Jump to content

Talk:Jumbo Glacier, British Columbia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 February 2021 and 17 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gquenville01.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Basic stub, please help

[edit]

I started this, don't really have time to expand it, but it's a blank spot in BC municipalities and skiing articles; not yet a ski resort, doesn't even have buildings yet. Lots of political controversy see here. As many of you know, I took myself out of the loop a couple of years ago so this is a very raw stub and |I've forgotten a lot of templates and formatting and such.....I'll find the muni templates and add the regional skiing template, even though this isn't yet a ski hill; also as it's a municipal article where the ski resort will be privately owned (so far as I know), should the ski business article be different from the municipal one? And Jumbo Glacier should be a glacier article, though like Whistler Mountain and such greatly intertwined with Whistler, British Columbia and Whistler Blackcomb.Skookum1 (talk) 16:43, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've initiated expansion by adding relevant sections suggested by Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian communities/Structure guideline and adding an infobox. I'll add some more content over time, particularly the History section if no one else steps up (see hidden note within the section).

The map within the infobox is actually a map of Invermere's location from its article. I'll leave it to the discretion of other editors on whether a map specific to Jumbo Glacier's location should be created. Hwy43 (talk) 04:06, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]
There's a lot of useful images in that folder, for other articles if not this one. If you grab that whole folder, I'll help find homes for them. The Interior (Talk) 18:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have time today. You could ask over at commons if there is a bulk uploader for flickr. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Commonist would upload them in bulk but I think they you would have to tag them for the flickerbot to check. Just put the {flickrreview} tag under a {CC-by-2.0} licence if that is what he uses on flickr. The bot may detect the licence without it though. I checked the docs on the bot over there http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Flickrreview and it doesn't say whether the bot can detect a licence or not.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:41, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I uploaded File:Kootenays Lake of the Hanging Glacier.jpg that may be in the area. I asked at commons whether there is an easy way to bulk upload the others.--Canoe1967 (talk) 03:19, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
one source about that glacier says it's out Horsethief Creek west of Radium; Jumbo is south of that off another creek, more SW of Invermere. North side of the massif vs south side. The attribution "Kootenay Range" is wrong on your image title; the Kootenay Ranges are in the Rockies on the other side of the Trench; not sure; there's no range-name for that particular area, it's just the Purcells.Skookum1 (talk) 04:29, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Their website uses "Central Purcell Range"....though the range's official name is "mountains" ("range" in official terminology, as used on BC Names and established by geographer S. Holland in Landforms of British Columbia, replaced "mountains" for smaller ranges; and he/they don't use capital-R "range" though e.g. Omineca Ranges or Chilcotin Ranges exist for larger subgroupings of the large groupings labelled "Mountains" like the Purcells and Selkirks, and their parent grouping the Columbia Mountains (which includes the Monashees and Cariboos).....sources that call this the Rockies are very wrong, though the US Selkirks and Percells [sic] are classified as Rockies, as are the Cabinet and Salish Mountains to the south of them across Lake Koocanusa.Skookum1 (talk) 06:01, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, turns out there's at least a view of the Lake of the Hanging Glacier (whatever the lake's real name is...watch the main page's slideshow)] from the four glaciers the resort will have lifts to; not clear if it's in the municipality or not, though; like the bottom end of the Blackcomb Glacier and places like the Overlord Glacier at Whistler, which aren't in the resort, it's maybe outside the muni boundaries.....people CAN ski out via the Spearhead Glacier, but it's not a good idea, you wind up over by Skookumchuck Hot Springs or have a long hike back via Long Goat Creek.....I haven't had time to look at the plans from MoF posted by User:The Interior, maybe this evening (it's afternoon here, I'm on Thai time....Skookum1 (talk) 07:57, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Might be part of the Farnham Group, or just off it. Purcell Wilderness Conservancy Provincial Park and Protected Area is across the creek to the south. One of the photos Canoe found is from that PP, or PPPA in this case. The Interior (Talk) 05:46, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I will have it re-named then. http://toolserver.org/~magnus/ts2/flickr2commons/ is a bulk upload tool but my sys won't let me sign up for a TUSC account for some reason. Does anyone else want to try?--Canoe1967 (talk) 05:11, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Its prominence group is indeed Farnham, which is its "line parent"; the Farnham Group article is as yet unsourced, I'm guessing that comes from bivouac.com or peakbagger.com......"not an official name" though prominence groups are maybe the next-best thing....Purcells is otherwise a very big meta-range, like the Selkirks (most of the Selkirks subdivisions have range-names). Jumbo is definitely not in the park/protected area though maybe the northern part of the Commander Glacier is, I'll have to look that up on BC Parks....The Wilderness Committee, Sierra Club or the Ktunaxa Nation might have pages about the project.....or the East Kootenay Regional District? - of which Jumbo Glacier will be a member municipality (weird because it has no residents....)Skookum1 (talk) 05:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Regional District of East Kootenay site makes no mention of it, not that I can see, could be that it's not going to be part of the RDEK board; it's anomalous in many ways, this might be another....Skookum1 (talk) 06:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh, here's the "master plan" for the development, courtesy of the Min: [1] The Interior (Talk) 06:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weirdly, like all else about this, I just mouse-overed most of the links on that page....they're from the Ministry of Forests, not the Ministry of Municipal Affairs or MoE or even Ministry of Tourism and Culture......MoF is a branch of that new Natural Resources ministry now, so far as I know, though I don't see it mentioned......."expediting development by streamlining the process" etc.....enviro objections can be found on Ktunaxa and NGO links. And in the 6000 comments that were ignored during the EA review......don't mean to stump, but there's nothing un-controversial about this......maybe it should have a "current events" tag on it?Skookum1 (talk) 07:45, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note that ministry is now Forestry, Lands and Natural Resources Operations. Trying to defuse its controversy perhaps. Read some of the links on the resort's page, where on the opening it says it's had FN and envir group supports, then on the one about the Qatmuk declaration p.r.izes it so say they have no credibility; sigh....Skookum1 (talk) 09:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lake of the Hanging Glacier mebbe NOT in the muni

