![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Vancouver has been nominated again to become a featured article. Go to Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Vancouver to view the review and submit your support. If there are comments for improvement on the review, help out and try to improve the article to meet their requirements. Mkdw talk 05:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
The discussion about densification in downtown as city initiative currently in the first paragraph isn't by rights a "demographics" topic; it belongs somewhere else but I'm not sure; unless Architecture is retitled Architecture and Planning. The blurb about Sullivan's pet policy seems like political bumpf; the densification of Downtown South/Yaletown, Coal Harbour and International Village/City Gate are more specific, and pre-date Smilin' Sam becoming mayor; a lot of this paragraph sounds like planner-friendly apologism, too; Vancouver's motive isn't to reduce sprawl, which is a suburban problem, but to generate more construction, hence via property value and increased population more tax revenues, and more pretense to seeming like a "world city". And I'm a bit stunned to see almost no mention of the diversity and range of backgrounds of those of British heritage, who are the historically most important of all groups in the city (whether seen pro, or fashionably con); or the Scandinavians and others who have been here from the beginning; there is, in other words, a fascination/confabulation with non-white demographics in this section, and in the demographics article. Both should be in terms of at least showing some interest in other groups; particularly the Brits, in all their diversity. That Vancouver also had the largest from-Europe component, and from-Britain components, than any other part of the country, ever since its founding - even moreso than the Prairies, should also be noted. Also the highest rates of interethnic and interracial marriage, despite the latter-day pretension that BC was the most racist part of the country (nobody else got the chance to be racist because of the relatively mono-ethnic nature of communities in other parts of the country; even in the Prairies certain ethnic groups dominate certain small towns, and non-whites were rare from the Rockies to the Atlantic, other than aboriginal and black Canadians in ON and NS. Skookum1 08:48, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
The reason that they are both is that many Latin Americans here are ladino or criolla stock, i.e. upper-class, more white than mestizo; although there are lots of mestizos. I have several Argentinem, Chilean and Brazilian friends/acquaintances who are not "visible" as minorities, albeit they are certainly "audible" and recognizable; "visible" Latin Americans, i.e. of mestizo background, tend to be from Mexico, Central America, and northwestern South America, although many Mexicans living here now are definitely from the ladino/white upper class stock. In general I think "visible" and "non-visible/invisible" designation of minorities is unworkable in Vancouver; "audible" is far more relevant, since there are assimilated Chinese and Japanese as well as assimilated Scandinavians and Poles; i.e. trying to categorize people by colour just doesn't work, especially in complex cases like people of US or Latin American origin (many blacks in the city, for instance, are US in origin, others from Africa, others from Europe/Britain, others from the Caribbean and sometimes Latin America; so who's what?). Given the racial multiplicity of Vancouver now I think the term "minority" is also an unwelcome transplant from US civil rights jargon that has outlived its usefulness here; especially in Richmond and Vancouver where there is no clear majority any longer. BTW cites for the new British-stock mention at the opening of the demographics section are the various Canadian censuses (censi?) and also Strangers Entertained (cf. Talk:English-Canadians). Skookum1 20:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
PS - and does anybody actually call West Broadway "Greektown" (other than city bureaucrats, that is)?? I don't know any Greeks that call it that, and I know lots of Greeks. Speaking of assimilation, here's a group that has maintained its language/culture in-family for the most part and, when they first arrived, were considered a "visible" minority (i.e. "not quite white", as were at one time Italians, Yugos and other Mediterranean peoples) but are now definitely placed in the "white" camp. Which is why I think it's high-time Vancouver got over the visible/invisible thing; it's never been a useful definition except for people with a "point to make" (claims for compensation). Skookum1 20:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you Skookum. I have many friends from South and Central America who are immigrants and still have their accents but most Canadians and they themselves would say they are Latin in culture but are White. The term Hispanic doesn't exist here especially and I've never really heard an educated person use it in Canada as I believe it is seen more of an American derogatory term. I have two women at work with a light complexion, and medium brown hair and one has green eyes and I would consider them White just as much as my blonde haired and blue-eyed self. Nowadays in Canada people of Iberian and Mediterranian descent are considered White, so therefore it makes perfect sense that Latin Americans of Spanish and Portuguese descent would be considered White. I also have never heard of anyone call West Broadway "Greektown". It does have a few