Talk:Lillooet

Intro

I've been the main contributor to this page, and have sought to incorporate material from the original, shorter page into newer material; I'd appreciate advice from Wikipedia specialists on how to get it to conform to style/content guidelines; my own style is rambling but attempts to be thorough; on the other hand because of incorporating previous material there is some repetition, maybe, and some recursive comments that could be combined or condensed. Advice please to mikecleven_at_gmail.comSkookum1 22:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Population

The population figures in the InfoBox are those for the District only. The town, in an informal sense, includes the three main reserves of the Lillooet Tribal Council which abut the town on all sides, and in a practical sense also includes the population of the Fountain Indian Reserve, about 12 km up Hwy 99, although that place will have its own entry anyway, as will the reserves. I'll figure out the totals and put the real-town total in the text, rather than the infobox; above and beyond the reserve populations there are unincorporated populations down the West Side Road (Texas Creek et al) and up the lower Bridge River and otherwise outside the district boundaries and the immediate vicinity of town.Skookum1 21:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Postscript: I've realized since I wrote the previous paragraph that this is also the case in any number of BC communities, especially (in the southern part of the province) the Fraser Canyon towns but also many of the Island towns; and Chilliwack and Mission and ?? So the infoboxes should probably carry something like a "greater area/agglomeration" figure as well as the official municipal population; theoretically in Lillooet's case this would be the population of the district, the Lillooet, Cayoose Creek/Papshilqua and Xwisten Reserves, plus the electoral areas encompassing at least the Texas Creek Road (up West Pavilion and up Yalakom seem a bit far). Seton and Fountain, though sort of part of the greater town area of Lillooet, are still not part of its population grouping, so they can be left out; and as with the case about Lillooet needing a combined population total, likewise with any number of smaller rural communities like D'Arcy/N'quatqua or Seton/Shalalth. But infoboxes are kind of clutter anyway; I'd rather see maps and images.Skookum1 05:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Spelling of lee/lea

Regarding an earlier discussion: I checked spelling today in Oxford English Dictionary (online). See my talk page; text from OED will be (temporarily) posted there. Ufwuct 03:07, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I noticed Usgnus posted the same, and reset it to "lee". However definitions follow which serve my meaning/intent:

I. 1. a. Protection, shelter, rarely pl. Also in phrases in, under (the) lee (of) both in material and immaterial senses. Also, a resting-place.

2. a. Chiefly Naut. The sheltered side of any object; hence the side (of a ship, the land, an eminence, etc.) that is turned away from the wind. Frequent in beneath, under the lee (of).

Although I note the use of the -ee spelling; but in the meadow section there's also the -ea spelling. Funny that myself I'd think lee was the nautical version, cf leeward. It happens that in the case of the Coast Mountains/Fraser Canyon, the leeward region does have a lot of lea, as in meadowland; part of the same climatic effect. Leeward in Greek is apanemo, the name of the small hotel I stayed at in Akrotiri, Santorini; windiest damned place on the island, despite the name...but I wonder if there's any corroboration, historical or incidental, between where certain meadows are and where the wind-lea is, and what forms it (forest, mountains, hill).Skookum1 07:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

"Only In Lillooet" section considered

For anyone who's been/lived there, they'll recognize this as something of a local expression, as also the name of the annual town celebrations in July, also known as Gold Rush Days on the lillooetbc website. But the reason the expression exists is because of the town's many singularities; just wondering about listing some of them, whether it's the wild white poppy and wild asparagus or the Death Slides and Hanging Tree and Ice Caves, or any of the particular type of town gossip/affairs that can qualify; the comment can be as much cynicism as anything else, of course. What does come to mind, right away, are bits of Lillooet speech - "ooizit" and "kweesht", which I'd thought of adding to Canadian English but seem so specific to Lillooet/Seton/the Canyon and adjoining areas I think they're better put on local pages, since they're not standard Canadian English, nor even standard BC English. Can anyone visiting here thing of other things that locals say that you just don't hear anywhere else?Skookum1 06:46, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Credibility of "notable visitors" section?

Seriously, it seems kind of unencyclopedic. I live in Sitka and we get loads of celebrities and people passing through but it hardly seems notable to stick it on a town or city's encyclopedia entry. Jarfingle 03:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Imagine if NYC had a notable visitors section. --Usgnus 03:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

That section I titled wrong; other than "Dr. Joe Bellows", the others all played a part in Lillooet's history; unlike AC Elliott, none of them ever lived there (except maybe Chartres Brew who I've got to check on). I didn't know what to call such a section; but I guess even the Emily Carr visit's no big deal and Begbie/Douglas/Bushby were here necessarily; Culm-Symour and Boies Penrose were prominent repeat customers of the famed local hunting guides Chief Hunter Jack and W.G. (Bill) Manson. Joe Bellows' spam-mention is, it seems, part of an ongoing hype war between Lytton and Lillooet as to who's "Canada's hot spot".Skookum1 17:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC) Bold text

Climate

There is one item that I think is not accurate. You state that there are places only a short distance from the weather station that only receive 2 inches of precipitation. Is this per year? if so, how do they know if its a few hundred meters away from a weather station? Also, Environment Canada (who keeps such records), does not have any place in all of Canada that has only received 2 inches in the driest of years. 24.84.168.24 (talk) 22:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)Jdog

Environment Canada is also notorious for mis-placing recording stations; Vancouver's is on Sea Island and its measurements don't bear any resemblance at all to downtown Vancouver's; similarly Victoria's is at Pat Bay, i.e. Victoria Int'l, 20 miles away. So where Lillooet's recording station is will make a difference; I know it's an issue in the "hot spot" wars, as Lillooet hot-spotters maintain their measuring station isn't in the potentially hottest location, wherever that might be adjudged to be. But you know, as far as a source for the 2 inches thing, that's a good question; it's a famous bit of old local lore than I rephrased there, and in the back of my mind I wondered how they knew; I have a geographer buddy who lives up there so maybe he can come up with specs; somewhere out there, even, I think there's a minor study of the Lillooet-area microclimates. My guess is that, for one thing, the current Environment Canada weather-station (hmm, have to think where it is, behind the old courthouse maybe) hasn't been the only rain-measuring system in town; "amateur" sites might include some of hte ranches, or agriculturalist's study's commissioned by ranchers, e.g. Riverlands in East Lillooet, or before Environment Canada came along the recording station could have been somewhere else, like the Phair place (which I think was out towards T-Bird, not sure). Actually, a corollary to the local lore, a joke, is that in Lillooet one inch of rain means the drops on the ground are one inch apart (before drying), two inches of rain is when they're two inches apart (i.e. even drier). it's definitely wetter than it used to be; my friend may have files on the historical records and any former recording stations (I know the Forestry yard behind the Reynolds had their own) and maybe specifics on where the near-zero rainfall is, or used to be. I don't know if you're aware of the area, but within 10km of downtown you're in coastal-type forest, albeit an inland fringe of it; by the time you hit the banks of the Fraser, you're lucky to get cactus to grow in some spots; that's right below town. Something in the back of my head says something about measurements relative to VLA Flats, which was Chinatown before WWII and agricultural; there may have been reason to have a measuring station there (for agriculture). Anyway, I promise to try and find it; it may be myth, but I've been downtown when the streets are wet but by the time you get to the bridge everything is dry and hand't been rained on; similarly the winds at hte Bridge River Rapids are supposed to be the driest on the Fraser, which is why the wind-dried salmon made there is the highest-quality (I know, I have to cite that too...).Skookum1 (talk) 22:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, got an answer, not quite what I wanted, i.e. some corroboration for the bit of old lore; which may be just bar lore, I'm thinking it's either one of my two former landladies or my old crewboss...somewhere anyway, maybe even in Mrs. Edwards, who I've got on hand in TIF scans and will look over later. My friend got back to me with this reply:

Rainfall...records kept by 'hobby' meteorologists, then BCFS, Hydro, possibly PGE/BCR, the hatchery on Seton River etc. etc. A site with an annual average fall of anything like 2" is totally unreal, although the pattern can and does wander from site to site.

