Talk:Tsuu T'ina 145

Untitled

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/mobil/news-nouvelles-eng.asp?cat=00&id=1350 "Since 1908, DND has leased about 11,800 acres of Sarcee reserve land, commonly referred to as the Sarcee Training Area" That's about 20% of the reserve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fourtildas (talk • contribs) 02:04, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

--This is mentioned on the other Tsuu Tina nation article. It's true the Top hemisphere of Tsuu T'ina was leased to the army, as well as a corner (Harvey Barracks)...It was returned to the nation in 1996, when CFB Calgary was decomissioned. Again I think this is mentioned on the other Tsuu Tina site.

Actually, the orginal poster is right. I'm going to dig a little bit more, but it would seem that not only was the Sarcee Training Area leased. But it seemed to have incorporated the communities of Signal Hill (Battalion Park), Currie Barracks, Mount Royal College, Garrison Woods etc etc etc).... That a combination of land grabs (pressurized land sales), of surrendered lands which the Tsuu Tina's were not adquately compensated with, IN ADDITION to the Weasel head areas (the mouth of the Glenmore). This would be interesting...

Merge

There is a similar page entitled "Tsuu T'ina Nation", does it have any relation to this page? Can we combine the data from that site on here too? or do a redirect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsamcat (talk • contribs) 09:31, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

As the Tsuu T'ina Nation only has one assigned Indian reserve, a proposed merge might be worth exploring. However, I would suggest the proposal be that this article be merged with Tsuu T'ina Nation, not the other way around. Hwy43 (talk) 09:12, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Grey Eagle, and other economic hubs

The Grey Eagle casino intends to expand as the economic hub of the nation, and has signed an agreement with the city. Nenshi also agreed to other mutual cooperation. Yet this information is not public, and when interviewed by the press former Chief Joseph Sunstrum preferred Nenshi to mention this. Eventually, it will be revealed the extend of the cooperation the two communities agreed. I hope that these details are revealed for academic archival Wiki purposes.

Should I add this section? I have discovered details during my Nenshi research...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsamcat (talk • contribs) 09:43, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

No. Do not add anything until it can be verified by reliable sources. Hwy43 (talk) 09:13, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

The size of the nation

The Tsuu T'ina nation signed an accord with the province and expanded the territory of the community (with . Does current data reflect this change? (posted November 2013) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsamcat (talk • contribs) 09:43, 29 November 2013 (UTC) ACtually on second thought, Canadian Census didn't register this yet, and wikipedia needs us to cite official census so to wait until the Federal government registers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsamcat (talk • contribs) 11:09, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

The acquisition of additional land does not mean that these additional lands will be automatically carry the Indian reserve designation. The lands may very well just become land owned by the Tsuu T'ina Nation outright rather than Indian reserve lands owned by the feds on behalf of the Nation like the current arrangement for its Indian reserve. This concept is not uncommon. Paul Band owns land outside its three reserves that don't carry the Indian reserve designation. In this case, Paul Band is simply a private landowner. Hwy43 (talk) 09:18, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Some aspects outdated

A survey of local media and the website tsuutinanation.com indicate that the seal has been updated, and also the nation name is now spelled Tsuut'ina - one word, no space. 70.73.90.119 (talk) 04:49, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Spelling

