User:Tpcanoe/sandbox

This is tpcanoe's sandbox page for testing out new edits

Article Evaluation
This article will be based off the wikipedia article of the Charlottetown Conference.

To commence, my initial thoughts are that this is article is short. It does somewhat encompass all the events needed to demonstrate the Charlottetown Conference and its importance to Canadian history. Throughout my reading of this article, it does seem to state solid facts as limited as they may be. Although clear, there is one sentence that I find irrelevant and more of a fun fact rather than a important fact as the author writes, "Coincidentally there was a circus in Charlottetown during the conference, and it was much more interesting to the majority of the population. This line was even flagged for needing a citation as well perhaps showing its lack of necessity.

The article does do a good job of remaining unbiased as there doesn't seem to be anywhere where the article leads toward one side or another as well as not using any personal pronouns such as "I" or "you". The only argument I have is in regards to the viewpoints of the delegates. Although the article does do a good job of pointing out the delegates from the different provinces, it would be better and well presented if they did add a little paragraph or note of the people involved and how they played a role a the conference itself as pointing out the names of the delegates and where they come from only explains the article in basic fashion.

Although the article only offers one citation. The link works and it is a valid citation from the official website of the Canadian government in which contains a primary document from George Brown, who discussed in length the events of the Charlottetown Conference in which fortifies the statement expressed in the article. The Government of Canada is a neutral source in which only represents facts and details of ongoing and previous events and information based on its nation so I would categorize this source as a neutral reliable source.

However, I believe some areas of the article need to be should be referenced and cited such as when the article states, "Most of the Maritimes were convinced that a wider union including the Province of Canada would also be beneficial to them; Prince Edward Island was unsure, however, and very much against confederation". My only question regarding this is whether or not this is a valid claim. I do believe it is valid however, a source would help validate such claim.

In regards to its talk section, it does offer limited replies. In it encircles 3 edits in which involves external links, which I find to be accurate and useful for other events besides the Charlotte Conference, an edit on why the section of Newfoundland was deleted, and a comment based on the circus. The Newfoundland comment is interesting as there is a debate on whether it should be added to the article though the author mentions Newfoundland just being an "observer". Also, it does appear that the circus comment resonated with my earlier comment as well as it lacking in actual importance and acts as more of a trivial statement.

The article is rated a B- and is rated as mid-importance which I think is a fair grade for the article. I would say this conference had more then a mid-importance in Canadian history however, and it is in fact part of the WikiProject Canada. The way in which the Wikipedia article discusses it seems to be fairly similar to the way we talked about the conference in class with less of an importance to the impact of Canadian history.

Article Editing
Due to the unexpectedly large amount of visitors in the city, a sizable proportion of the Canadian delegates remained aboard the Queen Victoria while others found accommodations at the Franklin.

Possible Article Choices
Opération McGill français

There is no Wikipedia article for this topic and it seems to be a pretty significant part of the history in Montreal leading to multiple revolts during the late 1960s

The Charlottetown Conference

Charlottetown Conference

Although, it is already setup, I feel as if there are multiple different areas it can improve largely concerning the delegates section of the Wikipedia page. I believe for this to be a wellput article, it should focus on the roles of each of these delegates in the actual conference itself. This would also extend to the roles of each province in these discussions as well.

Operation McGill français
Operation McGill français was a street demonstration that posed great significance in Canadian history. It took place in Montreal on the 28th of March, 1969 in the midst of Quebec's Quiet Revolution. On this day, approximately 10,000-15,000 protesters, largely leftist activists, trade unionists, leftists and a few students from McGill University's CEGEP, gathered and walked down Sherbrooke street towards the Roddick Gates emphasising pro-worker and nationalist ideals along with a demand for McGill University to become francophone. These protesters held signs that read slogans such as "McGill aux Québécois!" and "McGill aux travailleurs", which loosely translates to "McGill to Quebeckers" and "McGill to workers" respectively. The political agenda of this demonstration, in which the demonstrators were trying to decolonize Quebec, was to attack a key symbol of Anglo-Saxon power. The fight for the decolonisation of Quebec also included equal working rights and equal pay. Leading the charge of this demonstration were former McGill professor Stanley Gray and nationalist Raymond Lemieux who spoke to the crowd of people demanding equal rights for French peoples and also demanded McGill to go to Quebeckers. Afraid this demonstration might turn violent, 100 police officers were deployed as well as 1,300 police officers on call. Also awaiting the demonstrators at the Roddick Gates were 3,000 spectators. The demonstration was mostly peaceful, with some altercations taking place between demonstration supporters and some English students who responded to the demonstration by chanting "God save the Queen".

Background
Prior to the demonstration, key demonstrator, Stanley Gray was fired from his position as a political science professor at McGill University in 1969. However, prior to his firing, he had established a group named the Students for a Democratic University (SDU) on November 23, 1967. Tt consisted of 150 students and professors who were also in favour of the idea of decolonisation and instituting more power to French peoples not only at McGill but throughout Quebec as well. The SDU had begun many demonstration, with each getting larger then the previous one. During the early months of 1969, before the operation, Gray and the other members of the SDU had interrupted a Senate meeting on January 24, 1969 echoing similar chants such as "Revolution", "Long live the Socialist Quebec" and "Long live Quebec". The group would then again take similar actions on January 27, 1969 when they impeded a meeting of the Assembly of the Board of Governors. Later, the SDU would be renamed as the Radical Student Association (RSA). Gray was also a founding member of the Movement for the Integration of School (MIS), who organised the demonstration on that day. The SDU and the MIS would work together for the same goals.

Another key member of the MIS was Raymond Lemieux, an American with French-Canadian heritage. He, along with fellow founding member Stanley Gray would gather approximately 3,000 members leading up to the demonstration. The MIS would then strengthen the Saint-Léonard crisis when elected on June 28, 1968. The Saint-Léonard crisis largely developed from leftist thinkings which disallowed bilingual classes and adopted only unilingual French classes.

The newspaper, the McGill Daily, also supported the cause heavily and distributed a special edition announcing the preparation of Operation McGill through 100,000 copies instead of its usual 14,000 copies. In it was a document titled "Welcome to McGill" written entirely in French and sent across the province of Quebec with the aid of students and the members of the CSN. In short, the document critisized the ruling elites of Quebec and argued that the people of Quebec were exploited both culturally and economically. Concluding the article with the need to democratise McGill for these reasons and why the workers, students and anyone who felt discriminated against should demonstrate.

On March 26, 1969 activists Raymond Lemieux, Stanley Gray, Léandre Bergeron and CSN president, Michael Chartrand stated that they would be talking about the Operation via posters throughout campus with would be held in the ballroom of the University Centre.

In the context of the Quiet Revolution
The Quiet Revolution, also known as La révolution tranquille, spanned roughly from 1960-1970 in Quebec, Canada. The Revolution began when Jean Lesage, leader of the Liberal party, was elected on June 22nd, 1960 winning 51% of the popular vote. Lesage's hope was to change the power structure which enabled the discrimination of the French people during Maurice Duplessis's, and prior reigns. After this win, many movements started forming including the Women's Liberation Movement, Black Power Movement, Quebec's Labour Movement and the Francophone Movement. These events also incorporated a lot of Leftist thinkings during this period. The operation would connect in some way with all these movements. The goal of the operation was to hopefully improve and give rights to people who felt discriminated against.

Student Movements
Francophone students did not fare well in the large scale of Quebec's education system. Very few Francophones were allowed into universities where a large percentage was Anglophone. Only 7% of McGill students had French as their mother tongue while the percentage of French-speaking people was 82%. Students who had English as their mother tongue accounted for 42% of university enrollments in Quebec which in greater context is higher compared to the 18% of students for the provincial population. As with other movements, the Francophone student population was not pleased with the lack of education. Education was and continues to be a key element through which people move up in society. The lack of education made it nearly impossible for the young Francophone population to succeed and could be a large reason why the Anglophones were elite in Quebec society.

To try and gain control of their education, a large amount of student movements adapted leftist thinking such as l'Union générale des étudiants (UGEQ). The UGEQ united the many other student bodies in Quebec, 1964 and would go on to form many student movements which the leaders of the Operation did consider as motivation. In the latter half of 1968, the UGEQ picked up its radical agenda. The CEGEP system was put in place to allow more citizens to attain an education. These junior colleges were established all throughout Quebec. However, these colleges, as most of the education system during this time in Quebec, would again disallow the French from attaining a higher education. In October, Quebec government officials had declared that about 20,000 students of the CEGEP system would not be allowed the opportunity to study at a university level come the following school year. This led to about 5,000 to 10,000 students protesting this affair on October 21, 1968 shouting "étudiants ouvriers" and demanding the allowance of a better education for the students under this system. No longer were the students going to try to collaborate with the government. Instead, they were going to fight for themselves within the context of student power and direct action.

Although a portion of the demonstration was to fight for a better education system, it was also used to call out the perceived notion that McGill University was directly influencing American Imperialism and thus, allowing discrimination against the French peoples. This not only affected the student movement but also all the other movements during the Quiet Revolution as well the fight against racism, to the workers movement and ending with the Women's Liberation Movement. Thus, Operation McGill français was part of a greater effort during the Quiet Revolution to incorporate better education and social equality.

Connection to the Parti Pris
The journal, Parti Pris, also began around this time in 1963. Two scholars named Jean-Marc Piotte and André Major were attempting to fight for the equality of the French people. Experiencing the discrimination firsthand, they were trying to join the common fight for the decolonisation of Quebec. They wrote many journal articles fighting for better education and worker rights. They too were supportive of left wing politics. With this journal, they created a new language of resistance during the early 1960s and continued to do so even after the revolution was finished. Their goal of reuniting all men seemed to gain stronger support with each new edition. However, their readings were not the only way that the journal connected citizens. The leaders of the Parti Pris also organized discussions, street protests, public meetings and reading groups.This newspaper was one of many journals in which the protesters of Operation McGill found support.

Connection to the Sir George Williams affair
Just a couple of months prior to Operation McGill was a another large protest known as the Sir George Williams affair. This was a protest in regards to Quebec's discrimination towards its black citizens when 6 black students argued racial discrimination from then assistant professor of biology, Mr. Perry Anderson. Much like the rest of the workers, feminist and student movements, the citizens involved in the Black Power movement felt like they were not being heard. In response to the administrations lack of action, 200 students and protesters peacefully overtook the ninth floor of the Hall building of Sir George Williams University on January 29, 1969. They overtook the computer centre and stayed there until February 11 when they were forcefully taken by police officers after starting a fire to keep around 30 police officers out. Nevertheless, the police officers were successful in detaining and arresting 96 students involved in the affair. It may just be considered the largest school riot in Canadian history.

The school protests at the time of the Quiet Revolution appeared to be all the same in regards to trying to peacefully protest the discrimination felt towards minority groups, The Sir George Williams affair would turn violent with over 2 million dollars worth of damage to computers and the school, but the initial intention was to remain peaceful and get their word across. This affair led to other school protests throughout Quebec which included Operation McGill during which both protests share the efforts of Quebec's decolonisation.

Both protests also did an efficient job of using their own respective newspapers, The Georgian and The McGill Daily to gain support for their causes.

Workers Movements
Quebec in the 1960s and prior was largely ruled by Anglophone elites. Francophones were not happy with this arrangement, since the vast of the majority of the population were French speakers. Anglophones and Francophones often lived in different conditions with the Anglophones living in wealthy areas and the Francophones living in the poorer areas. Anglophones consisted of 56% of Montreal's best-paid workers and only consisted of about 24% of the labor force. Furthermore, Francophones only controlled 20% of the economy and also represented 40% of Canada's total unemployment rate. Even though they lived in a French province, a large percentage were being forced to learn English to be able to work and almost half the time, workers were required to speak to their managers in English. During the early years of the Revolution (1961-1965), there was an average of about 67.6 strikes per year. In the later years (1966-1970), this number nearly doubled to 143 strikes per year. During these strikes, workers argued against poor housing conditions, unemployment, price increases and discrimination.

To change this, leftist parties engaging in nationalist ideas started organising worker movements. Such movements were led by then president of the CSN, Marcel Pepin. In 1966, Pepin would go on to change the situation with his 'moral report', which would then go on to explain the urgency for multiple worker movements and if need be, a call for arms and further resistance. This would later influence those involved in the October Crisis and members of the CSN to revolt in Operation McGill. Leftist thinkers believed that the French population as a whole had a right to defend themselves, and this did not exclude workers.

Examples of this led to many groups such as the Mouvement de libération du taxi, citizens' and workers' committees, the Chevaliers de l'indépendance, the Comité Vallières-Gagnon and the Montreal Central Council of the CSN assisting the MIS coalition gaining over 50,000 supporters. The CSN and MIS coalition would support the Operation showing how the demonstration was acting in the context of allowing better work for the Francophone people. It would try to allow French to strive in the workplace instead of English, which demonstrated power over the French people much like McGill had.

Post Operation McGill at McGill University
After Operation McGill français, a few other events appeared to protest the discrimination and continue with the fight of decolonisation at McGill University. A major event was the creation of the Birth Control Handbook which affected many women at McGill university and continued debates on whether or not McGill University should become French.

Birth Control Handbook
The Birth Control Handbook was considered part of the Women's Liberation movement as a way of decolonizing Quebec and being accepted into the general population. Women seemed to be tired of men controlling their decisions and life choices. The Birth Control Handbook, created by McGill Students Society, was an attempt to gain their longed for control of their own bodies and choices during the late 1960s. Although it was published in 1968, the handbook took off in the summer of 1969 when it had sold 50,000 copies and two years later it would reach nearly 2 million copies. This handbook demonstrates that there were still persistent problems being argued at McGill university during this time and that Operation McGill played into the bigger picture of decolonized Quebec and better equality for all.

The Legacy of Operation McGill français
There is no true legacy that exists for Operation McGill français. It did bring together thousands of people to protest unequal rights and for better services in the Anglo-Saxon community they lived in, but did not have much significance prior to such. In fact, it is something that historians have barely researched in regards to its influence on the Quiet Revolution and Quebec's history in general.

McGill University today
Today, McGill University continues to be one of three English universities in Quebec, demonstrating that the efforts to make McGill french had failed. However, today the student body is approximately 20.3% Francophone. This is a significant improvement over the Francophone student body during the Quiet Revolution that consisted of approximately 3%. Students now have the opportunity to write any work in English or French even though the language of instruction continues to be predominantly in English.

RCM museum
The image that follows does a good job of representing how Canada continued to be involved in wars post world war period. It demonstrates with clarity how Canadians were used in the war in which the image looks peaceful and calm, not the average battlefield one would come to expect. It almost demonstrates an air of tranquillity and in a sense Canadians bringing peace. Moreover, it demonstrates the continuation of Canada being involved in individual battles apart from the queen. In regards to Belshaw, this image can be related to the war efforts and Canada's involvement throughout chapter 6. Belshaw notes how important Canadians were in the war efforts as well which is what the posted also encompasses. Additionally, it also makes quite clear that this may have been used as a sort of propaganda in ways of posters which was also seen throughout Belshaw's chapter.

Image Analysis
This image is a cross marking the burials of 13 members of the 1st Canadian Infantry Battalion who died during the first day of the Vimy Ridge battle. I believe this image is significant because it shows the dedication and loyalty that these soldiers had for their country. Secondly, in chapter six Belshaw explains that the Western front entered the war with a “bombastic” attitude, however, the events of the war did not play out as expected and the mortality rates were high. I believe this image demonstrates the _________ of those who expected an easy victory and neglected the atrocities as well as complications experienced in the battlefield. For example, Belshaw explains how Canadian equipment was inadequate, weather conditions were poor, and German’s used banned chemical gasses. At the same time, I also believe this image represents the resilience of the Canadian soldiers who fought in this war. Belshaw explains how the Canadians were able to do what the French and British failed to do by capturing Vimy Ridge. This shows how the Canadians were able to efficiently work together and utilize their small numbers to conquer the enemy. Despite many allied deaths during previous attacks, these soldiers acted courageously and the 13 soldiers who died on 9 April 1917 were some of the first to sacrifice their lives for their Country (during this battle of course).

Article Evaluations:
The best articles have been evaluated as "good" or "featured" and the bad "start" or "sub." Articles should:
 * Have a clear and easy to understand lead section
 * Have a clear structure with several headings & subheaeadings arranged chronologically or by themes -> appropriate images or diagrams
 * Have a balanced coverage of many aspects of the subject with more important viewpoints more prominent
 * Neutral, unbiased, and represent disagreements according to their representation in reliable sources


 * Use reliable sources


 * Poor articles will contain poor language, short leads, persuasion, poor sources, poor citing, and will not represent relevance

Information should come from independent (not directly related to the subject), neutral and reliable publishers

Some poor sources: blogs, social media, media presses, promotional material, official websites, self published material

When paraphrasing, collect info from a variety of reliable sources, then proceed to interpret and restate with own words--> Avoid close paraphrasing--> key concepts not phrases

reflect multiple points of view neutrally, but should emphasize the most commonly expressed perspective in academic literature about the topic.

Sir George Williams Affair Article Evaluation
The Sir George Williams affair article reasonably discusses the causes, events, and aftermath of the Sir George Williams affair despite a minor factual error in the overview section (There were around 200 students, not 400, involved) and a minor spelling error in the aftermath section (should be passersby not passerby because plural). However, I believe the article fails to discuss the setting that influenced the Sir George William affair/ the impact of the event beyond the educational system.

In the background section, this article only discusses the direct causes of the demonstration (racism) but fails to discuss the indirect causes. For example, during this period Montreal was also undergoing the "quiet revolution" which influenced various social movements. I believe there should be a section or at least a paragraph discussing the context around which these demonstrations occurred. Also, I believe the aftermath section should further discuss the impact of the event beyond the educational system. There is a brief sentence stating that the event sparks international concerns, but this should be a larger section because it is very relevant. The section should continue to discuss the formation of black organizations following the event and the impact of the event on other sectors of society. The article could also briefly discuss the viewpoints of those who opposed the demonstration to give a more balanced coverage.

Montreal's Black Power movement
The Black Power Movement in 1960s Montreal was a period of rediscovering Black identity through a process of invoking cultural, economic, and political thought amongst Blacks. The eruption of political activism during Montreal's Quiet Revolution as well as the reformation of immigration policies which discriminated against non-white immigrants allowed Black communities to publicly express and bring awareness to their struggles with racism. The movement was an integral component of the emerging global challenges to imperialism during the 1960s and it stemmed from various movements including Garveyism, pan-Africanism, the Harlem Renaissance, Rastafari, and others. Montreal's Black Power movement culminated in the aftermath of the Sir George Williams Affair-a student occupation that resulted in an estimated $2 million dollars worth of damages and 97 arrests- which raised concerns of racism worldwide.

Background
During the early 20th century, Montreal Blacks primarily lived in the Saint Antoine district, where they were socially excluded and later on evicted to facilitate urban development, forcing them to disperse to other regions of Montreal. Structural racism was prevalent during the turn of the century and prevented Montreal Blacks from obtaining respectable work or adequate housing. Montreal's Black community fought the adversities of racism through the creation of various social groups such as churches and the Negro Community Centre in 1927. Although having a small Black population during the beginning of the era, Canada's removal of exclusionary immigration policies in the 1950s-1960s, which favoured non-white immigrants, led to a large migration of West Indian and African Blacks to Canada. This migration was met by an increase in the economic standards for Montreal Blacks, however issues of racism and resistance from the Black community against these issues persisted. Also, the internationally broadening language of dissent towards colonization during the 1960s sparked an increased sense of activism among Black intellectuals because it was seen as an opportunity to be heard. (Talk about social groups formed during quiet revolution and impact these groups had on each other). This increased activism was rooted in the idea of Black Power, a slogan coined by Stokely Carmichael in 1966. During this period, a larger scale Black Power movement was also occurring in the United States. ( Discuss ideas in the US to a greater extent)

Early to Mid-1960s
(Talk about influence of Cuban Revolution, Vietnam, liberation of Algeria & African countries, Civil rights, Francophone vs Anglophone etc)

NCA

In 1960s Montreal, Black activism was becoming more vocal and the Black community was beginning to take a stronger stand against racism. By 1965, Montreal's Negro Citizenship Association, a civil rights group, was beginning to take action against racism through their journal Expression. Expression typically published controversial, assertive articles advocating for the Black community and denouncing racism.

CCC

Alongside this development was the formation of the Caribbean Conference Committee in 1965, a group of Caribbean immigrants who sought to provide a platform for intellectuals to discuss anti-colonial ideas and formulate political as well as social change. The committee held multiple conferences that featured influential activists from around the globe such as George Lamming and C.L.R James. The committee discussed and formulated political and social change in the Caribbean, which consequently inspired ideas of change in the local setting of Montreal. The Negro Citizenship Association continued to publish quarterly, however, the Caribbean Conference Committee did not survive to 1968, when Black Power solidified in Montreal activism.

Late-1960s / CCC
(Discuss more abt the CCC and CBW)

In 1968, the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. resulted in a turn to radicalism for some Black activists. Although King advocated unity amongst all races, some Black activists began to see violence and separation from Whites as the only solution to racial issues in the wake of his death, resulting in a shift to the Black Power movement. Expression published an article that implied the necessity for violence in Black activism onwards, and Montreal's Black population voiced their rage through protests as well as two conferences.

The first conference was a three day event from October 4 to 6, 1968, held at Sir George Williams University. The conference was organized by Black activists seeking racial equality through civil means. Inspired by the Caribbean Conference Committee and titled the Black People in Canada Conference, It addressed the local, daily concerns of Montreal's Black population and featured Howard McCurdy, a professor at the University of Windsor, who emphasized the importance for Blacks to understand their identity and have a voice. The conference also sought to reconcile class divide and conflict amongst Montreal Blacks, particularly between the Caribbean immigrants and established Black Canadians. The second conference was a four day event from October 11 to 14, 1968, held at McGill and it was titled The Congress of Black Writers. The most prominent speech at this event was Stokely Carmichael's, which garnered a crowd of over 2000 people and was centered around Black Power as well as the idea that Blacks should liberate themselves internationally through revolt. Carmichael asserted that revolt was necessary to rebuild the social system that had previously oppressed Blacks internationally through slavery and colonization. The majority of the attendance at this second committee was of a younger demographic and the radical ideas expressed conflicted with the more civil ideas of the Black People in Canada Conference.

Montreal's Black Power Movement culminated with the Sir George Williams Affair which ended on February 11, 1969. Following the failure of the Sir George William's University committee to act on six accusations of racially-prejudiced-grading against Professor Perry Anderson, roughly 200 demonstrators-mostly White-peacefully occupied the computer centre at the school. After 14 days, negotiations went astray and the occupation ended in a fire, roughly $2 million dollars in damages and 97 arrests. The student occupation was the manifestation of the Black Power movement in Montreal and an international display of the daily adversities and discrimination faced by the Black community. Among the occupants arrested were Rosie Douglas and Anne Cools, who were seen as the leaders by authorities. While the fire occurred, White spectators chanted "Let the niggers burn."

Aftermath
The inaction of the university committee and the outcome of the Sir George Williams occupation publicly displayed the racial tensions in Canada. In Montreal, the Sir George Williams affair revealed the covert racism in society and brought the Black community closer together. Although francophone intellectuals had previously ignored Montreal's Black population, they showed support for the Black community following the events and denounced institutional racism. The events inspired Black activists to begin challenging imperialism through the entire community rather than solely through the university system. New organizations were formed such as the Black Coalition of Quebec, a Human Rights organization. The Black community also created a controversial newspaper titled "Uhuru," which became a venue for Black activism and recognized the colonization of Blacks as well as other groups. The events of the Sir George William occupation also sparked anger in the Caribbean, where Roland Michener was denied entrance into the University of the West Indies on his “Good-will tour." The arrest of 10 Trinidadian students during the occupation sparked protest in the West Indies, which eventually transformed into demonstrations against the government and began a Black Power movement in Trinidad. Following this series of events, Trinidad's local military nearly deposed the government. Alfie Roberts, a Black intellectual, believed the occupation affirmed the presence of Blacks in Montreal and corresponded with the local labour unrest of the 1960s.

Criticisms
Similar to other social movements during the Quiet Revolution, Montreal's Black Power movement had its own contradictions. The Black Power movement drew on an idea of Black masculinity, which was militant and exclusionary. At The Congress of Black Writers, Stokely Carmichael advocated for political change through violence, which received mixed reactions from members of the Black community. Also, the movement used gendered language which excluded women. Defined as a "struggle for manhood," the Black Power movement was a call to Black men and ignored the role of women. Black women felt the movement was hypocritical and devalued them- some believing they were oppressed by Black men just as Black men were oppressed by Whites.

Evaluate Wikipedia Assignment: Charlottetown Conference
The Charlottetown Conference article exemplifies Wikipedia's mandate as an overview and summary of the most important information; however, it does have room to expand. As an article, it is an excellent framework. The lead section is clear, and covers the key points in the rest of the article. It gives context to the Charlottetown Conference by explaining when it happened, who was there, and how they gathered together. The structure is clear. The two body sections have the appropriate information in each, with the section titled "Conference" having information about the Conference, and the section titled "Delegates" having the names of the delegates and from which province they come.

Although excellent in those qualities, the article begins to wain with deeper evaluation. The two sections, "Conference" and "Delegates", are very unbalanced. The "Conference" section has a reasonable amount of information about the Conference, but the "Delegates" section only has the names of the Provinces and the names of their respective delegates underneath. If there were other sections in the article, it would be more reasonable, but if it is half, then the article feels unbalanced.

In the "Conference" section, the article is neutral, which is excellent when covering an event that had many varying view points. This may seem like a strength for the article, but the main reason for the article's neutrality is because it does not describe the view points with detail. The article explains that the Conference was dominated by the Province of Canada, but it does not go into the detail of what was being dominated.

The references are also a slight issue. There is one footnote for the entire article, which opposes Wikipedia's mandate of citing everything from external sources. There is a bibliography of four books at the end of the article, with hyperlinks to buy it on Amazon. There is also a section of the article that has been flagged for needing a citation. The section explains that there was a circus in Charlottetown at the same time, which interested the general public more than the Conference. The citations given are reliable; the footnote is from the Canadian Archives, and the books are all scholarly sources. Although there are several books and all the references are academic, it does not make up for the lack of footnotes, and the section that was flagged for needing a citation.

Overall, the article is a good summation of the Charlottetown Conference, but it lacks detail. The essential facts are included, so as a brief summary the article has all the necessary information, but there can be more added in. This would flesh out the article and give more detail to those interested, without making the article too overwhelming. This is particularly the case with the "Delegates" section, where there could be information about the different view points of the provinces. When referring to the information, it is an excellent stump-article, that could be fleshed out into a larger one. When referring to the citations and the unbalance of the information presented, there are many improvements to be made. It is an excellent start, but needs to be revised and contributed to more.

Article Topic
This topic is really interesting to me. It does not have a Wikipedia article, but it is eluded to in the Parliament Hill article. It is the burning of Center Block in 1916. I think it is a very interesting event in Canadian history. It can also connect to other topics like architecture. After the Block was burned down, the new Block used Gothic architecture rather than Victorian. The only piece of Victorian architecture left was the library that was saved from the fire. I think it would be a very interesting and unique addition to Wikipedia.

Origins of Catholic Schools in Ontario
Canadian Catholic schools were established in Upper-Canada (Ontario) before Confederation. This raised tensions between the Protestant majority and Catholic minority. They wanted a separate education from the Protestants that focused on their religion. Catholic schools were often based in Irish Catholicism. During the mid-1800s, Irish Catholics in Ontario had a strong distrust towards public education. In Ireland, the Protestant minority ruled over the Catholic majority, and there was a strong connection between the Protestant government and the control of religion. The Catholic church in Ireland felt condemned by the Protestant government, so when in Canada, Irish Catholics had precedent to distrust an English based government. Public school legislation made the Irish Catholics worried about losing Irish culture and heritage. Catholic schools were not thought of highly before Confederation, but in the British North America Act of 1867, Catholic schools are recognized alongside public schools.

The British North American Act (BNA Act) was the piece of legislation signed during Canada’s confederation. In 1863, Sir Richard W. Scott created the Separate Schools Act (also known as the Scott Act), which outlined the creation of a separate school system that would grant religious privileges to students - in this case, Catholic. The first paragraph of section 93 in the BNA Act stated that “nothing in any such law shall prejudicially affect any right or privilege with respect to denominational schools which any class of persons have by law in the Province at the union.” This sanctioned Scott’s Separate Schools Act in Canada’s constitution.

As a part of the Scott Act, Rural area Catholic schools gained the same rights as those in urban areas. They also gained financial support from the central government. Canada’s confederation complicated the national Catholic school situation. By 1867, the groundwork and foundation for Catholic schooling had been created, but after confederation, jurisdiction over education was given to the provincial governments. One of the complications was for the minorities in the different provinces. The French minority in Ontario and English minority in Quebec struggled greatly with the Catholic school question post-confederation. As part of section 93 of the British North America Act, denominational schools (like Catholic schools) had their foundation from pre-confederation preserved in legislation. This small part of section 93 became a strong argument when Provincial governments tried to infringe on their rights.

Catholic schools often grew out of parishes, and through the transitional period, most parishes in the Toronto area were connected to a Catholic school. Catholic and public schools had a similar curriculum, but Catholic schools were as much about maintaining a Catholic identity in a largely Protestant province as it was about a good education. Opposed to public schools, Catholic schools started with a religious education and used that as a baseline. Once students had a religious background, it was okay to teach them secular subjects, because they understood Catholicism.

Catholic schools were extremely underfunded in the late 1800s, because they relied on private funding rather than public. Ontario Catholic schools survived because of religious leaders who built the schools, created the cirricula, and gave large donations. The business and corporate taxes Ontarians had to pay were not allocated to Catholic schools; however, in the 1880s Catholic businessmen were allowed to target their commercial taxes to Catholic schools. Ontario Catholic schools used the “Separate Schools Act” to justify public funding. The Separate Schools Act allows separate school boards to be created with relative ease in Ontario. Five families would have a meeting where they elect one member from three of the five families to be trustees of their new school board. The families then notify the leader of the local School Board and gain their signature. Lastly, the families send the signed document to the Department of Education in Toronto. The minister of Education did not need to be involved, and there were no mandatory minimums for class sizes, or proof of financial stability required.

Since 1855, Ontario Catholic schools have not paid public school taxes. Tax conflict and tension between separate school and public school supporters involves the “corporation tax” introduced in the 20th century. The corporation tax allows corporations to divide a portion of their public school tax to be given to the separate schools. This is one way Catholic schools have gained their financial aid.

In 1876, Egerton Ryerson instituted Catholic high schools, which added four years of additional schooling. Although the majority of Catholic students still joined labour forces after elementary, high school gave those who wanted it, additional education for careers in business or theology. Public funding for Catholic schools happened after the mass migration at the beginning of the 20th century, when Catholic populations rose and the demand for better and more Catholic high schools increased.

This is when Ontario’s government used section 93 against the Catholics. The government argued that because public funding for Catholic high schools was not a part of the foundation created pre-confederation and protected in the BNA Act, the government had no legislative obligation. Catholics refuted this by arguing that pre-confederated Canada did not have any high school education, and that curriculums taught in grades 9 and 10 were already taught in Catholic schools. There were some compromises. At the end of the 19th century, the provincial government included “Separate School Trustees” on high school boards. This gave Catholic students access to Catholic support in public high schools. Moving into the 20th century, this was still not enough. In 1925, Ontario Catholic bishops took the provincial government to court. In 1928, the case made it to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (the highest court in the British Empire) and they ruled in favor of the province.

Another cause for controversy were the Catholic school curriculums, because it is difficult to define of what a Catholic education consists. Catholic schools were forged by the communities around them. Communities had different interpretations of Catholicism, the Bible, how the school should operate, and their political structure. Although Catholic school curriculums used Provincial guidelines for their secular subjects, the Catholic church maintained authority over religious subjects. The Catholic school curriculum was strongly affected in the 1880s and 1890s, with the development of “new education” in Ontario. “New education” was the ideology that, in addition to what was already being taught, a more practical education was needed. Premier Whitney in 1905 added it to his policy, involving a big push for Kindergarten. Catholic schools started to implement the “new education” ideology in 1890, when 49 Catholic students were involved in the first kindergarten programs. There was a large debate in Ontario post-confederation about the certification of teachers for Catholic schools. Many argued that Catholic school teachers, who were at this time clergy with little teacher training, should have the same teaching standards as public school teachers did; Catholic school teachers should have provincial teaching certificates. On one side of the debate, public school teachers argued that their competition against Catholic teachers was unfair, because they were not as educated but were hired more often. This was because Catholic schools in the late 1800s were poor, and so it was cheaper for public schools to hire Catholic teachers. They did not need to gain the same education as public school teachers because of the BNA Act, which stated that “nothing in any such [provincial] law [relative to education] shall prejudicially affect any right or privilege with respect to denominational schools which any class of persons have by law in the Province at the Union.” The other side of the debate was Catholic leaders who argued that Catholic school teachers did not need to gain the same education as public school teachers, because of the constitution and their lower financial status. It was hard for Catholic school teachers to pay for the education needed.

The decision of Catholic teacher qualification was an important one. Catholic schools wanted to prove their legitimacy in comparison to public ones, and so they created Catholic teacher Certification. This was in congruence with the 1907 Seth Bill, which related the years of teaching experience to one’s certification. After continual urging by school inspectors, the Ontario Provincial government started to legitimately look into the certification of Catholic school teachers. Over the next 20 years, the issue was debated back and forth with the decision on November 2, 1907 by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to uphold that Catholic teachers needed certification. With seven years of teaching experience, one would receive a first-class certificate, while second- and third-class certificates were given to those with fewer years of teaching experience. The levels of certification made the school system appear more legitimate and made clergy and lay people equals when teaching at Catholic schools in Ontario.

By 1899, Catholic schools in Toronto were beginning to Change. The growing Catholic population in Toronto created a strong Catholic identity and community. This created a wanting to improve the Catholic school system from what was considered to be a daycare for Irish children. Their dual mission was to instill Catholic values and patriotism for Canada. Catholics wanted their youth to grow up as contributing members of Canadian society, while keeping their Catholic roots. They wanted better teachers, buildings, and curriculums than previous schools. The English-speaking Catholic school systems became very proud of these changes as the school system developed. Catholic school statistics show a major growth during this time. The number of schools, teachers, and students all more than doubled. In 1885 Toronto, there were 13 Catholic elementary schools, with 82 teachers and 3341 students, and by 1919, there were 29 schools, with 208 teachers and 8500 students. In 1910, The Public School Readers were settled on as the official reader for Catholic schools. Canadian and British history and culture were very prominent in the readers. Older Irish Catholics disliked them for this reason, but they were chosen because they were the most updated texts, and would be the most useful for students going to secondary and post-secondary institutions. Because the main goals of Ontario Catholic schools were to prepare Catholic students for further public education, and to make them contributing members to Canadian society, these readers were crucial.

Many older Irish Catholics did not like the new direction of the Catholic schools. When they were first developed in Ontario, Catholic schools were a symbol of Irish and Catholic identity, but in the growing multicultural Canada, it became more important for the Catholic schools to emphasize a “Canadian” identity rather than an “Irish” one. They were focused on Canadian patriotism and teaching their students how to survive in a Canadian society. Canadian identity referred to many different cultures, including the Irish, but not limited to them. The other point of tension was that Canadian identity then was still predominantly British, and so, similarly to how they felt about the public schools, older Irish Catholics were worried that their children and grandchildren would be assimilated and indoctrinated into British culture.

Franco-Ontarians were also worried about the influence of British, and moreover English, culture in Ontario Catholic schools. Bilingual schooling was a very controversial topic in late 19th and early 20th century Ontario. The Bishop of London, Ontario, Michael Francis Fallon, exemplifies the bilingual school tensions within the Catholic Church. He, as a Catholic bishop, was against bilingual schools. He argued that bilingual schools weakened the already low respect for Separate schools, and ordered his Catholic school teachers to only teach in English or French but not both.

Franco-Ontarian immigration represented approximately 25% of a 600,000 person increase between 1881 and 1911. During this time, although there was a growing French population in Ontario and thus a necessity for bilingualism in schools, many English Ontarians were getting frustrated by the lack of English teaching in the bilingual school system. Those for whom bilingual schools were there, thought that the teaching was excellent. The difficulty was, these bilingual schools catered to the minority in Ontario, and as such focused as much (or more) on the minority language. Those in charge (the English) did not agree with them, because there was less English being taught in the schools. This was an issue that affected many minorities including the Germans. The increased French population made them a large target. In 1885, English was a requirement for both Catholic and public school teachers, and it was necessary for all readers to be written in English. These tensions would eventually result in an Act titled Regulation 17, which demanded teachers to only use English.

Catholic schools in smaller Ontario counties would integrate Irish and French Catholic students, because there is not enough financial support to build more than one school. This was not only difficult because of the cultural divide, but also because teachers in these smaller counties were often not bilingual, and so teaching English and French was hard.

20th Century Catholic Schools and the Push for Grade 13
By the 20th century, Catholic schools had little money, were old and in disrepair, and the increasing Catholic population created overcrowding. Student evaluations showed that even when affected by these factors, Catholic school students had “good” and “middling” grade scores. As Catholic school enrollment increased at the turn of the century, there was a need for more teachers. At the same time, there were many catholic women graduating with a catholic school education and were prepared by their sisters to teach. It became a cycle of Catholic school graduates teaching at Catholic schools. In 1890 Toronto, 90% of the teachers were clergy, but by the 1910s, one third of the teachers were laypeople. Canada after the First World War had a strong economy, so the production of more Catholic and public schools increased; however, the provincial government did not fund Catholic schools after grade 10. This was changed by Archbishop Neil McNeil, who argued that there was a constitutional right to grants and government funding for grades 11, 12, and 13 too. His argument was that Catholic schools taught material similarly to public schools, and because the constitution recognized high school education as an extension of public schools and Catholic education as a form of public school education, they had a constitutional right. This was still denied by the government.

In the 1930s, strong amendments to Catholic allocation of business and corporate taxes were made. The Catholic Taxpayers Association (CTA) began lobbying the provincial government for better allocation. In 1934, supported provincial Liberal Mitchell Hepburn (Ontario Premier from 1934 - 1942). After he won, he amended the corporation tax system to include the Separate School Board. This was short lived. After a terrible  by-election in December of 1936, Hepburn repealed the amendments because he was afraid of repercussions from the Protestant majority of the province.

After World War Two, Canadian education systems started leaning towards fair and equality-based ideologies. In 1946, Catholic school systems argued again for provincial grants for grades 11 - 13. This was based on equality for education, and they argued that each school system should receive the same opportunities for funding. This backfired on the Catholic school system’s funding opportunities. Over the course of four years, the school system put together a proposal report, and the Provincial Government investigated the schools. By 1950, the provincial government put forward legislation to cap the public funding for Catholic schools at grade 6, rather than the previous cap at grade 10. The Foundation Tax Plan from 1963 was quintessential in helping the Catholic school system gain equality to the public-school system. The plan allotted for more Catholic school grant money as recompense; Catholic schools could not tax most corporations.

Funding was still difficult for Catholic high schools in the late 20th century. After World War Two, there was also another increase in immigration from eastern and southern Europe. With a larger Catholic population, the provincial government started to investigate public funding opportunities. In 1964, the provincial government took more control over school funding from the municipal and regional governments. After the 1950s, and with the greater provincial control in the 1960s, Catholic schools could no longer use the corporation tax.

In 1969, county and district school boards replaced the local ones, which made distributing public funds far easier and more efficient. There was a regimented system that allowed for fair distribution. In the 1971 provincial election, Conservative Premier William Davis did not support funding, while the Liberal and New Democratic candidates did. Unfortunately for the Catholics, Davis’ Conservative party won the election and public funding for Catholic high schools remained unsupported. Davis’ argument was that public funding would set precedent for other Christian denominations to ask the same. Very oddly in 1984, Davis agreed to publicly fund Catholic high schools. Grade 13 was eliminated during Davis’ reform, but by the end of the 20th century, Catholic schools were publicly funded from Kindergarten to Grade 12. His decision was caused by the Report of the Task Force on Education Policy. It was written by the Ontario Elementary Catholic Teacher’s Association, which put pressure on Davis to make a final decision.

In 1985, the Liberal Provincial government introduced Bill 30, titled Act to Amend the Education Act 1986. This Bill’s goal was to extend the public funding for Catholic secondary schools to grade 13. The Bill went through a judicial ruling to ensure that it was consistent with the Constitution of Canada and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The decision was 3 in favor and 2 opposed, and by 1986, the Bill was deemed constitutional. Funding for grade 13 began in 1987.

The Education Act, Ontario from 1974 made Catholic schools open to students who were Roman Catholics in the area. Through the latter half of the 20th century, Catholic populations in Ontario rose 5%, from 1961 (30%) to 1981 (35%). Although established by Irish immigrants, the more immigration and multiculturalism that grew in Ontario through the 20th century, broadened the Catholic schools to other national forms of Catholicism. Between 1960 and 1980, Catholic school enrollment went from 33% of the public-school enrollment to over 50%. Between 1971 and 1984, 41 new Catholic schools were created, making the total number 98.

Catholicism and Immigration
Immigration to Canada of Catholic nationalities other than Irish and French aided in respect for Catholicism, and the development of Catholic schools. By 1920, 45% (3.5 million) Canadians were Catholic. This was a result of the mass migration to Canada before World War One. These Catholic immigrants included those from the Ukraine, Greece, and Italy. These immigrant Catholics decreased the percentage of Irish-Canadian Catholics from 25% to 17%. The French still made up ⅔ of Canadian Catholics, but the growing immigrant population coincided with a growing Catholic population. After WWI finished, close to 50% of Canadian Catholics were non-Irish and French Canadian Catholics.

By 1920, 450,000 Ukrainians, Germans, Poles, Italians, and other Catholic nationalities had immigrated to Canada. Most of Canada’s immigrated Catholic population settled in the Prairies, with Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta having the most ethnically diverse Catholic dioceses. The Ukrainian population was expansive in Canada’s prairies. By 1912, they had 21 clergy members for about 100,000 people. With a group of 40,000 by 1914, German Catholics were another population that settled in the prairies. The prairies were a popular settlement area for new immigrants because it offered copious amounts of land and job opportunities as farmers.

In Ontario, immigrants were attracted to industrial work in cities like Toronto, or mining and forestry work in the north. In Thunder Bay, Ukrainians and Italians worked in the transportation industry with the railroad, and in the iron industry with foundries. As these immigrant groups developed, they began to establish churches and dioceses. These parishes developed slowly. By 1917, Italians in Sault Ste Marie finally received a priest and a church. Although the great migration pre-WWI and continued migration after increased the Catholic population of Canada, they were still a minority group, and thinly spread throughout the nation.

In 1920s Toronto and Ottawa, there was a 1,200 person Italian population from both northern and southern areas of Italy. Other than the prairies, 5,000 Ukrainians, 2,000 Poles, and over 100 Lithuanians settled in 1920s Toronto. The war gave immigrants access to a wider range of jobs. This raised their income for the four years, and allowed them to build more churches in Ontario cities. I 1914 Hamilton, the 1,700 Pole population built their church. A Polish Catholic church was built in 1914 St. Catharines, but after the war it closed down because of decreased attendance. In 1917, Ukrainians built churches in Kitchener, Hamilton, Oshawa, and Ottawa. Within a twenty-year period (1900 to 1920), the development of immigrant Catholic churches across Canada grew at a severely fast rate. As Catholic immigration intensified, the desire for a stronger Catholic school system increased too.

Tensions: English and French
Much of the Catholic and bilingual schools conflict between English and French in Ontario was in Ottawa. It is on the border between Ontario and Quebec, and represented strong Irish and Franco-Catholic tensions. Reverend Joseph-Thomas Dunhamel, who was the Catholic diocesan Bishop of Ottawa from 1874 - 1909, was considered to be “the defender” for Franco-Catholic Ontarians. He was adamant about the importance of bilingualism in the Church.

Tensions rose in 1868, when Archbishop John Joseph Lynch from Toronto argued that the Anglo Franco-Catholic problem in Ottawa was caused by the location. The issue with the diocese of Ottawa’s location was twofold. First, it encompassed more than just Ottawa. It ranged both east and west of the city. Second, because of Ottawa’s proximity to the border, it was a part of the Ecclesiastical Province of Quebec. This gave Ottawa duel Catholic identities, and Lynch argued that the easiest way to solve this problem was to divide the diocese of Ottawa down the Ontario-Quebec border, and merge the Ontarian side with the diocese of Toronto. Because of his connection to Franco-Ontarian Catholics, Dunhamel fought hard against this assertion. Dunhamel and Lynch fought back and forth with the Vatican about this divide for two decades (1870s and 1880s).

Archbishop of Quebec E.A. Taschereau argued against Lynch, stating that the ecclesiastical borders for Catholic Canada were to aid the cultural identity issues, attempting to group together the majority of one Catholic-cultural identity. The Ecclesiastical Province of Quebec contained the French, the Ecclesiastical Province of Ontario contained the English, and the Ecclesiastical Province of Saint-Boniface contained the Indigenous Catholics. Taschereau explained that when the divide was created, most Catholics in Ottawa were French, and so it was compartmentalized to the Ecclesiastical Province of Quebec. The number of French Catholics was still strong, and so Taschereau argued that Ottawa should stay with Quebec. National and language identities caused strong tensions within the Catholic Church of Canada. Lynch, an Irishman, and Dunhamel, a French supporter, fought these tensions for the rest of their lives. These tensions played out in Catholic Schools.

In the late 1800s, there were many French migrants coming from Quebec to Ontario, making the Irish Catholics, who were the previous majority, left to contend with a growing French population. There was an interesting difference in prejudice from both Irish Catholics and Anglo-Protestants towards bilingual Catholic schools in Ontario. Irish Catholics did not like French Catholic schools because it went against their language. Anglo-Protestants did not like French-Catholic schools because it went against language and religion. The problems and tensions between Public and Separate School systems, and the problems and tensions between English and bilingual schools were different, but they often worked in tandem. Most bilingual schools were religiously affiliated, and so the growing stigma against bilingual schools and the Franco-Ontarians often transposed to stigmas against the Separate School system.