The hatchery has, or had, a weather station, it's in old photos of it, and like I said the old MoF/BCFS yard by the Reynolds/train station, probably in the old days at Phair's store (he was Government Agent), there might be reasons for Hydro to keep readings at the Lillooet Powerhouse. Hobby meteorologists would include farmers, in the modern era that would be the ginseng farms on the east bank of the river; some of those have websites with maybe weather data, as is the case with some vinyard sites; someone I know knows about that so another place to ask for data. I think in Brian Hayden's A Complex Culture of the Northwest Plateau I think there's isohyet maps mixed in among population and fishing site maps; so someone made a local isohyet map, but I don't have Hayden's book anymore. All I can say for sure is that one side of Main Street is a lot drier than the other, likewise from one end to the other, and rainfall is extremely low in certain spots; perhaps an interesting research project for some geography student/researcher from the area would be to dig around farm records, old govt agent records, Forestry, Highways, railway and anybody else's work on the area and map it out; but like I said there's local isohyet maps out there somewhere, so somebody's found something in the way of data outside Environment Canada's weather station. Which I'll try and find out where it us (currently) and where else it may have been in the past. One thing's for sure - that country's greener now than it was thirty years ago; eerie sometimes. Must be historical data out there somewhere; btw with all town articles I hope to see rainfall/temperature charts/indexing; shoudl maybe be in town infoboxes.....Skookum1 (talk) 02:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I would love some sources for the statements regarding the microclimates with less than 50mm of precipitation per year and the frequency of +40°C temperatures. This smells a lot like hyperbole used to draw tourism. This crap can/could also be found in the Osoyoos article. This kind of exaggeration should stay in tourism brochures; it has no place in an encyclopaedia, and I'm pretty damn tired of it.1brettsnyder (talk) 21:24, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

I see I didn't link the Environment Canada page I got the thing about the weather stations from; it'd be dead by now probably, lots of federal government links are now 404s due to restructuring on govt servers....the sunny/hot thing goes way back before Lillooet even was tourism-inclined, the rivalry with Lytton over being the "hot spot" is decades-old also. I'll see what I can find, busy today though.Skookum1 (talk) 06:02, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

and it's not an "exagerration". It can be raining ("spitting") on Cayoosh Heights, the bench above Main Street, while bone dry on Riverlands in East Lillooet, only a mile away; Seton Powerhouse is commonly cooler than town, partly because it's on the river and not away from it, as downtown is. There's an old saw in Lillooet that one inch of rain means the drops are one inch apart before they evaporate, and two inches of rain means that they're two inches apart......Skookum1 (talk) 06:05, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

OK, first off I'd like to say I'm finding many Wikipedians just want to dispute and display cynicism, without bothering to look things up and find out for themselves. It's not like there's no such thing as google. I found a bunch of citations, re various weather stations including a whole bunch of new ones down the Canyon past Lytton which are studies for the new Lillooet wine region.

Lillooet weather stations (Environment Canada)

The first one is a list of historical weather data for Lillooet, I can't see a yearly total, only monthlies and dailies, so summarizing those into yearly totals is kinda original research, unless tables showing monthly data compiled in the table into annuals is OK. Note that the recording stations have moved over time, some are not in town (e.g. Fountainview Farms which is about 20 miles south of town. Lillooet Heights is I think the area known as Cayoosh Heights and I think is data collected at Cayoosh Heights Elementary School (I'm not going to take the time to input the coordinates given on each individual page), East Lillooet is probably the airport, not "Riverlands" which is the lower bench north of it, but it may have to do with that farm's operations, I'd only know by checking the latlong on this "Almanac" page (other options are "monthly" and "daily"), but noting it's 296m and the airport is 402m it seems likely to be Riverlands or nearby, not up on the airport bench. I won't detail all of their locations, except to say that "Lillooet Seton BCHPA" is the current location of the main weather station and is at Seton Powerhouse, aka Lillooet Powerhouse, south of town on the other side of Cayoosh Creek (as the Seton River is still called locally despite an official name change), and the second listing for "Lillooet" is the old, original one, dating back to 1878, at the aforementioned location of Phair's Store, or perhaps Miyazaki House, which was the Phair residence and afterwards that of Dr. Masajiro Miyazaki; roughly the Post Office location....I think I recall a weather recording box between the Post Office and the Courthouse, which is right in front of Miyazaki House and between it and Main Street, which would have been the Phair yard, which had a small orchard. Its records end span 1878-1970, followed as the main one by the Seton one from 1971 onwards. Russell Street I think was behind the old RCMP office on Main Street (Russell Street is the next block west from Main St), but could be the old Ministry of Forests office next to the Reynolds, as I remember a weather station there, though that could be a Ministry of Forests one (fed and prov governments in Canada are very separate entities and often don't share data). Not sure at all where "Cedar Falls" is, maybe Dickey Creek, where the honey farm is on the north side of town, or somewhere south of town on the Texas Creek Road, maybe the Jones Ranch. I don't know why Environment Canada doesn't make available on those pages annual summaries, maybe there's another page somewheres. The DoH (highways) yard also had a weather station, I think, and many people have their own, though not rigorous as scientifically-mandated stations can be expected to be. One local pasttime, on long hot days, is to compare temperatures on house/garden thermometers in different parts of town, the variation locally is so marked. Gonna have write EnviroCan because the latlongs for most of these are all the same, rounded off to the nearest minute, which doesn't help.

Lillooet wine region studies

These have yearly totals and more accurate latlongs, and there's several immediately in the environs of town and at test locations down the Canyon past Lytton, as mentioned. Most of these are hours of sunshine and growing-season totals and for reasons beyond me don't have precipitation figures - probably because most agriculture in the area is entirely dependent on irrigation pumped up from the river and rainfall is so marginal it's not useful for agricultural studies. This one, on page 24, has yearly precipitation for available years, from 1941. It says "Texas Creek Ranch" which I gather is one or the test vinyards, though the 1941-1970 average is for the Russell Street station previously described. This one is from the Winegrowers Association, this one, from 2010, is also from the Winegrowers Assn, as is as is this one. Maybe I'm missing seeing precipitation tables on them, the point of referring to them is the variation in the Fraser Canyon region and immediate environs of Lillooet.

Bridge River-Lillooet News article

This article is only about August and September figures in certain record years but gives you an idea how little rain there is in Lillooet. I know the editor, I'll write her to see if she has any compiled figures for the town's history, she probably does, and will post this to a few FB friends I have there who may be able to provide more or give further comments. Nothing so far to back up (officially) the 2" figure I've mentioned, though it's part of local folklore for sure, if not official data. The disparity between Seton Beach, East Lillooet, the different levels of town, and "Hop Farm" which is a northern "suburb", is very obvious if you spend any time at all in town. A few miles up Highway 99 towards Pemberton the climate, and vegetation, change markedly within less than 10 miles.Skookum1 (talk) 07:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

• Comment I'd sent a query to Environment Canada about the locations of the weather stations and where to look for annual totals/comparisons; apparently they don't have them, they have to be calculated from the monthly totals, though there is a CSV file that could make that easier; this is verbatim other than my formatting of the links provided:

<quote>1) monthly data is available up to 2007 using the "monthly" interval

2) annual data is not available on archive online

3) I would recommend downloading all of the monthly data from archive online for free as a CSV file (entire period of record in one file) and then look at the bottom of each daily data report for the monthly average temperatures and monthly total precipitation values to add to the CSV file

3) in terms of comparing one climate station to the next, I would recommend looking at the Canadian Climate Normals (1971-2000) available at Canadian Climate Normals, Environment Canada website

4) in terms of determining which place is the driest, wettest, etc. I would recommend visiting the Weather Winners website at Environment Canada "Weather Winners" webpage

5) there are a variety of different climate networks in BC such as MOTH, BCFS, etc...</quote> I expect to find a Climate of Canada or a Climate of British Columbia page where this information could be posted; doesn't seem to be one, I'll post a link to this section on Talk:Geography of British Columbia instead.Skookum1 (talk) 04:16, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

I just looked at the "weather winners" page, but it's only for major centres; Whitehorse is listed as the driest, Kamloops is 2nd, Yellowknife is third...Penticton's in the top few, Kelowna is 9th......not much use for smaller centres like Lillooet, Lytton, Ashcroft, Osoyoos etc....and there are no weather stations, other than maybe BCFS at places like Big Bar and the like, though the MOTH stations, which I guess are Ministry of Transport (airports) might have data on a lot of very obscure places like Jesmond....Skookum1 (talk) 04:51, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the interesting winery information! I have in my possession an Excel file of every weather station ever used in the province stretching all the way back to 1872. I also have a copy of Environment Canada's database for the entire country back to 1840. From 1929 to 1931 there was a severe drought in British that had never been see before nor has it since. In 1929 Lillooet received 129.9 mm of precipitation.

