This page has archives. Sections older than 61 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.
Bad climate chart data edits
It should be known that a user (
Special:Contributions/Donkeybread) has gone through and "updated" a number of climate charts with new 1991-2020 data but only updated certain sections of the charts with new data leaving the old 1981-2010 data mixed in with it in the same charts and then changed the header of the charts to say that all the old data and new is now all new "1991-2020" data. This here
[1] is an example. For some reason ECCC (Environment Canada) has not released complete 1991-2020 data for certain locations so that's part of the problem here.
This new added data at the very least should be reverted, but that would need to be done manually unfortunately. At best it could be added as a separate but incomplete climate chart, but that's a lot of work too and I don't know if ECCC has said if they even have and are going to release more data for these incomplete locations.
Air.light (
talk) 23:32, 19 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Looking at the contributions it seems that the user has done some self-reversions. Is this resolved?
JM (
talk) 21:35, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
Merging of Canada Health and Social Transfer, Canada Health Transfer, and Canada Social Transfer
These programs are all related through a common history (
CHST was split into
CST and
CHT), but the pages are all a little stump-y. I feel like they would benefit from merger into a single article with a History section.
I would prefer keeping them seperate, as the latter two are separate programs. I'm thinking of how we have separate articles for split and combined ministries etc. Really the only page that's short is the CST one and I don't see it as a huge problem.
JM (
talk) 21:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC)reply
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
I am looking for editors to provide feedback on
John Rolph, a Toronto-area politician, lawyer and doctor from the 19th century. I am hoping to nominate the article to FAC later this year. The PR can be found
here. Thanks for your help!
Z1720 (
talk) 19:35, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge Proposal: "Provincial and territorial courts in Canada" into "Court system of Canada"
Hi! Wikimedia Canada invites contributors living in Canada to take part in our 2024 Community Survey. The survey takes approximately five minutes to complete and closes on March 31, 2024. It is available in both French and English. To learn more, please visit the
survey project page on Meta.
Chelsea Chiovelli (WMCA) (
talk) 17:31, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
You are invited to join the discussion at
Talk:Blaze Island. There is an additional Blaze island near the US-Canada border, on Canada's side.
ExclusiveEditorNotify Me! 19:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Elisa (restaurant) at AfD + photo request
Elisa (restaurant) has been nominated for deletion, if any notice board members are interested in weighing in. Also, this article could use a picture or two if anyone is in the neighborhood and able to upload. Thanks! ---
Another Believer(
Talk) 19:16, 10 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Royal Society of Canada President undocumented on Wiki, easy, necessary fix
Hello! Back to Wiki editing after years away. I months ago noticed that the President of the Royal Society of Canada does not have a reliable Wiki page in any language, which doesn't make sense. Online users can look to tons of other spots, such as the RSC (
https://rsc-src.ca/en/governance-programmes/board-directors/alain-gagnon), but not here!
So I drafted and new-page posted something very careful in English (
Draft:Alain-G. Gagnon), pending an update to the weak sourcing of the existing French (
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alain-G._Gagnon). Figured that would be a good first step. But given the backlog in new page approvals there is months later nothing reliable on this from us that's public-facing.
This seems to me a Canada group priority, to the extent we can swing it. Happy for feedback on my drafted content, and would be even happier if someone with the editorial seniority can improve the draft so that I can get that reflected in French and we can clean up the Wiki profile on this one.
Thnx for your attention to this, should you give it ;), and all the best...
Edits2024 (
talk) 18:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)reply
An editor, Mr. C.C., has been revising
2024 in Canadian music to follow a variant format not consistent with any of the other "Years in Canadian music" articles — instead of using the "events" section primarily for things like the Juno and Polaris and Felix awards as all other years do, they've been greatly expanding the section by using it to double-list the release of every individual album that's already listed in the "albums set for release" section, and the deaths of individual musicians who are supposed to be listed in a separate "deaths" section rather than being listed as "events".
I've already explained to them twice on their talk page that repeating the same things as both "events" and "albums" simultaneously just introduces unnecessary clutter to the page, and that they would need to gain a consensus for the 2024 article to do any differently than
2023 in Canadian music and
2022 in Canadian music and all of the others are doing — but they've continually revert-warred me to put it back the way they want it with a false claim that I'm the one acting against consensus. I also note that they've been temporarily editblocked at least once in the past for persistent revert-warring, and that they were formerly known as "Fishhead2100", an editor I remember well for doing something very similar at
List of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation personalities, where they tried to convert it from a list of CBC employees (journalists, radio hosts, etc.) into a comprehensive list of every individual actor who had ever appeared in a scripted drama or comedy series on the CBC, which was also against consensus and made the list excessively long but had to be escalated after they revert-warred over that too.
