Okay, I started this page to help focus building the information on here about Ontario, I have modelled it after some similar projects and hopefully some of you will pick it up from here! user:blacknail 19:31, 7 September 2005
I'm interested in developing the articles pertaining to the Rainy River District, I'd certainly need some help as I'm not too familiar with the formatting used.--Picard10216:58, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
The project isn't dead, just not particularly active. Technically, it hasn't really gotten started yet, though a few users have silently edited WP to add new Ontario-related content (for example, Bearcat). Of course, we welcome any ideas regarding this project or its promotion. Mindmatrix19:01, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Demographics?
I'm not currently a participant in this project (is it still alive?) but I have noticed a significant number of Ontario-related articles now include a Demographics section. While I guess this information is relevant to some, I have a few issues with how it's being done:
Contributions seem to be anonymous and mainly from 24.226.10.98 and 24.42.42.132 with no edit summaries
Inconsistent formatting & terminology (e.g. "racial" vs "ethnic", "native american" vs "aboriginal", etc.)
Prominence (does Demographics really deserve to appear before History?)
Thoughts? Ideally I'd love to hear from the two anonymous contributors, as it's obvious they've put a lot of work into tabulating this information. -- Darthsco20:19, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
I hear ya, I'm having a similiar problem in the Hamilton, Ontario article where an editor wants to include figures that have no cited source and are not in the 2001 census. It doesn't seem useful to me to give a discussion on demographics in an article as they are frequently changing, easily linked to on a statscan site and tend to produce a lot of debate over accuracy and under representation. I know one fellow was calling them rascist on the talk page. Your thoughts? Alan.ca10:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
We have had that problem all over the place - at one time, there were 3 different population numbers on the article for Markham. The best answer is to write the data in its full context, ie "according to the 2001 census, etc.". Other population data is OK as long as it is referenceable, so population numbers on roadsigns should be avoided. PKT17:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I recently created this article, I think it would be great if someone could take a look over and offer suggestions for improvement. I think there's still lots to do here and the redlinks indicate more articles that could be created. Thanks Matt01:10, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Hello. I'm a member of the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing articles using these criteria, and we are are asking for your help. As you are most aware of the issues surrounding your focus area, we are wondering if you could provide us with a list of the articles that fall within the scope of your WikiProject, and that are either featured, A-class, B-class, or Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Do you have any recommendations? If you do, please post your suggestions at the listing of all active Places WikiProjects, and if you have any questions, ask me in the Work Via WikiProjects talk page or directly in my talk page. Thanks a lot! Titoxd(?!? - help us)18:29, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Regarding the "Western Ontario" stub, the official name for this part of the province is "Southwestern Ontario". Western Ontario is an outdated name partly because it can be confused with Northwestern Ontario. I think the name of the stub should be changed. Jc802519:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I wrighte article about Kristen on cs.wikipedia, but I am frustrated from to small part of article, which is related to her life befor kidnaping. May be, these infromations are on internet and I can not find it (as You see, my english is really primitive :-). Please, help me! If you find, what I need, give me link. If you have (solid) newpapers with this or tape with this, contact me, please.
The second problem: I need Image for article. On internet are many Images (1, 2, but I am afraid to be thinking about copyright od this Images is works for very crazzy men. And If You have Image PD or GFDL, please, I need it_ :-).
After all, These things will be good for these article to. If you will improve en: article, I'll improve cs: article too... :-). Cinik18:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Cinik 18:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I see the difficulty you're facing, as per the AfD nom. I will do some research and attempt to put some cited sources in the document. I will also add the page to the biography project.Alan.ca06:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Project directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T218:33, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
The referenced project has been linked to Regional Municipality of York, Ontario, not a bad thing in itself but when I checked the project page, my concern began. The author seems to want to compartmentalize York Region's road network, which I think is ill-advised since roads are built to connect municipalities. Any opinions on how, or whether, to address this? PKT02:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Comment: If we don't start sourcing our statements in the Hamilton articles I imagine there are going to be more nominations. I flag articles on other topics frequently for deletion that lack sources. I think the wikipedia community has been extremely tolerant with our articles considering how few of them have been deleted. If we need a concerted effort, it's not to dispute the AfDs, but to get atleast one well included source in each article. Alan.ca12:29, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
ARTICLE DELETED, however, I've placed an appeal...hopefully that some folks here in Ontario might have concerns; for some reason, it was a someone from Oakland, California who pulled the article...guess we all remember the California Golden Seals?? Bacl-presby18:20, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
If it was the article I saw, which only included a list of the ministers of the church, then the deletion was appropriate. An article about the church ought to point out its historic or architectural importance. PKT19:29, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Geography sections uncited
I am having a difficult time citing sources in the sections/articles related to Geography. I have searched many other cities around the world and it seems to be a common problem. If anyone has any suggestions on how we can overcome this problem I would appreciate their assistance. Alan.ca12:32, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker21:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I just realized that Category:GTA was resurrected, despite having been deleted in July.
It is poorly populated (again). Do we need it? If so, I'm concerned that it doesn't seem to
have any structure, and would strongly recommend that it should sort of adopt the existing
categories for Toronto, York, Durham, Peel, Halton, etc. as its subcategories.
If we don't need it, let's have it deleted.