Over the years there have been at least nine difference weather stations around Lillooet, but none have ever come close to this number. The second driest year for Lillooet was 1922 when 177.8 mm were recorded. Ashcroft is the driest spot in Canada outside of the high arctic, and they average about 200 mm/year in the driest locations of that village. It is a bit tricky to compare past stations to today because the climate has become about 8% wetter over the past century.

The number of weather stations in Canada have been slashed since 1995 to the point that Canada is now in danger of slipping into "junior partner status" for weather monitoring according internal government documents. This is a euphemism for "an embarrassment on the world stage." To make matters worse, many of the weather stations that have not been removed do not measure precipitation year round. The current weather station in Lillooet is one such example.

I suspect the area north of Lillooet, namely around Big Bar, may be similar as Ashcroft based on vegetation, but it is hard to say for sure. There are a few years worth of data for Edge Hills and Pavilion, and it looks like that area is fairly similar to Lillooet in terms of precipitation - about 300 mm/year Tatlayoko (talk) 18:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

What's in a name?

What's the origin of the name? TREKphiler ^{hit me ♠} 22:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

It's a complicated story....some might be accounted for on Talk:Lillooet River, if not I'll be back later tonight, I have errands to do and it's too involved to give a brief answer.....Skookum1 (talk) 22:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, like I said it's complcated and many people are also confused why the town of Lillooet isn't on the Lillooet River. Hte name-origin is from the ancient First Nations name of what is now hte Mount Currie reserve, Lil'wat, which popular lore says means the type of wild onion that grows in the area, but lately I've seen lingists saying "no, it doesn't," and that it's of unknown meaning. Mount Currie was "Old Lillooet", and "the country of the Lillooet" was from the top end of the Douglas Portage (from Harrison to Little Lillooet Lakes) onwards; in white eyes, that is, as really the name only applied to the site of Mount Currie, and in the form Lil'wat'ul to the people, or thigns to have to do with Lil'wat....in native terms their mythographic boudnary is a place called the Footstone near Birken; beyond that was the country of the lakes and Fraser River people; this has to do with what comes next. The town of Lillooet's original "white name" was Cayoosh or Cayoosh Flat; it was one of half-a-dozen gold rush bootowns in the vicinity, but hte only one surviving the rush and that remained as any kind of a resemblance to the town by mid-1860. It was then, during a visit by the Governor (or Judge Begbie, but I think it was Gov. Douglas), that residents petitioned the government for a change in the name of the town, as "Cayoosh" was deemed objectionable, possibly because of the name-aasociation with the Cayuse War and associated hostile native peoples. They proposed the name Lillooet as being "more euphonious", apparently because the town was at the end of what was by then known as the Lillooet Trail, meaning originally the trail through the country of the Lil'wat. Because Lil'wat/Lillooet was the name of, or belonging to, the people in the Pemerton Valley, permission was required and granted; in the course of which the Lil'wat and the St'at'imc came to terms over their shared name - "We are all Lillooet now" as one St'at'imc chief put it (St'at'imc means "people of Sat', which is the hame of the Bridge River Rapids north of town and was a collecctive name for the non-Thompson,non-Shuswwap inhabitants of the rapids area (both were present at the fishing site in the old days). Today you'll hear some people say the whites stole the name, or that they were mistaken; but it was all done :"indigenously correct". Taht is, if you don't dismiss non-indigenous accounts simply because they're non-indigenous. In terms of putting this in the article, I think the easiest and maybe most succinct way to do it is for me to find the relevant passage in Mrs. Edwards' or Mrs. Harris' books, and use a blockquote. Anyway, there you have it; any number of subtopics tangent off it but I'll leave off here....Skookum1 (talk) 22:04, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Fountainview Academy

The new mistitled/ or mis-contented "Education" sectino has been expanded with significant detail about Fountainview Academy (currently a redirect here, and shouldn't be), which once I'm woken up will split off as a separate article; for one thing it's not in the District of Lillooet, albeit it is in the Lillooet District (word order has a lot to do with very real esmantics as used in the area!); it does deserve its own article and a palce on the BC Education tempaltes, so after I'm woken up I'll split it off and rewrite the section here covering SD schools; FN schools also although they're not "in" t he District of Lillooet, though in the greater town of Lillooet (which Fountainview isn't; in fact being on the south side of hte Big Slide kinda puts it "outside" Lillooet...."Lillooet" in that context being the sociogeographic space aka the Lillooet Country, although really I guess Laluwissen is more likely the "boundary" with the "Lytton Country")Skookum1 (talk) 14:20, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Added Image

Just added an Image of the "Welcome to Lillooet" Sign, I Took the image in July 2010 when driving from Calgary to Vancouver, I hope the image comes in useful, after all it is the only real image on the article. HordeFTL (talk) 21:07, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Hours of sunhine

On the climate section of the Geography of British Columbia page, it's stated that the valleys of the Southern Interior get a lot of cloud and fog and that total hours of sunshine are less than the Coast; this may be true of the Kamloops and Okanagan and other areas, but as I recall Lillooet and Lytton get considerably more sunshine.....hours of sunshine and number of sunny days I was hoping to find in the climate table here, for comparison to the Okanagan and Kamloops pages, but so far this is just temp/precipitation. Anyone care to expand the climate section accordingly?Skookum1 (talk) 04:00, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Environment Canada just released the most recently climate normals over the weekend (you can speculate as well as I as to why they sheepishly released such important information on a quiet weekend when no one is looking).

• http://climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climate_normals/index_e.html

Anyway, it is in a database format, so you can run searches. Sunshine has never been recorded in the Lillooet area, but it has been in Lytton. Interestingly, after Princeton, Lytton has the most number of days per year with sunshine in the province (320.07 days/year). While many places in BC do get more hours of sunshine per year than Lytton, Lytton gets more days with sunshine than all but one of them. This tells me that the valley cloud is not as bad in the Fraser Canyon as it is in other southern interior valleys such as the Okanagan. Lytton is definitely much wetter than Lillooet in the winter, but this does not automatically translate into more hours of sunshine. The large hills and mountains also reduce the number of hours possible in the Fraser Canyon, which I suspect is the only reason Lytton gets less sunshine than Kamloops, but I'm only speculating.

“Children have never been very good at listening to their elders, but they have never failed to imitate them.” - James Baldwin (talk) 16:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Actually if you look on Fort Berens Winery and its talkpage there's some links to wine-region studies with detailed stations recording exactly that; 222 between Pavilion and Kanaka or so, and more analysis of the EC data and other stations like those. I don't know much about shade/sunlight records, but there's huge variation because of the depth of the overall gorge in that area, and its relative narrowness; I've got some fog satellites of the Interior somewhere already uploaded, back later on that, as with overall cloud cover, there's this narrow strip of no-cloud in the overall mass of the clouds, just inside of the Coast Mountains....my observation about microclimates there is obvious to any local; where you are on which mountainside is going to influence temperature and precipitation; and you're familiar with how Highway 99's descent from rain forest to semi-arid happens in less than ten miles. Nobody ever though to take sunshine records in the sunniest town in BC, maybe because you don't metre free water, too, but that there's variation within the municipality, and especially within "metropolitan" Lillooet (10-20 mile radius, roughly), is demonstrable from available data; I think those wine studies compare where the winery is, what we called Riverlands for so long - alfalfa then ginseng, at one time market gardens - and where the official Lillooet station is at the powerhouse on the Fraser (Seton Powerhouse); that part of town gets into the (relative) cool of the shade a few hours earlier than Main Street. Up on the heights, above the courthouse, on Columbia Drive and higher, not sure where else, you can see the sun go down three times as it comes out from behind peaks twice more (up the Cayoosh); and then at that point, if the weather westward is right, the near-horizon setting sun plunges through Seton Canyon and illuminates the winery side of the river, and Fountain Ridge, and the flanks of Seton Canyon's overhangs....this isn't a tourist brochure, I'm trying to be literal about what you see when living there; point is there that climate isn't just temperature and other data; it's theatre. And full of extreme contrasts within short distances; those short distances being e.g. 8000' in a horizontal half mile or much less; Fountain Ridge drops 4500' near-sheer on the one side, maybe 3000' steep forest on the back side; most of Brew's ridges are near 9000 and up, on the SW side McLean's on the west, the main summit of Mission Ridge, is 8093' or something, Seton Lake, the shoreline being 1/4 mile away, is 800'. That valley has the tempering effect that the Fraser's does not - no big, cold lake - and at Fountain, which isn't much higher than Lillooet, if there's no wind you'll be thinking you're in Arizona, it's so hot; no weather station though; logical positivism requires the data to validate fact, so if no data then it didn't happen. Strange how mathematical reality has taken over experienced reality, huh?. Anyways gtg check that data, I was impressed by the detail; and wish I could try the wine LOL.Skookum1 (talk) 18:40, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you that Lillooet is one of the sunniest places around. Looking at my Environment Canada, the sunshine data from the nearest station to the northwest (Puntzi Mountain) reveals that the Chilcotin is unmistakably the sunniest place in the province during the winter months. Of course, over the years there have only ever been about 100 different places in the province that have measured sunshine - most of which are concentrated in the populated areas - so many areas can only be estimated. Because of government cutbacks, there are only 3 stations today that measure sunshine; none of which are in the BC interior. Tatlayoko (talk) 18:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Ashcroft