[edit]

According to these PDFs it's not in the muni, if that's the same thing as the "development area"....oddly, Jumbo Glacier won't have lifts on it....which begs the question how do you get back up if you use it?? Photo caption should be amended, or preferably a pic used actually of somewhere IN the muni/development area....most people visiting there will never see this view, which is accessed from Horsethief Creek, the next basin north...nor is the Hanging Glacier skiable by the look of it.....Skookum1 (talk) 17:11, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you're right, thrown off by the resort website. Looks like LoHG will be an attraction though, from what I can see. Hopefully Canoe's email will get a more appropriate image. The master plan has one of the valley and planned townsite that would be ideal ... The Interior (Talk) 21:10, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
How they'll make it an attraction when there's no lift down to it, and it's accessed via a completely different valley anyway, is completely beyond me....and like I said the muni name is deceiving because the Jumbo Glacier itself isn't even in the development area, nor will it be lift-serviced.....maybe there's a Phase II? All the media copy about this has said only "Jumbo" (meaning the mountain), "Jumbo Glacier" was new to me but obviously a marketing pitch built into the brand/ the big glacier is Commander Glacier. A listing of the serviced glaciers prob a good idea, I'll look into it; can't remember if the Blackcomb glaciers of Whistler's little one have their own articles; probably not....Skookum1 (talk) 05:51, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resort input

[edit]

I emailed the resort to see if they wish to provide images under a free licence. I asked them to respond here or by email to me. See Details on licencing to choose a licence. CC-by-3.0 is a very common one. Be aware that the images can be used by anyone for any purpose including commercial. You can insist on 'attribution' though. This can be a name, company, and/or website. See Commons OTRS for details about emailing permission. If you provide a link to the images from a website, then we can deal with upload and you can then send the email. The images need to be uploaded first so OTRS has a file name to tag. 30 days max. before deletion if no permission email is sent.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:39, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Material deleted on controversy?

[edit]

I know there was some material someone added about the ongoing controversy and continued efforts to block this development; wasn't me, and it may have been POV in nature, though it was cited......but now there's very little, only a brief mention that the hearings went through, and no mention at all of the municipal controversy (the extraordinary creation of a municipality with no actual residents......). The result is a POV document, IMO. Whose decision was it to delete that material, rather than tone it down, if needed? I will try to find the edit in question, I just noticed this now......the controversy continues to rage, and the development's own site mentions it and has negative p.r. about it; whose POV is being presented, whose is missing?Skookum1 (talk) 05:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No material was deleted. There was only one sentence in the lead explicitly involving controversy, which was originally contributed by you. I copyedited it, removing subjective POV terms (or to use your words, I "toned it down") such as "highly" and "strongly". What you are seeing is additional content added by The Interior about "grizzly bears and other wildlife" and protests in Victoria in the History section.

