly contribute photos that are more informative? Thanks much! --AStanhope 23:13, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've been by the building many times, and I believe the claim is true. It is deceptive when you see the building, as it's attached to another building. If I get a chance tomorrow I'll drop by and see if I can get an alternate picture.--Bookandcoffee 08:35, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A five second google search indicates through several sources that it's in the Guiness Book of World Records as the world's narrowest building. At least a couple of the refs seem to be very legitimate and cite-able. Anchoress 08:54, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, this reference at the City of Vancouver site should suffice. Anchoress 08:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's got Ripley's and Guinness Book stuff posted at the building. I've done a little googling on this before, but some clarification would help, specifically, which part measures 4'11? There's a building in the US that was claiming to be skinnier, the Skinny Building I think it's called, but it's hard to tell if they have a valid claim without this info. bobanny 22:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Hey guys, we need some new content for the Portal Vancouver. Ideas for upcoming Showcase articles, pictures, and biographies. Some new Did You Knows... would also help. Any suggestions? Mkdw^talk 20:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that WikiProject Vancouver rename itself as WikiProject Metro Vancouver. Why? The use of the name and the flag promote the idea that we're focused just on the city limits. However, the project scope is actually the surrounding region. Switching would also align us with the GVRD which is changing its name to Metro Vancouver. The change would make work-in-Vancouver, live-in-suburb Wikipedians feel more at home and encourage more collaboration on topics in the surrounding area. What do you think? Canuckle 23:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Maybe we should use the Metro Vancouver flag as well. --Canadianshoper 19:18, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The change would be appropriate, even if the name isn't official yet. (FYI, I've had to move the GVRD article back to its proper name as it was prematurely moved. The change still requires provincial approval, and wouldn't be official until September anyways.) --Ckatz^chat_spy 20:47, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. It's a little confusing the way it is now. There should also be a separate City of Vancouver article, not to replicate Vancouver, but just to put it on the same footing as other metro cities.bobanny 22:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree. Let's not pretend that one has to live in *Metro* Vancouver to be a part of this project. I don't live in Vancouver or Metro Vancouver, but I love Vancouver and spend as much time as I can there. Vancouver is great. Now, I like Burnaby... I even hang out in Surrey, Langley and (lord love me) Richmond sometimes. Vancouver is the thing though. It is the centre. A place to go. A state of mind. "Metro Vancouver" is a brand—and it excludes me. Sunray (talk) 13:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also disagree. When you look at a map you see Vancouver. Not Metro Vancouver, not the City of Vancouver & surround areas. When it was the GVRD, nobody really called it that. It was simply a local political term. London is made up of hundreds of 'townships' and the same with many other large cities. Take a look at New York. The fact remains that to everyone else in the world it's Vancouver and I believe it will most likely stay that way. Mkdw^talk 15:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This Sun article might be of interest for those concerned with COI issues, and it's kind of amusing. bobanny 22:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Imperial Hotel Management College in Vancouver, BC has been nominated for deletion. Any interested editors should contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imperial Hotel Management College Luke! 23:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another template for deletion by the same user arguing that templates inside templates are not good. See: the discussion--JForget 19:02, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Selkirk Annex (via WP:PROD on 7 December 2007) Deleted

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 15:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:26, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that Statistics Canada updated in 2006. Are the demographics old or am I wrong? –thedemonhog talk • edits 20:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The 2006 census results are being released in phases. The first release (March 13, 2007) gave population and dwelling counts, the second release (July 17) gave Age and sex cohorts, the third (September 12) gave households, dwelling, and marital characteristics. The fourth release will occur on Tuesday (Dec 4) on languages, citizenship, and migration. The stats and updates are all here. --maclean 22:02, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Genetrack Biolabs (via WP:PROD on 3 January 2008)

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

class=notpageimage|

Location of Barnston Island in Metro Vancouver

{{Location map Vancouver}} will add a map of Metro Vancouver with a dot placed automatically using geo coordinates. The following code will produce the map at right. --Qyd (talk) 19:32, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{Location map
|Vancouver
|lon_dir    = W    
|lat_dir    = N
|lat_deg    = 49
|lat_min    = 11
|lat_sec    = 38
|lon_deg    = 122
|lon_min    = 42
|lon_sec    = 11
|caption    = Location of Barnston Island in [[Metro Vancouver]]
|width      = 220
}}

• This template has been renamed to {{Location map Canada Vancouver}}. The original name is now a redirect. RedWolf (talk) 17:51, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Vancouver neighbourhoods all have a neighbourhood map with the neighbourhood in red, for instance Kitsilano uses the image Image:Vancouver_Kitsilano.jpg.