Seems Ashcroft, and Spences Bridge seems to be forgotten alot in regards to desert like climates. Being from the island, i really dont consider Lytton, nor Lillooet to be desert. Kind of the the fringe really. I imagine it's a thorn in the side of the Lillooet and Oysoyoos fan boys, i would rather be ignored by same — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.194.133.9 (talk) 22:59, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

None of them are proper desert, despite Osoyoos' loud promotional brags about being the only one in Canada. They're all just semi-arid, and it applies to Big Bar and Riske Creek as well as Ashcroft-Cache Creek and Spences Bridge.....Kamloops and the TNRD promote an area on the northwest side of Kamloops Lake as "Red Desert Country" also. Being from the Island, why do you care at all?Skookum1 (talk) 03:20, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I care because ive noticed your latent fanboy claims about lillywet as well. Just putting on you son. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.194.133.9 (talk) 00:52, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh, so you're just here to yank my chain? How nice, kinda cute. "Lillywet" is not made up, and your "latent fanboy" comment indicates you're just a piss-ant. Smalltown bulls**t. And typical Canadian carping and criticism...you live for that huh?Skookum1 (talk) 02:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. We appear to have consensus that this town is the primary topic of the term "Lillooet". Cúchullain ^t/c 13:05, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

---

Lillooet, British Columbia → Lillooet – The District of Lillooet (the town, that is) is the primary topic of this name in Canadian English. Lillooet (disambiguation) exists and has nothing on it that satisfies WP:UNDAB or is in any way anything resembling a parallel primary topic. Even if Lillooet people had not been RMd (rightly) back to St'at'imc UNDAB would still apply, and the "FOO people" problem "people who are from FOO" would still be a problem even if this name of the people were as much a MOSTCOMMON meaning of "Lillooet" in Canada. What it means elsewhere is irrelevant per CANENGL. CANSTYLE calls for unique town/city/village names to be without comma-province, as per the parallel RMs on various other BC names at present. Skookum1 (talk) 12:36, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

• Comment I have moved the old Lillooet dab page to Lillooet (disambiguation) and pointed the resulting redirect at the town as primary topic.Skookum1 (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
• Comment I'm not convinced that this town is the primary topic. Need evidence that it's much more likely to be sought than the people or language by someone searching with "Lillooet". Results of a quick search at Scholar does not seem to support this move [1]. --B2C 18:16, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Well, as I said, what's on scholar's shelves in other countries has no bearing on the primary topic status of the town in Canadian English. And with the people now styling themselves as the St'at'imc there is no name-conflict, unless you insist that the obsolete name still favoured by linguists in other countries (if that is indeed the case which it may not be) and by linguists of the past is to share equal priority with a well-known (if small and hard-up) BC town; same goes for the language, as St'at'imcets is regularly seen in Canadian English now too (though not as much). And you should read WP:UNDAB about how "FOO whatever" is not as primary as "FOO" (they don't put it that way, that's my rendering). "Lillooet Tribal Council" is still DBA name for the St'at'imc Nation, but increasingly in disuse; "Lillooet Indians" tends to mean, and always has, natives from the reserves immediately surrounding the town (Lil'wat has been in use for a long time for Mt Currie, it's the original placename-sense of "Lillooet"); and the Lillooet Band is the other meaning, and their name now it T'it'q'et; all are secondary; I'll come back with regular google cites, IMO googlescholar is not useful for this because it (a) brings up obsolete usages and (b) includes English usage from other countries. I'm not sure if you can limit the results to, say, Canada since 1990 or so, but that's what's required for any such comparison to be valid.Skookum1 (talk) 00:33, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
    • If you established consensus to move Lillooet people and Lillooet language to the St'at'imc variants, you'd have a stronger argument here. --B2C 03:35, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
      • Re that, see Talk:St'at'imc#Requested move where St'at'imc was exhaustively brought to consensus on various grounds as St'at'imc; the language is a secondary topic anyway. Lillooet Tribal Council is a secondary use but there are grounds to move it to St'at'imc Nation. Per the language I didn't bother with an RM at the time, though that article was, at least for a while, at St'at'imcets which is also current in English; likewise Smalg'yax (sp?) and Gitxsanimaax which are now at Tsimshian language and Gitxsan language. Halkomelem language is needlessly disambiguated per WP:UNDAB. The main argument here in any case is CANSTYLE and obvious PRIMARYTOPIC given modern usages.Skookum1 (talk) 08:31, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose - sorry, no evidence of primary, and please move Lillooet (disambiguation) back to where it was. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:08, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
  • I keep on hearing this 'no evidence of primarytopic' but I have yet to see any proof of that claim.Skookum1 (talk) 10:14, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Since the existence of primary topics are the exception, not the rule, the onus is on someone who proposes a primary topic exists for any term to demonstrate it. But in this case the "Lillooet is" test fails to support the RM. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:34, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Lillooet as a proper name does not take "the" and that biases your search towards the people(s) and/or the region (Lillooet Country or the Lillooet River, which can be referred to as "the Lillooet" as with other rivers (though such usage would be rare because of hte confusion with the town, which is nowhere near the river); and this is about Canadian English usage; I don't know how to cull out non-Canadian items from such a search, or limit them to, say, post-1990.Skookum1 (talk) 10:44, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

in a regular google search for "Lillooet is" excluding Wikipedia-related hits, there are 18,800 hits, none on the first page. You have used a google books search with only 996 hits, including old-era publications using the obsolete term for the ethnic group. How to separate that "books" search between items about the people vs other usages I don't know how to do. Not that it can be easily culled but a search on the BC Govt page for "Lillooet" has 2,870 hits and offers secondary searches on:

• squamish lillooet
• lillooet bc
• lillooet british columbia
• lillooet bc destination
• lillooet regional district
• lillooet timber supply
• lillooet tsa
• squamish lillooet regional
• centre lillooet ccc
• downtown lillooet visitor

i.e. nothing about the people, indicating something very right about modern Canadian usages. I just scanned the first ten pages of that search, there are none for the people. There are btw 303 hits for "St'at'imc". On the Government of Canada search page there are 5910 hits for "Lillooet", and from a scan of the first page I know I won't find much there about the people except maybe INAC/AADNC listings for the T'it'q'et Band under its old name and/or the tribal council. There are btw 1280 hits with "St'at'imc". The search engine at the Union of BC Indian Chiefs site is not working. No results for either were found at the Assembly of First Nations website. Skookum1 (talk) 11:01, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I have yet to review/verify this, but at least now you are presenting what appears to be an argument for the town being the primary topic. --B2C 16:56, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

These particular searches would have been useful in last year's Talk:St'at'imc#Requested move and can also be applied here to why the town is indeed the primary topic, since the title of a secondary topic is no longer confused with it or by it. Government usages, whether municipal, regional district, provincial or federal government ministries and agencies and crown corporations are all English usages, and in output may not match academic writing using the "Lillooet" name for the people (there's a history to why that really doesn't apply to the St'at'imc; the tribal council office happens to be in Lillooet, but the people name Lil'wat is the cognate and they're at Mount Currie, British Columbia. How the town and the group as a whole wound up with the name "Lillooet" dates to the same moment, as you'll find out the details of if you read the article.Skookum1 (talk) 17:27, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

I just searched the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's website (the government broadcaster is you didn't know that) and there are 6 results for St'at'imc, and 609 for Lillooet, all of the first half dozen pages of results I've looked at reference the town; so far I haven't seen one for the river yet though probably a few are in there (flooding, power projects, coverage of news from the Pemberton area where that river flows (60 miles from the town of Lillooet), none so far from the people (the site crashed, I didn't continue. On the Vancouver Sun website, there are 0 results for St'at'imc and about 71 for "Lillooet", most referencing the town but sometimes mention of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District (which is named for the towns/areas, not the two peoples), some are crime reports from Lillooet Street in Vancouver, some might be for Lillooet Road in North Vancouver, some in reference to the former Yale-Lillooet electoral district (named for the towns) and the former Lillooet (electoral district) and the later Lillooet East and Lillooet West ones ....and so on and so on and so forth.

