Talk:Penticton

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

Recreation Centre was Originally $30 Million[edit]

I'm thinking of adding that... I remember very clearly that the centre was promised to be around $30 Million before the cost was blown out of proportion. Edson88888 (talk) 00:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shortened Page[edit]

Is this page shorter now? It seems like it was cut down. There's not much info here anyways.

Page Move[edit]

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

The result of the proposal was Penticton, British Columbia → Penticton

For the same reasons as all the other Canadian cities we've moved from City, Province to just City. Penticton already redirects here, so why not move the page? Any discussion? -Royalguard11(T·R!) 00:37, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support move. I temporarily deleted the redirect to see what would come up in the search list if the title Penticton was empty, and got exclusively references to this Penticton. So while I'm not 100% sure that the name is unique, it's definitely primary. Bearcat 02:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I also support the move, as it conforms to the Canadian naming conventions for cities. Skeezix1000 11:18, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose there's a well established naming convention, with a solid rationale behind it. No advantage whatsoever from moving the page, as Penticton already redirects here. The reason for moving other Canadian city pages to names that don't include the province is ultimately vanity. --Qyd 12:16, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Kindly reread WP:AGF and WP:CIVILITY. Your comments impugning the motives and reasonings of other editors, with whom you disagree, are inappropriate.

And, yes, there is a naming convention for Canadian cities, and I recommend that you read it. This move is entirely consistent with the convention. Skeezix1000 12:41, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. On reflection, I shouldn't be giving you a hard time, then be catty myself in the second paragraph. Skeezix1000 17:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The well established naming convention is that titles that have redirects at somesity to somecity, someprovince should just be moved to somecity. And we're talking Canada here, we have our own naming convention, we definitely don't follow the American one. -Royalguard11(T·R!) 20:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The "well established convention" is a rather biased re-iteration of the discussion, see the original proposal at Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board#City naming convention poll, which clearly states that:
I don't know who or how added the text at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (settlements)#Canada, but it is not what the discussion agreed on. --Qyd 16:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Here's another poll, achieved Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board/discussion/Archive 8#City naming convention poll 2. --Qyd 16:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As I've said, the new convention came about because of actions and not because of discussion. We moved pages last year and before that to new names and they have stuck, therefore they are the new convention. If you don't like it, make a proposal to move them back. -Royalguard11(T·R!) 18:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The idea of adding a population cutoff to the naming convention was explicitly rejected; the convention most certainly did decide that cities with unique and primary names are eligible to be moved to "City" regardless of their population. Check the populations of Iqaluit, Flin Flon, Lloydminster, Moncton, Fredericton, Charlottetown and Lethbridge, and then look at their titles. The discussion you're alluding to here was a draft policy that failed to achieve the consensus necessary to be adopted as the actual convention. Bearcat 05:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm late to this chat, but have nothing else to add except to say that Qyd is relying on never approved policies to make his point. Skeezix1000 17:04, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly support --Kmsiever 22:02, 10 October 2007 (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.

Premature archiving[edit]

I don't see why a page that was only a few sections long was archive;d yes, I misunderstood the edit - which was describedd as "blanking" not "archiving".....I've reinstated the archive box but I don't think either it or the archive was needed; and indeed, has turned out to be a waste of (my) time.....Skookum1 (talk) 03:42, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Residents[edit]

Who is Brett Martens, and does "local celebrity" qualify for inclusion in that list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.218.68.62 (talk) 16:38, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

climate section[edit]

this caught my eye:

Penticton is sheltered from cold Arctic air in winter by the surrounding mountain ranges,[citation needed] making blizzards and freezing rainstorms very rare.

Well, it's not just cold Arctic air it's sheltered from, more or less, it's primarily wet coastal air it's sheltered from, which in combination with cold Arctic air is what produces any blizzards (usually, though some may come from the north - "freezing rainstorms" is something I much more associate with Chilliwack but maybe there's reason to mention it here, dunno). So this bit needs rewording and of course citation, it's fairly obvious as a rain shadow location but if there's evidence that Okanagan Mountain, which is to the north after the first leg of Lake Okanagan, provides shelter from the continental air masses we need to cite that....I would think outflow winds would happen here (I'm here for now) but maybe Okanagan Mountain blocks those, ditto with any t hat might sit on the Columbia Plateau to the south....I'll add in a locational section with which mountains are on which side....the peculiarities of Penticton's climate are also due to its low elevation, and being flanked on two sides by lakes....I was told there's a winter effect here called a sun bubble, sort of a thermal inversion by all accounts, which keeps it warm when areas nearby can be much colder; something to do with the hills/lakes trapping a warm pocket of air and the prevailing winds not being strong enough to disrupt it - I suppose that may be the root of that "sheltered by surrounding mountains" bit.Skookum1 (talk) 22:54, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Geez, no History section at all[edit]

I just noticed that there's no "History" section at all...I was gonna add a pic/account of Shanghai Alley, the old Chinatown off Front Street.....I think I'll work on Steamboats of Lake Okanagan and Hotel Incola first, as they're key components of the story....I'm living in Penticton right now, been meaning to spend some time over at the museum to write up the Canadian Pacific Lake and River Service and other items, now I realize I'm facing a whole history section here, from the ranches and orcharding/early resort era through the veterans' housing ("K streets"), the history of Peachfest, and more.....Skookum1 (talk) 19:38, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chinatown sources[edit]

Here are some source-links for Chinatown and Chinese history in Penticton and the Okangan Living Landscapes website, III. THE CHINESE: Early 1900s - 1930s, with further sources included, Penticton Heritage Strategy (City of Penticton-commisioned report), and Walking through Penticton's past, Steve Kidd, Penticton Western NewsJul 21, 2011 which references Chinatown and the extant Chinatown monument] which I have pictures of somewhere taken during a stay there in 2010-2011, and there are historical photos out there online somewhere.Skookum1 (talk) 17:46, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Last paragraphs on History section read like tourism brochure[edit]

The last paragraphs are very problematic. I haven't deleted them outright because the gist could be culled to base a more insightful, appropriate piece on more recent history. 24.67.85.133 (talk) 01:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I was born and raised in Penticton and back in the '80s when we left I remember the population was around 32,000. So, to me, it also reads like a tourism brochure. --Skippingrock (talk) 07:12, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Panoramic Photo[edit]

The caption claims that the North Cascades are visible in the distance. However this is a view looking generally east while the Cascade Range lies well to the west of the Okanagan Valley. It could be mentioned that Penticton is visible at the far right, however. 209.121.11.201 (talk) 10:14, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. TBrandley (what's up) 16:34, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're referring to a panorama I deleted; Penticton wasn't visible, if only very dimly, it was of Skaha Lake taken from the heights of Kaleden and not in Penticton; and yes the North Cascades (Cascade Mountains in Canada) are on the other side of Keremeos.....not visible at all from Penticton. The town's brochures talk about "spectacular mountains on all sides"....you really have to wonder what they put in the water cooler at the local tourism/advertising agencies....Skookum1 (talk) 06:24, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suburbs (suggested text)[edit]

Penticton since the 1950's has developed suburbs. The most obvious one is West Bench. West Bench is easily reached as one encounters it while entering the town on the highway going southwards. Since the 1960's wealthier people started to settle in the upper levels suburb on the Eastern side of the town. The upper levels residential area has not been given a formal name yet.

A suburbs section is needed as the town evolved from a ferry dock that was near a rail station, separate from when the area was a First Nations settlement. Suburbs should not be confused with town history, as that is somewhat viewed broadly as being in the time range 1700 - 1950. If you don't have a suburb section a misleading view of the town's physical evolution might arise. Eyreland (talk) 02:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The benches are not really suburbs in the usual sense, they're part of/extensions of the city even when not in city limits. Naramata and Summerland are nearby but not suburbs; arguments might be made the Kaleden and Olalla and Okanagan Falls and even Oliver are suburbs; but they're not. It's like saying Anarchist Mountain is a suburb of Osoyoos, or Peachland is a suburb of Kelowna; the term only really belongs on larger cities; Kamloops and PG have incorporated all surrounding rural communities, such that "the Hart" in PG and Heffley Lake in Kamloops are formally part of the city, not not suburbs or exurbs or anything else. Info on the Benches should be included, yes, but the term "suburb" is highly questionable in Pen's case.Skookum1 (talk) 06:28, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics section should vbe more than just visible minorities[edit]

It's not like that's all demographic data there is available, nor is it the most relevant in places where the visible minority population is not all that important. This was just added......but why the obsession with visible minority figures, vs age/income strata, sector of employment etc??Skookum1 (talk) 05:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1912 image from British Library collection in Commons[edit]

Can't see where to fit it

is from 1912.Skookum1 (talk) 07:49, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First Passenger train at Penticton Station, May 31, 1915

maybe better on the KVR page. The yard in the foreground would be that of the {[Incola Hotel]], which I'm looking for pics/facts on but no luck so far.Skookum1 (talk) 07:57, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weather Box[edit]

Does anyone know how to edit the weather box? I was wanting to update for the new climate normals, but unlike other wiki pages, it seems that I cannot edit this box. I suppose I could delete and start over? Tatlayoko (talk)

Climate Classification[edit]

Please, people. If you are going to use the Köppen climate classification, do not call Penticton semi-arid because it is not according to that classification system. There are other means and formulas that might yield the desired result, but you need to specify which climate classification system you are using if you don't want your edit deleted in the future. Stop putting erroneous information on Wikipedia.

Allow me to walk you through the formula for arid and semi-arid climates. Step #1) Take the mean annual temperature and multiply by 20. 9.5 X 20 = 190. Step #2) If 70% of the annual precipitation falls between April and September add 280; else if 70% of the annual precipitation falls between October and March, add zero; else add 140. For Penticton we add 140. Therefore, the total number = 190 + 140 = 330. Step #3) Take the total annual precipitation (346 mm), and divide it by this number. 346/330 = 1.05. Step #4) If this number is less than 0.5; the climate is arid; if this number is greater than or equal to 0.5, but less than 1, then the climate is semi-arid. Since 1.05 is not less than 1.00, Penticton is NOT semi-arid (according to the Köppen climate classification). Tatlayoko (talk) 21:54, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2009 Needs?[edit]

Top of article still includes 2009 requests for more inline citations (although now has 83 references), and clean-up to improve article. Are these still needed or should it be removed? Canuckle (talk) 05:53, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Penticton&oldid=1212173756"