Ottawa’s bilingual schools experienced a lot of controversy. In the 1880s, the bilingual schools were debated by the Ottawa Separate School Board. Extreme tension rose between English and French School Board trustees. Bishop Duhamel interfered and resolved the conflict. He decided that Ottawa’s Separate School Board would separate into a French Separate School Board and English Separate School Board. In 1912, the provincial government wrote a report titled the Merchant Report. Those who wrote the report, recommended having “French be the language of instruction in the primary grades, but... English be introduced gradually…to replace French as the main language by the third form” as an attempt to solve the bilingual school problem. Conservative Premier James Whitney enacted this recommendation in his policy statement: “...instruction in English shall commence at once upon a child entering school, the use of French as the language of instruction and of communication to vary according to local conditions upon the report of the supervising inspector, but in no case to continues beyond the end of the first form.” This piece of legislation would be the precursor to Regulation 17.

Regulation 17 was issued in June of 1912. For those unable to speak English well were placed into a newly created English course that was tailored for them. Teachers who could not effectively teach English were fired Regulation made all schools in Ontario English speaking and taught. The Franco-Ontarian issue with Regulation 17 was the restriction of French rights in Ontario, particularly when there was a growing French population.

The tensions were eventually semi-resolved. In 1967, Premier John P. Robarts gave Franco-Ontarians access and funding to French-language education. This set a series of events in motion that concluded in 1988, when French Catholic and French public-school boards were separated in Ottawa. This gave precedent for multiple French school boards in other areas of Ontario with large French populations.

Tensions: Catholic and Public Schools
People often thought that Catholic school education was not on par with public school education, but when Catholics went to public high schools after graduating Catholic elementary schools, they were able to do well and understand the material. The quality of Catholic school education was improving, and comments against was most likely due to rivalry between the two education systems or religious bigotry. Although religious material was crucial to Catholic schools’ curriculum, it is important to note that during the 1960s, the opposite was happening in public schools. School prayer was removed and the growing diversity in urban Ontario was creating a more secular environment.

After gaining equal funding for Catholic schools in 1984, the Catholic schools then began to open their enrollment to the general public. There was debate over this idea. Many Catholics were against this idea. Many clergy worried that the integrity of the Catholic school system would diminish with the presence of non-Catholic students. In the 1960s, public schools started to become more secular, so the worry that the same would happen in the Catholic school system was not without precedent.

When the equal funding for Catholic schools was enacted, many public school supporters argued that public funding for Catholic schools was unfair to other denominations. They argued that it was a form of religious persecution. While not a Christian denomination, a similar argument was voiced by Jewish communities who felt alienated by this legislation. Both sides worried about how to balance Catholic identity and the growing multicultural Canadian identity in a school with both Catholic and non-Catholic students. The public schools were different because they did not have a religiously based curriculum embedded in their ideology.

Catholic Schools in Ontario have gone through transformations and struggles to maintain a Catholic identity, while teaching their students how to live in a country with a wider “Canadian identity.” Canadian immigration and multiculturalism has transformed these schools from what were originally symbols of Irish Catholic identity in Ontario, to the current multi-national and multi-lingual Catholic identity in congruence with a wider Canadian and Ontarian identity.

Ontario Catholic Schools Draft
** Not part of the article. This is to state that my draft is one section of a larger pre-existing Wikipedia article. The article has some information on pre-confederation Catholic school history, and a very small section on Quebec Catholic schools, post-Confederation. There is not, however, a section on Ontario Catholic schools. This is where my addition to the page will be. It will be a section of the larger article, but it will be far more fleshed out than the others. The Wikipedia page is Catholic Schools in Canada.

Origins of Catholic Schools in Ontario
Canadian Catholic schools were established in Upper-Canada (Ontario), before Confederation, when the Catholic minority was having political tensions with the Protestant majority. They wanted a separate education from the Protestants, that focused on their religion. Catholic schools were often based in Irish Catholicism. During the mid-1800s, Irish Catholics in Ontario had a strong distrust towards public education. In Ireland, the Protestant minority ruled over the Catholic majority, and there was a strong connection between the Protestant government and the control of religion. The Catholic church in Ireland felt like it was condemned by the Protestant government, so when in Canada, Irish Catholics had precedent to distrust an English based government. Legislation for public schools made the Irish Catholics worried that they were just about assimilating and taking away Irish culture and heritage. Catholic schools were not thought of highly before Confederation, even though Catholic schools are recognized alongside public schools in the British North America Act of 1867.

By 1899, Catholic schools in Toronto were beginning to Change. The growing Catholic population in Toronto created a strong Catholic identity and community. This created a wanting to improve the Catholic school system from what was considered to be a daycare for Irish children. Their dual mission was to instill Catholic values and patriotism for Canada. Catholics wanted their youth to grow up as contributing members of Canadian society, while keeping their Catholic roots. They wanted better teachers, buildings, and curriculums than previous schools. The English-speaking Catholic school systems became very proud of these changes as the school system developed from 1887 – 1922. Catholic school statistics show a major growth during this time. The number of schools, teachers, and students all more than doubled. In 1885 Toronto, there were 13 Catholic elementary schools, with 82 teachers and 3341 students, and by 1919, there were 29 schools, with 208 teachers and 8500 students.

Many older Irish Catholics did not like the new direction of the Catholic schools. When they were first developed in Ontario, Catholic schools were a symbol of Irish and Catholic identity, but in the growing multicultural Canada, it became more important for the Catholic schools to emphasize a “Canadian” identity rather than an “Irish” one. They were focused on Canadian patriotism and teaching their students how to survive in a Canadian society. Canadian identity referred to many different cultures, including the Irish, but not limited to them. The other point of tension was that Canadian identity then was still predominantly British, and so, similarly to how they felt about the public schools, older Irish Catholics were worried that their children and grandchildren would be assimilated and indoctrinated into British culture.

Catholic schools often grew out of parishes, and through the transitional period between 1887 and 1922, most parishes in the Toronto area were connected to a Catholic school. Catholic and public schools had a similar curriculum, but Catholic schools were as much about maintaining a Catholic identity in a largely Protestant province as it was about a good education. Opposed to public schools, Catholic schools started with a religious education and used that as a baseline. Once students had a religious background, it was okay to teach them secular subjects because they understood Catholicism.

Ontario Catholic School Curricula
Curricula in Catholic schools have been controversial, because it is difficult to define of what a Catholic education consists. Catholic schools were forged by the communities around them. Communities had different interpretations of Catholicism, the Bible, how the school should operate, and their political structure. Although Catholic school curricula used Provincial guidelines for their secular subjects, the Catholic church maintained authority over religious subjects.

The Catholic school curriculum was strongly affected in the 1880's and 1890's, with the development of “new education” in Ontario. “New education” was the ideology that, in addition to what was already being taught, a more practical education was needed. Premier Whitney in 1905 added it to his policy, involving a big push for Kindergarten. Catholic schools started to implement the “new education” ideology in 1890, when 49 Catholic students were involved in the first kindergarten programs.

By the 20th century, Catholic schools had little money, were old and in disrepair, and the increasing Catholic population created overcrowding. Student evaluations showed that even when affected by these factors, Catholic school students had “good” and “middling” grade scores. As Catholic school enrollment increased at the turn of the century, there was a need for more teachers. At the same time, there were many catholic women graduating with a catholic school education and were prepared by their sisters to teach. It became a cycle of Catholic school graduates teaching at Catholic schools. In 1890 Toronto, 90% of the teachers were clergy, but by the 1910s, one third of the teachers were laypeople.

It was important to decide the proper qualifications for Catholic teachers. Catholic schools wanted to prove their legitimacy in comparison to public ones, and so they created Catholic teacher Certification. This was in congruence with the 1907 Seth Bill, which related the years of teaching experience to one’s certification. With seven years of teaching experience, one would receive a first-class certificate, while second- and third-class certificates were given to those with fewer years of teaching experience. The levels of certification made the school system appear more legitimate and made clergy and lay people equals when teaching at Catholic schools in Ontario.

In 1910, The Public School Readers were settled on as the official reader for Catholic schools. Canadian and British history and culture were very prominent in the readers. Older Irish Catholics disliked them for this reason, but they were chosen because they were the most updated texts, and would be the most useful for students going to secondary and post-secondary institutions. Because the main goals of Ontario Catholic schools were to prepare Catholic students for further public education, and to make them contributing members to Canadian society, these readers were crucial.

Although Catholic elementary schools were developing and expanding at a high rate, Catholic high schools and post-secondary schools developed far slower. The High-School buildings available were in terrible condition, and were unable to have the necessary components to compete with the public high-schools. In Toronto, there was no Catholic university, so, out of convenience, Catholics in the area would generally go to non-Catholic universities. There was also less appreciation for Catholic higher learning from the Irish Catholics in the area. Some argued that although the new Catholic school education system was helping students integrate into Canadian society, it left them without a calling for further religious education.

Catholic Schools and Another Transition in the 20th Century
Post-WWI Canada had a strong economy, so there was an increase in Catholic and public schools; however, the provincial government did not fund Catholic schools after grade 10. This was changed by Archbishop Neil McNeil, who argued that there was a constitutional right to grants and government funding for grades 11, 12, and 13 too. The evidence for his argument was that Catholic schools taught material similarly to public schools, and because the constitution recognized high school education as an extension of public schools and Catholic education as a form of public school education, there was constitutional justification. This was still denied by the government.

After World War Two, Canadian education systems started leaning towards fair and equality-based ideologies. In 1946, Catholic schools again argued in favor of provincial grants for grades 11 - 13. Based on the new equality of education ideology, they argued that each school system should receive the same opportunities for funding. This backfired on the Catholic school system’s funding opportunities. Over the course of four years, the school system put together a proposal report, and the Provincial Government investigated the schools. By 1950, the provincial government put forward legislation to cap the public funding for Catholic schools at grade 6, rather than the previous cap at grade 10. The Foundation Tax Plan from 1963 was quintessential in helping the Catholic school system gain equality to the public-school system. The plan allotted for more Catholic school grant money as recompense, because Catholic schools could not tax most corporations.

Catholic schools began transforming again in the latter half of the 20th century. The Catholic Church started to transform its ideology and theology during the 20th century with the beginning of Vatican II. Vatican II is a title that distinguishes the Catholic Church ideology and theology after the Second Vatican Council from 1962-5. This council strongly changed the Catholic church to better fit with the modernizing world. There were different perspectives and interpretations of Catholic theology and politics, and the transition of the Vatican’s doctrine created strong tensions between Catholics. These tensions were played out in Catholic schools. The schools are one aspect of Catholic identity that struggles with the transition between the pre and post Second Vatican Council ideology. Catholic schools had to transition to align with the theological and political decisions the Council made, but also had to contend with the theologies and politics of those at the individual schools.

Growth of Ontario Catholic schools continued in the later 20th century. Through the latter half of the 20th century, Catholic populations in Ontario rose 5%, from 1961 (30%) to 1981 (35%). Although established by Irish immigrants, the more immigration and multiculturalism that grew in Ontario through the 20th century, broadened the Catholic schools to other national forms of Catholicism. Between 1960 and 1980, Catholic school enrollment went from 33% of the public school enrollment to over 50%. Between 1971 and 1984, 41 new Catholic schools were created, making the total number 98.

Taxes and Funding
Funding for Catholic schools in Ontario is unique when compared to other provinces. In Ontario, they receive money from the Provincial Government, while Maritime and Prairie provinces have a “time out” out method. There, Catholic students go to public school, but have designated times where they leave the classrooms for private religious education. Different than the Maritimes and Prairies, Quebec’s education system is strongly made up of Catholic schools because of their large Catholic population. Ontario Catholics can choose to send students to either Catholic schools or other “non-denominational” and public ones. Ontario is mainly unique, because there is public funding for Catholic schools, which was still considered the minority school system. Although they have access to public support, there is no established amount of support dictated in the constitution.