I could go on, but I think I've adequately demonstrated why it's common knowledge among Canadians in these discussions that the town/city is necessarily the primary topic; which is why Kamloops is a city article and not a dab page, despite the Kamloops Indian Band whose name was there before the city was even a trading post. Same story with Nanaimo between the city and what no longer calls itself the Nanaimo Indian Band but the Snuneymuxw First Nation (snuneymuxw, "the strong people", though the old-era name including the Nanoose Bay was Snaw-na-wa-was, which that band now uses for itself and means something different; Snuneymuxw is a modern invention like Nuu-chah-nulth, Kwakwaka'wakw and Sto:lo. This pertains also to the RM at Talk:Comox#Requested move and my ongoing struggle with getting modern reality recognized as valid at Category:Squamish people's CfD. Lillooet, as with Squamish and Comox and Sechelt, clearly is the primary topic even if they were named after the peoples in question; though in Squamish's case it was named for the river, and Comox for the location, the Comox Peninsula (the band's reserve is on the outer portion of that peninsula), and also at Talk:Saanich, British Columbia per the WSANEC groups ("Saanich people at present, really should be Saanich peoples as also with the groups collectively known in English as the Comox.

What piles of linguistics papers based in out of date ethnographic studies and older government sources ("colonialist" and yes, we were a colony, and for all intents and purposes are still run like one) use, whether published in Canada or not, and can be found in vast numbers on google is irrelevant to the facts on the ground in Canada as far as what such names mean; the town, not the people; Whonnock is another example on a much more localized scale (the Whonnock Band were merged in my time with the Kwantlen; they are from about 4 miles from where I grew up; the name refers to the type of salmon once abundant in the creek coming down from Whonnock Lake, the humpback salmon, and was the name of the indigenous people in the area, anglicized into that form by the creation of the Whonnock Indian Reserve and the former Whonnock Indian Band......but the primary topic of that name is the 'town' (rural settlement, more of an area than anything with a downtown and precise boundaries). Same as with Illinois vs Illinois Confederacy; the state is the primary topic even though it was named for that alliance of peoples (er, actually more likely it was named for the Illinois River, which was named - by the French as the spelling suggests - for the people). I can produce reams of Canadian media and academic and newspaper cites that will show the same thing here re the town of Lillooet as primary topic if you really want me to, but should no longer be necessary.Skookum1 (talk) 17:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. Excessive text not withstanding, you have to prove that there is a primary topic. I fail to see that here. Maybe it is buried in the verbose responses, but maybe not. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:17, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
  • And yes, the dab page should be moved back! Vegaswikian (talk) 23:18, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Take a look at the reply timestamped 11:01, 20 March 2014 (UTC). IMO this is where the strongest argument is. --BDD (talk) 23:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

• Weak support Skookum's evidence presented in reply to IIO is fairly convincing. But I don't know where he's getting this idea of "primary topic in Canadian English". This isn't Canadian English Wikipedia, so I'm not sure what it would mean to have primary topics specific to one variety of English, nor how that would look in practice. I think the evidence weakly leans towards the town being primary topic, but not decisively so, hence my qualified support. --BDD (talk) 23:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Come again? This article is about Canadian topics and Canadian usages very much apply. Other similar discussions e.g. Chemainus, Sechelt, Spallumcheen, Saanich, Esquimalt, Sooke (those are town articles, not dabs) and other related/parallel situations have been closed in favour of the removal of comma-province. Haida Gwaii is still known as the Queen Charlotte Islands in the rest of the world, but that title conforms to Canadian norms and recognize that the towns are the main usage in English for those names; same as with Kamloops, Nanaimo and other long-standing ones.Skookum1 (talk) 01:30, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Does precedent mean nothing around here??Skookum1 (talk) 01:34, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
      • NOTE Please take note of WP:CSG#Places where this situation is covered explicitly and also the list of undisambiguated town titles at Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board/List of undisambiguated communities for the ever-growing list of undisambiguated town titles, many of which are of the very same kind of this. The international "fame" of the St'at'imc, even if not at that title, does not qualify for a primarytopic dispute although Point 1 at CSG#Places only refers to cities; that there is no dab on the name of the people article, now at a different title, rules it out as comparable in meaning or primarytopic; the river and lake are also not qualified as comparable primarytopics.Skookum1 (talk) 03:27, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

CANSTYLE and the like apply, sure, but PRIMARYTOPIC isn't country-specific. --BDD (talk) 16:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I won't relist all those parallel precedents to this one that have been decided in favour of what is the obvious standard usage in Canadian article and category titles; acquaint yourself with them please. And if global usage is really what the subtext is about - the language, not the people even - are a parallel primarytopic, despite the incorrectness of the old name (especially in this case, then that's just weird to a Canadian, and also to experienced Canadian editors other than myself. Also if you were to come to understand how both the town and the people got to have a name that came from 60 miles away i.e. that of the Lil'wat/Lillooet River/Lillooet Lake, then please read up. And Canadian toponymy and lexicon are part of CANSTYLE and do override global usage; see WP:CSG#Places.Skookum1 (talk) 19:10, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I read "primary topic... in Canadian English" as suggesting that a single term could have different primary topics in multiple languages or varieties of English. I don't think that's actually what you intended. --BDD (talk) 21:24, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't have time to comment at length just now (good thing huh?) but read {{Canadian English}} about Canadian English being used on Canadian articles. Globally re "Lillooet" there may be no primary topic, due to the continued use of older names instead of the modern (and in the case of the endonym, official - to both Canadian governments, and also to the St'at'imc, who have no treaties with the Crown and regard themselves as sovereign) - and per guidelines sources since a name change are to outweigh those from before; if the rest of the world's massive amount of before-the-change uses are to be counted then those are out of date ; embracing them perpetuates incorrect names. As per how well the town fares on global comparisons is a good question, the claims about PRIMARYTOPIC being not the town themselves have not yet provided citations as to that. Even in the US "I'm going to Lillooet" indicates a place, not a language or a people. "Lillooet is" and "the Lillooet are" searches perhaps need to be done (the first would be for the town, potentially for the language and so would have to be culled), the latter would be for the archaic and now disregarded and archaic name for the people. In any case, a language or foreign exonym is not the primary topic in comparison to a "major" town or other placename, as has also been seen at Ktunaxa/Kutenai/Kootenay and Secwepemc/Shuswap or Tsilhqot'in/Chilcotin, Shishalh/Sechelt and more.

