Category talk:Plateaus of British Columbia
 | Canada: British Columbia / Geography Category‑class | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Plateaux vs Plateaus[edit]
isn't the plural of Plateau actually Plateaux ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sfsorrow2 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Both Plateaus and Plateaux are correct, so it don't really matter which one is used. --StoneCold 89 03:47, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
- This category uses Plateaus because that's what the other plateau categories use. Black Tusk (talk) 03:54, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Gonna start this, might as well start compiling it here as it will be hte "main" article for the catmore. havent' added other category-contents like Shuswap Highland or Westwood Plateau, this was just a copy-paste from a BCGNIS search for "% plateau".Skookum1 (talk) 20:15, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
}
I just updated the table by consolidating the coordinates into the coord template, and adding a column for map-link for those which do have maps already.Skookum1 (talk) 21:06, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- Not that it really matters, but should Chilcotin Plateau Basalts/Chilcotin Group be included in this list? Just because it is a lava plateau and some of the plateau articles already in the list are smaller portions of it, although Chilcotin Plateau Basalts or Chilcotin Group might not be official names but known in volcanology. This is also because other volcanic plateaus in different areas are included, see Columbia River Basalt Group for example. Black Tusk (talk) 20:58, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- Well, to me, there's a distinction between geographic objects/names and geologic objects/classifications; it's a different taxonomy. Also, in the case of the Chilcotin Plateau Basalts, they're pretty well identical with Fraser Plateau, or rather are the defining geological characteristic of the geographic object; it would be enough to put "See Chilcotin Plateau Basalts in the "comments" field of the Fraser, Cariboo and Chilcotin Plateaus, wouldn't it? Note also that I didn't include Plateau Icefield and other non-plateau "plateau names", and I'm dithering about "unofficial plateaus" like Eagle Heights, but since they're in the category they woudl seem to belong here....also plateau-like landforms like Burrard Peninsula strike me as candidates; but then so would the Aldergrove Upland or whatever it's called, ditto areas like Ferndale-Cedar Valley in Mission; which arne't in BCGNIS naming but are decidedly plateaus.....some of these I'm not sure hwere they are - that's why I laid out the coordinates in the maplink way, so i could have a look. I'm also thinking the "scale:60000" setting for some of them should be adjusted, e.g. if it's a huge landform like the Fraser Plateau or Liard Plateau the resulting map shoudl show the whole item, not just its centrepoint and environs...the Yukon Plateau had a latlong in BCGNIS but I ignored it as the true geographic centre of it will be in Yukon Territory. Certainly there are other bits of BC that could go on here; I'm uncertain as to whether the Chilcotin Plateau Basalts are a plateau; the basalts form the Chilcotin Plateau, also the Cariboo and by default the Fraser Plateau; but they are not a plateau themselves, they are a group of classified rocks, no? and include non-plateau objects as well....Skookum1 (talk) 21:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- According to the book Volcanoes of North America: United States and Canada, the Chilcotin Group is a flat-lying lava plateau made of basalt flows that cover about 25,000 km2 of the Interior Plateau of south-central British Columbia and have a volume of about 1,800 km3. I'll create some plateau articles that are curently red links. Black Tusk (talk) 22:45, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- In that definition, it seems identical to the Fraser Plateau, which is comprised of the Chilcotin and Cariboo Plateaus combined. I suppose we'll run into this again, where a geologic name and a geographic name are different, i.e. two different taxonomic systems. A similar issue exists with thigns in Ecoregion categories (see Talk:Columbia Plateau)....hmmm I wonder if there's Northwest Plateau, which in ethnography is the Columbia, Thompson and Fraser Plateaus (but not hte nechako)....I"m not suggesting that Fraser Plateau and Chilcotin Plateau Basalts should be merged...but you shoudl note that the real synsax of "Chilcotin Plateau Basalts" is with the first two words functioning as an adjectival phrase, and "Basalts of teh Chilcotin Plateau" is teh actual meaning, i.e. "of the type comrpising hte Chilcotin Plateau]] because the area/lgeogform in question is bigger than the Chilcotin Plateau, which is its namesake. Does your Volcanoes of Canada book not mention the Fraser Plateau by nname? Once again, it would help if the different disciplines started referncing each otehr's terminologies and taxonomnies, rather than always re-inventing the wheel under different names. Other "plateau-like landforms" are going to find their way on to this list and the geographic listing is'nt teh definingn one....I've wondered what to do about Sared headwaters, for instance, as it's not a range, is more like a plateau, is really defined by its watersheds....and thigns like teh Liard Plain and even Level Mountain Range are moer plateau-like than they are plains or ranges...(and Level Mountain is the Kawdy Plateau, isn't it?