Talk:Saint Pierre and Miquelon/Archive 2

Internet Speed
As of 2015, Saint Pierre and Miquelon was ranked third in the world for internet download speed, behind Singapore and Hong Kong.

These rankings are so utterly unreliable that they are close to being worthless and I am concerned that they are quoted in Wikipedia. For instance, while St Pierre ranked 3rd as of 11 May 2015, it ranked 59th as of 31 March 2015. The URL for reference 58 no longer works but the information is available from the Way Back Machine. I suggest this statement be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gentleman wiki (talk • contribs) 06:29, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Etymology
Last sentence in paragraph 1: "It appears that this is a very common form in that language." Subjective without a source. Removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.209.209.131 (talk) 00:49, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Removed secessionist allegations
Removed :


 * At various times, residents and politicians in Saint Pierre and Miquelon have proposed that the islands pursue secession from France to become part of Canada, so that the islands could participate in Canada's much larger maritime zone rather than France's limited "keyhole" zone, although as of 2008 such proposals have never come to a vote or referendum.

No serious local politician or resident has ever advocated such secessionist policies. Please provide citation. Miquelon (talk) 02:12, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Would solve a whole lot of red tape & polical arguments if Canada just invaded & connected it up to Quebec. This would alow France to jump up & down on the world stage while quitely handing the Canadians a few million under the table with a wispered thanks very much. France should have handed them over years ago. Only the French could be so idiotic as to maintain control over a spec in the ocean so far from home with no stratigic or economic value & with a large modern french speaking population right next door in Canada & its Quebec province. Any value in fishing rights has long since gone (swamped by USA & Canada). If the younger generations keep migrating away, France will end up having to publicly pay Canada to take the islands or will have to pay people to go & stay there. 144.139.103.173 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:11, 8 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Total stupidity, typical from a troll IP, as if France would abandon its last part of New France. Money isn't anything. Also, it's not even close from Quebec but from Newfoundland and Acadia.  BIRDIE   ® 19:30, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Saint Pierre and Miquelon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6EIX6F6dk?url=http://www.iedom.fr/IMG/pdf/cerom4_spm.pdf to http://www.iedom.fr/IMG/pdf/cerom4_spm.pdf
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6EIX6F6dk?url=http://www.iedom.fr/IMG/pdf/cerom4_spm.pdf to http://www.iedom.fr/IMG/pdf/cerom4_spm.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:55, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Native history
As there were no mention of First Nations in the history section I have added a line. I have also altered the wording of the Fagundes sighting as, though this may have been unintentional, it was worded in a way that made it sound as if their was no human history prior to the 1500s.

Sdrawkcab (talk) 20:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)sdrawkcab

Ok, it is now clear that the only humans there were Indian savages before the islands were discovered by civilised man, thanks. 86.176.80.47 (talk) 09:59, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Why?
What this article does not answer is why out of all the territory ceded to Britian after the Seven Years War, why did this little island remain? Why this island chosen? Why even bother? The article is just narrative that does not answer these fundamentals aside from telling a little story.86.129.68.20 (talk) 08:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe the islands were kept because they were important vis-a-vis French fishing rights. The article should have some explanation. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

True, and why did Britain agree? Could it not have just kept the islands, regardless of French needs? Some diplomatic history needed here. 86.176.80.47 (talk) 10:02, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Population
“Britain invaded and razed the colony in 1778, sending the entire population of 2,000 back to France.[19] In 1793 the British landed in Saint-Pierre and, the following year, expelled the French population”

But there was no one there? They must have come back. Mention of the return would make this more complete. 2A00:23C3:E284:900:954:67F3:61B7:A910 (talk) 06:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Native history re-added
Have re-added the line about native history. Not sure why it was removed. Maybe it was user 86.176.80.47, who states "Ok, it is now clear that the only humans there were Indian savages before the islands were discovered by civilised man, thanks." I guess history doesn't count until a white guy guy shows up and claims the land for a king back in Europe. Sdrawkcab (talk) 20:05, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Usualy not until it is recorded. Which savages don’t do, Indian or not. The Indian civilisations to the south have some records to show, so we know more about them. 2A00:23C7:E287:1900:6164:96C7:764C:41AC (talk) 13:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Location Map
Does the US really need to be at the center of the location map? Can't the islands just be shown in relation to eastern Canada, and maybe France? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.225.33.241 (talk) 15:51, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It probably doesn't have to be, that might be a better way. I am not sure how to change it though.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 22:43, 20 December 2020 (UTC)