Hello @Michael60634, I noticed you recently moved this article back to "Tsuu T'ina 145". It had been moved to the former—with the common, modern spelling—over two years ago, and you moved it back about six months ago with the comment "Official sources refer to this reserve as Tsuu T'ina Nation 145". I moved it back to "Tsuut'ina", you moved it back to "Tsuu T'ina"... Before I move it back to "Tsuut'ina" once again, can you please elaborate on the "official sources" you're referring to? Your most recent move back to "Tsuu T'ina" carried the comment "Reverted erroneous good faith edit. While the nation itself has a new spelling, the reserve does not." I appreciate that you recognize I moved it back to "Tsuut'ina" in good faith, but I'm confused as to where you're getting your info that the spelling of the "reserve" is somehow different than the spelling of "the nation itself". I don't want to get far off into the weeds, but in common parlance "Tsuut'ina Nation" is used to refer to the people, the band government and the reserve lands interchangeably. If you do have an "official" source, frankly if it reads "Tsuu T'ina" it's simply in error and hasn't been updated. See for example [1] and [2]—sources already referenced in this article—which read "The newly opened Costco on Tsuut’ina Nation" and "Costco opens on Tsuut'ina Nation". Thanks! CplDHicks2 (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Regarding official sources, I am referring to both the Government of Canada[3] via Statistics Canada, and the Alberta Government[4]. Again, I believe it's important to have a distinction between the group of people and the land they inhabit. While the spelling "Tsuut'ina" is the more modern spelling, as far as I can tell, it's not used in official contexts when referring to the reserve itself. And as this article is about the reserve and not the nation, I do not believe it's appropriate to use the spelling without the space when referring to the reserve. Additionally, declaring all sources saying that the spelling with the space is "simply in error" and out of date, is, well, simply in error. The StatCan source I provided is from the 2021 Census. That is well after the name change for the nation, so it's in no way out of date. And the Alberta Government source I provided was updated on 28 February 2023. Again, this is in no way out of date. michael60634 / talk / contributions 00:54, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for replying. I suspected your sources were going to be some government databases. They are out of date, in the sense that they have not been kept up-to-date. If they were up-to-date, they wouldn't use the old spelling. :) The Tsuut'ina people and Tsuut'ina lands do not have different spellings: it's one and the same spelling. It's inappropriate to use the old spelling with the space when referring to anything, because it's not the commonly accepted spelling anymore.

Even if you believe the "official name" has a space in it, Wikipedia policy on article titles is to use the common name, and the spelling with no space is the common name now. Witness the couple of articles I quoted above about the new Costco: they read "on the Tsuut'ina Nation", as in "on the Tsuut'ina Nation lands", i.e. the reserve lands. CplDHicks2 (talk) 17:00, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

I've assembled a few additional sources for your info, from a cursory Google search:

The City of Calgary has a page up for a new fence being erected along the boundary between the City and the Nation. This project began last year (2022). The page includes a small map, which refers to the reserve lands as "Tsuut'ina Nation".

The Nation commissioned a report on the northern boundary of the reserve lands, which summarized the fencing project and the historical context of the boundary. This report, dated August 16, 2021, is titled The North Boundary of the Tsuut’ina Nation Reserve. The only uses of "Tsuu T'ina" within it are a direct quote from a Rocky View County land use planning document ca. 2005, and in the title of a Government of Canada document in the bibliography ca. 2015. Everywhere else throughout this document it's "Tsuut'ina", no space.

The Taza Development Approval Process Law, which sets out the guidelines for the new commercial development on the east side of the reserve, reads: "This Law applies only to certain lands within the Tsuut'ina Indian Reserve No. 145 [...]".

The Stewardship Agreement which defines the relationship between the Nation and Redwood Meadows, reads: "'Reserve' means Tsuut'ina Nation Indian Reserve No. 145, which has been set apart for the use and benefit of Tsuut'ina Nation, formerly known as the Sarcee Indian Reserve No. 145."

A third-party environmental impact assessment report about the Springbank Off-Stream Reservoir project reads, "Tsuut’ina Nation Reserve 145". CplDHicks2 (talk) 18:20, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

To simplify everything, I'll reply to your two comments here.

You'll note that the Alberta Government source was updated as of 28 February 2023. That's only three months out of date. Not fifteen years. Not five years. Three months.

Regarding your map from the City of Calgary, I need to note that it also includes the wrong spelling of Rocky View County.

I'll have to do more research on this, but as far as I can tell, the Government of Canada and Alberta Government sources are indeed up to date. And it wouldn't make sense to use out of date information when the topic is recent census data or statistics.

Also worth noting is that any map I can find uses the spelling with a space. I'll exclude OpenStreetMap as I have a conflict of interest as I am an active contributor. But various maps and services including Google Maps[5], Bing Maps[6], MapQuest[7], AccuWeather[8], and Yr[9] use the spelling with a space.

I apologise in advance if I take a while to reply. I'm quite busy with work recently. michael60634 / talk / contributions 02:39, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate that you're busy, so I am. No problem replying to my two replies with one consolidated reply; mine were meant to be read as one, essentially.

That said, I don't think you quite understand what I mean when I say that that Alberta government stats page is out of date. The data on that page may have been updated as of February 28th, 2023 (although I fail to see where you gleaned this from; I click on that link and I see lots of data marked "OLD DATA" and 2017, 2015, 2014...), but the spelling of Tsuut'ina is not up-to-date. If it was up-to-date, it wouldn't have the space in it. ¿Comprende?

Your use of maps as sources is... interesting. First of all that Government of Alberta data page has a map on it, apparently produced by Mapbox, which reads "Tsuut'ina Nation", haha. I honestly glossed right over the misspelled "Rockyview County" on that City of Calgary map, but the salient point is throughout that page it spells Tsuut'ina with no space. On the subject of errors, a cursory peek at Google Maps is riddled with errors and ye olde timey locales in the vicinity of the Tsuut'ina Nation: it has "Pirmez Creek" townsite [10] (Pirmez Creek was a ranch that happened to have a post office at it in the late 19th/early 20th century, nothing more; it was never a town unto itself), a completely fictitious neighbourhood called "Festuburt" [11] (there was a Festuburt Avenue when the army barracks were there, but the area was never, ever called "Festuburt"), there's a point for "Tsuu T'ina Education Department" [12] which if you go to their linked website [13] reads "Tsuut'ina Board of Education", and "places" like "Keith" [14] and "Bearspaw" [15] were just Canadian Pacific whistle stops that were closed... gosh I dunno, 80 years ago? There's also an underlying problem here, in that Google Maps is using Wikipedia as a source. So too is Bing Maps. So this is just a circular reference to this very article and its incorrect spelling...

Referring to Mapquest had me giggling; Mapquest is still around? Hahaha, I think it has been 15-20 years since I last perused it, which speaks precisely to my point.

Accuweather's map is just gleaned from Mapbox and OpenStreetMap, so if this is what OpenStreetMap says then... yeah, no wonder it's still wrong.

"Yr" I've never even heard of, but the page says "Norwegian Meteorological Institute"...? Really? We're digging awfully deep here, my friend.

I suspect I know precisely where these maps are getting the outdated spelling from: the Canadian Geographical Names Data Base (CGNDB). In particular the Indigenous Names data set. You can download your own copy here (note: it's a zipped CSV file). Row 14645 is the one in question, and it does indeed read "Tsuu T'ina Nation 145". That is where every reference to it in StatsCan data, every federal government map, etc. gets it from. All because some government bureaucrat hasn't fixed it yet. I would wager that's the data set that all of the maps you've presented get their info from, so it's in reality one source that is being referenced over and over and over by third parties, which makes it look like it's a common spelling when in reality it's just the deference to a single government data set that is perpetuating a misspelling over and over and over and over. It's important to understand that that data set not necessarily up-to-date. They say as much here: "The Geographical Names Board of Canada (GNBC) is working to increase awareness of existing Indigenous place names and help promote the revitalization of Indigenous cultures and languages. Many more Indigenous place names exist in Canada, and this dataset will be constantly evolving as additional Indigenous place names are officially recognized and identified. The Geographical Names Board of Canada does not warrant or guarantee that the information is accurate, complete or current at all times."

I also appreciate you being upfront about contributing to OpenStreetMap. I perused that site and ended up down a very interesting rabbit hole... You see, I found some very contentious comments [16] about changes you made to that map. It took a little digging, but based on the references in those comments to a "talk-ca mailing list" I found this: an archived email chain about this very subject, which seems to have been precipitated by you changing the name of the Tsuut'ina reserve lands to "Tsuu T'ina Nation 145". I'm guessing it's not a coincidence that you moved this article from "Tsuut'ina Nation 145" to "Tsuu T'ina Nation 145" on December 1, 2022 and you started this email thread the very next day? It sure doesn't look like a coinkydink... I won't quote that discussion beat for beat but it looked less than amicable.

This Amos Hayes fella seems to have a very measured take on it, which honestly I think you really ought to heed: "Note that some of the ideas that at first glance seem to make a lot of sense on here like using 'official_name' for what Canada calls a First Nation or reserve is actually a very biased approach and is highly problematic for anyone who recognizes Canada as an occupier. The 'official' name of a First Nation comes from their authority, whatever form that takes." He's basically saying "if the Tsuut'ina call themselves Tsuut'ina not "Tsuu T'ina", then call them Tsuut'ina". That's basically what I'm saying here too: don't just blindly defer to a Government of Canada database. CplDHicks2 (talk) 05:29, 7 June 2023 (UTC)