[Talk-ca] First Nations reserve naming

Tue Dec 6 21:34:34 UTC 2022

Hoser, please stop being an asshole. You truly are the definition of your
username.

On Tue, Dec 6, 2022, 3:03 PM James <james2432 at gmail.com> wrote:

> long story short we should revert these changesets
>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2022, 3:47 PM Hoser AB <hoserab1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ooooh boy, hahaha...
>>
>> So what you're saying Michael is that you contacted someone in order to
>> "do your research" but didn't bother waiting for a response before blazing
>> ahead with whatever changes you wanted to make anyway. Not unlike your
>> earlier appeal in a changeset comment to "consensus on the talk-ca mail
>> list" where there was/is none.
>>
>> When someone from the nation responds that they make no distinction, and
>> it's all "Tsúùt’ínà" in their language and "Tsuut'ina" (categorically no
>> space) in English... then what? Are you going to ignore it because it's not
>> the answer you were looking for? Are you going to ignore it because it's
>> the answer I already gave you, but I'm a big meanie and you don't like me?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, December 6, 2022, Michael Stark <michael60634 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Just because they have a web site does not mean they are the
>>> authority.  It is usually far more complex than that."
>>>
>>> It's the official website for the Tsuut'ina Nation. I think they have
>>> authority to say what the reserve is called in the Tsuut'ina language.
>>>
>>> https://tsuutina.com/
>>>
>>> "My suggestion would be to desist changing things in Canada."
>>>
>>> No.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2022, 3:19 AM john whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> " I contacted the Tsuut'ina Nation through the easy to find contact
>>>> form on their honestly very well-designed website. I am waiting for their
>>>> response. I don't know any specific people there to contact directly, but
>>>> I'm sure my email will end up in the right place soon enough. When I get a
>>>> reply, rest assured, this mailing list will be the first to see it."
>>>>
>>>> Just because they have a web site does not mean they are the
>>>> authority.  It is usually far more complex than that.
>>>>
>>>> My suggestion would be to desist changing things in Canada.
>>>>
>>>> Cheerio John
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2022, 1:27 AM Michael Stark, <michael60634 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The nation and the reserve absolutely do not have the same name. I
>>>>> believe I was referring to the official name before, so I'll use that as an
>>>>> example. The official name of the nation is "Tsuut'ina Nation Band No. 432"
>>>>> and the official name of the reserve is "Tsuu T'ina Nation Indian Reserve
>>>>> No. 145". Notice that each official name is different and refers to a
>>>>> different entity. And the nation and the reserved have a different
>>>>> population, as another example.
>>>>>
>>>>> I did not create a solution for a nonexistent problem. If I see
>>>>> something on OSM that has missing or inaccurate information, I do my best
>>>>> to make improvements.
>>>>>
>>>>> I contacted the Tsuut'ina Nation through the easy to find contact form
>>>>> on their honestly very well-designed website. I am waiting for their
>>>>> response. I don't know any specific people there to contact directly, but
>>>>> I'm sure my email will end up in the right place soon enough. When I get a
>>>>> reply, rest assured, this mailing list will be the first to see it.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 12:02 AM Hoser AB <hoserab1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. I can assure you I couldn't care less.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. I *asked* you, pending this discussion. Which is a perfectly
>>>>>> reasoned thing to do when someone makes a contentious edit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3. It doesn't matter what other editors happened to do with some
>>>>>> other OSM element. I made no reference to what other people did; I stated
>>>>>> several times that First Nations lands should be treated on a case-by-case
>>>>>> basis and shouldn't have a "top-down" approach applied to them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 4. No, the nation and the reserve are one and the same and have the
>>>>>> same name.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 5. Oh I have no doubt you're trying to be helpful and have been
>>>>>> editing with nothing but the noblest of intentions. But, as I said, you've
>>>>>> created a solution in search of a problem rather than the other way around,
>>>>>> are seemingly oblivious to why anyone would object, and are quick to react
>>>>>> in a confrontational manner.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 6. So whom did you speak with at the Tsuut'ina Nation, and what did
>>>>>> they say? I'm sure we'd all love to know.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 10:40 PM Michael Stark <michael60634 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's break things down so everything is clear and easy to
>>>>>>> understand.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. Yes, I can be busy. You don't understand my life, and you
>>>>>>> shouldn't need to.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. You specifically told me to stop editing. You are not the
>>>>>>> authority of editing on OSM.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3. The edits I made were based on similar edits made by the exact
>>>>>>> same editors you referenced when you said they fixed the name.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 4. I am aware of that. But again, the nation and the reserve do have
>>>>>>> different names and other info other than the Wikipedia and Wikidata tags.
>>>>>>> So it should be clear I didn't create anything purely for the purpose of
>>>>>>> representing Wikipedia and WIkidata tags.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 5. Yes, I edit Wikipedia. In fact, I edit quite a range of things on
>>>>>>> Wikipedia. I moved the article so the title would be more accurate. This
>>>>>>> has absolutely nothing to do with my editing on OSM. It would be best not