So, since I don't want this to turn into an ongoing revert war because
WP:3RR is a thing, I wanted to ask if anybody else could review
2024 in Canadian music to determine if that user's insistence that it's their way or the highway is warranted or not.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:00, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I reverted their most recent edit. There's a section for album releases, so there's no need to repeat them as "notable events". PKT(alk) 19:44, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Sockpuppet investigation
I have opened a sockpuppet investigation at
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/His Highness Prince John of Newmarket to try to stop the knucklehead who has vandalized articles on York Region municipalities over the past couple of years under a variety of similar usernames. Let's see how this goes. Regards, PKT(alk) 13:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The investigation has been merged with another and is now under
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HH Crown Prince Wayne of Markham. Unfortunately, the admin comment is, "I've merged this case to the correct location. CUs are aware of this, and an effective rangeblock is not going to be possible. I suggest making liberal use of
WP:AIV &
WP:RFPP and not giving this individual any more attention than is strictly necessary. Closing." PKT(alk) 11:57, 20 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello WP:Canada members! I'm Dom from
Second Harvest. We're looking to have our Wikipedia page be more fully fleshed out - would love to have it have more content and be more helpful to users. Cross-posting to a few WPs :)
Domeniquebs (
talk) 14:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello @
Domeniquebs:! I have addressed the issues you mentioned. Regards, PKT(alk) 14:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Provincial government houses, as monarch's official residences?
Six of our ten provinces still maintain an official residence for their respective lieutenant governors. I've noticed however that most of those government houses, are described as also being official residences of the monarch. Starting in 1867, I don't recall Victoria, Edward VII, George V, Edward VIII, George VI, Elizabeth II or Charles III spending much time (if any) in either of those provincial residences. Aren't we kinda distorting info & stretching things, by suggesting any of those places are an official residence of the monarch?
GoodDay (
talk) 17:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Where are these descriptions? I skimmed the monarchy article and didn't see one?
Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (
talk) 18:04, 29 March 2024 (UTC)reply
This appears to be dredging up the same issue over and over again, for example with this same discussion from
Talk:Rideau Hall#Queen's official residence from 15 years ago, another above that from 16 years ago, and still others at different articles over the same time span.
I would note that an official residence (designated residence of an official) and where the holder actually lives are not necessarily the same thing. For example, Justin Trudeau has never lived at the official residence of the prime minister during his term as prime minister, and that fact has no bearing on the designation of whether that building is an official residence or not. Or in other words, where someone actually decides to live has zero bearing on the official designation of a residence.
trackratte (
talk) 06:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)reply
That's partially the core of the dispute. Definition of 'official resident'. As for Trudeau? he's not residing at 24 Sussex Drive, because it's undergoing repairs. King Charles III isn't residing at Rideau Hall, the Citadelle or the aforementioned provincial residences, because he simply doesn't reside in any of those places. Trudeau does reside/live in Canada, where's King Charles III does not.
GoodDay (
talk) 20:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes pls let's get some more eyes over here.....have a young student that needs some guidance. Our resident expert Miesianiacal is no longer around.Moxy🍁 15:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi, I've been looking at very old articles with no refs. I'm not able to read references about
Boubou Macoutes, I was wondering if anyone here could help suggest refs which show notability. Thanks.
JMWt (
talk) 09:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)reply
There's a slightly better article on the French Wikipedia, and Google shows some Québec media coverage in the last ten years about it being applied to a new wave of inspectors. This is probably a job for somebody fluent in the local French.
G. Timothy Walton (
talk) 13:59, 19 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Who's sovereign of each provincial legislature?
I need some help concerning the infobox at
General Assembly of Nova Scotia (where I think I kinda butchered it & have since reverted) & other provincial general assemblies, with complicated histories. Who's sovereign in each provincial general assembly? The monarch, the lieutenant governor or both? Is there consistency among the provinces or none, on this matter?
GoodDay (
talk) 14:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
So which provincial general assemblies do we include "The King in Right of..." & which do we exclude?
GoodDay (
talk) 15:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
All 3 in my view.Moxy🍁 15:21, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The provincial legislatures are generally constitutionally defined as consisting of the Lieutenant Governor of the province and the legislative assembly. (This is different to the composition of the Parliament of Canada, which is defined as the King, Senate, and House of Commons.) For example, section 69 of the Constitution Act, 1867 states: "There shall be a Legislature for Ontario consisting of the Lieutenant Governor and of One House, styled the Legislative Assembly of Ontario." Very similar wording is used for Quebec (Constitution Act, 1867), Alberta
[2], Saskatchewan
[3], and Manitoba
[4]. (BC and the four Atlantic provinces all had pre-existing legislatures that were continued when they became a province, so I haven't checked those ones.)
I think saying that the legislature consists of the legislative assembly and the "LG (acting in the name of the King)" is more reflective of the actual constitutional structure than saying the legislature consists of the "King (as represented by the LG)".