Greek restaurants and shops, but over the last five years many have closed down and now there's a pretty good mix of shops from other ethnic flavourings. I'm in my mid-twenties though so maybe that's an older term used by those that were around when it was a full-out Greek neighbourhood. Although nowadays I see more Greeks living in Kerrisdale than I do in Kits and have lived in both neighbourhoods. Rapunzel In Van 11:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I have to shout a resounding "who cares?" about the concept of visible minorities. At the extremes, it can be an objective (superficial) measurement. In the middle, it's constant debate. And even when it's objective... to what end? In Vancouver, of all cities, noting one as a visible minority accomplishes very little in terms of concluding what "status" the person holds professionally, socially, economically, or how they vote politically. I understand that federally, the Canadian government still holds onto the concept of a "visible minority"... but here in context... what does it actually contribute to the article about Vancouver? -- Ds13 19:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
...have people been mucking up the footnotes? After hearing many comments about how a lot of the footnotes were inconsistently and/or improperly formatted, and after dropping hints for someone else to do it, and realizing this was a major sticking point for the fac, I took on the tedious task of systematically going through them and fixing them. Now I see that the retreival dates have been removed from most (but not all) of the notes, same with the ISBN numbers (just the number, not "ISBN" for some reason), and other things (like changing the name of BC Studies to British Columbia Studies, which is NOt the name of that rag), and possibly other things. I can't imagine why these changes were made, perhaps it was some malfunctioning wikipedia "bot" turned evil and retaliating against its human oppressors, but if it was you, please fix 'em. Thank you. Bobanny 04:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Nice article, but I think that the infobox is confusing. It is not clear if the Pop'n rank and the Metro rank is within Canadian cities or world cities. Plus, it is also unclear for someone who has no knowledge about Canadian politics wether the members of parliament and legislative assembly represent the city, the district or the province . CG 18:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Vancouver is now a featured article. Thank you all for your tireless contributions in making Vancouver one of the newest Featured Articles. If you wish to help out with other Vancouver related articles, please visit the WikiProject Vancouver. Mkdw talk 00:01, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
To heck with it; I just sent their website a query as to what name they use for it in Chinese, and what characters if any. They/he may answer here, as I linked him to the section/page for reference as to why we're asking. Skookum1 02:23, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Would Gung Haggis Fat Choy which already has its own article be a good example of harmony, either replacing or adding to the Dragon Boat Festival and Lunar New Year's Day Parade? -- TheMightyQuill 05:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
A side note, which might make MightyQuill grimace a bit given my edits elsewhere ;-) but it struck me when seeing this section that non-Asian events aren't mentioned, e.g. the St. Patrick's Day Parade, which also has a multi-ethnic flavour/context (especially since Vancouver's not known as an Irish ghetto). As with the demographics section, the self-fascination of Asian topics re Vancouver is more than a bit tiresome, and indicative of a certain prejudice/cultural egotism; I'd have added the St. Pat's Parade by now but I don't know enough about it to write even a stub, other than of course what day it's on. Canada Day, you'd think, would also be mentioned in the multicultural-events context. The flip side of the "tradition" of the Dragon Boat Races is that the REAL tradition in canoe-racing in BC was the old War Canoe Races on Dominion Day, which were a highlight of the city's annual calendar until they were forbidden as a result of the anti-Potlatch laws of 1922; although the audiences were from all backgrounds, all participants were the First Nations of the Coast and Fraser only. Skookum1 01:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Here's another event, although since it's held in Burnaby (but for Greater Vancouver) maybe it doesn't count: EurofestBC, which is on the May weekend (or thereabouts) at the Scandinavian Centre near Eight Rinks in Burnaby (in the angle of land between the freeway, Sprott and Kensington). Watching Serbs and Croats glare at each other from their respective baking booths is more than half the fun.... Skookum1 01:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC) Diwali, also, seems to becoming more cross-cultural in recent years.... Skookum1 01:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC) One more: the emergence of " fusion cuisine", which is a globaliing step up from normal "West Coast Fusion".... Skookum1 01:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC) Ooops - Greek Days is increasingly multicultural also, or rather I'm meaning "cross-cultural" as "multicultural" tends to also have a monoethnic meaning.... Skookum1 01:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Gung Haggis Fat Choy, on the other hand, is more pointedly Scots and Chinese, and IIRC the founder's name is also intercultural (Todd Wong aka "Toddish McWong") and he's of fifth generation Chinese origin; started by invitation to Wong by the SFU pipe band, it's also intercultural in nature although entirely Scots and Chinese in repertoire, and historically authentic in a couple of ways - the Scottish being the predominant non-First Nations ethnic group here pre-World War I, and there also being a long tradition of pipe bands in Hong Kong (and with Chinese pipers, although I think pipe bands in HK had Gurkha or Sikh or other South Asian British military as members also) due to the British military and cultural presence there; but pipe bands here have always had Chinese, Ukrainian, Scandinavian, German, Japanese and other flavours in their corps, as also in the main military bands. Be fun to see a pipe band try some bhangra sometime, maybe ;-). Skookum1 05:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Not sure where to put the Polar Bear Swim here, as it's just indigenous - although, contrary to popular folklore, it wasn't the first (see [ [2]], although that currently redirects to Coney Island Polar Bear Club but should instead be a disambig; Coney Island's dates to 1903, ours only to 1920 (see [ Polar Bear Swim google search] for others worldwide); what's interesting about ours is that it was founded by the Pantages family of theatre-circuit fame, who are still part of the city's upper-class social whirl; and there used to be a Pantages - a very nice Pantages - a Pantages Theatre, that is, down on the old theatre row, the Great White Way (Vancouver) (see Talk:Great White Way), which was from Main to Abbott/Cambie before it turned into what it is now (ahem) (needs an article, obviously). But the Polar Bear Swim is getting pretty colourful, other than the usual pornographic reindeer and other fun costumes; and it always was, as Vancouver's beach was never segregated in any way (hard to consider doing that when the boss lifeguard Joe Fortes was from Barbados or wherever). I think there was a dragon dance or lion dance that plunged into the water this year; I didn't go, although somewhere in all the junk in my house I've got eight or so participant buttons from the late '80s/early '90s; I'm not sure if it's the cold or the hangover (from the chocolatized vodka we used as prep) that keeps me from going anymore; maybe I'm just getting old. Skookum1 05:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
"Haggis" maybe could be represented by an ideogram - an neologistic ideogram maybe - of the character for a stomach overlaid by the characters for oats and "stuffed"; just speculating, if there's not already something in Chinese cuisine that's close to the concept (and I wouldn't be surprised...). Re Halloween and Wicca: Halloween, like Carnaval and Christmas, is more about the survival of ancient pagan traditions into the new calendar (unlike Carnaval and Christmas, it doesn't have directly Christian overtones; its importance forced the church to place All Saints and All Souls on the successive two days of the calendar, though); and I don't think Wicca should get the credit - holistic mother-earth touchy-feely-feelgood nature religions don't quite fit the bill if you know the history of druidic and pre-druidic worship (human sacrifice and all that); Wicca's a soft-core version of ancient Celtic paganism in my estimation, and has no a priori rites to Halloween; just as Christianity has coopted Yule/Jul as a Christian feast (when the poor little blighter was actually a Pisces, not a Capricorn...). 'Nuff for now, but all food for thought, huh? Skookum1 05:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Suggestion: as per the old War Canoe Races, and the Sea Festival in its original form, there are historical events in the city that are no more that should maybe have articles one day; same with old buildings like the original ExPark exhibition structures, the Orillia; the Birks Building and the Second Hotel Vancouver have articles now, but there are others. I'll put my sig on the end of all the paragraphs preceding so people can intersperse replies. Skookum1 05:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
One last shot though: the role of places like the Croatian Cultural Centre, which hosts non-Croatian events right and left, also the [ http://www.italianculturalcentre.ca/Italian Cultural Centre] and others, e.g. Cambrian Hall; but the Croatian Centre is notable for its Latin American and African events and music. I think perhaps the "racial tolerance" phrasing might be better re-termed "ethnic tolerance", as it's not always about race ("invisible minorities" and all that). A listing of all the various ethnic community clubs does seem a propos, e.g. the German and Polish Halls on Fraser, Cambrian Hall (Welsh), the Irish Community Centre on Prior, and so on). Skookum1 05:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
How could I forget - the Powell Street Festival (in Oppenheimer Park, which is a lot more than just Japanese culture meets junkie culture (though it's a lot of that). There's also the role of interdemoninational and universalist religions in the city's history, such as the Unitarian Church and others on "Religion Row" (south Oak). Skookum1 05:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
