Talk:Chilko Lake

References

How the fuck does a page about a lake this significant not get any references or external links? That is beyond me! AndrewEnns (talk) 07:47, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

The water volume and residence time are wrong. 65 km by 100 m deep by 2 km wide is 13 km^3. The residence tim e is 17 to 25 years, not 0.74 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.66.22.27 (talk) 23:19, 18 November 2014(UTC)

Requested move 26 June 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

---

Chilko Lake → Tŝilhqox BinyTŝilhqox Biny – Given that the lake has been officially renamed in 2019, shouldn't this article be moved to Tŝilhqox Biny, with a redirect from Chilko Lake? Admittedly, the WP:TITLE policy is a bit ambiguous, but I'm looking especially at WP:NATURALNESS which states that "title usually conveys what the subject is actually called in English" — granted, 'Tŝilhqox Biny' isn't English, but that is the official name now. Compare with eg. Mount McKinley > Denali. DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:39, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Support WP:WIAN and general practice of WP:LAKES is if an official database for the body of water of a country sets a name it should be the one used as the article title, but make sure the other names are listed in the article, infobox, and Wikidata. All in all the move seems like the right choice. Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 23:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 24 June 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Consensus is that Chilko Lake is the common name. To comment on some of the discussion: while there is good reason to have a discussion to be had over what the name should be, Wikipedia is not the place for that discussion, as it by nature does not take the lead on questions like this. (closed by non-admin page mover) –Maltazarian ^{ᚾparley$\lor$investigateᛅ} 08:45, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

---

Tŝilhqox Biny → Chilko Lake – The official name change seems to have had little popular uptake with local and foreign media plus government agencies continue to use the name Chilko Lake. Chilko Lake seems to be the WP:COMMONNAME.

See:

National media: https://curiocity.com/chilko-lake-bc/

National media: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/chilcotin-river-sockeye-1.7316239

Government press release (DFO): https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/pacific-smon-pacifique/chilcotin-landslide-glissement-terrain/index-eng.html

Local media: https://www.myprincegeorgenow.com/142437/news/chilcotins-chilko-lake-to-be-featured-on-season-8-of-the-history-channels-alone/

Foreign media: https://www.islands.com/2192007/chilko-lake-canada-largest-high-elevation-provincial-park-beauty-fishing-hiking-boating/

Comparing the two using Wikipedia's official WP:TITLE policy:

Recognizability – Chilko Lake is certainly favoured as the common name.

Naturalness – Chilko Lake is certainly favoured as the common name.

Precision – Both names are equally precise.

Concision – Both names are equally concise.

Consistency – Both names are consistent with BC lake names in the province.

Comparing the two using Wikipedia's official WP:PLACENAME policy:

The title: When a widely accepted English name, in a modern context, exists for a place, we should use it. This will often be a local name, or one of them; but not always. If the place does not exist anymore, or the article deals only with a place in a period when it held a different name, the widely accepted historical English name should be used. If neither of these English names exist, the modern official name (in articles dealing with the present) or the local historical name (in articles dealing with a specific period) should be used. All applicable names can be used in the titles of redirects.

Again, this points to Chilko Lake being the favoured name for this geographic feature, which Google Trends backs up as well.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%205-y&q=Chilko%20Lake,T%C5%9Dilhqox%20Biny&hl=en

Futochu 09:13, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:29, 24 June 2026 (UTC)
• Courtesy ping: @2pou, DoubleGrazing, and Wolfgang8741: from previous move discussion.
• Support. As noble as the intentions of the prior name change might be, it just doesn't seem like WP:COMMONNAME. Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's official name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:47, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

  Appreciate the ping. I have no opinion myself; my previous involvement was merely determining the consensus of the discussion at the time, and WP:CCC. -2pou (talk) 23:10, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

• Comment Thanks for the ping, but nil return from me: I've no knowledge of the area, therefore couldn't comment on what name is or isn't in common use. (Also, I've no recollection of the previous move discussion, which is a bit scary!) --DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:22, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

• Comment Thanks for the ping as well, I'm curious what prompted this move? I don't have strong feelings, to say support or reject, but the following is food for thought. Papers like https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.00787 talk about how long geographic name changes take to be absorbed by media while what "common name" depends on where you live and who named it. Take also a read of https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-21510-0 and consider if there is colonialism or de-colonialism occurring through a name. Is most common English the previous name because of inertia? As in are these sources just beyond the edge of their adoption curve. The BC https://apps.gov.bc.ca/pub/bcgnws/names/70281.html sets the official government use in maps and parks, it doesn't mean people are perfect and update those. It has been many years, but I'd rather not say which common and create friction to the decolonization of names in Canada especially a change made in with the First Nation of Canada. Thus in this case both are probably accurate names for the local, but which representation should be the weight ie the main label for the article. My previous support for the current name is based on not imposing a name to keep the status quo. I wonder if these sources were contacted and asked about the name change if they would support Tŝilhqox Biny or Chilko Lake as according to https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/celebrating-british-columbia/historic-places/geographical-names it could be an awareness gap for sites to not use the official name or other social reasons based national perspective or not having an event that causes higher investigation of the area name.

Wolfgang8741 says: If not you, then who? (talk) 03:36, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

Hey just answering why I initiated the move; In the news recently a hydroelectric project has been proposed in the region, and apparently this lake is potentially part of the plans. I had never heard of the article name before but I saw the previous article name and name change and it seems after 7 years it has not stuck. I'm sympathetic to official geographic name changes taking a long time to percolate, but the name change clearly has not percolated so I believe it makes more sense to use the common name for now. Futochu 06:34, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.