User talk:LeCanardQuoi

Welcome!

Hello, LeCanardQuoi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 16:20, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Frenchtown, Washington has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Frenchtown, Washington. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 01:28, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Will of course disambiguate. LeCanardQuoi (talk) 03:13, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Frenchtown, Washington has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Frenchtown, Washington. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 01:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

LeCanardQuoi (talk) 03:39, 6 March 2019 (UTC) Comment was: "See place notability guidelines. This does not appear to be a legally recognized inhabited named place." "Places with protected status (e.g. cultural heritage sites) and named natural features, with verifiable information" are presumed to be notable according the wikipedia article on place notability. So shouldn't Frenchtown Washington abundantly written about (including many scholar references) be presumed to be notable? French Prairie in Oregon is a very similar heritage area and has a wikipedia entry, thus presumed notable. Frenchtown, Indiana does not look much different as far as "place notability goes". See French Prairie. Am a bit lost, this being my first ever article.[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Frenchtown, Washington (March 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure. Note to reviewers: do not leave copyright violations sitting in the page history. Please follow the instructions here.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

Draft:Frenchtown, Washington may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SITH (talk) 17:07, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LeCanardQuoi! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! SITH (talk) 17:07, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, LeCanardQuoi. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by David Biddulph (talk) 18:07, 26 March 2019 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.[reply]

What do you think about AIs on Wikipedia?

Hi LeCanardQuoi,

Welcome to the Wikipedia community!

Did you know that Artificial Intelligences (AIs) support Wikipedia? I saw your post on Teahouse, and I’m personally contacting a small handful of new Wikipedia editors to make sure your voice is heard as we build and refine these AIs.

Will you please provide an interview to share your thoughts about AI on Wikipedia? It would only take about 30 minutes over phone or video chat. We will send you a $15 Amazon gift card as a way to thank you for your time.

I am working in collaboration with Wikimedia Foundation staff to do this research, so if you decide to participate, your opinion could help build the future of Wikipedia. Hope to talk to you soon!

PS. You can learn more about our study here.

Best, Bowen, aka Bobo.03 (talk) 19:09, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi LeCanardQuoi! You created a thread called Submitted article status inquiry at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Frenchtown, Washington (May 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Shemtovca was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

I don't see any sources proving the WP:GEOLAND

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Frenchtown, Washington and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Frenchtown, Washington, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Shemtovca (talk) 18:12, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Wikipedia. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Do not cite other Wikipedia entries as sources. Sounder Bruce 06:58, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pacific Northwest, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frenchtown (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 16:19, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fraser River

At Fraser River your wrote:

The Hudson Bay Company sent a crew in 1824 across Pudget Sound from its Fort George southern post located on the Columbia River to further explore the lower Fraser on the basis of the 1808 maps. The expedition was led by James McMillan. The Fraser was reached via the Nicomekl River and the Salmon River reachable after a portage. The objective was to reacquaint with friendly tribes met earlier on and subsequently locate on the Fraser a trading post with agricultural potential.

You added this source to support your edit.

Perhaps I missed it, but where in the source cited does it mention the Nicomekl River, and 1808 maps? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 09:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

13:43, 1 December 2022 (UTC)LeCanardQuoi The James McMillan article existing reference iterates the 1824&1827 expedition highlights conveyed in my revision. I removed the unnecessary reference (mainly implied) to previous Simon Fraser map as I could not readily find them. John Works log reference remains the primary source for the 1824 expedition.

I'm not sure I understand. Does the source cited specifically say "1808 maps"? Also, where does it mention the Nicomekl River? Magnolia677 (talk) 14:54, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:06, 1 December 2022 (UTC)LeCanardQuoi Simon Fraser maps referred earlier are no longer referred as per earlier note. The existing McMillan article now referred details as follows: "He led an exploration party of 40 men from Fort George to Puget Sound and on to Mud Bay, just east of present-day Point Roberts. On local advice of a shortcut, McMillan's party proceeded east up the Nicomekl River through what is now South Surrey, British Columbia where they portaged over to the Salmon River in order to finally reach the Fraser. The expedition traveled and surveyed up the Fraser River as far as Hatzic Slough, before returning to Fort George.[4]"

And for the third time, where does the source cited mention the Nicomekl River? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:28, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

16:38, 1 December 2022 (UTC)And for the n'nth time, several sources are cited. The McMillan article reference goes into the route details and sources, including the Nicomekl, the portage and the Salmon rivers.

But you specifically used this source to support the edit, and "Nicomekl River" is not mentioned at that source. Could you please either find a source to support this, or delete it. Thank you. You also wrote that Fort Langley was "the first ever mixed ancestry and agricultural settlement in southern British Columbia on the Fraser". To support this, you used this blog post. Where in that source does it say this? Thank you again. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

01:05, 2 December 2022 (UTC)LeCanardQuoi As suggested, John Work's log reference was simply removed as it is already used in the referred James McMillan article that documents the 1824&1827 expedition highlights. Assertion made in submitted revision "The trading post original location would soon become the first ever mixed ancestry and agricultural settlement in southern British Columbia on the Fraser (Sto:lo) river" was summarized from the following reference fragments: "The men wintered over, and some started to partner with native wives. The first wave of mixed ancestry descendants in southwest British Columbia would soon follow.[]Throughout its 10+ years of operation, a model of peaceful coexistence with the Indigenous people had generated a local bicultural population of mixed ancestry.[]Tools made by the local blacksmith enabled farming of new crops at nearby Langley Prairie: grain, potatoes and peas, followed by dairy, cattle and pigs. []New know-how was acquired in the areas of local farming, food curing, storage, shipping, transportation and even forestry: many premières in south-west BC!"

Disambiguation link notification for December 21

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cowlitz Prairie, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Simpson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected ambiguous reference LeCanardQuoi (talk) 07:02, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 29

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Willamette River, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Rogue River and Wallace House.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 4

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hudson's Bay Company, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fort Victoria.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]