- which is built in redundancy in Holland's classification if it is.). Anyway leave it on then; we should probably ad a coolumn for source/citation for each entry I guess, so it's clear where the definition/name comes from....Skookum1 (talk) 15:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- It does not mention the Fraser or any other plateau, just the Interior and "Chilcotin Group" lava plateau. According to the same book, Level Mountain lies between the Kawdy volcanoes and the Coast Mountains. And the Kawdy Plateau most likely contains granite if Atsutla Range is made of granite. Level Mountain can't be part of the same formation (or can it?) because Level Mountain is volcanic origin. The book can be found here and if you happen to look for the Level Mountain Range section there should be a map of the surrounding area. Black Tusk (talk) 21:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- In that definition, it seems identical to the Fraser Plateau, which is comprised of the Chilcotin and Cariboo Plateaus combined. I suppose we'll run into this again, where a geologic name and a geographic name are different, i.e. two different taxonomic systems. A similar issue exists with thigns in Ecoregion categories (see Talk:Columbia Plateau)....hmmm I wonder if there's Northwest Plateau, which in ethnography is the Columbia, Thompson and Fraser Plateaus (but not hte nechako)....I"m not suggesting that Fraser Plateau and Chilcotin Plateau Basalts should be merged...but you shoudl note that the real synsax of "Chilcotin Plateau Basalts" is with the first two words functioning as an adjectival phrase, and "Basalts of teh Chilcotin Plateau" is teh actual meaning, i.e. "of the type comrpising hte Chilcotin Plateau]] because the area/lgeogform in question is bigger than the Chilcotin Plateau, which is its namesake. Does your Volcanoes of Canada book not mention the Fraser Plateau by nname? Once again, it would help if the different disciplines started referncing each otehr's terminologies and taxonomnies, rather than always re-inventing the wheel under different names. Other "plateau-like landforms" are going to find their way on to this list and the geographic listing is'nt teh definingn one....I've wondered what to do about Sared headwaters, for instance, as it's not a range, is more like a plateau, is really defined by its watersheds....and thigns like teh Liard Plain and even Level Mountain Range are moer plateau-like than they are plains or ranges...(and Level Mountain is the Kawdy Plateau, isn't it?- which is built in redundancy in Holland's classification if it is.). Anyway leave it on then; we should probably ad a coolumn for source/citation for each entry I guess, so it's clear where the definition/name comes from....Skookum1 (talk) 15:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- According to the book Volcanoes of North America: United States and Canada, the Chilcotin Group is a flat-lying lava plateau made of basalt flows that cover about 25,000 km2 of the Interior Plateau of south-central British Columbia and have a volume of about 1,800 km3. I'll create some plateau articles that are curently red links. Black Tusk (talk) 22:45, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
- Well, to me, there's a distinction between geographic objects/names and geologic objects/classifications; it's a different taxonomy. Also, in the case of the Chilcotin Plateau Basalts, they're pretty well identical with Fraser Plateau, or rather are the defining geological characteristic of the geographic object; it would be enough to put "See Chilcotin Plateau Basalts in the "comments" field of the Fraser, Cariboo and Chilcotin Plateaus, wouldn't it? Note also that I didn't include Plateau Icefield and other non-plateau "plateau names", and I'm dithering about "unofficial plateaus" like Eagle Heights, but since they're in the category they woudl seem to belong here....also plateau-like landforms like Burrard Peninsula strike me as candidates; but then so would the Aldergrove Upland or whatever it's called, ditto areas like Ferndale-Cedar Valley in Mission; which arne't in BCGNIS naming but are decidedly plateaus.....some of these I'm not sure hwere they are - that's why I laid out the coordinates in the maplink way, so i could have a look. I'm also thinking the "scale:60000" setting for some of them should be adjusted, e.g. if it's a huge landform like the Fraser Plateau or Liard Plateau the resulting map shoudl show the whole item, not just its centrepoint and environs...the Yukon Plateau had a latlong in BCGNIS but I ignored it as the true geographic centre of it will be in Yukon Territory. Certainly there are other bits of BC that could go on here; I'm uncertain as to whether the Chilcotin Plateau Basalts are a plateau; the basalts form the Chilcotin Plateau, also the Cariboo and by default the Fraser Plateau; but they are not a plateau themselves, they are a group of classified rocks, no? and include non-plateau objects as well....Skookum1 (talk) 21:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
WP Canada class[edit]
Hi - I changed the Class in the WikiProject Canada banner to List because I'm trying to manage down the unassessed pages in Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Canada-related articles by quality statistics, and there's no Category class in the statistics. Talk pages that were set as Category or Template class showed up as "unassessed". List class is better than non-article because a category is a list of articles. PKT(alk) 00:46, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- but I've been pondering this; many categories should get tags, I think, because there's so many proliferating and getting named which maybe should more under group "awareness", I don't know whether really having them with the WP templates really does that; but certainly if there's dsicussion on a category talkpage it shoudl get the template; can't we create an assessment rating that just says "category". I'm unclear on the details natch....Skookum1 (talk) 01:04, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- Then there should be a "Category-class" category for categories. "List-class" categories should be for lists only. Black Tusk (talk) 02:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- I wouldn't disagree, but I have no idea how the statistic-gathering process would have to change in order to count the categories and templates separately. PKT(alk) 03:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- I don't know either, but I know such categories exist, see Category:WikiProject Volcanoes categories for example. Perhaps this is something to discuss at the Canada WikiProject. Black Tusk (talk) 01:42, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- I wouldn't disagree, but I have no idea how the statistic-gathering process would have to change in order to count the categories and templates separately. PKT(alk) 03:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- Then there should be a "Category-class" category for categories. "List-class" categories should be for lists only. Black Tusk (talk) 02:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC)