Talk:Comox, British Columbia

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

Untitled[edit]

There is a discrepancy regarding the population of Comox. Neither statistic has a source. If anyone with more knowledge would please clear this up, it'd be great. Also, it seems that much of the information in the Culture section would more appropriately belong in the Comox Valley or Courtenay articles. - Hoolme

As far as I can tell, the 20,000 figure was supposed to refer to the population of the Comox Valley, not Comox itself. I've rewritten the first two paragraphs, so hopefully things are clearer now. —smably 21:25, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is also a discrepancy regarding the Lorne being the oldest licensed pub in BC. The Six Mile pub in View Royal was established in 1855 and licensed in 1856 and is still in operation today. It's 22 years older than the Lorne. http://www.sixmilepub.com/history.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.48.86.117 (talk) 04:53, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article Format is Wrong[edit]

This article reads as a tourist information brochure. The dates, telephone numbers and prices for local events does not follow the Wikipedia format. This is not the Comox Tourist Infocentre webpage, it should be encyclopedic. I recommend an immediate cleanup. --Mezaco 22:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Schools[edit]

I'm confused, is this article about the Comox Valley to Comox City? As some of the schools listed, such as GP Vanier, are not in Comox City. --PrinceScamp 07:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm aware, Comox is part of SD71, and many Comox students attend schools in Courtenay. If you feel the need to edit, however, you are free to do so. --Mayalou6999 (talk) 19:59, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Comox which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:29, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kahkahmatsis First Nation[edit]

The Kahkahmatsis aka Salmon Arm Nation are mentioned in several sources used for this article, including the history provided by the present-day K'ómoks Nation in their 2014 document cited here.[1] If the problem is that there is no present Nation, it's because they almagamated with the K'ómoks in 1940 and the Nation no longer exists. Otherwise I am unsure of what the problem with mentioning the Kahkahmatsis is. Guinness323 (talk) 05:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am. To me the issue is to who they were. The article says that the K'omoks were displaced when these people invaded - that's not actually in the cite given - which to me indicates the Lekwiltok (Cape Mudge Band of the Southern Kwakiutl) - but "Salmon River First Nation" is no longer in any directory of FN peoples or bands anywhere. The cite's text seems to indicate they were another branch of the Coast Salish (there were six or seven peoples who comprised the historical pre-invasion Island Comox); Salmon River IR No. 1 is not in BC Names' directory, though in INAC there's two, one up near Kamloops and KIB, the other Salmon River (K'omoks) Indian Reserve No. 1. That being said, "Kahkahmatsis" looks Kwak'wala/Li'kwala rather than Salishan. More citations are needed to back up what the article says, since the cite given doesn't. I'll look over the two band-related pages, which have more detailed aboriginal history than what's here so far....the "who?" tag was because that name is not currently on the BC landscape or common in records; there are other bands who are defunct, including the Pentlatch Indian Band (official name might have been Puntledge or another variant); the defunct band may have been named "Salmon River Indian Band"..... the use of aboriginal names wasn't current at the time of this merger, so Kahkahmatsis is "new", and other than the K'omoks pdf we have no other citation for who they were. Kwakwaka'wakw or another kind of Salish is my issue; and the use of recognizable names, which since there are no other cites for Kahkahmatsis remains an issue.Skookum1 (talk) 03:11, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sources do seem to be in disagreement about the name of the band in question. Paula Wild & Rick James, in "The Comox Valley" (Harper, 2006) say that the Lekwiltok, "a particularly fierce group of Kwakwaka'wakw", forced the K'ómoks to move south to Pentlatch lands, where they amalgamated with the Pentlatch (p. 22-23). On p. 26, Wild & James state that by 1865, the Pentlatch and K'ómoks had begun to intermarry with the Lekwiltok. Another source, "Land of Plenty" (Isenor et al, Ptarmigan Press, 1987) quotes the actual letter to to Chiefs Moses Moon and Andy Frank advising of the amalgamation of the "Salmon River and Comox Bands" in 1940 (p. 52). The same book identifies the brouhaha in 1865 that led to a naval squadron being dispatched to the area as being caused by a group of Eucletaw who had moved from the Cape Mudge area and were causing friction with the resident K'ómoks. I have made changes to the wiki based on these sources. Feel free to correct if necessary.Guinness323 (talk) 04:19, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I also found this and this and yeah, it's the Lekwiltok/Cape Mudge Band in question; about the "naval brouhaha", somewhere out there's also the account of the Royal Navy shelling the Cape Mudge IR, which was a fortress village, not sure if that's the same year. There was a lot more "Indian war" in BC than the usual myths about Canadian history fudge up about; there were lots of shellings of villages...and also inter-native war of all kinds; Gwayasdums, which was destroyed by the Nuxalk in that same year, is a case in point. In any case that "Kahkahmatsis" should link to Laich-kwil-tach, which is the current official-to-them spelling of the name of the Lekwiltok/Euclataws/...or to Cape Mudge Indian Band, wherever that redirects to now, not sure of their modern name.Skookum1 (talk) 07:27, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The information deleted on this edit really belongs on the Comox Indian Band page, or K'omoks page, as it concerns a reserve at Campbell River, and not at Comox.Skookum1 (talk) 07:45, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Mitchell, Alanna; Shaw, Pam, eds. (2014), "K'ómoks First Nation Comprehensive Community Plan 2014-2024", Comox, British Columbia, Canada: K’ómoks First Nation, p. 30 http://www.komoks.ca/sites/default/files/luplibrary/CCP%20Version%201.0%20March%202014.pdf {{citation}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Drake at Comox Bay[edit]

The paragraph about Drake should be pulled or changed to "one discredited idea suggested that Sir Francis Drake visited the area in 1579." Several references can be provided. The accepted sites are Oregon Dunes for Drake's landfall and Drakes Bay for New Albion. The US National Park Service has studied this matter and awarded the Drakes Bay site a National Historic Landmark designation.

Comox Bay has been included in Fringe theories on the location of New Albion MikeVdP (talk) 06:28, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article says "some historians believe" that Drake landed at Comox Bay. That's a rather vague statement; the address is a bit misleading to suggest that Drake's landing here is generally accepted as historical fact. Perhaps handle this as main articles on other geographical places that are associated with fringe theories. Also: "...found a good port somewhere along the northwest coast of North America and stayed for several months while restocking supplies and trading..." Several months? Why would he land for several months just to restock supplies and trade? Wouldn't it be more like a few weeks? Pcvjamaica (talk) 20:41, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Comox, British Columbia. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 00:41, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Comox, British Columbia. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 15:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Comox,_British_Columbia&oldid=1201076888"