And, as for the original "...and unlike other municipalities, has only a mayor and three councillors and no residents" statement, that has been moved to the Government section and now reads as "Despite not yet having any residents, the first council consists of a mayor, Greg Deck, and two councillors, Nancy Hugunin and Steve Ostrander." Hwy43 (talk) 05:42, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm I"m sure I saw something yesterday, maybe it was an IP edit and was reversed by someone before you saw it.....I'll study this later.....Skookum1 (talk) 05:48, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There are no IP edits in the history. I've been through it all. You won't find anything. Hwy43 (talk) 05:55, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
hm must have been hallucinating....long time since I had dreams about wiki-editing LOL must have been something like that....anticipating POV edits from enviro groups that haven't happened yet ;-)Skookum1 (talk) 06:06, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination

[edit]
Great work thanks you guys; btw "councillors" is the Canadian spelling, no matter what your spellchecker says....Skookum1 (talk) 07:27, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well done Skookum1 and Interior, and thanks to Interior for nominating it! Hwy43 (talk) 03:04, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Further expansion

[edit]

Areas for expansion: proposed dev. - a more detailed description of the planned community and facilities. Opposition: the opposition continues, the Ktunaxa have named the region [Qat'Muk] ("Got'Mook"), Scotty Niedermeyer (my favourite player growing up!), Bruce Cockburn, and the NDP have all made statements against it, and also suggesting that investment isn't in place (how they know this, I'm not sure). G&M, G&M. The NDP also aren't happy with the whole incorporation with no people deal. The Interior (Talk) 23:06, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppostion on investment is common at this stage I would think. My dad kicked himself for not buying a 120x120' lot at Whistler in the late 60s for about $C2,000. He was working building Cypress Bowl lifts at the time and decided the money was better spent on a new roof for the house.--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:49, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Burned! I assume the Jumbo lots will be going for a bit more than that. The Interior (Talk) 00:11, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My landlord at Whistler owned all of Alpha Lake and the west side of Hwy 99 including the Husky and Creekside (if that's what they're still called). Not sure the extent of the property but it included the old "Trap" cabin and the Jordan Lodge, which is now the Nita Lake Lodge (1902 and 1904 respectively, both beautiful old log places, now vanished to "progress")....he bought that land in the '60s for 50 cents an acre......when I was living in the Jordan Lodge in '85, townhouse-type city lots on the streets branching south of the road to the train station were going for 450-475k each.....this is all speculatoin, which is why the muni was created, much like how IPP licenses were granted private incorporations with no capital or line of credit; the Haida Gwaii renaming deal carried with it a Haida Nation promise to use their credit to help the Naikun wind project get started; stories like this are legion; land is a commodity, sometimes a "futures"...and this development is no different. what I want to know is if they're going to have 750 workers, will they be citizens? Or will only property owners be citizens? In Whistler if you're Canadian and own property, you vote in TWO municipalities; the long-time-resident working populatoin are considered "transient" and discouraged from voting....sorry to stump; and re Qatmuk have a look on the resort site what's said there, as I already noted above somewhere.Skookum1 (talk) 11:40, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find an article for BC, but List of summer villages in Alberta states that people can vote in two places. It seems that only 'grandfathered' villages have this option. It would be interesting to see if this muni will be have dual vote system, and whether seasonal residents can vote. I haven't heard back from the resort yet. They may not check their web email often and I may ask about it if/when they do respond. When I lived full time and worked in Jasper, Alberta the town was controlled by Parks Canada. I moved out before they got a 'dual governance' in 2001. I was told Jasper always got a hard time from Parks Canada because development of Banff, Alberta was too 'fast and loose'. I doubt Jumbo has a dual vote system yet, and don't know if they will wish one or be allowed one. The BC laws concerning this and Whistler's status should be online somewhere and perhaps material can be added to the Whistler article(s) explaining it.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:28, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I believe under the Municipal Act it's standard across the board; Whistler just has an extraordinary high rate of non-resident property owners......I think it includes corporate owners, many of whom don't actually pay taxes e.g. BC Hydro in Lillooet, for one.Skookum1 (talk) 10:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

trying to find MINFILE cite for mining claim, 1890

[edit]

Having a hard time winnowing MINFILE to find it; here's my latest google, maybe you can refine it some.....somewhere there'll be a detailed history of the active claim....Skookum1 (talk) 06:26, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the details from Boles, et al: Staked Oct 25, 1890. Size was 20.66 acres on Toby Creek. Owner Daniel Corbin. The Interior (Talk) 07:08, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
those details might help narrow the MINFILE search, I just tried a grid around it using the coordinates, noting comes up could be because the mineral claim is no longer extant?Skookum1 (talk) 08:05, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jumbo Glacier, 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After 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 {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 11:52, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jumbo_Glacier,_British_Columbia&oldid=1203146346"