I have developed a very crude template which puts clickable "X"s onto this map. The user can hover over the "X" to see the link to other neighbourhood articles (works especially nicely with popups) and click the "X" to go to the associated article.

I have placed the template at User:Franamax/Test2 and an example of its use at User:Franamax/Test3 (with just four badly placed "X"s).

I propose we use this template for all Vancouver neighbourhood articles. I'd like comments here before fully developing the template, if others feel it won't be useful, I won't go any further. Franamax (talk) 20:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• What would be the point of markable x's on neighbourhood maps; or would these be for specific sites as located within those neighbourhoods. Also, I think in the long run, the simple location maps won't be enough; eventually a street-grid map of just the area; even Kitsilano has subneighbourhoods, some quasi-official like Arbutus Ridge, Alma, West Broadway (meaning beyond Arbutus rather than as the street per se), Kits Point, Point Grey Road (as a neighbourhood) and so on....the boundary shown here is also the official bureaucratized one; to me Kits starts at Fir/Granville, not at Burrard; as with the {{tl:Historical geographic regions of British Columbia}} there's a big difference between traditional areas and conventionalized/officialized ones. Fuzzy boundaries I like better, but make crappier maps unless someone's a reallly good artist ;-) - but I do recommend we find a usable Vancouver street grid that neighbourhood-localized maps can be made, showing parks, buildings/businesses with articles etc.Skookum1 (talk) 01:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BC

AB

SK

MB

ON

QC

NB

PE

NS

NL

YT

NT

NU

• I like the idea. It provides context on where the neighbourhood exists in Vancouver. The Metro Vancouver article uses something similar in the info box. --maclean 04:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• And the provincial Wikiprojects use this image at the right maclean 09:26, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think I'll go ahead and see what happens. Maclean, thanks for the examples, given the size of the map I'm working with, I think I'll be stuck just using an "X", but at least it will allow for spatial navigation.

Skookum, the point of the X's is not for intra-neighbourhood navigation, it's more of a "what's around here?" thing, so the user can go to the article of the n-hood next door. You're right that a map of the neighbourhood itself would be nice. However, in order to be legible, it would probably need to be fairly large, thus best off near the bottom. I wouldn't mind having a shot at creating such a map for Kits, if you want, make a section in Talk:Kitsilano with some of the notable streets and features you think should be shown and linked. Franamax (talk) 20:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've finished the basic template and will show it below. I've also made some alternatives, one with some different characters for the clickables, another with (badly-placed) abbreviations for the neighbourhoods. None of them look particularly elegant, but the "X" version is IMO the best one. Comments? Please let me know soonest so I can get this disruption off this page! Franamax (talk) 04:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

See WT:TWP#Vancouver SkyTrain - mass move. Simply south (talk) 13:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like this was deleted. Does anyone want to start a new group? It's about time we had a meetup, especially to celebrate the accomplishments of our colleagues at UBC. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 04:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I live in the north but I'll be in Vancouver on May 5, 23-24. I can attend if there is a get-together then. --maclean 05:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a venue and a date in mind? Mkdw^talk 06:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Conversation continued here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Vancouver/Meetup 2008. I hope it will be well-attended! Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 07:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey everyone. It's been awhile since our last major WikiProject collaboration and reorganization. Perhaps now is a good time to do some house cleaning and see if people are up for another challenge.

1. Activity. I recommend an attendance is done on the membership list to see who is currently around and active. I can do this.
2. Plans for a new structure. We should talk about the WikiProject's mandate and what we would like to encompass as well as discuss any changes we'd like to make.
3. Discuss and introduce any other ideas.

Your thoughts? Mkdw^talk 07:25, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The 2010 Olympics are going to be Vancouver's next major event. I'm positive its Wikipedia article will soon be gaining some international attention. I think it would be a great long term collaboration piece. The article could already be quite substantial. We will face a few challenges:

1. The article will not be finished until well after the Olympics.

We will have much to write about in the mean time such as the bid, development plans, affects, pros and cons, protests, major political issues. Plenty to be done and set up for when the time comes.

