Talk:Kamloops Indian Residential School

News article on 200 bodies found at the school

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kamloops/335241/Remains-of-215-children-found-at-former-residential-school-in-British-Columbia#335241

May 26, 2021 article on 200 child bodies buried at the school. Questions

1. What church denomination ran the school?
2. What records are there of the children deaths?
3. Is there a past government inquiry of the school?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:d591:5f10:4d07:2940:1f2e:7d97 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

According to this CNN article, it was run by the Catholic Church from its opening until the 1960s. (see https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/28/world/children-remains-discovered-canada-kamloops-school/index.html). A report was done in 2015 by the Canadian Truth and Reconciliation Commission which reported on issues of physical, sexual and emotional abuse. The report estimates 4000 children died but there was no mention about the records documenting the deaths. Though the article does not talk about a new investigation, I imagine with the finding of the bodies, there will be an additional investigation. Jurisdicta (talk) 04:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

reports states that 4000 children died in the NATIONWIDE SYSTEM, i believe, not in this one school alone! 66.30.47.138 (talk) 02:35, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@66.30.47.138 Thank you for clarifying that, as I was wondering how large the enrollment was. Are there any figures on the total enrollment over the period? Wakelamp d[@-@]b (talk) 23:24, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Removed text

"In 1962, the dancers were awarded the Norman Day Confederation Life shield, after taking the first three places in an under-18 folk dancing competition at the Okanagan Music Festival.

Trying for WP:DUE. Currently article lists awards then right at the end casually mentions physical abuse. Will need more work, but currently cutting this paragraph.

Western Standard

@Fluorescent Jellyfish: I have reverted some (not all) of your removal of content sourced to the Western Standard. What is your basis for claiming it is not a reliable source? Riposte97 (talk) 03:17, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

In real life I research disinformation, misinformation, and the Canadian far-right. I'm familiar with the Western Standard from my work.

But anyways, as it states in the page you linked about Wikipedia's guidelines for determining reliable sources, sources such as newspapers (which Western Standard would be counted as) have certain caveats relating to reliability. The page states that news reporting from "well established outlets" can often be considered reliable for statements of fact - Western Standard is not well-established; it was 're-established' in 2019 (see it's own About page: [1]) by disgraced right-wing politician Derek Hildebrandt, having originally been established in 2004 by extreme-far-right figure Ezra Levant.[2]

But far, far more than not being well-established - it is a far-right[3] misinformation outlet.[4] It frequently publishes racist, transphobic, and homophobic stories (and has repeatedly had to retract stories, along with failing various fact checks by media-observers). It has also been a key player in spreading Covid-denial and anti-vaxx disinformation.[5] It is a promulgator of far-right conspiracy theories.

From the (peer-reviewed) article The public, the pandemic, and the public service: The case of Alberta (Wesley and Ribeiro, 2024):

"Organizations that exhibited high levels of bias, frequently skewed or misrepresented facts, did not use reputable sources, and engaged in promoting conspiracies or misinformation were categorized as fringe. Here we included Fox News, Western Standard, Rebel News, Sun News, and talk radio as fringe news outlets."[6]

Additionally, just for a quick example:

"The Western Standard, a conservative publication based in Calgary, amplified in early July a conspiracy theory that claimed fires were being deliberately set at farms around the world to make populations more dependent on governments."[7]

"[E]xtremists from the far-right of the political spectrum, including the Canadian Yellow Vest movement and the Canadian chapter of the Islamophobic and anti-immigrant Soldiers of Odin. Their narratives are laundered and amplified by a well-established alternative media ecosystem, including outlets such as Rebel News, Western Standard, True North, and the Postmillennial."[8]

In fact, in its previous iteration, the Western Standard was charged with two counts of hate speech![9]

And, lol, just two days ago, "[Derek] Fildebrandt, 38, who is now the publisher of the Western Standard news website, faces four charges of uttering threats to cause death or bodily harm, according to court documents."[10]

It has a long history of anti-Indigenous racism. It promulgates a current far-right, anti-Indigenous conspiracy theory revolving around Residential Schools, elements of which were featured in this article until I had removed them. It is unfortunately not a reliable source, and I would appreciate my changes being accepted.

Hope you have a good rest of your day! Fluorescent Jellyfish (talk) 05:14, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

The mere fact that a publication is 'far right' is not a valid reason to discount it. Respectfully, I do not see anything in the evidence you have provided that would suggest WS fails the relevant test. Links 1, 2, and 3 are neither here nor there. Links 4 and 5 go to the same article, and do not allege falsity in reporting. The segment you extract from the 'peer reviewed article' at link 6 is taken from the methodology section, which for a number of reasons, is inappropriate as a source for your claim. Link 7, although rather vague, seems to allude to an opinion piece, which would not impugn the paper's news reporting. Link 8 just links to the same article as 4 and 5. Link 9 is an irrelevant point about a charge (not a guilty verdict) unrelated to the truth or falsity of the reporting. Link 10 is the same.

Perhaps more importantly, is there any reason to omit the assertion that no human remains have been confirmed at the site? That seems like a bare fact.

I also hope you enjoy your day! Riposte97 (talk) 05:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Respectfully, the onus is more on you to show that a deeply questionable source is reputable. It is not merely right-wing - it is a known purveyor of inaccurate claims, recognized as an outlet that propagates conspiracy theories. There is no sound reason to insist the claims it supports remain. Fluorescent Jellyfish (talk) 08:39, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Shoot, forgot to include this part - the article states at several points that no human remains have been exhumed, and that the presence of bodies cannot be certain until/if there is an exhumation. However, the claims by the Western Standard (plus giving a known misinformation source legitimacy by using it as a source) do not merely state this fact; they heavily imply that the fact that bodies have not been exhumed means that there are no bodies. This is not accurate, as it does not reflect the true nuance of the situation (e.g. that exhumation has not taken place due in a large part to ongoing discussions of family and community members of whether exhumation would be seen as personally and culturally appropriate), and unfortunately reflects current conspiracy theories amongst the global alt-right. Fluorescent Jellyfish (talk) 08:44, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

There may be bodies, there may not be. It is simply not for us to say. We cannot exclude a source because it comes down on one side or the other. Riposte97 (talk) 09:50, 6 June 2024 (UTC)