As for whether the legislature and legislative assembly articles should be merged, that would probably be fine, and might reduce confusion by clearly explaining everything in one place like at
Legislative Assembly of Ontario. I note that
Legislative Assembly of British Columbia currently says that the LG is part of the Legislative Assembly, which is incorrect; the LG and the Legislative Assembly together make up the Legislature.--
Trystan (
talk) 15:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Moxy: & @
Trystan:, I've added the "The King in Right of..." to the infoboxes of the general assemblies of British Columbia, Nova Scotia & Newfoundland and Labrador, to bring consistency among the nine existing pages. Are these additions correct?
GoodDay (
talk) 16:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
My preference would be to standardize all the provincial legislature infoboxes to reflect the actual constitutional language, which would mean stating in the text and infobox that the Lieutenant Governor is a component of the legislature. The text of the article can explain that the LG assents to legislation in the name of the King. (Here are the relevant statutes for
PEI and
NS to add to the list in my post above.)--
Trystan (
talk) 16:28, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I would also disagree with getting rid of the Legislature articles, because that is the legislative body. The Legislative Assemblies, by themselves, cannot pass a law. Better to use the term from the Constitution, that each province has a Legislature composed of the Lt Gov and the Assembly, rather than get rid of the Legislature article and create an incorrect assumption that the Legislative Assembly is the legislature. (Note that in Quebec, the terms are the Parliament of Quebec and the National Assembly, rather than Legislature and Legislative Assembly, but it's functionally the same; the Parliament of Quebec is composed of the Lt Gov and the National Assembly.) My preference is always to stick as close as possible to the language of the Constitution.
Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (
talk) 17:42, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't think the expression "king in right of ..." is appropriate in the LG and legislature articles. It's my understanding that "crown/king/His Majesty in right of <jurisdiction>" is used in legal proceedings when more than one jurisdiction is involved, or to distinguish provincial crown land from federal, and so on. But it's an abstract legal concept not a person, and it's not correct to call Charles III "king in right of BC". His only Canadian titles are King of Canada and Head of the Commonwealth. But I'm not a lawyer, so set me straight if I'm wrong.
Indefatigable (
talk) 02:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree with Indefatigable. I’ve generally only seen the term « in right of » used in land titles, contracts, and the style of cause for court cases, to distinguish the government entity that is involved. It’s not a title, but a clarification that the king of Canada is acting in right of a particular government.
I think all of the legislatures should refer to the Lt Gov, since that is how they are defined in their constituent document.
For example, the fully elected BC Legislature was created by the provincial Constitution Act, enacted by the BC Governor and Legislative Council in 1871, in anticipation of joining Confederation. Section 6 of the Act provides that legislation can be passed by the Governor and the new Legislative Assembly. See:
https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/hstats/hstats/1799836107
I will do some digging, but I’m pretty sure that none of the Atlantic provinces constitutent docs referred to the Crown as part of the colonial legislatures. Those legislatures were established by the royal commissions to the governors of each colony, directing them to establish legislative bodies, with the governor being part of the legislative process.
Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (
talk) 12:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Here’s an example of an SCC case that uses « in right of » in the style of cause: Her Majesty in right of the Province of Alberta v. Canadian Transport Commission. This terminology was presumably used because it was litigation between the province of Alberta and a federal Crown agency, so necessary to distinguish.
https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/5987/index.doMr Serjeant Buzfuz (
talk) 12:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Who ever knows the correct way & implements on the nine pages-in-question? 'Tis fine by me.
GoodDay (
talk) 20:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I think we have consensus. I'll start some edits.
Indefatigable (
talk) 19:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Another question. Should we include or exclude the monarch into/from the infoboxes of the
House of Commons of Canada, the
Senate of Canada & the ten provincial & territorial legislative assemblies page?
GoodDay (
talk) 20:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Exclude. The king is not part of those bodies (but he is part of Parliament).
Indefatigable (
talk) 22:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Government Houses as royal residences
A question came up at
Government House (Prince Edward Island) which I think actually concerns all of the government houses in Canada. I initially started a discussion on the talk page of that article but since this possibly affects many articles I'm going to redirect the discussion here.
We have a source defining government houses as the official residences of the Canadian monarch when they are in those provinces (and Rideau Hall when they are in Ottawa). Up to today we had a category
Category:Royal residences in Canada but user
Wellington Bay has cleared the category today as well as the same category for Australia, on the basis of there being no source explicitly describing them as royal residences, and that an official residence of a monarch is not the same as a royal residence.
I'm not sure that there's value to an encyclopedia in distinguishing "official residence of a royal" from "royal residence", but I also don't think there's value in having the royal residences category in parallel to
Category:Government Houses in Canada with presumably exactly the same content. We don't have a description for "royal residence"; our title royal residence is a redirect to
Palace, which also has a section for the Canadian government houses. I'd like more opinions on where to go from here.
Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:43, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Just to give added background, "Government House" is a term that originated in the colonial era for the official residence of the colonial governor and, as colonies evolved into states, of the governor general (or lieutenant governor) so in our article
Government House, it is defined as "the name of many of the official residences of governors-general, governors and lieutenant-governors in the Commonwealth and British Overseas Territories." More elaboration is given in
Government Houses of the British Empire and Commonwealth which states "When King Charles III or a member of the royal family visits a Commonwealth nation, they will often stay at the Government House" - so these structures are also considered "official residences" of the monarch when the monarch is visiting. Does this make them "royal residences" though? We did have a discussion in
Talk:Governor General of Canada on whether or not Rideau Hall (and by extension the other official vice-regal residences) are "official residences" of the monarch. There appears to be a consensus that there are, but we also found no sources for them being "royal residences" per se and that term is not used in government sources, even those which say they are "official residences of the monarch". The term generally used for these buildings is "vice-regal residence" or "vice-regal estate" rather than royal residence) see, for example
Parks Canada webpage on Rideau Hall which refers to Rideau Hall as "the vice-regal estate of the Governor General of Canada". The term vice-regal is a form of the word
viceroy meaning governor general or lieutenant governor in our context. It's reasonable to refer to Government Houses in Commonwealth countries (and British overseas colonies) as "vice-regal residences" but not royal residences per se - that term is simply not used either in Canada or the Commonwealth in regards to these structures, nor do any official websites of the monarchy list Government Houses as "royal residences", a term which is generally associated with
palaces (which is also where
royal residence redirects in Wikipedia) - and yes while the
palace article does list Canadian government houses, I think that's an interpolation by an overenthusiastic editor as a) no other Government Houses from any other Commonwealth country are listed b) the section does not refer to Canadian government houses as palaces or royal residences - nor are there any sources that support such a description. Indeed, it was added on November 2, 2016 with no explanation or sources to support inclusion
[5].
Wellington Bay (
talk) 18:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
With the United Kingdom as the obvious exception. It's interesting, that there's any resistance concerning Canada, when there's no resistance concerning Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Jamaica, etc.
GoodDay (
talk) 20:52, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Wellington Bay this may be a topics you need to do more research on from what I can see.Moxy🍁 00:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Perhaps you can provide a source that states these or other Government Houses are "royal residences"?
Wellington Bay (
talk) 02:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
We have been over this already. There were extensive discussions
here and
here among other places. The Government of Canada's publication A Crown of Maples says that all Government Houses are official residences of the monarch.[1] Countless discussions of this on other pages is not helping.--
Darryl Kerrigan (
talk) 21:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Do you have a source that actually uses the phrase "royal residence"? Crown of Maples does not use that term at all.
Wellington Bay (
talk) 23:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
It says it is an official residence of the monarch, that's what "royal" means.--
Darryl Kerrigan (
talk) 23:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Nowhere is the term "royal residence" used in Crown of Maples or any other government or credible source, instead, the term "vice-regal residence" or "vice-regal estate" is used. Nor do any sources, including the official monarchy website, refer to any Government House in any Commonwealth country or British overseas territory as a "royal residence". Furthermore, there is no need to have both
Category:Royal residences in Canada and
Category:Government Houses in Canada as the contents are identical. Having two categories is redundant.
Wellington Bay (
talk) 23:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I've restored the monarch to the intro at
Rideau Hall, as that's what the last RFC there, called for. It also makes it consistent with the intro at
Citadelle of Quebec. I think it's best that all these government houses-in-question, be consistent. Whether it's to include the monarch or exclude.
GoodDay (
talk) 21:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Fourthords, a user who previously caused a ruckus at
Teryl Rothery (see
Wikipedia_talk:Canadian_Wikipedians'_notice_board/Archive_27#Teryl_Rothery) is at it again on
Eve Harlow, where they're basically vetoing any source whatsoever that describes her as "Canadian", and forcibly reverting anybody who tries to diffuse her out of
Category:Film actresses or
Category:Television actresses, even though those are container categories that are not allowed to have any individual articles filed directly in them, and are only allowed to contain subcategories. Obviously this is not acceptable, but they're revert-warring anybody who makes any edits to the article that don't fit their agenda — and, in fact, the article is very poorly sourced and not really demonstrating that she would actually pass
WP:GNGat all, as it's referenced almost entirely to directory entries on Rotten Tomatoes rather than proper media coverage, and even what there is for media coverage is coming primarily from Screen Rant (a marginal source at best) rather than real GNG-worthy media of record.
So I wanted to ask if anybody's willing to help repair the article with better sourcing that would properly support getting her out of the container categories, and/or willing to back me up on an
WP:AFD discussion if the sourcing can't be improved.
Bearcat (
talk) 21:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply