Talk:Regina, Saskatchewan

File:Wascana Centre and Regina downtown.jpg
Attractive photo, certainly, but it seems a trifle superfluous to have it twice in the article. Any serious and wide objection if I remove the second one? User:Masalai

Photos for right of the opening paragraphs
Any better ones than these of mine (and one of someone else) or shall I go ahead and insert them there? Masalai (talk)

Minimap error
Shows Regina being in Manitoba, not Saskatchewan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.17.69.138 (talk • contribs)


 * That problem has been fixed by others. Hwy43 (talk) 01:56, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Collage
thanks for the images at the top of the article. The fourth image though is difficult to look at. It's from inside a stadium, not of a public space in the city, and it's very distorted. Do you have an image that is more along the lines of the other images you used? Air.light (talk) 03:11, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Incorrect City Coat of Arms
The coat of arms displayed is not correct. As per the city of Regina's web page: https://www.regina.ca/export/sites/Regina.ca/about-regina/regina-history-facts/.galleries/pdfs/City-Symbols.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.2.247.19 (talk) 18:47, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism in name pronunciation
Is it correct that the name is pronounced like that (rhyming with 'vagina') or is it vandalism? I would assume it is pronounced ruh-GEE-nah78.35.8.194 (talk) 17:12, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * That is the correct pronunciation (with a hard "i" as it "sign") in that it's how Canadians and most Commonwealth nations folks pronounce it. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 17:47, 7 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that's correct (and the butt of many jokes). Masterhatch (talk) 17:59, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

No entry for "White" in the Stats Can sources
The section on "Demographics" currently states that Regina has a "White" population of 78.6% of total population. Neither the 2011 nor the 2016 Stats Can sources have a category of "White", nor a population of 78.6% for that category. It strikes me that this statement fails the "verifiablity" / "no synthesis" principle, and should be removed. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 18:02, 9 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. When I saw the whole paragraph deleted as unsourced, I though it odd. I looked at the stats can site and saw an ethnic break down. I didn't look closely to see if everything matched up, only that there was info on it. Is it possible that the person who originally wrote that in simply did math? 100 minus Visible minority minus aboriginal equals white? Not that it matters. I have no issue if that paragraph gets removed again. Masterhatch (talk) 18:34, 9 October 2021 (UTC)


 * That may be it, but I think for something as potentially sensitive as racial categories, it has to be clearly sourced in the cited source. Thanks for re-deleting it. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 02:50, 10 October 2021 (UTC)


 * The history behind this was that xenophobic editors were enraged that visible minority and aboriginal populations were getting airtime and not the white majority. The math theory from is exactly what happened to appease those editors despite it being WP:SYNTH. Hwy43 (talk) 05:05, 10 October 2021 (UTC)


 * I deleted the entire paragraph because the single largest group was unsourced. I can re-add it with only the information that is in the StatsCan materials.  StatsCan gives the data as numbers of individauls, not percentages.  I don't think there is a problem converting those numbers to percentages?  WP:CALC would seem to apply?  Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:34, 10 October 2021 (UTC)


 * No concerns from me. Hwy43 (talk) 19:25, 10 October 2021 (UTC)