1. Writers and editors have been criticized in the past on other international-Canadian related articles for showing a bias. We all remember Hollywood North.

I strongly believe in unbiased writing. I think if we make a genuine effort to write the facts we won't have a problem.

1. Finding enough active participants.

There most likely will be enough people interested.

Mkdw^talk 07:25, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I won't be around, just dropped by about the following section, but just wanted to advise/remind that the 2010 pages are going to have Olympics p.r. and other consultants going over it with a finetooth comb - "information/media management" you can get degrees in now, and they'll be busy; not always as obviously cheesy as some of the edits to Whistler, British Columbia and related articles, but the p.r. machine will get rolling soon. I think in terms of post-Olympics writing it'll be easier because you['ll have editors from outside here helping cover the events/athletes etc. I'd venture "your" first priority is the venues articles...."your" because I live in Halifax for now, despite mucking about in BC and PacNW history/geography articles, and because if I'm in Wiki at all I've already got too much to do.....anyway I'd recommend a tight POV watch...and also "brochure-style/cheesiness" watch...and be careful with their friggin' logo copyrights ;-).Skookum1 (talk) 14:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also people coming here, physically ("here" being an abstraction for me considering where I am right now....) and also webwise, are going to be looking things up about the city a lot, not so much about the venues etc (ticket holders won't need us, they['ll have their guidebooks or whatever); so missing parks articles (see below) adn the like, maybe neighbourhood write-ups and - ??? - are gonna maybe get a lot of hits. Trick is to not think like a Vancouverite...i.e. never take it for granted they know what you're talking about....Skookum1 (talk) 14:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was just tidying up senakw a bit and disco vered Vanier Park doesn't yet have an article. Not even a stub....I'd guess or hope that the Planetarium/Museum, VancConservatory of Music, Van Archives, Coast Guard station and Maritime Museum would have their own entries; just surprised me but I see there's not that many articles at all in Category:Parks in Vancouver so I guess Vanier's just one among many unwritten; it's just kinda high-profile, given its location and all, and the features in it....(and waht it was, i.e. senakw)Skookum1 (talk) 14:19, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

K, I started on it, still could use some more work, like images and stuff. OlEnglish (talk) 23:38, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think these could do with a bit of clarification. I was looking at Vancouver International Airport#South terminal and noticed that several of the operators are float planes but it's not stated in the article and probabably should be. Then at the water airport it says planes can be transferred to the land airport. So can float planes land at both airports and/or does the south terminal serve both airports? CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 04:00, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Willingdon Secondary School is a weird article. As far as I know, it's not a public school; it's some kind of youth custody centre across from BCIT. SD41 has one broken link for it on their website; otherwise it pretends it doesn't exist. As it stands right now, the article is misleading. Carson 21:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vancouver Meetup Please come to an informal gathering of Vancouver Wikipedians, Monday, May 5 at 6:30 pm. It will be at Benny's Bagels, 2505 West Broadway. We'd love to see you there, and please invite others! Watch the Vancouver Meetup page for details. This box: view • talk •

I don't know if their is much work being done of the current elections race, but this article could use some help. It's written with a pro-allan POV and could use some help. I just ran across it and thought I would bring it to the attention of the group for anyone interested. I fixed up a few things for now, but I'm really not familar with writing politicians biography's. Thanks! OldManRivers (talk) 07:12, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This Ministry of Tourism region showed up in Category:Regions of Canada and is inappropriate as a title, except as a redirect to existing geographic articles; see reasons on the �AFd template/talkpage..Skookum1 (talk) 16:18, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unless a Category:British Columbia Ministry of Tourism marketing regions is a worthwhile undertaking ;-| Skookum1 (talk) 16:20, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just happened to find this article in the "West End" section of the {{VancouverNeighbourhoods}} template and was shocked by its contents; this is a fictional, promotional neighbourhood, a usage not used by anyone but Korean promoters/ethnic loyalists, as part of hte quest to create a Koreatown. See Talk:Koreatown, Vancouver as to why this needs a speedy delete; a retitling to Koreatown, Coquitlam I could almost deal with but it's not a usage that non-Korean residents or busiensses in that area see themselves as. I say delete it, or at least trim its promotional/fictional contents. It's bunk.Skookum1 (talk) 13:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There is an apparent, obvious presence of Korean investment along parts of Robson street, but that in itself does not create a "Koreatown" in Vancouver. Koreans do not make up the majority of the business (not even close!), Korean settlement is virtually non-existent, and there is nothing resembling a Korean cultural environment. Some of this article might be incorporated in an article on "Koreans in Metro Vancouver"- or something like that- but otherwise the suggestion of a distinct Koratown is entirely fictional. Let's delete it. Dionix (talk) 18:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