The Lunar New Year Parade was predominantly Chinese during its existence; it was on the opening day of the big Chinese New Year thing held in the PNE buildings, the Forum mostly I think, but word in the paper last week is it's not going to be held this year. Diwali is generally still South Asian (inherently multiethnic as Sikhs, Hindus and South Asian Muslims all celebrate it); but this year it seemed that there were a lot of non-South Asians hitting the stores for deals on Diwali sweets and specials on saris and silk/lamé and other specialty fabrics. Skookum1 05:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Maybe a useful link for all events: Links to Events Pages In and Around Vancouver, B.C. Skookum1 07:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I've noticed the occasional dispute over whether to use Scotland's flag or the Union Jack's flag for the sister city section, so I checked out what the standard is for other cities on Wikipedia. I discovered that there is none. To the person who insists that sovereignty is the correct measure and therefore it should be the Union Jack, check out: Florence; Alexandria, Virginia; Sarasota, Florida; San Diego; Nice; Xi'an; Munich; and Tokyo for examples that use the Scottish flag instead of the Union Jack. Other cities don't mention sister cities at all. My guess is that the closest thing to a compromise is to use both flags (since both places are mentioned anyway), for which there are also plenty of precedents, such as: Sarasota, Florida; Havanna; Washington D.C.; Turin; Yantai; and Dunedin. Bobanny 17:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I was surprised to see no mention at all about the growing television and movie industry in and around Vancouver. Several U.S. television shows are filmed in the area. Some even call Vancouver "Hollywood North." I think there should be a new category titled "Hollywood North" in quotes, along with a description of the industry and its history in Vancouver. There could also be a link to a more detailed article about the industry, as well as a section that lists all the TV shows and movies that have been and are being filmed in the Vancouver area.
There could also be links to TV-related sites like Hollywood North Report and official sites for shows that are filmed there, like Battlestar Galactica, Smallville, Stargate Atlantis, Stargate SG-1, and The X-Files (which was filmed in Vancouver during its early seasons). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123home123 ( talk • contribs)
Hollywood North Report] is filmed here? Looks very Toronto...oh, I'm thinking of Entertainment Tonight Canada. Which brings to issue the fact that while Hollywood North is very much a Vancouver term, and originated here and within the non-Canadian industry (i.e. the non-Toronto-based film sector) it still means Vancouver/Greater Vancouver and its branch locations (including Calgary and Victoria, interestingly). But in Toronto-speak Hollywood North is all about T.O. and as we all know in Toronto show biz Vancouver is a blip except for its nice restaurants and the chance of running into stars in Yaletown bars; they've coopted Hollywood North as if it were only about them, just as they have also done with The Big Smoke (used also in the UK for London and Manchester, but from what I understand was genuinely coined here). The Hollywood North article when I found it barely mentioned Vancouver, but obsessed over T.O. based shows and the Mock Walk of Fame on Yonge Street (look, T.O....there's only one Hollywood Boulevard, OK? And only one Broadway...and I don't mean ours). Whatever; just a heads-up about the Hollywood North thing and the associated article; it needs monitoring because earnest types from the Centre of the Universe insist on writing it to up-play their version of reality. Since they are the only reality, that is, at least if you listen to the media in this country.... Skookum1 07:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
The classification box should read "City of Vancouver" instead of simply "Vancouver" since it appears to be the Wikipedia standard to use the "official" name of any country, nation-state, American state, etc. in such classification boxes. Further, I notice alot of articles about Vancouver's neighbouring municipalities that do not mention the official names of such municipalities. Why simply say "Delta" when one should be saying "The Incorporation of Delta" when the government website of that municipality uses such as a legalistic title? I know that lawyers are the only type of people who really care about municipal boundaries and official names, but this is still Wikipedia and all the technical and legalistic details should be mentioned. After all, municipalities, whether a city, town, township, village, etc., are merely creations of the law of incorporation.
I was wondering if any person living in the Greater Vancouver Area had a hand in writing this article because there is lack of distinction being made between the City of Vancouver (i.e. Vancouver proper) and the surrounding municipalities such as the City of Burnaby, City of Richmond, etc. Until the Greater Vancouver Area undergoes the type of municipal amalgamations as seen in the Toronto, Ottawa and Hamilton areas, this important distinction must be made. This article should not use the simple word "Vancouver" to mean the larger metro area that includes Burnaby, Richmond, etc. Doing so would be very confusing to a reader in view of the Greater Vancouver Area map with all those municipal boundaries drawn in.
-- User:Alf74 17:35, 04 December 2006 (UTC)
I've requested a peer review for this article. If you're interested in giving some feedback, click here. Thanks, Bobanny 00:22, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Vancouver's port exports more cargo than any other port in Norht America...what about New York or Los Angeles?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TotallyTempo ( talk • contribs) 21:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC).