Please read the closer's comments on Talk:St'at'imc#Requested move from last year. In that and parallel RMs, native names were distinguished from town/region names that others had claimed were not global usages; this was disproven and also CANSTYLE et al. were at play per ENGVAR. And what is the nature of "global usage"? - in one field only (well, too, linguistics and ethnology) - per TITLE's admonition that specialist priorities should not outweigh those of the general reader. I've already listed the parallel cases exactly like this one which were closed in favour of the town being the primarytopic; other than this one, Comox, Bella Bella and Saanich only remain open and disputed on the very same grounds (as here) and in face of the same PRIMARYTOPIC claims about global usage; there are scads of precedents here, and also Canadian editors and others who weighed in in favour of town=primarytopic; the pretense that the parallel native exonyms in global English are potential dabs is now irrelevant because of the endonym titles now in Wikipedia for them, they are not valid dabs; and there's no way that Lillooet language (the increasingly common term for which is St'at'imcets, just as Halkomelem is also in English and Kwak'wala, or "St'at'imc language") - there's no way that globally, other than in those two fields, that the association of "Lillooet" with a language is even in the public mindset. Luckily for those who have TLDR syndrome, which I know you don't, my client has just arrived (electronically) for his lesson, so I have to go. I will leave other supporters of the PRIMARYTOPIC=towh to weigh in as I know they are; otherwise the decisions in other RMs are by consensus and now are an extensive series of precedent against those who maintained that they were not PRIMARYTOPICs.Skookum1 (talk) 02:38, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

If your logic were to hold sway, then American sources which say the Rocky Mountains include the Purcells, Selkirks and Monashees would outnumber the Canadian sources (and official definitions as being components of the Columbia Mountains. In Canada, the Rocky Mountains are completely on the east side of the Rocky Mountain Trench. If Canadian usages don't matter, it means that American usages would 10:1 overwhelm our own (or more); similarly most Americans, though not those in OR and WA generally, don't consider BC to be part of the Pacific Northwest....but *we* do...... This is very much along the lines of Pierre Trudeau's comment about Canada being a mouse in the same bed as an elephant. The same applies both to the general and modern acceptance indigenous endonyms and in many cases also the language names vs the incorrect but heavily-sourceable names and also to our different knowledge of what is and isn't a PRIMARYTOPIC. I'm going to try and figure out how to do a search limitable by country of publication, and by date, in google, googlenews and googlebooks; sources since the names were adopted (20 years ago and more) may even outnumber the outmoded/incorrect ones in places like the UK and Australia...Skookum1 (talk) 11:38, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

• Google searches re PRIMARYTOPIC (globally)
  • For "Lillooet language -wikipedia", there are 12,300 results, including many Canadian hits (please bear in mind I am not googling from google.ca but from google.co.th)
    • NB for "St'at'imcets" the modern name for this language, there are 92,500 results
  • For "Lillooet -language -wikipedia" there are 3,340,000 results again with many Canadian hits; taking out Lillooet River, Lillooet Lake, and St'at'imc, there are 151,000 hits. The first mention of the native people is on page 2, and is from the extremely dated Catholic Encyclopedia. Still excluding the lake and the river but including St'at'imc, there are 3,340,000 results. The Catholic Encyclopedia entry for the "Lillooet Indians" shows up on page 2, the American Museum of Natural History entry on page 3. The 1913 Declaration of the Lillooet Tribe on the statimc.net shows up on page eight; taking out the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District there are slightly fewer. the problem with his mass of results is how to remove the many sites that are from the town itself or press copy about the town of one kind or another from items about the people; suffice to say if:
    • "Lillooet Indians" is searched for directly, there are 9,410 results;
    • for "Lillooet tribe" there are 4,630 results,
    • for "Lillooet people" there are 6,600 results,
    • for "Lillooet nation" there are 2,350 results\
  • for "Lillooet BC" there are 192,000 hits
  • for "Lillooet, British Columbia", there are 84,900 results
  • On Googlebooks for "Lillooet, BC", there are 5,480 results
  • On Googlebooks for "Lillooet, British Columbia", there are 2,020 results, some of them about the native people but using "Lillooet, British Columbia" as, for example, the site of an archaeological dig.
  • for simply "Lillooet -wikipedia" there are 140,000 results, with mixed results including references to the "Lillooet district" (which could mean the general area, or the Lillooet Land District]]
    • of the hits on that is Bryan Hayden's A Complex Culture of the Northwest Plateau where there are 88 hits for Stl'atl'imx (the St'at'imc spelling hadn't been come up with yet; this is from the mid-70s)
  • Form on Googlebooks "Lillooet -"Lillooet language" -St'at'imcets there are 18,400 results,.
  • on Google News, excluding the river and the lake, there are 42 results, taking out "regional district" there are 38 results. None in either search are about the Lillooet people/nation/tribe.
  • Summary of results So....I don't know how to cull those results or restrict them to the US or UK or South Africa or Australia/NZ or Singapore of HK or India or Jamaica or English publications from Europe,and exclude references to the town or the people/language depending on the search (since the town will get mentioned in the latter searches, necessarily), but I'd really like to know where these PRIMARYTOPIC claims that the town is NOT the PRIMARYTOPIC are coming from. Wouldn't you??Skookum1 (talk) 14:14, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. The town of around 3000 is not the primary topic vis-à-vis the river, the language, and the people (see User:In ictu oculi's remarks above). And, yes, please also move the dab page back to Lillooet where it resided before the undiscussed move. —  AjaxSmack  15:21, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment/reply The town is highly significant in BC history and is the major centre for a very large region; it was the first non-native town in the BC Interior and at that time was the largest centre west of Chicago and north of San Francisco. It was home to two Order of Canada awardees and various other highly-notable personages including two Premiers, was and is the legal home to the Lillooet Land District and the associated court/records system and mining and forestry districts and though the DoL has only 3000 citizens (less actually) "Greater Lillooet" includes the T'it'q'et (Lillooet IR), Sek'welwas (Cayoose Creek) and Xwisten (Bridge River) bands and their reserves; and if you asked any of those people including their chiefs where their communities were they'd say "in Lillooet". Quantitative data does not determine PRIMARYTOPIC: I have demonstrated that the most common usage of this name in English is for the town, all you can do is assert that the people and language as formerly known (names which they do not themselvss use any longer) are somehow "equal" or somehow "greater" as topics; but for all your quantitative data the qualitative reality is very different. Chemainus, Sechelt, Nanaimo,, Coquitlam and others are all at undisambiguated names despite attempts to claim that the native peoples/languages are equally primary topics (in the first two cases; the cities of Nanaimo and Coquitlam no one has dared challenge on such terms as they are major centres; but so, in their own terms as regional centres, are Sechelt and, especially, Lillooet.
  • Futher, there is not a "people" article named "Lillooet", only a redirect from Lillooet people to St'at'imc which was faultily moved without discussion last year and required an exhaustive RM to correct back to St'at'imc. As for the language, the town has 3000 citizens, the "metro" more like 4500, the greater Lillooet region (from Bralorne-Gold Bridge and Seton/Shalalth to Upper Hat Creek and Big Bar and including Texas Creek, has somewhere above 5000. How many speakers of St'at'imcets are there??. You want quantitative analysis? Then answer to that comparison, and debunk the very convincing search results above. And not that in one of teh specialized google searches (books or sholar), St'at'imcets citations outrank the archaic Lillooet language and that needs an RM too as the much-vaunted "sources" that were used to justify that are outdated and per TITLE older sources before name changes should be discounted in favour of newer ones. There is no substance whatsoever to any claim that the usages for the people and the language are equally primarytopics here, none at all.
  • Comment about the disambig move My move to a disambiguation title was correct, Lillooet as a title was originally created as a redirect to the town by User:Redwolf in 2004, then moved without discussion by User:Ishwar in 2005, then in that same year, when I first joined Wikipedia (this being my hometown, which puts me in a position of "local expertise" I know others here hold in disdain as "parochial", of all things) expanded into a disambig page by myself (BigSkookum was my original username from an email address I no longer have as no longer with the ISP it was POPmail on); this was before WP:CSG#Places had come into being as general practice. Other than an addition of a disambig template and a spelling correction in the wake of FlorianBlaschke's bigoted-motive edit -"monstrous" in reference to St'at'imc and St'at'imcets, and the removal of interwikis by Addbot, I am the the principal editor and creator of this page (other than the Redwolf/Ish Ishwar switcheroo of redirects at its inception, prior to my expansions). My move was according to the mandate of WP:CANADA's guidelines and CANTALK direction, and is in line with Canadian PRIMARYTOPIC realities and CANSTYLE's no-comma-province-on-unique-town-names policy, and also with TITLE in various ways. Turning it into a dab page, and changing the original town redirect to the native people redirect (under their correct modern name) were also undiscussed; reverting back to all undiscussed changes takes us back to the town redirect. The very clear (to anybody but a linguist, it seems), PRIMARYTOPIC as RedWolf clearly knew.
  • I am from there, am a rather noted locally as being a town/region historian and loyalist, and have strong native sympathies. I even know a little St'at'imcets. Actually saying things in it, not reading books about its grammar and phonology only. "Lillooet" is a derivative of Lil'wat; how the name came to be at this location has to do with the founding of the formal townsite in 1860 and it's because of the town that this name is at this location. And again, if you asked members of the St'at'imc from the three bands whose reserves surround town (i.e. the DoL) on three sides where there reserves were, they'd say "Lillooet". If you asked people in Seton or Shalalth or Pemberton/Mt Currie where/what Lillooet was, they'd answer about the town; same as if you were in Kamloops or Victoria or Vancouver. the claim that the people/language are equal topics is entirely ORIGINALRESEARCH and highly POV (and outdated)....and not demonstrable by googles, as I have shown very clearly.Skookum1 (talk) 16:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Ancillary comment though it's a moot point now, Florian Blaschke's edit-comment claim that St'at'imcets is only a dialect, not the whole language, is not borne out by sources; Ucwalmicwts ("our language", "what we speak") is used also for the "Fountain" dialect also, and is on the curriculum materials used in schools. "St'at'imc" means "people of Sat'" referring to the Bridge River Fishing Grounds but the Lower Lillooet River bands (all those Lower Lillooet who are not Lil'wat) are part of the Lower Stl'atl'imx Tribal Council (Stl'atl'imx being the native name until the van Eijk spelling system was formally adopted....). St'at'imcets was created then dabbed in 2005 to St'at'imcets language by Ish Ishwar in 2005 then moved without discussion to St'at'imc language by Kwami in 2010 saying "redundant", then moved by Xqbot to to fix the double redirect to Lillooet language, due to Kwami's undiscussed move from "St'at'imc language" to "Lillooet language" - without citations or sources - on the same day. You want this page's undiscussed move reverted; why don't you call for that one to be reverted as well, especially given the RM required to revert his damage to/attack on the St'at'imc title the same day (now reverted by RM/consensus)? The original title had stood for over five years until that undiscussed move..... so watch where you're pointing the finger about "undiscussed moves" and calling for reversions......the upshot of that, were it reverted as it should be, and the St'at'imc title, is that there really is no other title that is a competing primary topic to the town......per DAB it's very clear, Lilooet's primary usage IS the town...... Skookum1 (talk) 16:44, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
• Strong Support The nay'sayers here have very weak rationales, mostly consisting of IDONTLIKEIT by putting reverse onus on the person with local knowledge to verify your doubts from an international perspective. If you are not familiar enough with the various terms to be able to say without a doubt that "This is" or "This isn't" the primary topic, then your reasoning will be poor at best... because you don't know any better.

