Talk:Whistler Blackcomb

Isn't the Fitzsimmons lift on Whistler?

The Fitzsimmons lift runs from the village base up Whistler Mountain. It links (sort of) with the bottom of the Garbanzo Chair. It is the primary lift for accessing the bike park on Whistler during the summer. It is also a quick way to bypass long lines at the gondola on busy ski days.142.177.195.152 14:02, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

When Blackcomb opened it had four fixed-grip triple chairlifts and one double chairlift and they were numbered, not named. Later they assigned names to the lifts and the one which ran from the village elevation to the upper parking lot, originally called Lift One, was called Fitzsimmons Chair. That chairlift was eventually replaced with the much longer, but still only marginally useful, Excalibur Gondola.

Names of places, structures, runs and lifts get moved around, and even repeated, frequently and seemingly at random at this resort.

The Resort Municipality of Whistler and the ski area Whistler-Blackcomb are not one and the same, incidentally. Intrawest only owns and operates the two ski areas and some retail shops and land management services. They are principally a developer and, contrary to popular belief, do not own or run the town.

Nippon cable of Japan also owns a minority share in Whistler/Blackcomb (not the town). They have been a partner in the mountains for many years, and were involved with Blackcomb when Aspen Skiing Corporation was also involved.--Baoluo 06:43, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

The vertical drop stated in the article is as supplied by the ski area, but is not correct. The true elevation at the top of the highest lifts is 2,240 metres or 7,347 feet--but that doesn't work out to a vertical mile unless one can get from the top of the lifts on Blackcomb Mountain to the bottom of the lifts on the west side of Whistler Mountain--not an easy feat.

Reference?

Accurate elevations have been taken from 1:5,000 scale planning maps produced for Whistler-Blackcomb by Ecosign and on file with the Resort Municipality of Whistler planning department. These map elevations have been verified with several calibrated altimeters and a GPS. Approximate elevations can be taken from Google Earth. Elevations used for marketing purposes have no known reliable or accurate source.

Figures for elevations and vertical heights corrected again. This is a losing battle between fact and marketing, unfortunately, since somebody seems to be getting paid to fudge the figures. Isn't .972 mile enough for you? Even your own reference, http://verticalfeet.com/, supports the facts and not the numbers you keep plugging in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ttoesen (talk • contribs) 04:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

In the section on the upcoming Olympics, it is written "Whistler, as the main focus of the 2010 Olympics". This strikes me as subject to certin conditions at best, if not plain wrong. Am I missing something? Given that the majority of people will be in Vancouver, and the opening and closing ceremonies will be in Vancouver, it seems the city is the main focus. Whistler is the almost exclusive focus of the Paralympic games however.

Also, the same section seems to mix together Whistler and Vancouver issues with the mention of "local mountains in... Vancouver". Seems to me this should be kept separate.

Finally, perhaps it should be noted that upgrading the highway has been in discussion for years before the Olympics came around. The event just kicked the schedule ahead a few years.

When did they merge?

The Blackcomb section mentions they were purchased in 1986 by Interwest, but it does not say if they already owned Whistler (I don't think they did). So when did Whistler-Blackcomb become Whistler-Blackcomb? Maury 21:30, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Found it, edited... Maury 21:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Blackcomblogo.png

Image:Blackcomblogo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Idiots in the Alpine

some idiot has reversed all the verbs to read the opposite of what is meant, thinking it is hilarious, I have corrected most.