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Vancouver has been nominated again to become a featured article. Go to Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Vancouver to view the review and submit your support. If there are comments for improvement on the review, help out and try to improve the article to meet their requirements. Mkdw talk 05:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
The discussion about densification in downtown as city initiative currently in the first paragraph isn't by rights a "demographics" topic; it belongs somewhere else but I'm not sure; unless Architecture is retitled Architecture and Planning. The blurb about Sullivan's pet policy seems like political bumpf; the densification of Downtown South/Yaletown, Coal Harbour and International Village/City Gate are more specific, and pre-date Smilin' Sam becoming mayor; a lot of this paragraph sounds like planner-friendly apologism, too; Vancouver's motive isn't to reduce sprawl, which is a suburban problem, but to generate more construction, hence via property value and increased population more tax revenues, and more pretense to seeming like a "world city". And I'm a bit stunned to see almost no mention of the diversity and range of backgrounds of those of British heritage, who are the historically most important of all groups in the city (whether seen pro, or fashionably con); or the Scandinavians and others who have been here from the beginning; there is, in other words, a fascination/confabulation with non-white demographics in this section, and in the demographics article. Both should be in terms of at least showing some interest in other groups; particularly the Brits, in all their diversity. That Vancouver also had the largest from-Europe component, and from-Britain components, than any other part of the country, ever since its founding - even moreso than the Prairies, should also be noted. Also the highest rates of interethnic and interracial marriage, despite the latter-day pretension that BC was the most racist part of the country (nobody else got the chance to be racist because of the relatively mono-ethnic nature of communities in other parts of the country; even in the Prairies certain ethnic groups dominate certain small towns, and non-whites were rare from the Rockies to the Atlantic, other than aboriginal and black Canadians in ON and NS. Skookum1 08:48, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
The reason that they are both is that many Latin Americans here are ladino or criolla stock, i.e. upper-class, more white than mestizo; although there are lots of mestizos. I have several Argentinem, Chilean and Brazilian friends/acquaintances who are not "visible" as minorities, albeit they are certainly "audible" and recognizable; "visible" Latin Americans, i.e. of mestizo background, tend to be from Mexico, Central America, and northwestern South America, although many Mexicans living here now are definitely from the ladino/white upper class stock. In general I think "visible" and "non-visible/invisible" designation of minorities is unworkable in Vancouver; "audible" is far more relevant, since there are assimilated Chinese and Japanese as well as assimilated Scandinavians and Poles; i.e. trying to categorize people by colour just doesn't work, especially in complex cases like people of US or Latin American origin (many blacks in the city, for instance, are US in origin, others from Africa, others from Europe/Britain, others from the Caribbean and sometimes Latin America; so who's what?). Given the racial multiplicity of Vancouver now I think the term "minority" is also an unwelcome transplant from US civil rights jargon that has outlived its usefulness here; especially in Richmond and Vancouver where there is no clear majority any longer. BTW cites for the new British-stock mention at the opening of the demographics section are the various Canadian censuses (censi?) and also Strangers Entertained (cf. Talk:English-Canadians). Skookum1 20:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
PS - and does anybody actually call West Broadway "Greektown" (other than city bureaucrats, that is)?? I don't know any Greeks that call it that, and I know lots of Greeks. Speaking of assimilation, here's a group that has maintained its language/culture in-family for the most part and, when they first arrived, were considered a "visible" minority (i.e. "not quite white", as were at one time Italians, Yugos and other Mediterranean peoples) but are now definitely placed in the "white" camp. Which is why I think it's high-time Vancouver got over the visible/invisible thing; it's never been a useful definition except for people with a "point to make" (claims for compensation). Skookum1 20:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you Skookum. I have many friends from South and Central America who are immigrants and still have their accents but most Canadians and they themselves would say they are Latin in culture but are White. The term Hispanic doesn't exist here especially and I've never really heard an educated person use it in Canada as I believe it is seen more of an American derogatory term. I have two women at work with a light complexion, and medium brown hair and one has green eyes and I would consider them White just as much as my blonde haired and blue-eyed self. Nowadays in Canada people of Iberian and Mediterranian descent are considered White, so therefore it makes perfect sense that Latin Americans of Spanish and Portuguese descent would be considered White. I also have never heard of anyone call West Broadway "Greektown". It does have a few Greek restaurants and shops, but over the last five years many have closed down and now there's a pretty good mix of shops from other ethnic flavourings. I'm in my mid-twenties though so maybe that's an older term used by those that were around when it was a full-out Greek neighbourhood. Although nowadays I see more Greeks living in Kerrisdale than I do in Kits and have lived in both neighbourhoods. Rapunzel In Van 11:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