Opinions? PKT17:12, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Greetings! I come under the auspices of WikiProject Abandoned Articles, a project designed to bring abandoned articles that have not been edited for a number of years back to life. One such is Julia Munro, which by the looks of things seems to have a lot of outdated information, as well as not being perticularly informative. So if anybody would be able to spare some time, knowledge and expertise in bringing it back to life and expanding on it, it would be much appreciated. Lord Pheasant05:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Ms. Munro is my MPP, and she is not a particularly active one. She's an opposition backbencher these days, and consequently does not make much news. I would agree that the article could use more biographical detail. PKT20:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
So, with Belinda in thev federal scene, it notes that Newmarket-Aurora is a VACANT Provincial seat (no by-election like in Markham, Burlington, and York South-Weston this coming Thursday)...
I removed your project banner from the talk page for Hamilton, Ontario because it does not support a small version. Please look at other project banners to develop a small version of your talk page banner and then re-add it to this talk page. 22:50, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
The articles link to each other at the top, but for the sake of consistency they should redirect to the same one. Which? –Pomte13:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Government of Ontario should be its own article, referencing the Legislative Assembly and Politics articles. It shouldn't redirect to either one. PKT22:19, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi all! I have created a userbox for members of WikiProject Ontario. It is not very good, as I am new at making userboxes, and the name is quite long, so you'll have to copy and paste it. Thank you!
Like the other provinces, this project's template has been merged with the {{WikiProject Canada}} template. You can now tag articles talk pages with {{WikiProject Canada | on=yes}}. This will allow you to assess articles using class= and importance=. Once you have tagged a few and waited a few days for the bot to notice the changes, you will have a WP:1.0 assessment table here. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I've mentioned this already at the main CWNB, but I wanted to mention it here as well. Because we still have a lot of redlinked gaps and very brief stubs about Ontario geographic topics, I've begun a slightly different practice for articles on unincorporated communities within larger municipalities than we've tended to use in the past. Essentially, for smaller communities which are either (a) still redlinks, or (b) only one-or-two line stubs identifying the topic as a community within Township of Whateverville but giving no other verifiable and properly sourced information about the community, I've begun redirecting them to the municipality's article if the municipality's article is also still a stub or a redlink.
For example, Utterson is now a redirect to Huntsville, and Verschoyle is a redirect to South-West Oxford. And since Desbarats had a stub article but the actual township of Johnson was still a redlink, I moved the article to Johnson in the meantime since an article on the incorporated municipality really should have come first.
However, I do not follow this practice if either the smaller community or the parent municipality already has a substantial article. And, of course, an unincorporated community that isn't part of any municipality (e.g. Nolalu or Estaire) remains a standalone, regardless of length, since there isn't an appropriate parent article to redirect it to.
Note, of course, that the existence of a redirect is not a permanent ban on the community ever having its own separate article, but we should use redirects rather than one-line stubs until such time as the parent municipality's article is actually long and detailed enough that it's worth dividing it into multiple articles. Bearcat (talk) 01:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Tagging
I'm not a part of this particular project, but through interaction with another editor I've come in contact with some Ontario articles. I wanted to suggest that the project see about going through Category:Western_Ontario_geography_stubs and make sure all the articles are tagged? None of the ones I saw were except a few I tagged last night to get them under the project's scope for much needed clean up and expansion. AnmaFinotera (talk) 19:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
I have been working through a few lists of communities and adding/updating tags wherever necessary. Regarding the "Importance" variable, the 'norm' I am using is that towns, villages, etc. are of Low importance, while counties, districts, cities, and regional municipalities are of Mid importance. Any comments? I think it would be useful to try to establish a set of parameters for Importance ratings. PKT (talk) 02:06, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Great Lakes
I've been working on the article for the Great Lakes and it's not currently part of WikiProject Ontario. I wasn't sure which tag to use—could someone add it? Thanks. Mr. Absurd06:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC) whoops, missed signature
Input Needed: KDSL and Ontario minor-league/semi-pro football/soccer leagues
I have flagged KDSL as "not notable" twice and each time an anonymous editor has removed this flag without explanation. Fair enough, maybe he knows something I don't know.
I'm asking those of you familiar with Ontario: Is the Kitchener and District Soccer League notable enough to warrant an article in Wikipedia? If it is:
Are there other Canadian semi-pro football/soccer leagues that also deserve the same?
Please improve the quality of this article and demonstrate notability.
In the article "Algoma Steel", there is no mention of its nationalization under the NDP government of Ontario. Was the plant not temporarily nationalized by the province and put under worker self-management in order to preserve its existence? Or am I imagining things?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by SaintsCanada (talk • contribs) 16:37, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable)21:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
High Falls Ontario - the one on the Spanish river
Is there anyone with knowledge and access to information on the INCO townsite of High Falls on the spanish River west of Sudbury? I grew up there and intend to begin an article under the Wikiproject Ontario area. My beginings will be more anecdotal but I will start to gather archival information. as well I have photographs dating back to the early 1900s plus those of my own from around 1968.Jografy (talk) 03:25, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot22:35, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
An image used in the article, specifically File:Milliken GO Station.JPG, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back when the rules around image uploading were less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploader was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.
An image used in the article, specifically Image:Grand Bend lake.jpg, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back when the rules around image uploading were less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploader was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.