• Lillooet, British Columbia - 60-80 hits/day
• Lillooet - 4-8 hits/day
• Lillooet (disambiguation) - <5 hits/day
• St'at'imc - 20-25 hits/day

The town is by far and large, the primary topic. Some of the editors in this discussion and the many related and prior discussions need a good trouting for resting their laurels on ignorance. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 17:38, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

• Support When I created the Lillooet redirect in 2004, I strongly suspect I did that because I really only knew about the town at that point and so would have seemed to me to be the primary topic in 2004. That being said, the edit was almost 10 years ago and my memory about this "insignificant" edit at the time is rather weak. St'at'imc was created on May 17, 2004 one day after I created the redirect. I certainly would have not known about the people in 2004 and I think today is probably the first time I visited the article. If I were to create the article today (and without any of the arguments presented above being known to me), I would have most probably created a disambiguation page rather than a redirect. The May 2005 edit of changing the redirect to point to St'at'imc would have been questioned by me had I know that it had occurred -- a logical result would have been changing it to a disambiguation page. I have never lived in BC although I have visited the province on numerous occasions, primarily through the southern corridors of travel (i.e Trans-Canada or Crowsnest Highway). Given the maps I typically use for such travel, I would have only come across the town of Lillooet and so the use of that name would be most closely tied to the town for me. I would strongly suspect that most Canadians who have ever heard of the name Lillooet (excluding those living near the town/district), would immediately think of the town if someone mentioned Lillooet unless more context was given that explicitly referred to the other meanings. Again, that's just conjecture on my part and I have no reliable sources to back that statement up, just my own personal bias. I think Skookum1 makes some good arguments for the RM while those opposing it have not made strong arguments against but still the counter arguments do merit consideration. Since Sookum1 is the one who made the request, the onus is on him to make a good argument for the RM which I think he has done. The city where I live is not the primary topic even though I would be biased to make it primary for obvious reasons. However, given that the city name is not really unique, I do not contest it not being primary. Lillooet is different because it is unique and tied to just BC. I think the majority of people looking for Lillooet would be searching for the town and thus the RM has a good case. That being said, I cannot give the RM strong support because there is more than just a few links on the current page that give me brief pause. RedWolf (talk) 19:26, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
• Support per compelling evidence and comments supplied by Floydian. The community is the primary topic. As a non-BC resident, I had only known of the community prior to this RM. Hwy43 (talk) 19:56, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose. No primary topic. Proposal fails the precision criterion. It also hurts recognizability. The current is easily recognized as a settlement. Without comma Province, the title could indicate multiple things. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:22, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
  • You are so wrong it's pointless to explain it to you; have you ever heard of this town before or anything else on the dab page? Who are you to say? Are you unable to read the searches and view stats given above which conclusively demonstrate that the town IS the PRIMARYTOPIC?Skookum1 (talk) 12:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
    • The oppose is just a bunch of buzzwords strung together. There is no evidence presented, no reasoning behind the decision, no quoting of PRIMARYTOPIC to validate the opinion. It's just a generic oppose that could be slapped on any requested move without changing a word. Again, it's simply IDONTLIKEIT without some kind of reasoning. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 16:42, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

• I don't recall this town, but I do recall way back knowing something of the Lillooet people. I did not, do not, know that the Lillooet people are defined/definable as the people (currently) from this specific place. I see now that this place is named after the Lillooet people, a factor, of "long term significance", that diminishes a claim of PrimaryTopic. I dispute that "searches and view stats" conclusively demonstrate anything beyond the click rate of idle people with fast and easy access to the internet. We should follow usage in scholarly sources, not try to remould to appear congruous to google. This is a shallow objective dangerous to the integrity of the project. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:54, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

View stats have been brought forward on many RMs as demonstrations of what people are looking for, and googles are a standard practice. And you've got it backwards about the town being named for the people(s), the St'at'imc adopted the anglicization of the name of the Lil'wat, the largest group o of the Lower St'at'imc, when the town requested permission to use the name of the Lil'wat to replace Cayoosh Flat/Cayoosh, which was the gold-rush era of the town until the official name change was made by Governor Douglas at the inauguration of the first town street/lot-survey in 1860; because of the onslaught on non-natives through both territories, the two formerly separate peoples united, the chiefs of the St'at'imc saying "we are all Lillooet now", with some resignation at their fate. The name would never have been transplanted from the Lillooet River valley (named after the Lil'wat, who in those times were recorded as the 'Liluet-ol', the suffix being something like "all about the Lil'wat" meaning the place/culture as well; the Skwxwu7mesh ccognate to that is -ullh which was on the Skwxwu7mesh cum Squamish people title for a while. There were several distinct groups of the people who now all go by St'at'imc (or in the case of the Lower Lillooet River communities, Stl'atl'imx, a former standard spelling still with the Stl'atl'imx Tribal Police in Lillooet and Mt Currie (which is Lil'wat, and refers to both the place and that group of people). The Lakes Lillooet were a separate group which I've seen as something like Lexalexamux in one source and are now separated by the Indian Act into two bands (Seton Lake and Nequatque). The Lower Lillooet overall use the term Ucwalmicw for themselves and other St'at'imc as a group, and that is in fact the in-St'at'imcets name for all peoples now grouped and self-identifying in English as the St'at'imc. Before 1860, "Lillooet" meant only the western group and the area that they reside in. In whatever case, the St'at'imc are now at that title and though the Lillooet Tribal Council still sometimes goes by that name (they prefer St'at'imc Nation which is also a name for that tribal council; which one INAC uses I'm not sure just now), and the former name therefore is not a primary dab candidate as it is (a) obsolete and (b) superseded by official and media/government usage of St'at'imc and (e) not even the same word/name.Skookum1 (talk) 05:12, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks Skookum1. I did have it backwards, thinking the settlement was named after the native name of the people. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:24, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

