Talk:Patriation

Lead
"She remained monarch and Head of State of Canada, separate from her role as the British monarch or the monarch of any of the other Commonwealth realms.[5][6][7] Canada has complete sovereignty as an independent country, however, and the Queen's role as monarch of Canada is separate from her role as the British monarch or the monarch of any of the other Commonwealth realms.[8]" I guess, one sentence on the Queen would be enough. --SamWinchester000 (talk) 19:04, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose to move Kitchen Meeting into this article, as Kitchen Accord was already moved here some time ago and the coverage of the kitchen meeting is better in this article than the separate article. Samuell Lift me up or put me down 01:06, 23 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Peter K Burian (talk) 01:47, 23 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Knoper (talk) 12:49, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Tooltip Issue?
I'm not sure how to change this, but I figured I should make someone aware of it: when you hover over the internal link for this article elsewhere on Wikipedia, you get an apparently vandalized text that just reads "Bruh moment" over and over. Funny as it may be, I figure that it should be fixed... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.166.173.5 (talk) 15:58, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

improper use of
The opening documentation of says This template can be used for block quotations (long quotes set off from the main text). The Manual of Style guidelines for block quotations recommend formatting block quotations using the template or the HTML element, for which that template provides a wrapper. [emphasis mine]

Is "this use is not advised in articles" unclear? —Joeyconnick (talk) 04:56, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Is "used for block quotations [...] set off from the main text" unclear?
 * The template is used in 773,000 articles; from Anime to Premier League to Margaret Murray to PlayStation (console) to Stanley Kubrick to First Amendment to the United States Constitution to Galanthus to Samuel of Bulgaria to Simón Bolívar to Battle of Dunkirk. Since you feel they're all using the template incorrectly, perhaps you should take this up at the template talk page? Correcting three-quarters of a million articles is going to take some time. -- ₪   MIESIANIACAL  04:58, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah no, no one has to correct every misuse of a thing at Wikipedia just because someone doesn't like that they've been reverted in one case of misuse, although kudos, that is a super-common red herring argument. But this is a new addition to this article and the guidance says "don't use this template in this manner" (i.e. in articles). Just because it's used elsewhere in articles doesn't mean its addition here is correct. Per WP:STATUSQUO and WP:BRD, its inclusion requires consensus on this talk page and at the moment, pretty sure it doesn't have it.
 * By all means include the quotation itself but it should be done using ... as per the documentation's advice. —Joeyconnick (talk) 00:58, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I actually like the use of quote boxes in this way. I think it highlights an important quotation better than Blockquote.  What is the rationale for not using it in articles?  And, if a style direction is generally ignored by editors, in over three-quarters of a million articles (i.e close to 1% of all articles) that is perhaps a statement by the community that the style guideline needs re-consideration. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 01:07, 8 March 2023 (UTC)


 * It's the WAY the template is used in ALL 773,000 articles. That shows a clear consensus on how the template is used. Regardless, that's just an illustration. The template page spells out exactly what the template's for. Which brings us to the main point: You didn't answer the question. -- ₪   MIESIANIACAL  01:14, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * There's no question to answer: the template isn't meant for article space.
 * Please see here, along with MOS:BLOCKQUOTE and MOS:PULLQUOTE. —Joeyconnick (talk) 01:39, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Pull quotes are irrelevant. There is a question. Please read things thoroughly. -- ₪   MIESIANIACAL  02:05, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Joeyconnick, I think you are missing a couple of things. First, the Queen's quotation is not a pull quote. Nowhere in the article are her words reproduced, so we are not repeating and emphasizing some surprising revelation like in a Rolling Stone interview. And secondly, it's only 32 words, which IMO does not rise to the barrier of long quotes set off from the main text which are discouraged. In fact, I consider it to conform to the guidance For very short quotes...or can be used... in the Template:Quote box documentation you linked to. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 02:13, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Use .  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:40, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Why? What is the problem with a quotebox?  I find it is a very effective way to highlight something that has been said by the subject of the bio, for example.  What is the reason not to use a quotebox?  So far, all I've seen is people saying not to.  It's much easier to understand a style guideline if reasons are given, instead of a peremptory command. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 23:00, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * It's a pointlessly decorative usage that actually makes the article look like it was written by a poorly educated child who doesn't know how to incorporate a quote into the actual article text.--User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 19:27, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * False. -- ₪   MIESIANIACAL  20:04, 23 March 2023 (UTC)