The article List of universities in Ontario is currently at FLC; since the article falls under this WikiProject's scope, I am posting this notice here. It needs more comments, so if you've got time, please post comments on the FLC. If you do not believe that the article can be improved further, feel free to Support it; otherwise, if you find issues with the article that are actionable, then please Oppose it. Thanks in advance! GaryKing (talk)04:17, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Is there anybody in Hamilton who can tell me/us whether Centre Mall is still operating? Its website has been offline since early in 2008, and I found a youtube video that talks in terms of it having closed. The article about the mall ought to be updated accordingly. PKT(alk)16:02, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.
All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:13, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
I found both of the islands on Google maps. The first one is here and the latter is due south of Gananoque. I'm not sure the one in the St. Lawrence is worthy of an article - as far as I can tell it's one of the Thousand Islands and it's only about 7 acres in size. PKT(alk)16:21, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm thinking of AfD-ing it, but I don't know what makes an island notable or not. If I do nominate it, what would the specific reason be? ~EdGl(talk)17:26, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't think it meets WP:NOTE. I didn't see any specific guidelines for islands, but what's notable about it, other than it's for rent? I'd like to see some opinions from our colleagues before going ahead, myself. PKT(alk)21:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Wow - silence, and a few crickets ...........—Preceding unsigned comment added by PKT (talk • contribs)
If it is one of the Thousand Islands, let's just redirect the article there, without merging content. (Let's also fix the title.) In fact, I'll do both right now. Mindmatrix14:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't think either merit an article. As noted above, I've already dealt with the one in the Thousand Islands. Mindmatrix14:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Wherever I've noticed, the talk page of a redirected page usually remains. Thanks to Mindmatrix for stepping in, btw. PKT(alk)14:44, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
If there is an article, then yes it should. Set the "on=yes" flag in the {{WikiProject Canada}} template. On the other hand, the temple shouldn't have an article unless there's something notable about it; such as being in a historic church or something. PKT(alk)21:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
All Mormon temples have articles about them (129 of them not including those under construction or announced). A coordinator for WP Christianity that I have been working with has not raised concerns about notability, so I have been working on the premise that all Mormon temples are notable enough to have an article. The question is, do you want a template on the Toronto temple? LDS-SPA1000 (talk) 21:40, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Please refer to my earlier answer, "...yes it should." PKT(alk)
I can't attest to the specific notability of the building in question, but based on my own experience with other churches, they get referenced in at least the local newspapers rather regularly, and on that basis significant churches, like cathedrals or Mormon temples, of which there are only 130 or so, they all almost certainly qualify as notable. John Carter (talk) 00:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Hunter Island and Template:Subdivisions of Ontario
I have been spending time adding geographic coordinates to the various and sundry Canadian articles that need them, and from time to time I have run into a stumper.
Apparently, in British Columbia, specifically in the Regional District of East Kootenay. (see Grasmere, British Columbia and StatsCan SGC, 2001). I can find no such place in Ontario, which basically means that if it did once exist, it ceased to do so before 1991 (most web sources such as StatsCan's SGC have documentation about placenames going back to 1996, and some to 1991). In fact, the place in BC isn't listed in the 2006 SGC. Mindmatrix00:39, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
BTW: I'll delete the article, but I'll hold off just in case someone can come up with some proof of its current or prior existence. Mindmatrix00:40, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Ontario electoral districts
I have created two Ontario electoral district stub pages Wellington East & Wellington West as there are former New Zealand electorates of the same name, and I wanted some pages to redirect to from the New Zealand pages (though I have kept the short name for the Canadian electoral districts to avoid having to redirect the many past Ontario election pages). But these stub pages need expanding. NB: Wellington North & Wellington South are OK. Hugo999 (talk) 03:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
It has been (rightly) noted on the Windsor Mayor's article that his conduct was recently reviewed by the city's Ethics Commissioner. I have tried to add to the article that the Commissioner exonerated the mayor's conduct (with citation), but another editor has repeatedly removed this fact. Can somebody else please intervene? Thanks in advance, PKT(alk)18:38, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:44, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Listing all of the unreferenced living people for your project and Robert J. Hamilton
Robert J. Hamilton, the 40th mayor of Barrie, Ontario is an unreferenced living person (BLP), so it will probably be deleted if it is not referenced. I have no expertise in this subject. Could someone in this project please reference it?
List of all articles which need cleanup for your project
Cleanup listings is a list of articles which need cleanup for each wikiproject on your page. A bot collects all relevant tagged unreferenced living people, plus other lists onto one page. This bot is updated regularly monthly.
I can also get a current listing of unreferenced BLPs for anyone who asks me on my talk page. A bot which will be updated daily is forthcoming. Okip (formerly Ikip)19:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Ontario articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Ontario articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!
I'm writing to request an article rating in concordance with WikiProject Canada/Ontario for Transformix Engineering, an industrial automation company located in Kingston, ON. A note was placed on its talk page asking for an independent review.
Please do not hesitate to leave a note on my page with any comments or suggestions of ways to improve the page.
Apologizes to the editors on WP:CANADA who will see a similar invite
Hello! For 2011 the Wine Project is doing a new Wine Improvement Drive where each month we focus on an area of articles that relate to a particular theme. In January, we are are ringing in the New Year with New World wine, with a focus on the wines of the Northern Hemisphere-Canadian wine, American wine and Mexican wine. I am going by related projects to see if there is any interest in collaboration between this project and the wine project on the subject of Ontario wine? Some suggestion on potential article creations include History of Ontario wine, the Ontario related red links on Vintners Quality Alliance as well as individual appellation articles such as Pelee Island VQA (similar to the American Viticultural Areas where each wine region gets its own article) that are featured in Ontario_wine#Growing_regions. On a smaller scale, there are Ontario wine related articles that could use some help with clean up (such as Henry of Pelham Winery and Jackson-Triggs) or expanding beyond a stub such as the Vidal Blanc grape which is the source so many delicious Canadian Icewines. And, of course, of HUGE help would be the upload of free use photos of Ontario wineries, wines and wine regions to Commons that could be used to better illustrate Ontario wine articles. If you're interested in helping, please drop a note at the Wine Project's talk page with the article you're interested in helping with. Thanks and have a great New Year! AgneCheese/Wine22:46, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
While the terms involving the 'tiers' (single-tier, upper-tier, lower-tier) are much favoured by AMO and the Ontario Ministries, can we avoid using them? 'Unitary authority' and 'two-level system/configuration' are much clearer. The term 'unitary authority' would capture both merged municipalities like Kawartha Lakes, and administratively separate (independent) cities like Windsor.
Also can we discard the term 'separated municipality', referring to these instead as 'independent cities'? It makes their relationship to the county clearer.
Finally, the City of Brantford is described as a 'single-tier municipality', but it's more accurately described as a independent city. Yes, the County of Brant which it left is unitary, but saying Brantford is somehow different from other independent cities is misleading. Particularlystatic (talk) 06:03, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
New Editor
Hi,
There's a new editor, User:Louve101, who seems to be interested in Oakville, Ontario and has created multiple articles about the neigbourhoods of the town which are unsourced, and likely not to meet notability. I don't want to discourage enthusiasm, but there's a high likelihood that his work to date will get either redirected or deleted. I think he needs some guidance. I've left a message on his talk page. I was wondering if somebody in this wikiproject might be able to provide some guidance and steer him in the right direction. (cross-posted to WikiProject Ontario) Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 03:25, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Also this, which is a map of the Cochrane-Temiskaming electoral riding showing all the old townships in that electoral district... I'm not sure if these are available for other northern districts, but this is a goldmine of townships that you won't find on any other maps. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲτ¢13:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
WikiWomen's History Month
Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:Ontario will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in Ontario's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 23:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
This section of this list article needs cleanup. In particular, references based on reliable sources (not user-generated media such as blogs, forums, tweets, etc.) for the numerous of nicknames are required, as well as weeding out editor-derived/questionable nicknames from the genuine nicknames of widespread usage. I've cleaned up the Alberta section, and am looking to the members of the applicable provincial/territorial WikiProjects to help out with the other sections including this one. Thanks, Hwy43 (talk) 06:55, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Brant County info duplicated
In the descriptions of the former townships of Brantford and Burford, both are given the same area. Could this be checked, please.
--Oldontarian (talk) 11:02, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello, this is my first time visiting WikiProject Ontario. I am wondering why your page has a geography section, but no equivalent history section. I am working on an article about the Ontario Genealogical Society. I know that there are a number of other organizations in Ontario dedicated to preserving Ontario's history, such as the Ontario Historical Society, the Ontario Heritage Trust, the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario, Community Heritage Ontario, to name a few. There are plenty of articles on Wikipedia about historical events in Ontario that could benefit from being supported by a project. Is there another project that covers this type of thing? This has probably been brought up before, so if it's an old discussion just ignore this. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello Anne; I assume you are referring to Wikipedia:WikiProject Ontario#Geography, which is where somebody attached to this project defined the scope of articles that relate to the geography of Ontario. I guess nobody has felt the need to similarly define scope of history articles - I'm not sure there is a need for it, but if you have suggestions I think we'll be happy to read them. If you find articles about Ontario's history that aren't tagged as such on their talk page, please add {{WPCanada|on=yes|history=yes|class=|importance=}} to the related talk pages. PKT(alk)21:14, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
I have nominated Paul Kane for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.--Jarodalien (talk) 07:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
This person recently was awarded Order of Ontario so I restored her page from the redirect that it had been since 2009. The page needs some cleanup.
There are several 2013 and for that matter earlier-year inductees into Order of Ontario who do not have Wikipedia articles. Many if not all of them are probably "notable" enough to have one. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 23:25, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a campaign to create and improve LGBT-related content at Wikipedia and its sister projects. The campaign will take place throughout the month of June, culminating with a multinational edit-a-thon on June 21. Meetups are being held in some cities, or you can participate remotely. All constructive edits are welcome in order to contribute to Wikipedia's mission of providing quality, accurate information. Articles within Category:LGBT in the Americas may be of particular interest. You can also upload LGBT-related images by participating in Wikimedia Commons' LGBT-related photo challenge. You are encouraged to share the results of your work here. Happy editing! --Another Believer(Talk)20:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Categories on road article for every place it passes through
An editor added numerous categories to many Ontario highway articles. While I feel it is beneficial categorically to be able to find a route listed in the Transportation in X category, some articles are overloaded with categories. For example, Ontario Highway 2 has 19 of these categories... and that only covers some of the cities along the route!
Seems excessive and seems like over categorization. Is there a precedent where this has been accepted and implemented elsewhere? Hwy43 (talk) 08:52, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
I don't believe so. It was just edits by one user (Steam5 I believe) that I reverted initially but that kept creeping back. Its very inconsistent now and would be impossible on articles like Ontario Highway 11, where there would be at least 50 categories! - Floydianτ¢18:34, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
The official consensus, for what it's worth, is that a shorter highway (e.g. a secondary highway, Ontario Highway 420, etc.) that is located entirely within one or two divisions with "Transportation in..." categories is appropriate for inclusion in those categories, but a longer one (e.g. Ontario Highway 17 or Ontario Highway 400) which passes through a lot of them, and could therefore need to be included in a large number of categories (sometimes even upwards of a dozen) at the same time, should not. In practice, however, this has proven to be virtually impossible to enforce — if you remove the categories from a highway that consensus says shouldn't have them, then they inevitably just come back (either through immediate reversion or somebody else adding them again later on.) And that conflict between the consensus and the actual practice is not unique to Canadian roads, as many American highways face the same problem (the one difference that at least partially controls how many categories any one article has to be in is that national Interstates or US Routes typically have separate "Highway in State" spinoffs that delve into much greater detail about the highway's route in each individual state than the main overview article does — so the main article on the whole route has its categories kept under control, while the "Highway in State" spinouts carry the category bloat instead. Conversely, that doesn't help state-level routes.) I absolutely agree that it's excessive and unsustainable to categorize a major crossprovincial highway by every individual county or city that it happens to pass through, but I've stopped even trying to enforce the official consensus because it feels like a losing battle. Bearcat (talk) 19:16, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Well, I have two solutions, one normal and one radical. The normal one would be to get rid of them altogether unless the highway is within a single municipality (or completely). The radical idea is to create a category named after the highway in cases where there are more than X number of categories, and then put the categories in there. This way all the municipalities can be listed without issue. - Floydianτ¢03:52, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
The 'radical" proposal wouldn't be of much value, because in most cases the only actual content would be the main article on the highway itself — and thus it would be an WP:OC#EPONYMOUS violation. The "normal" solution, rather, is the only one that's actually workable in theory — but as I explained, it's exactly what the official consensus already is, with the problem being the difficulty of actually keeping it that way. Bearcat (talk) 20:35, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
City infoboxes: "tier" or "conventional" municipal statuses (or both)?
I've been sweeping across the country implementing WP:CANSTYLE#Infoboxes, which states all city articles should use the "name", "official_name" and "settlement_type" parameters in their infoboxes. Determining a format for presenting the "settlement_type" parameter in Ontario has proven somewhat problematic due to Ontario's unconventional system of municipality statuses. In Ontario, we have the overarching "tier" municipal statuses (i.e., single-tier, lower-tier and upper-tier) and a set of more "conventional" municipal statuses (e.g., city, town, village, townships, etc.). Starting with Ontario's cities and referring to this Municipal Affairs and Housing source, I approached their infoboxes with the following wikilinked presentation format for single-tier and lower-tier cities:
Despite the above being factual and accurate, the presentation format has met some resistance. I therefore ask the Ontario WikiProject community to help determine a preferred format. Here are some options:
** Note for Option 4: if we abandon tier, we should also abandon other ways of inferring tier. i.e., no more usage ofIndependent city
Looking forward to the community determining a standard format. If we can come to a consensus, maybe we can update WP:CANSTYLE#Infoboxes to explicitly state how to approach the "settlement_type" parameter for Ontario articles. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 05:54, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Comments
I recognize Option 1 can be counterintuitive and lead to confusion because tier statuses, as far as I know, are pretty much unique to Ontario and are therefore relatively unknown to readers outside Ontario.
Therefore, my preference is Option 2 as it is reflective of both municipal statuses, and the embedded wikilinks (particularly for the tiers) explain to readers what they mean if clicked. It places the "conventional" status first, which is what most readers would expect based on what they've seen for articles outside Ontario, and reflects that Ontario municipalities are more commonly known by their "conventional" statuses rather than their "tier" statuses. Hwy43 (talk) 05:54, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I also agree that option 2 looks the best. And I also want to extend a thanks for these edits, I appreciate the consistency you are bringing to wikipedia. I'm also happy to have more links to the "list of municipalities pages"! Mattximus (talk) 02:47, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Preference for Option 4 to match the rest of the country and many other cities worldwide. The fact that the city is single tier or lower tier should be explained in the article. 99.224.114.253 (talk) 22:54, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
It has been 10 days and it appears that there is consensus in favour of Option 2 (the only one not in favour of Option 2 was UrbanNerd, and as far as I am concerned that's a mark in favour of Option 2. Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:09, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
I was thinking the same thing earlier today. I've just implemented the consensus among Ontario's 51 cities. It will take some time to implement across all remaining 393 municipalities, but we'll get there. Hwy43 (talk) 04:03, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Implementation is now over 50% complete with 242 done (all 30 upper-tiers, 51 cities, 90 towns, 11 villages and 60 generic municipalities) and 202 remaining (all townships). If anyone is willing to help, the 202 townships are all listed at List of township municipalities in Ontario and the following would be the wikicode for the "settlement_type" parameters in their infoboxes:
For lower-tier townships:
[[List of township municipalities in Ontario|Township]] ([[List of municipalities in Ontario#Lower-tier municipalities|lower-tier]])
For single-tier townships:
[[List of township municipalities in Ontario|Township]] ([[List of municipalities in Ontario#Single-tier municipalities|single-tier]])
The "official_name" parameters should be completed in accordance with the official legal names of the townships per this list published by the province (refer to left column). Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 08:49, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Hi Ontario Wikipedians! I am reaching out to see if anyone would be interested in helping out with editing training for a Wikipedia:Meetup/ArtAndFeminism edit-a-thon being organized in Peterborough. We would appreciate any assistance in securing at least one experienced Wikipedian in the area, and I'd be happy to put you in touch with the organizers if you are able to help out. If interested, please reply on wiki or by e-mail at thepwnco.wiki@gmail.com. Cheers! -Thepwnco (talk) 22:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Tracking Updates
I'm curious if there is a record of pages that have been updated that I should add to as I work on pages. Just wondering if there is tracking of what has been done and what still needs to be done, or if this is more of a "free for all". Kilgore89 (talk) 00:10, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
No, there is no record of "Ontario" pages that recently have been worked on. But as a good starting point, you can always work on adding content to stubs and try to make them "start" or "C" quality pages. See Category:Stub-Class Ontario articles. -- P 1 9 9✉01:32, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the help - I'm all of one day into wiki-editing so I'm still trying to learn to ropes. Out of curiousity, does the quality automatically update or does that have to be done manually? Further, is there anywhere that I can learn more about the different qualities of articles? Kilgore89 (talk) 03:02, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Assessment is done manually. A good resource to read through regarding the assessment process can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/Assessment. If you create or update an article related to Ontario, can you please open its talk page and ensure that it includes this code: {{WikiProject Canada|on=yes|class= |importance= }} , at a minimum ? Since you're new to wiki-editing it's better to leave the assessing for a while until you get familiar with the process. PKT(alk)13:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm only working on expanding stubs that have already been flagged as part of the Project. Figure it's a good way to contribute while learning the ropes. The link to the assessment process is exactly what I was looking for. I agree that I'm far too new to be assessing things myself yet so I was looking for a way to flag articles that I have worked on for review by someone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kilgore89 (talk • contribs) 14:31, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/The 10,000 Challenge is up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge for the UK which has currently produced over 2200 article improvements and creations. If you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Canada like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1300 articles in 3 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for Canada but fuelled by a contest such as The North America Destubathon to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. I would like some support from Canadian wikipedians here to get the Challenge off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile! Cheers.♦ Dr. Blofeld21:27, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Notice to participants at this page about adminship
Many participants here create a lot of content, may have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.
So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:
I don't know who does this but the article has just had a major update and is ready to be rated. (I also posted this in the Canada portal.)
This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Hi Peter - it looks like you put the WikiProject banner on the article page, where they shouldn't appear. Wasaga Beach already had WikiProject banners on its talk page, where they belong. I have upgraded it to Class=C based on the work done, but haven't reviewed it against Class B criteria yet. Cheers from another guy named Peter: PKT(alk)21:27, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
I created this based on a Windsor public library page online, then discovered this & this, which expressly contradict the library info. By appearances, the second two, with more details, are correct, but I can't independently confirm which facts are incorrect. Is there somebody living in Chatham who might contribute local knowledge (& a photo or two...?)? (I intend to rewrite based on the latter two web pages shortly, but if somebody beat me to it... ;p ) TREKphilerany time you're ready, Uhura13:33, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Volunteer recognition
The Canadian Content Award This is for outstanding contributions to Canadian related pages on Wikipedia.
Toronto Wikimania Bid 2008
TorontoCandidate City for Wikimania 2008
Support TORONTO in its bid to become the host city of WIKIMANIA 2008 Visit m:Wikimania 2008/Toronto for TORONTO's MetaWiki page and help build a strong bid.
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.
If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.
Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.
Gail Kim, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:36, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.
Portals are being redesigned.
The new design features are being applied to existing portals.
At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.
Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.
Hello! Your WikiProject has been selected to participate in the WP 1.0 Bot rewrite beta. This means that, starting in the next few days or weeks, your assessment tables will be updated using code in the new bot, codenamed Lucky. You can read more about this change on the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team page. Thanks! audiodude (talk) 06:46, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
A new newsletter directory is out!
A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.
Proposed amendment to the settlement_type parameter for Ontario municipalities
I am aware there was a discussion here a few years back that led to the adoption of a province wide [City] ([Tier]) style as the settlement_type on all municipalities in the province. That discussion, however, appears to be based on the false belief that Ontario uses the three tiers (single, upper, and lower) instead of traditional terms like "city" and "town", which is not true. The tiers set out my the province have no correlation whatsoever to the type of settlement in question, they are merely a legal status. This list here even refers to them as "municipal status".
There is nothing specific with regard to population, area, density, or geography that makes any given municipality a "single", "upper", or "lower" municipality. Take the clear, contrasting example of Toronto, Ontario and Brethour, Ontario. Both Toronto and Brethour are classified as "single-tier municipalities". Toronto has a population of nearly 3,000,000 and is the largest city in Canada; Brethour has 129 permanent inhabitants. Toronto has a population density of 4,334.4/km2; Brethour's is 1.6/km2. This simple comparison demonstrates the meaninglessness of including the municipalities' tier in the settlement_type parameter. One would think the most basic purpose of having a settlement_type parameter would be to differentiate between places like Toronto and Brethour, yet it needlessly fails to do so.
MOS:Canada#Infoboxes suggests using only simple terms like "city", "municipality", "community", or "town".
Oppose per past consensus achieved five years ago, opposed only by a blocked editor and his sockpuppet. Notifying @Moxy, Mattximus, Skeezix1000, and Johnny Au: as a courtesy as other editors involved in that discussion back then.
I too don't like Ontario's illogical approach to municipal status designation, but legislated municipal status is legislated municipal status and the consensus achieved respects this fact. The conventional municipal statuses no longer exist and are now simply how the municipalities in Ontario choose to brand themselves within the illogical system. We found a way to make an exception to overcome this through the use of parentheses under the current format, and it has worked for five years. Removing the factual municipal status would bring Ontario's municipalities out of consistency with municipalities across Canada, and therefore the wider Canadian WikiProject should be engaged as a result.
By the way, MOS:Canada#Infoboxes has been completely mischaracterized above to suit the proposer's argument. It actually specifically states "The settlement type field should use English-language terminology such as "city", "municipality", "community", or "town". Non-English terms such as "ville" and "communauté" should be avoided." (emphasis added) Thus, the French equivalent of lower/upper/single tier municipality must be avoided, not the municipality's actual municipal status. It is actually advancing a position on the language of the term, not the specific term to use.
Regarding the parameter itself, Template:Infobox settlement explicitly states "Any type can be entered, such as City, Town, Village, Hamlet, Municipality, Reservation, etc." And in this case, within Ontario and within Canada, a consensus has been established as to how to use this parameter when it comes to incorporated municipalities. Hwy43 (talk) 06:50, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
The parameter allows significant freedom in this regard. That said, when one municipality has 3 million people, and another has 128, and they both feature the same settlement_type, this would suggest there is a flaw in our usage of the parameter. --TrailBlzr (talk) 14:16, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Looking closer, I don't see what the problem is. The consensus was to implement Option 2 for settlement_types in that 2014 discussion, which for Toronto is "City (single-tier)" and for Brethour is "Township (single-tier)". These are not the same. City vs. township effectively conveys the vast difference in scale between these two extremes. Hwy43 (talk) 02:21, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
And while we are at it, one or more editors have circumvented the Canada-wide consensus for the 14 capitals across our country within the same parameter, noting them as "Federal/provincial/territorial capital city" rather than their actual municipal status, almost as if taking the American convention carte blanche and applying it here. The American consensus doesn't supersede the Canadian consensus. If there was a need and desire to include these roles of these municipalities, then discussion should occur and consensus should be achieved, such as including this in addition to rather than replacing outright, bringing these 14 out of consistency with the rest of Canada's thousands of municipalities. Hwy43 (talk) 07:13, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't support using this distinction. MOS:Canada suggests "city", "town", "community" etc. Using "capital city" in the settlement_type parameter appears to be more of a wide-ranging phenomenon than just American cities, however I don't think Canadian cities need to follow suit in this regard (with the possible exception of Ottawa as a national capital). -- TrailBlzr (talk) 14:16, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
MOS:Canada is not going to exhaustively list every municipal status type in use across Canada. If we want to implement something for capitals, propose something that does not replace implementation of consensus on the actual settlement_type (i.e. municipal status). For example, propose adding the fact in addition to the actual settlement_type. Hwy43 (talk) 02:21, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Oppose. While nominator is technically correct that "single tier" is not a type of settlement per se, what they're missing is that it conveys a very important detail nonetheless: the question of whether the place is an independent municipality (cf. independent city), or a municipality that forms part of a larger county or regional municipality. This conveys significant information about the municipality's political status: does it handle all municipal services on its own, or does it hand some of them off to another level of government? It is also not being used in lieu of any information about whether the place is a township or town or city — the actual type of settlement (i.e. township, town or city) is still given as the primary classification, and single vs. lower tier is given as a supplement to it, not a replacement for it. So the problem the nominator suggests simply isn't really there — "provincial capital city (single-tier)" and "township (single-tier)" are very obviously two different things that won't confuse anybody with an IQ higher than their shoe size. There's a longstanding consensus for this, and nominator hasn't suggested any good reason to actually blow it up. Bearcat (talk) 15:17, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Agreed. As stated in my reply above to TrailBlzr's first reply comment, there is no problem. Building on this, and building off my reply to TrailBlzr's second reply comment above, a solution could simply be:
This would be easy and reasonable to implement, though again I don't think we need to follow the approach used in the US and elsewhere. Hwy43 (talk) 02:21, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Agree with Hwy43 and Bearcat and oppose the change. This is simply information on the type of settlement and it does have political meaning so it makes sense to have it at that position in the infobox. Mattximus (talk) 18:33, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Bearcat, Mattximus, et al: I have just replaced the clumsily presented four examples above with what these would actually look like within the Infobox settlement templates. What are your thoughts on adopting this approach and applying to all 14 capitals? Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 05:47, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, Mattximus and Bearcat. Before I implement, I have a three questions.
First, I have been told previously that [[List of cities in Ontario|City]] is improper because readers seeing "City" in blue will click it thinking they are going to City, yet find themselves at List of cities in Ontario, which is unexpected and can be frustrating. Rather, I see it as helpful as the concept of "city" is widely understood already, and it is more informative to land at List of cities in Ontario as it tells the reader what a city is in the Ontario context. Further, I see no harm done as List of cities in Ontario links to the City article anyway (second word in lead); it is only one more click away. I seem to recall being told it was a MOS:SEAOFBLUE violation but my tired eyes aren't seeing it right now. If this is in fact a violation of SEAOFBLUE or something related, the same could be said for [[List of cities in Canada#Capitals|National capital]]. Is what I have been told regarding this a "too rigid", "beyond the intent" of SEAOFBLUE (or whatever MOS standard that is actually in question here)?
Second, I have been told that a situation such as [[List of cities in Ontario|City]] ([[List of municipalities in Ontario#Single-tier municipalities|single-tier]]), which renders as City (single-tier), is a SEAOFBLUE violation. MOS:SEAOFBLUE states When possible, avoid placing links next to each other so that they look like a single link (a "sea of blue"). Now I am observant enough to notice that the opening parenthesis between the two terms is black, which technically is a break between two blue links. So similar to my first question, is what I have been told a "too rigid", "beyond the intent" interpretation of SEAOFBLUE?
Third, as we are seeing no objections from anyone on the proposal above to solve the community's role as a "capital" concern, shall we amend WP:CANSTYLE#Infoboxes to suit what appears to be the consensus? That is, including the community's role as a capital "in addition to" the community's incorporated status for Canada's 14 capitals?
I agree with your reasoning. Linking to the article on city itself in that context would be overlinking, because it's a well-understood concept that nobody really needs a link for. So if the word "city" is to link anywhere at all, it should be to a more contextually relevant subpage rather than the general concept article — so in this case, that would be the specific list of cites that are actually in the province this particular city is in. That's contextually useful, because it names all the cities and ranks them by size, and explains the uniquely Ontario-specific aspects of cityhood (e.g. the population cutoff that has to be attained before city designation is conferrable, who actually gives that conferral, and on and so forth.) And SEAOFBLUE isn't an issue if the links are clearly separated by a line break or parentheses, so that they're not appearing as one link — it would be an issue if you [[did]] [[this]], but not so much if you [[did]] ([[this]]) or if you [[did]]<br>[[this]]. Bearcat (talk) 17:06, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't think the sea of blue is a problem here, since it's not in a paragraph but in an infobox with parentheses and a line break, I think your solution is actually quite ideal for this problem and needs no amendment. Mattximus (talk) 11:22, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't see any advantage to the change, particularly given that it causes conflict with the broader MOS (eg. use of small text), but if you'd like to propose amendments to CANSTYLE you are welcome to start a discussion at its talk page. This really isn't the place for such a conversation. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:20, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
Hello, is this discussion still open? I think the examples made by Hwy43 are fine. I believe MOS:SMALLTEXT discourages small text in infoboxes, however, can we just not shrink the text size? WildComet (talk) 23:36, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Ottawa until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America100001:10, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Merge in Kawartha Lakes taskforce
Similar to what was done with the St. John's, NL project (discussion here) and per WP:REVIVE, I would like to consolidate some of the small-scope or abandoned projects and task forces into larger projects. I think it preferable to have a smaller amount of active projects than a large amount of inactive projects. This task force in particular is for a region of less than 100k residents and has had basically no activity since 1 month after creation in 2009. The Kawartha Lakes page would be archived allowing it to be revived should the need occur in the future. BLAIXX12:54, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
List of churches in the Roman Catholic Diocese of London, Ontario
Hi everyone, I may be breaking protocol as I am not a member of this group, but I hoped this new article that I wrote might be of interest to members, especially history fans:
John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
Hello, Please note that St. Lawrence River, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBottalk00:05, 10 April 2023 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team
Just being a King's Counsel/Queen's Counsel/Senior Counsel is not in itself proof of notability, but it's a sign that someone might be notable for whatever has gotten them that recognition. For people interested in updating or creating biographies of Canadian lawyers, here's a list of Ontario's newly-appointed King's Counsel: https://news.ontario.ca/en/bulletin/1003229/ontario-reinstitutes-kings-counsel-designation This also applies to other jurisdictions that have or used to have the title. Eastmain (talk • contribs)19:50, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
Done We have our first province in which every one of its municipalities' articles complies with WP:CANSTYLE#Infoboxes using "Option 2" above. Hwy43 (talk) 07:52, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment#Proposal: Reclassification of Current & Future-Classes as time parameter, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. This WikiProject received this message because it currently uses "Current" and/or "Future" class(es). There is a proposal to split these two article "classes" into a new parameter "time", in order to standardise article-rating across Wikipedia (per RfC), while also allowing simultaneous usage of quality criteria and time for interest projects. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 06:51, 2 July 2023 (UTC)