That is usually the case, this is a very big exception....Skookum1 (talk) 09:20, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• A bunch of buzzwords strung together? What is "PRIMARYTOPIC" if not a buzzword? "IDONTLIKEIT" is another buzzword with little underlying substance. It's true I'm not seeing something. I'm not seeing the benefit to the product (WP:PPP), to the readership, of this religious zeal of some to minimise the lengths of titles. "Concise" does not simply mean short. Concision is a valuable writing skill, difficult to teach, and moderately well developed by Wikipedia editors collectively, but when zealously applied to titles under 50 characters, it is a good principle carried to absurdity. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:54, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• Support as per Floydian and Skookum1. I'm not convinced that the reader will understand that having ", province" after the name is an indication of a community. If it is, then the guidelines and policies that cover it require changing to match. It is my understanding that the original standard was for towns to be without the ", something" and a later exception was added for the US because that is the common standard. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:10, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• You not convinced? Is that because you haven't thought on it, or looked up something in an atlas, or places in a traditional encyclopedia. You think that Name, British Columbia conveys no information beyond Name? Including when "Name" doesn't even sound like a place name, but actually sounds like something else? It made sense for major cities to be names shortly, but this became unworkable when Wikipedia content became populated with small settlements, suburbs, and such things that introduced undeniable ambiguity to non-locals, and a failure to meet WP:AT's "Precision" criterion. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:54, 2 April 2014 (UTC

Many years ago I held that position too, and wanted comma-province kept, including in face of guidelines which now call for "neighbourhood, city/municipality" because of common usage about such places. But consensus at WPCANADA/CANSTYLE is now very clear and is a standard convention for Canadian settlement titles of all kinds. Please see WP:CANLIST for a host of examples, many of them recently added to that list because of parallel RMs now closed/moved -only the BC and YT sections are up to date; a few more in BC should be added today, having closed yesterday (in my timezone, I'm in Thailand).Skookum1 (talk) 05:12, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

@SmokeyJoe:, I'm not convinced because you haven't said anything that convinces me. What does convince me is the guideline at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Region-specific guidance. @Skookum1:, As for Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board/List of undisambiguated communities I'm not sure that the BC list is complete, the YT isn't complete but the NU and NT ones may be. Also Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Canada-related articles#Neighbourhoods/communities indicates they should also be at "Placename" without the ", Province". CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 23:00, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

I thought I had BC complete then remembered to look up Kingcome and Mansons Landing and Germansens Landing. Perhaps not all settlements are in the "populated places in X RD" and similar categories; but there's more than enough on CANLIST to demonstrate the no-comma-province is an established practice. Again, myself I used to maintain that comma-province was how we knew such places and argued to keep it - but it gets to be visual clutter. Also, "Toronto, Canada" and "Vancouver, Canada" and "Montreal, Canada" are common global usages; non-Canadians don't often know the provinces names; all of those three names are internationally distinct of course, with or without comma-country (despite the long-ago "war" with advocates for Vancouver WA about which was primarytopic). The BC listing may not be complete; the ghost towns in BC category I haven't looked at yet, for example, and there's actually quite a few placenames out there that don't have articles/titles yet. I've been busy "elsewhere" so haven't had time to proceed across the country yet, also.Skookum1 (talk) 01:15, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

City Directory listings

There's no historical population or historical commerce here as yet, and I haven't added information on the ranching and farming industry in the area, the new winery, and more; but suffice to say History of Lillooet is a probable spin-off article...as there's so much of it, as with other towns of its vintage and historical importance in BC. In re the commercial and population matters, I have hand-written notes transcribed from early censuses to add, but also lately have discovered the Vancouver Public Library has a large collection of online city directories, which lay out who could afford to pay for a listing (not a population matter, more like a local who's-who and merchants, etc); among them the listing of the Chinese merchants for most years, and listings of farmers; "Lillooet" meaning more than today's DoL, of course, and also including listings for the rest of the Land District (incl e.g. Clinton and Big Bar). Pages like this from 1863, or this from 1898 are too many to list all here; some include descriptive articles about the local economy...including early mention of how well grapes grew. They're not available in all years; sometimes it's a San Francisco shipping guide or a Victoria-only list, or just a listing of government officials as in the 1860 one. Sometimes they might be used as a cite for other articles, such that so-and-so lived there or did business there for bios; had a full list for Bralorne in 20th C pages too, and Seton Portage and Shalalth and others sometimes have their own listings, depending on the year.

Starting this section to use for notes drawn from them as I have time to explore them; they're interesting reading if you know the local names, many of which are still around town (Lillooet has an entrenched settler population from gold rush/ranching times), and I'll use the merchant listing for the Chinatown section even though their stores were all facing Main Street (China Alley being out the back below the residential Chinatown below what is now the BCR/CN tracks); so far all I see is merchants, though I think Wo Hing was also listed as a farmer. With the names found, also, I'll write the Chinese resources institute at UBC again and ask for specific records on specific people and see if I get an answer this (fourth) time I will have written them. Watching the rotation of type of listing for certain individuals has been interesting e.g. Dan Hurley (businessman) who was hotelier, storekeeper, hunting guide and more, listed variously. The variable spelling of Joseph l'italienne (Joe Italian for example even though the name is French) gets interesting too; the name Nicoli in the first directory linked above is still around as Nickoli, and the family is still in the freighting business. Certain natives are listed, I'm thinking of Frank Gott's family,but then he was a hunting guide so that'st a business listing; few notable natives like James Scotchman (Grand Chief Jimmy Scotchman) have listings if any.Skookum1 (talk) 11:50, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

merge discussion

I see no reason at all for Lillooet railway station to be its own article, especially given its minimal content; the station is not notable itself.Skookum1 (talk) 09:05, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Note also the parallel merge discussion at Talk:Seton Portage#Merge discussion. Both NN and UNDUE and no reason to exist separately from their community articles.Skookum1 (talk) 09:09, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

• Oh yes. Both of them - but leave the redirect since it has a station building and is not just a flag stop. Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:01, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  • The "station building" at Seton is a wooden shed, nothing more. All rail stops/stations can have redirects to any locality article, as more practical, and be categorized as "stations" or "railway stops" or whatever. It's only when a station is architecturally or historically significant that it might warrant its own article, otherwise a section within a locality/community article will suffice.Skookum1 (talk) 02:30, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
    • What? You said "I see no reason at all for Lillooet railway station to be its own article" and I agreed. Who are you debating with? Secondarywaltz (talk) 02:35, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
      • Referring to both articles, and the overall context of railway stops, per them being redirects; explaining not arguing. This discussion is only formality before the actual merge (which, um, since you were the creator of these, I think, perhaps you could do yourself).Skookum1 (talk) 02:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
        • I did not create any of this stuff, I only tried to clean things us. This is the ultimate cleanup. Thanks. Secondarywaltz (talk) 02:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Lillooet. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140713004716/http://www.cscd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/infra/library/Name%20Incorp%202011.xls to http://www.cscd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/infra/library/Name%20Incorp%202011.xls
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130627223111/http://climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climate_normals/index_e.html to http://www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climate_normals/index_e.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130513184618/http://www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/advanceSearch/searchHistoricDataStations_e.html?searchType=stnName&timeframe=1&txtStationName=lillooet&searchMethod=contains&optLimit=yearRange&StartYear=1840&EndYear=2013&Month=1&Day=2&Year=2013&selRowPerPage=25&cmdStnSubmit=Search to http://www.climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/advanceSearch/searchHistoricDataStations_e.html?searchType=stnName&timeframe=1&txtStationName=lillooet&searchMethod=contains&optLimit=yearRange&StartYear=1840&EndYear=2013&Month=1&Day=2&Year=2013&selRowPerPage=25&cmdStnSubmit=Search
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100629152423/http://www.lillooetbc.com/Business/Population-Statistics.aspx to http://www.lillooetbc.com/Business/Population-Statistics.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090609200551/http://www.lillooetbc.com/Visitors/Visitor-Centre.aspx to http://www.lillooetbc.com/Visitors/Visitor-Centre.aspx

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) 22:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

June 2021 heatwave record (outdated?)

I’ve noticed that the heatwave record for the June 2021 heatwave may be outdated. References 7 and 10 both say that the highest temperature was 46.8C on June 29, but for some reason in the both the paragraph and climate table that cite these references it is showing what was then the record temperature of 44.8C recorded two days prior on June 27. Looking at the edit history I can see that this was originally there but was (possibly accidentally) reverted by a user because they were trying to revert some other more dodgy edits. Seeing that the June 29 record is clearly cited by both Sources 7 and 10, I was going to edit it back, but I didn’t want to accidentally start an edit war or create a problem. Should I do it or leave it as it is, despite it being outdated? - InterstellarGamer12321 (talk) 12:57, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Since it’s been a while and nobody has replied, I decided to be bold and do the edit. Revert if there’s a problem. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk) 13:06, 2 January 2022 (UTC)