>>>>>>> to assume I have bad intentions, or to assume you understand my motives.
>>>>>>> Assuming I am editing in bad faith on both OSM and Wikipedia is problematic.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 6. I am aware of the "on the ground" rule. My edit history proves
>>>>>>> that. I do recall mentioning multiple times that I personally contacted the
>>>>>>> Tsuut'ina Nation to get their input on the matter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kindly knock off the attitude you have towards me. Stop assuming I
>>>>>>> am editing in bad faith. Stop assuming I am trying to edit to push my
>>>>>>> viewpoints on a culturally sensitive topic. None of this is helping anyone
>>>>>>> here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 11:25 PM Hoser AB <hoserab1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "A bit busy" continuing to edit relations you were quite politely
>>>>>>>> and pointedly asked to refrain from editing until you participated further
>>>>>>>> in this discussion, but I digress...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1) "I ended up following how other First Nations with one reserve
>>>>>>>> displayed on OSM" is problematic: we don't concern ourselves with how
>>>>>>>> things are *displayed* on the map. Nor do all First Nations need to be
>>>>>>>> mapped in the same way. Nor should they be.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2) It's entirely redundant to have two overlapping relations for
>>>>>>>> what is essentially the same thing. It is entirely contrary to one of the
>>>>>>>> most basic OSM good practices: "one feature, one OSM element". In the case
>>>>>>>> of the Tsuut'ina, the nation and the land and the people all have the exact
>>>>>>>> same name: Tsuut'ina Nation. Adding an additional, overlapping relation
>>>>>>>> (erroneously) called "Tsuu T'ina Nation 145" adds nothing to the map.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3) We add wikipedia=* and wikidata=* tags to OSM elements which
>>>>>>>> happen to have Wikipedia articles and wikidata codes for them; we don't add
>>>>>>>> elements to OSM for the expressed purpose of adding wikipedia and wikidata
>>>>>>>> tags to them. Or put another way, just because something has a wikidata tag
>>>>>>>> and a Wikipedia page does not mean it merits being added to OSM, especially
>>>>>>>> where it could have been represented with a single thing that's already on
>>>>>>>> the map. (see point 2 above w.r.t. "one feature, one OSM element") With
>>>>>>>> respect to the additional overlapping Tsuut'ina "reserve" relation you
>>>>>>>> added, YOU MOVED THE WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE to suit your preferred (outdated...)
>>>>>>>> spelling after someone else had already moved the article to the current
>>>>>>>> spelling (see
>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tsuu_T%27ina_145&type=revision&diff=1124936360&oldid=1124525054).
>>>>>>>> You're editing Wikipedia to suit what you wanted to do on OSM; that is
>>>>>>>> problematic...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I urge you to read the OSM wiki, especially as it concerns names
>>>>>>>> and "truth". See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ground_truth.
>>>>>>>> Geographical reality—"ground-truth"—is that "Tsuu T'ina Nation 145" is
>>>>>>>> simply "the Tsuut'ina Nation". "Official-truth" isn't lost if we simply add
>>>>>>>> official_name=*. This is precisely how the Tsuut'ina Nation was mapped in
>>>>>>>> the first place, before you ever touched it. It was absolutely fine the way
>>>>>>>> it was. You created a solution in search of a problem.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 2:03 AM Michael Stark <
>>>>>>>> michael60634 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hey, sorry for the delay in replying. I've been a bit busy between
>>>>>>>>> when I last wrote and now. Also, I hope I sent this correctly as I am not
>>>>>>>>> familiar with using the mailing list.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What I ended up doing is following what how other First Nations
>>>>>>>>> with one reserve are displayed on OSM. That would be a relation for the
>>>>>>>>> First Nation, and a relation for the reserve. It may sound redundant to
>>>>>>>>> have two separate relations, and I thought this at first too, but upon
>>>>>>>>> further consideration, I think it might be the right solution. The reason
>>>>>>>>> for this is that both the First Nation and the reserve have separate names,
>>>>>>>>> official names, Wikidata tags, Wikipedia tags, previous names, et cetera.
>>>>>>>>> So the existing relation is for the Tsuut'ina Nation and has all relevant
>>>>>>>>> tags, and I created a new relation for the reserve, which has all tags
>>>>>>>>> relevant to the reserve.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 3, 2022 at 9:22 AM John Whelan <jwhelan0112 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Even using the term "First Nations reserve" maybe controversial.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Not an easy one.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheerio John
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Mateusz Konieczny via Talk-ca wrote on 12/3/2022 8:31 AM:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OSM object representing XYZ should carry the name of XYZ
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> OSM object representing First Nations reserve should carry name
>>>>>>>>>> of First Nations reserve
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2 gru 2022, 07:08 od michael60634 at gmail.com:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> How should First Nations reserves be named? Is it best to use the
>>>>>>>>>> name of the reserve, or the name of the group that inhabits the reserve?
>>>>>>>>>> I've noticed that two mappers changed the names of many reserves across
>>>>>>>>>> Canada, and even the US, from the name of the reserve to the name of the
>>>>>>>>>> tribe inhabiting the reserve.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Talk-ca mailing list
>>>>> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
>>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>> Talk-ca mailing list
>> Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20221206/3efd4e8f/attachment-0001.htm>