Talk:Ranges of the Canadian Rockies

Classification system?

Just wondering what the source for the range-hierarchy table is; some groupings are not official names, I know that, so whose groupings are they? A mountaineering guidebook? S. Holland classifies these differently - I've been using him as a guideline for other mountain range/subrange pages.Skookum1 06:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

For more on this see hierarchy tree at Continental Ranges, Muskwa Ranges, Hart Ranges. those listings should be coordinated with these; or rather those listings are all from the same source as other mountain ranges/groupings elsewhere in Wikipedia, so this page should try to coordinate with them.Skookum1 06:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I've used the classification from Peakbagger (the only well organised online source I could find). The classification system is explained here. --Qyd 07:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

You weren't looking hard enough; the authoritative source is S. Holland's Bulletin 50 (58?) of what is now the Department of Natural Resources; links to it are on Talk:Western Cordillera (North America) but I have them on hand myself, having downloaded them (two PDFs; the map does not show the subranges, only BC's macro-areas). The same system is mirrored in official toponymic systems. Peakbagger is a US-based site and, if anything, might use Holland or sources derived from Holland; but it's a peakbagging site, not a proper geographic source. Bivouac at one time used to have all the ranges laid out in hierarchies nicely, but the site-owner there developed his obsession for redfining everything by prominence groupings and ditched a lot of the range definitions, which had been expanded from Holland and were otherwise based on CAnadian climbing guides. I'm not sure what NRC or GSC has, I'll look around, and will be back with links to Holland; although is range definitions mostly end at the Continental Divide/BC-Alberta border his references include Albertan and federal official sources. This page is currently only using peakbagger...which is fairlly accurate, but is not an authoritative site and should not be treated as such....actually look on List of physiogeographic regions of British Columbia, I think I've got Holland linked there in the refs....Skookum1 (talk) 23:22, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I've tried to make the page NPOV by reporting the controversy: that peakbagger is not the only (or even dominant) source of geographical hierarchy, and that this article is using peakbagger's hierarchical structure purely as a navigation tool, not as reporting it to be true or definitive. —hike395 (talk) 05:21, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Controversy? No, nothing at all controversial - Holland is the basis for the ranges as defined in BCGNIS/Basemap, and therefore also for CGNDB. Not sure what Peakbagger's sources are (quite possibly both of those), but Holland at least is not only based on sources, but also has been used as the defininitive system for official toponymy and accompanying descriptions.Skookum1 (talk) 15:10, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

My point is that both Holland and Peakbagger exist. They both exist, and they don't perfectly agree. As you've said, above, the previous version of the article indicated the Peakbagger mountain hierarchy was "the truth". You're right: that's a WP:POV, and I edited the article to no longer say that. However, the article does not need to claim that any mountain hierarchy is true. I believe it currently follows WP:NPOV: it currently cites to both Holland and Peakbagger, and explicitly says it only uses Peakbagger for user navigation through this article, not as a geographic truth.

So, how should we change the article to make it better? —hike395 (talk) 18:20, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm actually a net-acquaintance of peakbagger's siteowner, and worked "alongside" him during my - er, three years - volunteering for bivouac.com buidlilng their range and prominence systems....I'll consult with him as to his sources, since I can't find them on the site, but suspect they probably include Holland. Certainly in bivouac's case, if used as a ref, it would be like using a wikiclone as a cite in wikipedia; the same may be true in peakbagger's case. Official toponymies and definitions may not always be most common usage, but they can be supplemented by popular usage; they are nonetheless authoritative sources and they are official definitions, and Holland is the source used for official toponymy in BC (if not for the Alberta side of the range). If you look at the wild debates on Talk:Western Cordillera (North America), you'll see there was one editor claiming to introduce any-old-name because some academic coined or misused a term (i.e. without doing his/her research) and wanting them to all ahve equal validity; this cannot be the case; loosey-goosey mistaken "definitions" are not the same thing as recognized, official systems, and that's that. Where do we go from here? Use t he official toponymy as a basis, and add to it with popular usages when applicable; on the Alberta side I'd suggest Parks Canada's sources on Banff and Jasper and Waterton Parks will form a basis, can't speak to the Alberta government's official toponymy because I'm not familiar with their system. What you're suggesting is that, say if Peakbagger had included the Purcells or Selkirks in the Canadian Rockies (which it doesn't) then that makes that a valid claim and should have equal footing with the official definition which expressly doesn't include them; ditto with the oft-repeated mistake that the Rockies extend into the Yukon in "some sources". that doesn't make those sources correct, it renders them faulty.Skookum1 (talk) 14:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