I have to shout a resounding "who cares?" about the concept of visible minorities. At the extremes, it can be an objective (superficial) measurement. In the middle, it's constant debate. And even when it's objective... to what end? In Vancouver, of all cities, noting one as a visible minority accomplishes very little in terms of concluding what "status" the person holds professionally, socially, economically, or how they vote politically. I understand that federally, the Canadian government still holds onto the concept of a "visible minority"... but here in context... what does it actually contribute to the article about Vancouver? -- Ds13 19:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
...have people been mucking up the footnotes? After hearing many comments about how a lot of the footnotes were inconsistently and/or improperly formatted, and after dropping hints for someone else to do it, and realizing this was a major sticking point for the fac, I took on the tedious task of systematically going through them and fixing them. Now I see that the retreival dates have been removed from most (but not all) of the notes, same with the ISBN numbers (just the number, not "ISBN" for some reason), and other things (like changing the name of BC Studies to British Columbia Studies, which is NOt the name of that rag), and possibly other things. I can't imagine why these changes were made, perhaps it was some malfunctioning wikipedia "bot" turned evil and retaliating against its human oppressors, but if it was you, please fix 'em. Thank you. Bobanny 04:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Nice article, but I think that the infobox is confusing. It is not clear if the Pop'n rank and the Metro rank is within Canadian cities or world cities. Plus, it is also unclear for someone who has no knowledge about Canadian politics wether the members of parliament and legislative assembly represent the city, the district or the province . CG 18:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Vancouver is now a featured article. Thank you all for your tireless contributions in making Vancouver one of the newest Featured Articles. If you wish to help out with other Vancouver related articles, please visit the WikiProject Vancouver. Mkdw talk 00:01, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
To heck with it; I just sent their website a query as to what name they use for it in Chinese, and what characters if any. They/he may answer here, as I linked him to the section/page for reference as to why we're asking. Skookum1 02:23, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Would Gung Haggis Fat Choy which already has its own article be a good example of harmony, either replacing or adding to the Dragon Boat Festival and Lunar New Year's Day Parade? -- TheMightyQuill 05:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
A side note, which might make MightyQuill grimace a bit given my edits elsewhere ;-) but it struck me when seeing this section that non-Asian events aren't mentioned, e.g. the St. Patrick's Day Parade, which also has a multi-ethnic flavour/context (especially since Vancouver's not known as an Irish ghetto). As with the demographics section, the self-fascination of Asian topics re Vancouver is more than a bit tiresome, and indicative of a certain prejudice/cultural egotism; I'd have added the St. Pat's Parade by now but I don't know enough about it to write even a stub, other than of course what day it's on. Canada Day, you'd think, would also be mentioned in the multicultural-events context. The flip side of the "tradition" of the Dragon Boat Races is that the REAL tradition in canoe-racing in BC was the old War Canoe Races on Dominion Day, which were a highlight of the city's annual calendar until they were forbidden as a result of the anti-Potlatch laws of 1922; although the audiences were from all backgrounds, all participants were the First Nations of the Coast and Fraser only. Skookum1 01:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Here's another event, although since it's held in Burnaby (but for Greater Vancouver) maybe it doesn't count: EurofestBC, which is on the May weekend (or thereabouts) at the Scandinavian Centre near Eight Rinks in Burnaby (in the angle of land between the freeway, Sprott and Kensington). Watching Serbs and Croats glare at each other from their respective baking booths is more than half the fun.... Skookum1 01:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC) Diwali, also, seems to becoming more cross-cultural in recent years.... Skookum1 01:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC) One more: the emergence of " fusion cuisine", which is a globaliing step up from normal "West Coast Fusion".... Skookum1 01:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC) Ooops - Greek Days is increasingly multicultural also, or rather I'm meaning "cross-cultural" as "multicultural" tends to also have a monoethnic meaning.... Skookum1 01:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Gung Haggis Fat Choy, on the other hand, is more pointedly Scots and Chinese, and IIRC the founder's name is also intercultural (Todd Wong aka "Toddish McWong") and he's of fifth generation Chinese origin; started by invitation to Wong by the SFU pipe band, it's also intercultural in nature although entirely Scots and Chinese in repertoire, and historically authentic in a couple of ways - the Scottish being the predominant non-First Nations ethnic group here pre-World War I, and there also being a long tradition of pipe bands in Hong Kong (and with Chinese pipers, although I think pipe bands in HK had Gurkha or Sikh or other South Asian British military as members also) due to the British military and cultural presence there; but pipe bands here have always had Chinese, Ukrainian, Scandinavian, German, Japanese and other flavours in their corps, as also in the main military bands. Be fun to see a pipe band try some bhangra sometime, maybe ;-). Skookum1 05:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Not sure where to put the Polar Bear Swim here, as it's just indigenous - although, contrary to popular folklore, it wasn't the first (see [ [2]], although that currently redirects to Coney Island Polar Bear Club but should instead be a disambig; Coney Island's dates to 1903, ours only to 1920 (see [ Polar Bear Swim google search] for others worldwide); what's interesting about ours is that it was founded by the Pantages family of theatre-circuit fame, who are still part of the city's upper-class social whirl; and there used to be a Pantages - a very nice Pantages - a Pantages Theatre, that is, down on the old theatre row, the Great White Way (Vancouver) (see Talk:Great White Way), which was from Main to Abbott/Cambie before it turned into what it is now (ahem) (needs an article, obviously). But the Polar Bear Swim is getting pretty colourful, other than the usual pornographic reindeer and other fun costumes; and it always was, as Vancouver's beach was never segregated in any way (hard to consider doing that when the boss lifeguard Joe Fortes was from Barbados or wherever). I think there was a dragon dance or lion dance that plunged into the water this year; I didn't go, although somewhere in all the junk in my house I've got eight or so participant buttons from the late '80s/early '90s; I'm not sure if it's the cold or the hangover (from the chocolatized vodka we used as prep) that keeps me from going anymore; maybe I'm just getting old. Skookum1 05:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
"Haggis" maybe could be represented by an ideogram - an neologistic ideogram maybe - of the character for a stomach overlaid by the characters for oats and "stuffed"; just speculating, if there's not already something in Chinese cuisine that's close to the concept (and I wouldn't be surprised...). Re Halloween and Wicca: Halloween, like Carnaval and Christmas, is more about the survival of ancient pagan traditions into the new calendar (unlike Carnaval and Christmas, it doesn't have directly Christian overtones; its importance forced the church to place All Saints and All Souls on the successive two days of the calendar, though); and I don't think Wicca should get the credit - holistic mother-earth touchy-feely-feelgood nature religions don't quite fit the bill if you know the history of druidic and pre-druidic worship (human sacrifice and all that); Wicca's a soft-core version of ancient Celtic paganism in my estimation, and has no a priori rites to Halloween; just as Christianity has coopted Yule/Jul as a Christian feast (when the poor little blighter was actually a Pisces, not a Capricorn...). 'Nuff for now, but all food for thought, huh? Skookum1 05:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Suggestion: as per the old War Canoe Races, and the Sea Festival in its original form, there are historical events in the city that are no more that should maybe have articles one day; same with old buildings like the original ExPark exhibition structures, the Orillia; the Birks Building and the Second Hotel Vancouver have articles now, but there are others. I'll put my sig on the end of all the paragraphs preceding so people can intersperse replies. Skookum1 05:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
One last shot though: the role of places like the Croatian Cultural Centre, which hosts non-Croatian events right and left, also the [ http://www.italianculturalcentre.ca/Italian Cultural Centre] and others, e.g. Cambrian Hall; but the Croatian Centre is notable for its Latin American and African events and music. I think perhaps the "racial tolerance" phrasing might be better re-termed "ethnic tolerance", as it's not always about race ("invisible minorities" and all that). A listing of all the various ethnic community clubs does seem a propos, e.g. the German and Polish Halls on Fraser, Cambrian Hall (Welsh), the Irish Community Centre on Prior, and so on). Skookum1 05:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
How could I forget - the Powell Street Festival (in Oppenheimer Park, which is a lot more than just Japanese culture meets junkie culture (though it's a lot of that). There's also the role of interdemoninational and universalist religions in the city's history, such as the Unitarian Church and others on "Religion Row" (south Oak). Skookum1 05:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
The Lunar New Year Parade was predominantly Chinese during its existence; it was on the opening day of the big Chinese New Year thing held in the PNE buildings, the Forum mostly I think, but word in the paper last week is it's not going to be held this year. Diwali is generally still South Asian (inherently multiethnic as Sikhs, Hindus and South Asian Muslims all celebrate it); but this year it seemed that there were a lot of non-South Asians hitting the stores for deals on Diwali sweets and specials on saris and silk/lamé and other specialty fabrics. Skookum1 05:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Maybe a useful link for all events: Links to Events Pages In and Around Vancouver, B.C. Skookum1 07:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I've noticed the occasional dispute over whether to use Scotland's flag or the Union Jack's flag for the sister city section, so I checked out what the standard is for other cities on Wikipedia. I discovered that there is none. To the person who insists that sovereignty is the correct measure and therefore it should be the Union Jack, check out: Florence; Alexandria, Virginia; Sarasota, Florida; San Diego; Nice; Xi'an; Munich; and Tokyo for examples that use the Scottish flag instead of the Union Jack. Other cities don't mention sister cities at all. My guess is that the closest thing to a compromise is to use both flags (since both places are mentioned anyway), for which there are also plenty of precedents, such as: Sarasota, Florida; Havanna; Washington D.C.; Turin; Yantai; and Dunedin. Bobanny 17:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I was surprised to see no mention at all about the growing television and movie industry in and around Vancouver. Several U.S. television shows are filmed in the area. Some even call Vancouver "Hollywood North." I think there should be a new category titled "Hollywood North" in quotes, along with a description of the industry and its history in Vancouver. There could also be a link to a more detailed article about the industry, as well as a section that lists all the TV shows and movies that have been and are being filmed in the Vancouver area.
There could also be links to TV-related sites like Hollywood North Report and official sites for shows that are filmed there, like Battlestar Galactica, Smallville, Stargate Atlantis, Stargate SG-1, and The X-Files (which was filmed in Vancouver during its early seasons). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123home123 ( talk • contribs)
Hollywood North Report] is filmed here? Looks very Toronto...oh, I'm thinking of Entertainment Tonight Canada. Which brings to issue the fact that while Hollywood North is very much a Vancouver term, and originated here and within the non-Canadian industry (i.e. the non-Toronto-based film sector) it still means Vancouver/Greater Vancouver and its branch locations (including Calgary and Victoria, interestingly). But in Toronto-speak Hollywood North is all about T.O. and as we all know in Toronto show biz Vancouver is a blip except for its nice restaurants and the chance of running into stars in Yaletown bars; they've coopted Hollywood North as if it were only about them, just as they have also done with The Big Smoke (used also in the UK for London and Manchester, but from what I understand was genuinely coined here). The Hollywood North article when I found it barely mentioned Vancouver, but obsessed over T.O. based shows and the Mock Walk of Fame on Yonge Street (look, T.O....there's only one Hollywood Boulevard, OK? And only one Broadway...and I don't mean ours). Whatever; just a heads-up about the Hollywood North thing and the associated article; it needs monitoring because earnest types from the Centre of the Universe insist on writing it to up-play their version of reality. Since they are the only reality, that is, at least if you listen to the media in this country.... Skookum1 07:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
The classification box should read "City of Vancouver" instead of simply "Vancouver" since it appears to be the Wikipedia standard to use the "official" name of any country, nation-state, American state, etc. in such classification boxes. Further, I notice alot of articles about Vancouver's neighbouring municipalities that do not mention the official names of such municipalities. Why simply say "Delta" when one should be saying "The Incorporation of Delta" when the government website of that municipality uses such as a legalistic title? I know that lawyers are the only type of people who really care about municipal boundaries and official names, but this is still Wikipedia and all the technical and legalistic details should be mentioned. After all, municipalities, whether a city, town, township, village, etc., are merely creations of the law of incorporation.
I was wondering if any person living in the Greater Vancouver Area had a hand in writing this article because there is lack of distinction being made between the City of Vancouver (i.e. Vancouver proper) and the surrounding municipalities such as the City of Burnaby, City of Richmond, etc. Until the Greater Vancouver Area undergoes the type of municipal amalgamations as seen in the Toronto, Ottawa and Hamilton areas, this important distinction must be made. This article should not use the simple word "Vancouver" to mean the larger metro area that includes Burnaby, Richmond, etc. Doing so would be very confusing to a reader in view of the Greater Vancouver Area map with all those municipal boundaries drawn in.
-- User:Alf74 17:35, 04 December 2006 (UTC)
I've requested a peer review for this article. If you're interested in giving some feedback, click here. Thanks, Bobanny 00:22, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Vancouver's port exports more cargo than any other port in Norht America...what about New York or Los Angeles?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TotallyTempo ( talk • contribs) 21:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC).