Talk:.ca

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

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

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

reserved names
I'm not sure what to make of the long list of CIRA reserved names. If Coquitlam, BC is an actual place, coquitlam.bc.ca being reserved makes sense, but oddly CIRA also reserves the non-existent Coquitlam, Nunavut coquitlam.nu.ca along with PEI's non-existent coquitlam.pe.ca and the corresponding name in every other province and territory. With rare exceptions for existing local and provincial government, the third-level registration in .ca seems pretty much useless now as reserving or registering in one renders a name difficult to obtain or unavailable in the others. --carlb 19:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * What about toronto.bc.ca? Not only does (well, actually "did" now) CIRA reserve toronto.bc.ca (and your own example of coquitlam.pe.ca), but until they stopped allowing registrations of third- and fourth-level domains, you could actually register nonsensical domains! Don't believe me? Check it out: i-need-directions-to.toronto.bc.ca. --Craig (t|c) 10:31, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Dead link
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://www.cira.ca/dispute-resolution/
 * In .ca on 2011-05-20 21:41:29, 404 Not Found
 * In .ca on 2011-05-31 13:17:23, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 13:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://www.cira.ca/cira-history/
 * In .ca on 2011-05-20 21:41:29, 404 Not Found
 * In .ca on 2011-05-31 13:17:34, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 13:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 3
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://www.cira.ca/en/document/RCDN.pdf
 * In .ca on 2011-05-20 21:41:37, 404 Not Found
 * In .ca on 2011-05-31 13:17:44, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 13:18, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 4
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * https://tbr.cira.ca/
 * In .ca on 2011-05-20 21:41:46, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'
 * In .ca on 2011-05-31 13:17:55, Socket Error: 'A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond'

--JeffGBot (talk) 13:18, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Proposed merge with .gc.ca
.gc.ca is just a subdomain of .ca. The current article doesn't say much and should be easily merged into the latter and redirected (like any other gov subdomains on Wikipedia). Gotitbro (talk) 04:36, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose - If it were to be merged anywhere, it should be Government of Canada. Not that I support merging it at all. While it is a subdomain, most don't think of it that way. See also WP:COMMON & WP:UCRN. Me-123567-Me (talk) 16:47, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Would be completely unreasonable to merge a technical article with a polity one; the article is just about a domain not the government. There is no other second level ccTLD article on WP no reason the case should be any different here especially when the current article doesn't stand on its own, its almost exclusively related the primary .ca article. The naming policies don't even apply here, the notability and merging guidelines would (WP:NWEB/WP:MERGE) which justify merging a sub-section (sub-domain here) to an article which encompasses the whole topic. As for what most people would search a redirect would take them to the main article. Gotitbro (talk) 13:01, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Closing, with no merge, given the objections and no support. Klbrain (talk) 17:01, 27 June 2019 (UTC)