Contents

Talk:108 Mile Ranch

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Canada: British Columbia / Communities Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia. This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian communities.

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 19:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

108 Mile Ranch, British Columbia → 108 Mile Ranch – This place is a unique name and per Canadian disambiguation standards does not require a comma-province disambiguation. --Relisted. ^walk victor falk ^talk 06:11, 10 April 2014 (UTC)Skookum1 (talk) 04:58, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per nom and WP:UNDAB. --B2C 18:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Severely reduces recognizability with no advantage to any reader. Advocate Place, Province generally to create concistency for readers, leading to ease of recognition to settlements. 108 Mile Ranch sounds like a ranch, not a settlement. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:16, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's a dude ranch-cum-real estate development; many settlements in BC are named ranches e.g. Gang Ranch. Please read WP:CSG#Places carefully before making any more oppose votes, and also WP:UNDAB. The "concistency" [sic] you are referring to is NO comma-province dabs on unique town names; read the guidelines and have a look at the settlement categories and the Consistency section of WP:TITLE/ Skookum1 (talk) 13:44, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I've read these things of course. The guideline has little rational basis. UNDAB is someone's misguide mission without reference to serving the readership. The are so many settlement ambiguities that consistency can ONLY be achieved by comma region formatting. But the clincher, unambiguously expressed in policy, is recognizability, which is severely hurt in this proposal. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:52, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per SmokeyJoe. While I support the general guideline that unique place names do not require disambiguation by province, I am sympathetic to the idea that this case should be an exception based on concerns regarding reader recognizability. The nature of this settlement's name is such that it could easily cause confusion. The addition of the province name makes clear that this a settlement, not a single estate. Xoloz (talk) 17:46, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many subdivisions of this kind carry "Ranch" and similar nontown words in their names; please see WP:CANLIST for Gang Ranch and Coldstream Ranch, though those are actual working ranchesand not former ranches now worked over into real estate subdivisions; there are others but this is the only one that has a wiki article; this is a known exurb of 100 Mile House, the nearest municipality and main commercial centre in teh South Cariboo; the Douglas Lake Cattle Company title for a very famous ranch is also a fancy boutique resort and elite condo holding now as well. There are also "FOO Mile House" titles in BC (70 Mile, 93 Miles, 100 Mile and 150 Mile, as we call them for short; they have all been moved to standalone titles as per WP:CSG#Places. Non-conventional names are very common in BC....read the list.Skookum1 (talk) 18:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • If someone suggested a requested move on some of the place names you mentioned, I might be persuaded that they too merit exceptions to the general guideline. Those places are not currently at issue in this request. The tendency of citizens of a certain region to use unusual place-names is interesting; but, to my thinking, it is not especially relevant. Wikipedia is written for a general readership, not for the citizens of British Columbia, Canada, or any other particular region or nation. Familiarity with local customs should not be assumed. Xoloz (talk) 19:11, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as per Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Naming the specific topic articles, Wikipedia:Article titles#Precision and disambiguation, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Canada-related articles#Places. I'm not convinced that adding ", Province" will tell the reader that they are at a community without them having a knowledge of Wikipedia rules. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 21:21, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Superfluous disambiguation per wp:ncdab^walk victor falk ^talk 06:11, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment per claims that general readership overrides Canadian dab standards; it does not per ENGVAR and {{Canadian English}}. Other examples of this same series of titles have already passed RM and been moved:
  • 100 Mile House
  • 105 Mile House
  • 150 Mile House
  • 70 Mile House
  • 93 Mile House
  • and ultimately there will be others; all such mileage names were conferred by the distance from Lillooet on the Old Cariboo Road.Skookum1 (talk) 12:02, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Skookum1, noting that this is one of many places named according to distance from Lillooet, places the question in a different light. It would be helpful if the article explained the origin of the name. Are these places named for their distance from the Lillooet boundary, not from the Lillooet center? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:16, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Note 108 Mile Lake. I have no time right now but will add more details to the community article later today.Skookum1 (talk) 02:48, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. The article titles policy (WP:AT) favors the shorter name per the conciseness, precision, and consistency criteria. I don't think recognizability alone (and I don't think what the opposers mean by "recognizable" matches what the recognizability criterion says) can trump those three other criteria. —seav (talk) 20:29, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per WP:NCDAB. The statement that "108 Mile Ranch sounds like a ranch, not a settlement" doesn't really have much bearing on whether or not to keep the ", British Columbia". Either a reader already knows what 108 Mile Ranch is, in which case the ", British Columbia" is superfluous, or he doesn't, in which case the ", British Columbia" does nothing to clarify it (i.e., he still must click and read the article. On the other hand, having the ", British Columbia" is possibly misleading in that it makes it appear as if there are other 108 Mile Ranches. —  AjaxSmack  00:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Unusual settlement/town names in British Columbia are not rare; have a look here at WP:CANLIST which is the current listing of all unique-placenames without comma-province dabs.Skookum1 (talk) 02:12, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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