Since 1855, Ontario Catholic schools have not paid public school taxes. Tax conflict and tension between separate school and public school supporters involved the “corporation tax” introduced in the 20th century. The corporation tax allowed corporations to divide a portion of their public school tax to be given to the separate schools. This is one way Catholic schools have gained a large amount of their financial aid. In 1964, the province took more control over school funding from the municipal and regional governments. After the 1950's, and with the greater provincial control in the 1960's, Catholic schools could no longer use the corporation tax. In 1969, county and district school boards replaced the local ones, which made distributing public funds far easier and more efficient. There was a regimented system that allowed for fair distribution.

In 1971, with greater provincial control over Catholic schools, William Davis, who was the Ontario Minister of Education, denounced government financial support for them, because it could set precedent for other Christian denominations to do the same. Nevertheless, when elected as Premier of Ontario, he agreed to give the Catholic school system some financial support.

The difficulty that the 1980's presented, was the juxtaposition between the increasing interest and enrollment in Catholic schools and the lack of resources and space. This problem was something that only public financial aid could solve. At that time, most donations to the schools were from Bishops, clergy, and churches. By June 12, 1984, Premier William Davis passes Bill 30, which allows government funding for Catholic schools up to, and including, grade 13. This surprised many people, because Davis’ stance was generally opposed to the idea. His decision was caused by the Report of the Task Force on Education Policy. It was written by the Ontario Elementary Catholic Teacher’s Association, which put pressure on Davis to make a final decision.

Catholic schools compared to public
People often thought that Catholic school education was not on par with public school education, but when Catholics went to public high schools after graduating Catholic elementary schools, they were able to do well and understand the material. The quality of Catholic school education was improving, and comments against were most likely due to rivalry between the two education systems or religious bigotry. Although religious material was crucial to Catholic schools’ curriculum, it is important to note that during the 1960s, the opposite was happening in public schools. School prayer was removed and the growing diversity in urban Ontario was creating a more secular environment.

After gaining equal funding for Catholic schools in 1984, the Catholic schools then began to open their enrollment to the general public. There was debate over this idea. Many Catholics were against this idea. Many clergy worried that the integrity of the Catholic school system would diminish with the presence of non-Catholic students. In the 1960s, public schools started to become more secular, so the worry that the same would happen in the Catholic school system was not without precedent.

When the equal funding for Catholic schools was enacted, many public school supporters argued that public funding for Catholic schools was unfair to other denominations. They argued that it was a form of religious persecution. While not a Christian denomination, a similar argument was voiced by Jewish communities who felt alienated by this legislation. Both sides worried about how to balance Catholic identity and the growing multicultural Canadian identity in a school with both Catholic and non-Catholic students. The public schools were different because they did not have a religiously based curriculum embedded in their ideology.

Catholic Schools in Ontario have gone through transformations and struggles to maintain a Catholic identity, while teaching their students how to live in a country with a wider “Canadian identity.” Canadian immigration and multiculturalism has transformed these schools from what were originally symbols of Irish Catholic identity in Canada, to the current multi-national Catholic identity in congruence with a wider Canadian and Ontarian identity.

TP: Okay, but remember the first sentence of the assignment: "Expanding on a topic we have developed during our lectures, readings or in-class activities. There are a couple of ways to tie this in, but try to make these connections yourself. You also want to be sure that there is enough research material. What is available in our library?

Article Evaluation: Anthony Musgrave
-Minor typo: listed as "Governor of Newfoundland 1864-1869" twice

-Section mentioning his work in the colonial governments of the Leeward Islands is greatly lacking (latter section of "Life" subheading, first sentence of "British North America" subheading)

-Section under subheading "British North America", in the latter section discussing his efforts to make British Columbia a Canadian Province, there is no mention of the key part the trans-continental railway played in getting B.C. to agree to confederation

-Section under the subheading "South Australia" says, "This proved to be a substantially less taxing appointment". However, I have found the following two sources: http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/musgrave-sir-anthony-4283 and http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks13/1303951h.html#ch-03 (Chapter XIV, The Administration of Sir Anthony Musgrave"), which say that, while Musgrave may not have been directly involved in turbulence, the time was a turbulent one nonetheless for South Australia. It is not a lie, but I believe it is misleading.

Article on the Toronto Police Service's "Morality Department", including sources
--Section to be included in Wikipedia's "Toronto Police Service" page, under the Heading "Special Operations"--

Founding and Purpose
The Morality Department was formed in 1886, when then Toronto Mayor William Holmes Howland appointed ex-Royal Irish Constabulary officer David Archibald to head this special unit of the Toronto Police Service to deal specifically with vice, sin, and crimes which heavily impacted women and children. Howland had just won Toronto's Mayoral race that year by promising to make Toronto a beacon of morality for the world, even going so far as to give Toronto the moniker, "Toronto the Good". The department ran from then through the 1930's, and was seen as a forerunner to many social assistance programs, such as the Children's Aid Society. It was set up under a social purist pretext of policing people's everyday behaviours so that Toronto might live up to Howland's moniker. Among the offences, though not necessarily crimes, that Morality Officers policed were gambling, "Blue Laws" or "Sabbath Laws", being an absentee father, drug dealing, interracial relationships, homosexuality, bootlegging and alcoholism, vagrancy, family abuse and prostitution. The people in power who wrote these laws, such as Howland, and created the Morality Department would say that it was there to protect moral and good people from the evils of the city. However, when examining the direct implementation/enforcement of these laws, and the effects they had on civilian life, it would seem that the larger purpose of the Morality Department was to prevent working class people from socializing or coming together, and thereby to keep them in a generally less powerful position.

Methods and Effectiveness
The Officers' methods often, though not always, called for them to threaten fines or jail time rather than arrest all offenders, which made them popular among people as a social service. People knew that they probably would not be arrested or get the unwanted publicity that goes along with being arrested and going through the public courts. In this way, these officers became regulators of the community. Ordinary people would interact with them, and thereby come to trust them. As a result, these officers had many people willing to give them information on who might be a suspected drug dealer, prostitute, gambler or absentee father.

Prostitution
The primary focus of the anti-prostitution laws was to make prostitution unprofitable so that women would instead pursue legitimate ways to make money. In essence, the people who put these laws in place were attempting to save women from a life of prostitution. While that is noble, the legitimate forms of employment were few and far between; maid, secretary and factory worker were the only plentiful options, and each of those put women in a position where they were constantly subordinate to another. It is also important to note that prostitution had a much wider definition to the social purists of the time than it does now. For example, if a man bought a woman, dinner, and the woman then went home with him, that was considered prostitution. Thus, any women, and especially working-class women without social standing, who sought out men were persecuted, though not prosecuted. Seemingly innocuous behaviours, such as walking alone at night, might also get a woman arrested for prostitution. It would seem that these laws which were meant to protect women only made them more vulnerable to being told where they could go, what they could do, and when they could do it.

Sabbath laws
The Sabbath Laws were a series of laws designed to prevent people from working on the Sabbath, commonly known as Sunday, to respect the Abrahamic God's day of rest. They, like most laws enforced by the Morality Department, disproportionately affected working class people and/or favoured the upper class. One of the best examples of this was the fact that taxis used by the public to get around were not allowed to work on Sunday, but private chauffeurs of the wealthy were allowed to work. Beyond preventing many forms of work, they also prevented people from doing certain leisure activities that could be interpreted as work. Similar to the taxi driver–chauffeur contradiction, ball games for children in public on Sundays but still allowing for games of golf at private clubs. Because of this, and other contradictions, lead people to believe that these laws were put in place to prevent working class people from consorting with each other, to keep them separate and easy to manage.

Absentee Fathers
For most of their operating time, the majority of their work was finding absentee fathers from Canada, the U.S. and Great Britain, and then coercing them into paying maintenance payments. These maintenance payments would go towards supporting their wives and children. As much as this was a good service to the family the father left behind, it also re-enforced a family structure where the father was a provider and the mother was unable to support herself or her family. As attitudes towards policing among the upper ranks moved away from social management and into crime and punishment in the 1920's, it came to be that the police and social activist groups alike agreed that this work was no longer a job for the police. In 1929, the newly established Family Court system takes over the management of these payments.

First Women on the Force
Morality Officer was one of the first roles within the police force, not including secretary, that women were allowed to fulfill. In the early 1910's, they were brought in under the idea that they would be better suited to deal with young women who had been acting immorally, and that they would themselves be a moralizing influence in the Police Service. Also, the existence of policewomen was an encouragement for women to come forward with assault charges against their abusive husbands. Women would trust that if they went to a police officer who was also female, then something would be more likely to get done. Yet, the majority of their duties included arresting and searching female suspects, and interviewing female suspects and victims. As well, rather than being on the beat in dangerous parts of town, they would be searching for people, though mostly women, acting immorally, particularly in places where men and women came together. They were never tasked the same duties as their male counterparts, and so were seen more as social workers within the police force than actual members of the force. Through the 1920's, feminists argued that these policewomen were taken on by police for show more than to be actual policewomen, and interest from the upper ranks in policewomen faded along with their interest in social management, since the upper ranks saw the two as being deeply connected. Few more women were taken on until after World War II, and those that were there gained precious little ground for women in the police force.

Chemical Testing on Canadian Soldiers in WWII
Though I got some of the details wrong, the basic gist of the story is true.

According to the below sources, Canadian Forces Base (CFB) Suffield in Alberta was the site where, during WWII, Canada used mustard gas against thousands of their own soldiers so that Canada and Britain could test the effectiveness of their gas-masks (2). The soldiers were all volunteers who were enticed by an extra dollar a day and extra leave, on the condition that they didn't tell anyone what happened to them (1). There was a similar operation going on simultaneously at Porton Down, a weapons testing facility in Britain which has been operational since the Germans first used chemical weapons in WWI (2, 3).

(1) http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canadian-war-vets-exposed-to-mustard-gas-receive-compensation-1.515527

(2) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/may/06/freedomofinformation.politics

(3) http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36606510

RCR Museum Photo + 160 words
(Scroll, left) In the Monarch of the United Kingdom’s crest the words “Dieu et mon Droit” (French for “God and my Right”), reminds of the ancestral cross-over between the French and British people which takes on special meaning on the scroll of a dead Canadian soldier, Canada being the child of these two ancient monarchies. In The first lines of the scroll, all is linked to a greater sense of authority under which it should be a privilege to serve: “King and Country". The scroll then undertakes a poetic and romanticizing tone after “King and Country”, which consoles the family of the fallen soldier, and lets them know that their fallen friend was valued highly by his “King and Country”. The fallen is named at the bottom in conspicuous red: “Serjt. John Carroll/Royal Canadian Regt.”, which both allows the name to stand on its own in honour and suggests that the above may have been printed en masse and the names added later.

Beginning on the 10th of October, and lasting over two weeks, the Quebec Conference was set in motion. It was in response to the shift in political ground as Britain and the United States had come perilously close to engaging in war with each other. Therefore the overall goal of the conference was to elaborate on policies surrounding federalism, and creating a single state which were discussed previously at the Charlottetown conference around a month earlier. John A. McDonald requested that Governor Monck should invite all representatives from the 3 Maritimes provinces and those from Newfoundland to meet with the candidates who formed the United Canada to Quebec, in October, 1864. The conference was held where the Chateau Frontenac.

The 32 delegates from the Province of Canada, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island had agreed at the close of the Charlottetown Conference to meet again at Quebec City (at the Old Parliament Building) October 1864. Newfoundland also sent two observers, but did not participate directly in the proceedings. British Columbia did not participate in the conference.