24 hours yet, or just go ahead and add the "delete" tag? I don't see a reason, also, why "Koreans in Greater Vancouver" has any merit as an encylopedia article, certainly not "ahead of" many more signfiicant, historical ethnic communities, e.g. the Dutch and Mennonites. "Koreatown" also, btw, was the proposed name, IIRC, of the stripmall in Surrey where the Korean owners tried to evict all the non-Korean owners. Mind you, I also have problems with calling anything but Chinatown "Chinatown", which in wiki has come to mean anywhere with a concentration of Chinese-only businesses/social life, i.e. newly-minted Chiense commercial areas are not Chinatowns, no more than the Douglas Road corridor is "Norwaytown" or Ballard in Seattle is "Swedish town". What I mean isx that in my view, "New Chiantowns" and invented promotional concepts like Koreatown are "cultural imperialism" and meant to displace existing cultures/economies...also a form of wilfull ethnic segregation that if non-Asians were doing it, i.e. whites, there'd be screams of racism; in fact, British Properties caught a lot of heat and had to abandon its ethnic profiling; Beijing's sop to Europetown is a farce, but at least it's an actual place, if a bit of a mockery....Skookum1 (talk) 18:25, 15 July 2008 (UTC):::Huh, not hte right link but mayb it's Europe Town, I know it's out there; an assemblage of consumerist temples and fake bits of English/American housing and ersatz Bavarian....Skookum1 (talk) 18:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"...attracts visiting students from Japan and actually has non-Korean residents in the majority, most of whom have no idea the area is called Koreatown". Delete tag please!! Dionix (talk) 17:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the way to delete articles when the deletion is challenged is at AfD. I have no personal opinion as to the result, but the next step is to find out. DGG (talk) 17:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, 1180 articles are assigned to this project, of which 220, or 18.6%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 17:43, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not that hard to compile, would give motivation for article-creation; there's surprisingly few in Category:Parks in Vancouver, given the scale of the parks system. Just an idea.....also List of regional parks in Metro Vancouver (or X Regional District) maybe, although that still doesnt' take in the watersheds (or does it?) and BC Hydro facilities like Buntzen....(or is that Regional Park now?)Skookum1 (talk) 07:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The AFD has begun on this, posting a notice here so we have actual Vancouverites taking part in the AFD. I haven't my responses to the "keep" votes yet but will do so later today; essentially the cites provided by one comment are "circular" - sites which have copied Wiki-based content mentioning this non-existent place, or the site about the two (and two only) businesses which are pushing the branding of Haro & Denman as "Koreatown" (which explains the African, French, Montreal Fried Chicken place; the article actually says the lower part of Robson, which has as many (if not more) Japanese eateries. If there is a Koreatown in Greater Vancouver, it's North Road, not anywhere near the West End.....delete, delete, delete, but it's going to take one of those "proof that something doesn't exist" rationales, because of the gullibility and/or lack of local knowledge of various admins/editors. The creation of neologistic geography in Wiki articles has produced a somewhat large problem - that the other sites like nationmaster and answers.com which mirror Wiki content propagate material/names that aren't actually real, to the point where they're so prevalent on-line that other people think they're valid cites. "Making original research true" by Goebbel's method - "make a lie big enough and loud enough and repeat it often enough, and people will come to believe it." The same method has been used - and I do mean used - by the propagators of terms like Salish Sea.....Skookum1 (talk) 15:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also to comment that the same circular-citations abound for Greektown, Vancouver, which I also have my doubts about its validity; Yes, there's a Bank of Greece at Mackenzie & B'way and "more than the usual concentration of Greek restaurants" (sort of, as there's a hell of a lot of Greek restaurants throughout Greater Vancouver), but the term "Greektown" is not something that residents of that area would identify with; Greek Days yes, and the fact that West Broadway is the closest thing to a Greek cultural enclave - but "Greektown" seems entirely invented/wishful thinking; though at least more substance than Koreatown......if the logic used for Greektown, or even the definition of Chinatown provided on that article, were applied to other groups, then the Douglas Road corridor in Burnaby, from the Scandinavian Community Centre on Sprott through the various ethnic retirement homes along Douglas Road, and a high rate of residency in that area of Canadians of Scandinavian descent, would qualify somethiing like "Nordictown". The Polish Community Hall on Fraser would make "Polishtown" and so on......Central Lonsdale could be "Farsitown" etc......Skookum1 (talk) 15:38, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If one wants, try photographing the Consulate-General of Japan in Vancouver. It is at 800-1177 West Hastings Street. If the consulate has its own building or has markings on the outside, photograph the markings and post them on Diplomatic missions of Japan. If the building is in an office suite and only has its markings in the inside, try going into the facility and photographing the markers of the consulate. Be very careful when photographing diplomatic missions; if the mission is inside of a larger complex, you may need to ask for permission before taking the photograph. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been "in need" for a while, mostly on historical contexts as it relates to a nubmer of things - the Great Fire especially, also the development of uptown as a way for the CPR to monopolize/redirect development from the old downtown (Gastown), and also because lke the West End and Granville, BI (Gastown townsite) it was one of the main land divisions of the early city; it corresponds rougly to the combination of Granville Mall, Downtown South and Yaletown today; boundaries are Hamilton and Hastings to Burrard, and everything between Hamilton and Burrard to the False Creek waterfront...shows on all old maps of the early city.Skookum1 (talk) 15:51, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This very notable hotel is conspicuous by its absence, especially considering hotels that aren't even finished yet have articles.....I don't ahve the resources and am not in Vancouver to photograph it; it was part of the CP chain when it was built, or rather became part of it while it was being built as I think teher were some "problems" with the initial investors and their ties to the Tom Campbell-era City Hall....for many years one of the handful of five-star hotels in the city, ranked with the Georgia and Hotel Van long before any of the new roster of hotels were built, and historically significant as the setting for the all-night party hosted for the Vander Zalms by Tan Yu and reported by Faye Leung, and also for being where Howard Hughes holed up for two years.....Skookum1 (talk) 15:57, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another hotel of note, though of a completely different rating, is teh Wild Duck Inn, whatever it's called now, by the Pitt River Bridge...also the Moody Arms and the like; the old beer-parlour "circuit" before neighbourhood pubs were invented; the Wild Duck and Moody Arms are very old and hoary though; the Wild Duck came up just now in ref to Alvin, British Columbia at hte head of Pitt Lake, see my talkpage if you;'re interested at all. Just noting it here; many of the older valley/suburban hotels "have stories to them", the Wild Duck is one of those....Skookum1 (talk) 23:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if someone who lives in the area of Vancouver could assist us editors over on the Smallville pages. The show is filmed in the Vancouver and surrouding areas (primarily), and I was curious if someone would be able to take some photos of the episode production. It would be really nice to have some free images for the articles. If that's at all possible, then it will be greatly appreciated.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:31, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just made Chehalis Lake and it brought to mind the number of other significant lakes in the Lower Mainland in need of doing; not just in the GVRD, and as a by-the-way I wanted to suggest that Lower Mainland/Fraser Valley-related debates might as well be here, given the interconnectivity and common geography. That aside, here's a list of all lakes I can think of some will overlap with regional or generally provincial park articles, i.e .there may not be a need for separate articles; in cases like Cults Lake I t hink the cmomunity/park shoudl be bfoken off from the physical lake "but" that's not the point here. I'm not sure whether this shoudl be a list, or should be acategory as well - Category:Lakes of British Columbia is going to be huge; in my view it shoudl be broken up by the "traditional countries" - Cariboo, Shusawp, Kootenays etc rather tahn ever using RDs; "if you insist" Category:Lakes in Metro Vancouver could exist as a subcat of Category:Lakes of the Lower mainland, but I think the latter one makes more sense, and will make more sense to readers of the various apges; if they're fgrom BC at least, and if not then they'll learn how BC is "arranged". Here's a list off the top of my headr:

• Hicks Lake
• Kawkawa Lake
• Lake of the Woods (British Columbia) - has another name I'll check, that's not hte BCGNIS name I think
• Ross Lake
• Wahleach Lake (Jones Lake)
• Chilliwack Lake
• Cultus Lake
• Chadsey Lake (Lost Lake)
• Sumas Lake (drained)
• Mill Lake (Abbotsford)
• Chehalis Lake
• Harrison Lake (*Harrison Bay deserves a mention, it's really more of a lake than a by...)
• Hatzic Lake
• Allan Lake
• Davis Lake - pDavis Lake Provincial Park probably (unless it's regional park)
• Silver Lake (Mission
• Connell Lake - Mission's reservoir
• Hoover Lake - smaller reservoir
• Winslow Lake
• Terepocki Lake
• Stave Lake
• Florence Lake (Mission)
• Morgan Lake
• Alouette Lake
• Hayward Lake
• Silvermere Lake
• Whonnock Lake
• Pitt Lake
• Betsy Lake and others in the UBC Research Forst
• Como Lake (British Columbia)
• Coquitlam Lake
• Widgeon Lake
• Buntzen Lake
• Sasamat Lake
• Seymour Lake
• Capilano Lake
• Burnaby Lake
• Deer Lake (Burnaby)
• Trout Lake (Vancouver)
• Beaver Lake (Stanley Park)
• Squint Lake

I think that's it, unless we count Lost Lagoon (fresh or saltwater?). Did I miss any>?Skookum1 (talk) 05:06, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone think that "The next station is..." in pages such as Metrotown Station should be deleted? If you look at London Underground station's articles, e.g. Lambeth North tube station, they don't have such headings. I think we can request bots from Wikipedia:Bot requests to clean it up.

Yeah, I support changing the heading. It's 'cute', obviously in reference to the female voiced announcement on the trains themselves, but cute doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. OlEnglish (talk) 02:57, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wait...what's the reason for the section to be deleted? -- _{signed by} SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24 _{spell my name backwards} on 03:00, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not the entire section, just change the heading title to something more appropriate. Or not have a heading at all would probably be better, but the template can stay. - OlEnglish (talk) 04:24, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

O...didn't read the whole paragraph of your comment. We don't need a bot do to that. I can just do it myself. I'm going to tell WP:TRAINS about this. -- _{signed by} SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24 _{spell my name backwards} on 05:58, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks bud. OlEnglish (talk) 23:32, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- _{signed by} SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24 _{spell my name backwards} on 07:12, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm conducting a new survey since the last was done 3 years ago (an editors lifetime on Wikipedia) at 2009 Vancouver Vs. Vancouver, Washington Survey. Your input would be most appreciated. Mkdw^talk 21:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The portal has been changed to update content automatically for articles, pictures, panoramas quotes, and biographies, so there are no more red wikilinked box sections on the portal. The pictures, biographies, and articles can still be nominated if they are B class or less. FA, A and GA class can be addd automatically into the portal without nomination, IMHO The old format produced the occasional lapse in nominated showcase month articles and images, this new format keeps the portal full, even if editors are busy.

• However....
  • Previously nominated biography Sam Sullivan was not re-added as the article has only a one sentence lead, and I do not know what was put on the portal last time around. Can someone familiar with this bio fix the lead to introduce all sections of a fairly lengthy article? Then the article could be re-added to the portal if so desired.
  • Prviously nominated article Vancouver Canucks was not re-added at this time as the article has a tag which has rated the article as having multiple issues. Is there anyone familiar with this content who could address the tag so the article can plop into the portal if so desired.
  • Previously nominated article Science World at TELUS World of Science was added to the portal as it had been a prior showcase article, however this article is still at start class.
  • Images were all re-added as there are not any featured, quality or valued images of Vancouver that I could find on wikimedia commons or on wikipedia en featured images. The one FA panorama was added in its very own box section though.  :-)

Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 00:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Talk:George_Fowler_Hastings. And to note I tried to BCGNIS-up Hastings, B.I. (now New Brighton Park) but it's not properly listed (I let them know); an article on New Brighton Park could maybe suffice....(see also Talk:New Brighton, British Columbia)Skookum1 (talk) 13:24, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]

		WikiProject Vancouver
		You have been invited to participate in Operation Schadenfreude to restore the article Vancouver back to featured article status.