You should read the section at the bottom of this page, "Rules used..." and you'll see he uses official toponymy as the basis, with "arbitrary" and "bogus" overlays when needed.Skookum1 (talk) 14:47, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

So, how should we make the article better? I personally don't think that dividing named ranges into pure Holland hierarchy makes the article better: I went back and read Holland's report #48 --- he divides the Rockies into slices that are narrow east-west, but extremely long north-south (i.e., the Park Ranges and the Front Ranges). I think we need some sort of division of the Holland ranges along a north-south axis: when I partitioned the true ranges into the Peakbagger buckets, I found they were much more comprehensible to me than a simply alphabetic list. In other words, I think it's valuable to tell our readers that the Colin, Fiddle, Miette, and Jacques ranges lie to east of Jasper, as opposed to somewhere down near Canmore.

We could arbitrarily split the ranges north-south ourselves, but that seems like OR to me. Using the Peakbagger hierarchy, again for purposes of organizing this article only, seems like a service to our readers, without performing our own original research. If you want to hew closer to the Holland classification, we could split the Kootenay ranges out into their own section: doing a hybrid between Holland and Peakbagger seems a little OR-ish to me, but I'm open. If "Northern Continental Ranges" seems to arbitrary, we could make the section be about the Northern Front Range, although then I'm not sure what do about the other 2. —hike395 (talk) 08:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Map

The inset on the map shows the Canadian Rockies on the coast of BC. This is clearly incorrect and makes me wonder whether the map is accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.229.4.58 (talk) 19:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

What appears as a darker area in the inset is caused by rendering of the irregular shape of the Pacific coast, it's not an outline of the Rockies. The inset only shows the location of the map relative to North America. See full resolution file http:/upwiki/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Canadian_Rockies.png --Qyd (talk) 15:58, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Alternative list of ranges

Here are the list of ranges I've taken from the main article. I'd like to reconcile them with the current page, if possible:

• Continental Ranges
  • Kootenay Ranges
    • Beaverfoot Range, NE of uppermost Columbia River valley
    • Stanford Range
    • Vermilion Range (British Columbia)
  • Front Ranges
    • Clark Range on the Continental Divide
    • Flathead Range
    • Galton Range
    • Livingstone Range
    • Macdonald Range
  • Park Ranges
    • Ball Range in Kootenay National Park
    • Bare Range in Banff National Park
    • Berland Range
    • Blackwater Range
    • Blairmore Range, east of Blairmore, Alberta
    • Blue Range in Banff National Park
    • Bosche Range
    • Boule Range
    • Brazeau Range
    • Brisco Range
    • Colin Range
    • De Smet Range
    • Elk Range (BC and Alberta)
    • Fairholme Range in the Bow River valley
    • Fiddle Range
    • Fisher Range
    • Lizard Range near Fernie, British Columbia, and in the Elk Valley
    • Maligne Range
    • Massive Range
    • Miette Range
    • Misty Range
    • Mitchell Range
    • Nikanassin Range
    • Opal Range
    • Ottertail Range
    • Palliser Range in the SE corner of Banff NP
    • Persimmon Range
    • President Range in Yoho National Park
    • Queen Elizabeth Ranges in Jasper National Park
    • Quinn Range
    • Rainbow Range
    • Ram Range
    • The Ramparts Range
    • Three Sisters Range in the Elk Valley
    • Royal Range
    • Sawback Range in SE Banff NP
    • Selwyn Range
    • Sir Winston Churchill Range in Jasper National Park
    • Slate Range in Banff National Park
    • Spray Range
    • Starlight Range
    • Sundance Range
    • Ten Peaks Range
    • Trident Range
    • Van Horne Range
    • Van Nostrand Range
    • Vermilion Range (Alberta)
    • Victoria Cross Ranges in Jasper NP
    • Waputik Range
    • Wilson Range
    • Wisukitsak Range
• Northern Rockies
  • Dezaiko Range
  • Hart Ranges
    • Misinchinka Ranges (from Pine Pass south to Monkman Pass)
      • Murray Range
      • Pioneer Range
    • Solitude Range
  • Muskwa Ranges
    • Akie Range
    • Battle of Britain Range
    • Deserters Range
    • Gataga Ranges
    • Rabbit Plateau
    • Sentinel Range
    • Stone Range
    • Terminal Range
    • Tochieka Range
    • Tower of London Range
    • Truncate Range

Merge finished

I have merged the list above into the framework of the existing article (which seemed to be a direct importation from Peakbagger). If there are any errors, please feel free to fix. —hike395 (talk) 23:08, 1 January 2010 (UTC)