The Beginnings at Charlottetown
The aforementioned Charlottetown Conference of November 1864, laid the foundations for the Quebec Conference and was a significant meeting that would determine what would be discussed in the Quebec Conference. During the Conference, the Canadians found support for the confederation, as discussions pointed towards a unified decision unite the provinces under the name of Canada. The Canada West member, John A. Macdonald, who would be highly prominent in the Quebec Conference, began to find allies that would enable him to have a more dominant and influential role in the Quebec Conference a month later. One key alliance made in the Charlottetown Conference that would transfer over to the Quebec Conference was made between the Maritime delegates and John A. Macdonald as they saw him as less abrasive and blunt than the other Canada West Official, George Brown. John A. Mcdonald appealed to the Maritime populous as he seemed a more make a friendly and a more diplomatic alliance than George Brown, and in terms of Canada East politician, George Etienne Cartier, John A. Macdonald was an anglophone, and although George Etienne Cartier was prominent at the discussions at Charlottetown, the Maritime politicians were yet to get used to the influence and power of the francophone politicians.

On the fifth and final day of the conference, it was clear that a second part of the confederation deal was on the verge of being consummated, and that the Charlottetown Conference had been making a breakthrough on the policy of Confederacy. The Maritime politicians, however, struggled to agree and accept the details of the Canadians scheme. On the 10th September, 1864, in Halifax 3 days later, they drew up plans to hold another conference in Quebec, in order to finalize the negotiations made during the last few days. They drew up motions for the Quebec Conference after the conclusion of Charlottetown, where they would focus on the confederation of British North America. They also agreed to invite a delegation from Newfoundland, as they were not involved in negotiations at Charlottetown. Therefore, the members of Charlottetown wanted to include all provinces of Canada in the negotiations at the Quebec Conference as the Charlottetown Conference had laid the foundations of discussions at the Quebec Conference. During the period between the two sessions, the members of Charlottetown prepared a list of resolutions that would be passed at the Quebec Conference, which proposed the constitution of a new union. These were going to become the 72 Resolutions.

Conference
The conference was comprised of 33 delegates from various regions of Canada. The meeting included members from Canada East-  George Etienne Cartier, Etienne-Paschal Tache as well as Thomas D’Arcy McGee. Those from Canada West included George Brown and John A. Macdonald. Members in New Brunswick who also featured were John Hamilton Gray and Samuel Leonard Tilley. Nova Scotian delegates featured Adams George Archibald and Charles Tupper. Newfoundland sent two delegates whose mere purpose was to observe proceedings and delegates from Prince Edward Island comprised of  George Coles and William Henry Pope. The two Newfoundland delegates included F.B.T Carter and Ambrose Shea, who were not government members. Overall Nova Scotia had 5 members, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island had 7 each, and the total made up all the delegates, making up all of the Maritime delegates. There were 32 delegates in total, and were given sets of calling cards, with the names and photo identification so everyone was clear with names and where certain people represented. The Conference lasted 14 days, but to some people, such as Edward Goff Penny, editor of the Montreal Herald, and an eventual senator, complained that this was too little time to conclude proceedings.

The major source of conflict at the conference was between those who favoured a "legislative union", i.e. a unitary state, such as John A. Macdonald, and those who favoured stronger provincial rights. The Conference tied in very closely with the discussions of the aforementioned Charlottetown Conference, as the topics being discussed in Quebec centred around whether the country should have a strong and single central government, or a more encompassing federal system. Representatives from the Maritimes and Canada East (now Quebec) tended to argue for provincial rights, fearing they would lose their cultural identity under a centralized unitary state. John A. Macdonald thought the failure of a weak central power was evident in the American Civil War, which was still being fought in the United States as the delegates met in Charlottetown and Quebec. The delegates eventually compromised, dividing powers between a "general" parliament and "local" provincial legislatures. They also decided to have an elected lower house, the House of Commons, and an appointed upper house, the Senate, although there was considerable debate about how many senators each province would have. The Prince Edward Island delegation called for a scheme similar to the Triple-E Senate proposal of the 1990s. Eventually, a proposed structure for the government was written out in the form of the seventy-two resolutions at the end of the conference.

Following on from the topic of the propsed division of the central government into the upper house, that would be based on regional representation and the lower house that would represent the population, this was a key topic in both the Charlottetown Conference and the Quebec Conference. This topic was discussed at Charlottetown with one examiner on the outlined that the meeting on October 24th 1864, was "debated all day with considerable warmth and ability but no agreement come to". He also outlined that "lower Canada complains that in the number proposed for her, 24, she would be unfairly represented (in the upper house), with it being proposed that upper Canada should have the same number." This discussion carried on over into the Quebec Conference in the hope that an agreement could be eventually made considering that it was not concluded at the end of the aforementioned Charlottetown Conference.

In terms of what the regions as a whole desired, it was quite overtly clear. Delegates from the Maritimes feared that a legislative union which the aforementioned John A. Macdonald was promoting, as they believed it would result in the loss of their identity as other nations would have an overbearing influence. However, the smaller Maritime colonies saw the Senate as a means of strengthening their regional representation to offset their regional weakness in the so called lower house. George Etienne Cartier represented the interests of Quebec at the conference. Similar to the Maritimes, he was more invested in the conference, although he made it abundantly clear that the province needed a strong provincial governments that would be able to protect their language, civil customs and local laws. Although he was not wholeheartedly against such political reform, he believed that Quebec should still maintain its identity.

In terms of priorities at the Conference, there were many differing agendas, especially the Maritime regions that, as mentioned earlier, saw a federalized state as beneficial to their economy and commerce. An example of this was the role of John A. Carter, a one of the Newfoundland diplomats invited to the conference, as he outlined the importance of the fisheries to the Newfoundland economy, and that a newly formed federalized state would open up a wide field of enterprise both with internal trade in Canada and within the continent of North America as a whole. However, one concern of the Maritime colonies was due to the fact that they benefited from free trade, and the aforementioned commerce of fishing for their livelihood, Canada was more concerned about industrialization in all the provinces, creating significant improvements to the Canadian economy. Such a concern was raised during the Conference as the Maritime colonies wished to maintain their stable economy. In contrast, some members from Prince Edward Island was highly skeptical of a union as advocated by John A. Macdonald, as they were concerned about the Islands autonomy if their was a confederation. The concept of particularism, whereby there was paranoia surrounding an overpowering Canada dictating Maritime policy was a salient characteristic of political thinking among numerous people in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. This demonstrated that even within the Maritimes, there were varying degrees of skepticism, with some parts more in favor than others highlighting the complexities within the Martimes. One key figure, Charles Tupper who was a politician from Nova Scotia who formed close alliances with John A. Macdonald, sympathized with the confederacy and stated that the Maritimes "could never hope to occupy a position of influence or importance except in connection with their larger sister Canada". This highlighted the varying degrees in which delegates from the Maritimes viewed the idea of confederacy.

The Result
Overall, the result was a compromise, as each province would have its own legislature and the power of government was divided up between the federal and provincial governments. It was decided that the central administrative area was to be placed in Ottawa, where the central government would reside. Delegates consolidated their previous agreement at the Charlottetown Conference, that the central government would have a lower house based on population and an upper house reflective of regional representation. The three separate regions of Ontario, Quebec and the 3 Maritime provinces would all have 24 seats in the appointment chamber. The actual overall result meant that Canada incorporated both the British Unitary system and the American federal system. 72 resolutions were drawn up by the end of the conference, maintained none of the democratic principles as demonstrated in the United States. The resolutions did not guarantee the protection for the rights of French Canadians, and excluded them extensively in other parts of the legislature.

However, the Christian faith was well protected as both Catholics and protestant minorities were granted Canada’s equality of rights and special privileges in anything involving education. Such resolutions received wide recognition and support from the colonial office. In Lower Canada, Reformers opposed the resolutions but were the only group to do so. In Nova Scotia, pressure was needed to force through legislative approval of the resolutions. Additionally, the federal government were given considerable power over the provinces. This was demonstrated under the power of dis-allowance, which gave the federal government the ability to reject provincial laws of which they did not approve. Other regions were considered as a result of the conference, including Newfoundland, British Colombia and the “North West Territory”, to eventually enter Canada on equal terms at a later date. Although the Quebec Conference changed the political influence in Canada considerably, the British crown would maintain its position as the head of the government and the protector and head of executive authority.

The 72 Resolutions
The Resolutions were highly comprehensive and within the first few resolutions, it was outlined that the general government would ensure that the intercolonial railway would be completed from Riviere-du-Loup, through New Brunswick and end up at Truro in Nova Scotia. The delegates from Nova Scotia also admitted that the building of this railway with the full financial backing of the central government was key in swaying the Maritimes decision to back a centralized government. The arrangements proposed by Alexander Galt in terms of finance, predominantly focussing on existing debts of various debts owed by certain colonies should be divided and shared. Some of the final resolutions outline that her majesty the Queen possess considerable power over the course of proceedings as Resolution 71 underlined that the Queen was to be solicited to determine the rank and name of the federated provinces. The 60th Resolution outlined that the central government would tackle the debts of all the provinces and aid the payments of all those involved. What was eventually enacted was the policy which resulted in each province being compensated by a federal transfer resulting in 80 cents per head.

The Quebec Resolutions received increasing support from the colonial office, with the only opposing group being the Lower Canadian Reformers who had not been drafted into the coalition. In both Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, considerable pressure was needed to formulate and pass through legislative approval. Prince Edward Island did not join the newly formed unified Canada until around 1873. The 72 Resolutions significantly influenced the British North America Act, as will be discussed in the next section, and little was altered or changed to the resolutions when enacted in London.

The British North America Act of 1867 and Quebec Conference's Legacy
The BNA (British North America) act received royal acceptance on the 28th March 1867 by Queen Victoria, and by the 22nd May all three provinces- Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Canada. Upper and Lower Canada were to be split into Ontario (upper Canada) and Quebec (lower Canada). All of these provinces were to be unified by the 1st July, 1867, 3 years after the agreement was made at the Quebec Conference. In the Act, it is clearly stated that 'not being more then 6 months of passing this act, the provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick shall form and be one dominion under the name of Canada.' It went onto outline that 'Canada shall be divided into four provinces, named Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.' However, although Canada was unified under the British North America Act, the act contained no general declaration or recognition of the fact that Canada was a bilingual and bicultural nation. Therefore, the official language of the newly unified Canada was the language of the Crown, with no recognition of the language of French in the francophone region of Quebec. Overall, the British North America Act consolidated the 72 Resolutions as passed by the Quebec Conference, but the British North American Act introduced into the Canadian Government a new factor, the sovereignty of the British Crown.

Canada

 * George Brown
 * Alexander Campbell
 * George-Étienne Cartier
 * Jean-Charles Chapais
 * James Cockburn
 * Alexander Tilloch Galt
 * Hector-Louis Langevin
 * John A. Macdonald
 * William McDougall
 * Thomas D'Arcy McGee
 * Oliver Mowat
 * Étienne-Paschal Taché

New Brunswick

 * Edward Barron Chandler
 * Charles Fisher
 * John Hamilton Gray
 * John Mercer Johnson
 * Peter Mitchell
 * William H. Steeves
 * Samuel Leonard Tilley

Nova Scotia

 * Adams George Archibald
 * Robert B. Dickey
 * William Alexander Henry
 * Jonathan McCully
 * Charles Tupper
 * John William Ritchie
 * Joseph Howe

Prince Edward Island

 * George Coles
 * John Hamilton Gray
 * Thomas Heath Haviland
 * Andrew Archibald Macdonald
 * Edward Palmer
 * William Henry Pope
 * Edward Whelan

Newfoundland (observers)

 * Frederic Bowker Terrington Carter
 * Ambrose Shea

Article Evaluation
The Wikipedia article on Joseph Howe provides a detailed summary of his life. The article begins with a brief summary of the most significant information on Joseph Howe referencing his early life, his legal life, his political life and his confederation opinions. This information is explored in more detail in sections throughout the article. Each paragraph contains a lot of detail with the exception of the "Poetry " and "Railway" paragraph. There are only two sentences of information in both sections and there are no references to support the claims in the sentences. To improve this, more detail should be included in both sections with proper references.

Howe's political career is covered extensively offering the reader a detailed summary without using wordy language or including irrelevant information.

The "Confederation debate" section is successful in providing a wide variety of information regarding Joseph Howe's opinions. Instead of only focusing on his anti-Confederation beliefs and campaigning, the article also includes information on what Howe's political life was like after Confederation. Only the facts are stated on why Howe did not want Confederation and there are no attempts to persuade the reader into having bias towards Confederation.

The "Family" section should be located near the beginning of the article. Since the article is mostly in chronological order, it would make more sense for this information to be located after "Early Life" instead of being the last paragraph of the article.

A problem with this article is the lack of references used within the paragraphs. The first paragraph summarizing Howe's life has the most references (only 4). The following paragraphs have very little references and two of the paragraphs, Political career and Confederation debate, have zero references! In the references section it is clear that many different sources were used to write this article. This helps the article have more breadth and not be overrepresented by one scholar. These sources should be cited more in the text to back up the facts being stated.

The only link in this article that does not work is the John C. Halliburton hyperlink. The other links properly direct the reader to other Wikipedia articles on the subject clicked.

This article is currently a part of many WikiProjects including WikiProject Biography / Politics and Government, WikiProject Canada / Nova Scotia / Politicians, WikiProject Journalism and WikiProject Politics.

Overall this article provides an informative introduction into the life of Joseph Howe. The article is easy to follow and mentions important facts about his life. The only problem with this article is the lack of scholarly references backing up the facts that are being stated. There is also a lack of information in the "Poetry" and "Railway" paragraphs.

Potential Article Topics
Battle of Ortona - Article currently has some information about the background and battle information. I think I could add more meat to the article using scholarly sources to dive deeper into the who, what, why, how of the campaign. There is also a lot of controversy in the articles talk page about the information that should be included in the article.

Juno Beach - The D-Day article has a lot of information, however there are only two small paragraphs regarding the Canadians landing on Juno beach.

Liberation Day (Netherlands) - There are only two short paragraphs regarding the liberations, there are no sub headings just two paragraphs that provide a small summary. I found a book in Western database called On to Victory: the Canadian liberation of the Netherlands, March 23-May 5, 1945 by Mark, Zuehlke which would allow me to contribute heavily to the article.

Operation Block Buster - There is only one paragraph of information regarding the liberation of the Netherlands. I'm sure I could find lots of resources to add to this article. I also noticed the talk page talks about tulips and the tulip festival but it has not been added to the article, which I could do as well.

Draft Article Notes
I would be to be able to add relevant, informative, interesting information regarding how the Netherlands were liberated, more specifically, how Canada played a role in the liberation

- Lt. Gen. Charles Foulkes is an important figure in the negotiations of German surrender

- I want to talk about the Royal Regiment of Canada

- Specific focus on Canada's contribution to the liberation and surrender of the Germans

- How the liberation of the Netherlands has been involved with Canadian Identity? Warrior Nation?

- Perhaps more info on How Canada is remembered in the Netherlands

- monograph ?

- exhibit pics

"In Memoriam: Christine Mohrmann." Vigiliae Christianae 42, no. 4 (1988). http://www.jstor.org.proxy1.lib.uwo.ca/stable/1584278. <-- not a good source

Touw, H. C. "The Resistance of the Netherlands Churches." The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 245 (1946): 149-61. http://www.jstor.org.proxy1.lib.uwo.ca/stable/1024815.

Goddard, Lance. Canada and the Liberation of the Netherlands, may 1945. Toronto, ON: Dundurn Group, 2005.

Zuehlke, Mark. On to Victory: The Canadian Liberation of the Netherlands, March 23-may 5, 1945. Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 2010.

Pearson, Frederic S. The Weak State in International Crisis: The Case of the Netherlands in the German Invasion Crisis of 1939-40. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1981.

Canada's Rhineland Campaign
The Allies had seen significant success freeing occupied countries since the Normandy landings. The Allies next goal was a full out offensive over the Rhine river. If this offensive was successful, it would lead to defeating Germany. The Canadians had the task of liberating the Netherlands. General Crerar is credited with commanding the largest formation ever lead by a Canadian officer. The final stage of the Rhineland campaign for the Allies was to meet at the town of Wesel.

There were many tasks given to the Canadians that they needed to complete before reaching Wesel. The main objectives included clearing the Reichwald forest and breaking the Siegfried line. The combination of the winter that had recently passed and the mild weather during the campaign, created muddy, wet terrain. This meant that whenever the Canadians needed to advance they did not have mobile units to protect them, because the ground was to hard on the vehicles.

Although the Rhineland campaign tested the Canadian army, the Canadians were successful in every operation they embarked on. The Germans blew up the bridges to try and disable Canadian transportation into Wesel and then retreated to the eastern bank of the Rhine. Thus, Canada was successfully able to capture the west bank, resulting in an end to the Rhineland campaign.

Among the Allied death toll, approximately 5304 Canadian lives were lost during the Rhineland campaign into the Netherlands. General Dwight D. Eisenhower (who late became President) acknowledged the success of the Canadians in a letter stating, “It speaks volumes for your skill and determination and the valour of your soldiers, that you carried it through to a successful conclusion. ”

Canada's Final Phase
With the success of the Rhineland campaign empowering the Canadian army, the reception of the Canadians from the Dutch population only strengthened the morale of the soldiers. Although the Rhineland campaign was a success, there were still many German soldiers occupying Dutch provinces. The Dutch launched acts of resistance to help the Canadians end the German occupation of their provinces. Churches throughout the Netherlands openly protested and resisted the German occupation while they were being occupied up until they were liberated. In a final attempt to fight back, the Germans had snipers on top of buildings, machine gun nests hidden in the cities, and SS soldiers dressed up as Dutch civilians. The Canadian army pushed the Germans back to the Wageningen border by April 28th. Most of the remaining German soldiers alive were professional soldiers who did not want to see anymore civilian casualties. Thus, an unofficial truce was declared and negations of peace began.

May 4-5 1945
On 5 May 1945 the Canadian General Charles Foulkes and the German Commander-in-Chief Johannes Blaskowitz finalized an agreement that resulted in the Germans accepting capture, thus ending the fighting and enabling support and supplies to be delivered throughout the Netherlands.

The Canadian army did not question Foulkes ability to handle himself with the negotiations. He was known for being a reliable tactician, and for taking responsibility for the administrational side of warfare. Foulkes made his way through the military rankings with impressive speed throughout the earlier years of World War II (147). The Canadian Corps Chief of Staff George Kitching has been quoted saying he is “impressed with Foulkes military decisions. ”  Refer to Charles Foulkes (Canadian Army general) for more information on him.

Before Foulkes met with Blaskowitz, he discussed terms of the surrender with Generalleutnant Paul Reichelt, who was Blaskowitz Chief of Staff. This discussion took place May 4, 1945. When the discussion begun, Reichelt, speaking on behalf of Blaskowitz tried to change the terms of the agreement by only allowing a 10-mile passage for Canadians to transport supplies into Western Holland. There was no mention of a German surrender. Foulkes then reminded Reichelt that the allies have them surrounded. It was revealed to Foulkes that the Germans in the Netherlands did not want to surrender out of fear of being prisoners sent to Russia. This term was mitigated with Foulkes stating he “had no intention of putting the German army into Russia ”. When the meeting concluded, Foulkes left Reichelt with his terms of a “truce across the entire frontage where the Canadian Corps and Germans faced each other. ”  Foulkes called the negotiations a “gentlemen’s agreement rather then a written truce. ” This was because if a truce was declared, the Canadians and Germans would be living in close proximity while the Canadians gave supplies to civilians.

The time between May 4 and 5 felt like forever for the Canadian troops. Because of the negotiations, an unofficial truce had been declared on both sides until the truce was agreed upon the following day. Both Canadians and Germans had been informed of the harsh consequences for breaking the unofficial peace, but soldiers on both sides still feared fighting would start any moment. The Royal Canadian Army Service Corps was the first to cross into the German lines during the unofficial truce. White flags hung from the trucks and the Canadians had weapons hidden in case of an attack. Food was continuously transported into Holland by the Canadians during the unofficial peace, and long after the war was over.

On May 5 1945, the Germans accepted the truce agreement knowing they would not end up as prisoners in Russia. Foulkes accompanied by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, met with Blaskowitz at the Hotel de Wereld in Wageningen. They sat at a table surrounded by debris and rubble from the fighting that had taken place days earlier. Photographers, the press, and the media came out of hiding to cover this truce meeting. Blaskowitz conducted himself professionally and did not question a single clause that Foulkes read out. The main terms of the truce agreement were as follows: “Germans would retain command of their troops and be responsible for maintenance. All units were to remain where they were. German police would come under military command, and all personnel guarding concentration camps and other detention centers arrested. ”

German Resistance
Although the truce had been declared and war seemed to be over, there was still some resistance in the Netherlands. The 34th SS surrendered to the Canadians on May 10, 5 days after the truce had been declared. German resistance was still a problem until around the end of June 1945.

Canadian Legacy in the Netherlands
In the immediate weeks following the liberation of the Netherlands, there were parties, parades and other joyous occasions celebrating the end of the Nazi occupation. The Dutch learned a whole new level of gratitude after learning the Canadians chose to help liberate them, especially at such a high cost. There was a boom in war brides between Canadian soldiers and Dutch women, and around 41 351 of these war brides moved to Canada after the end of the war. Marriage and family bonds between Canada and the Netherlands only strengthened these nations relationship. Moreover, the relationship between Canada and the Netherlands formed from their roles as liberator and liberated, respectively. Lance Goddard, author of Canada and the Liberation of the Netherlands, states that “nothing matched the emotional outpouring that resulted from the liberation pf the Netherlands. ”  Although Canada was not the only nation to help with the liberation, they were the first to arrive and remained stationed there the longest.

In contrast to the excitant both nations felt, there was still a war raging and a country in ruins. Canadians contributed a significant amount of effort into helping the Netherlands recover from their Nazi occupation. Bridges were rebuilt that had been bombed and the Canadians also helped to clear mines out of the major cities.

According to Mark Zuehlke, author of On to Victory, “Monuments commemorating Canada’s role in liberating specific communities in the Netherlands are common coin. "  The town of Diever even modified their coat of arms into including the maple leaf.   Schools in the Netherlands include information about Canada and the role the country played in their liberation.   The gratefulness of the Dutch is illustrated through their Canadian War cemeteries that acknowledge the sacrifice made by Canadians who died fighting for freedom.

RCR Museum
First of all this is a great test to learn how to insert an image into Wikipedia because prior to this, I had no idea! Secondly, I wanted to compare the relationship between Canadians liberating the Netherlands and Chapter 6.10 from Belshaw. The key points that Belshaw talks about are how Canada tried to show that is was separate from Britain and how the country would successfully participate in WWII. This is evident when Ottawa delayed Canada's involvement in WWII for four days. Although Belshaw says that Canada's involvement was small in the beginning, this changed at the end of the war when Canada was tasked with liberating the Netherlands. Comparisons can be made between Canada's first attempt at being recognized as an independent Nation at the start of the war to Canada liberating the Netherlands at the end of the war and being recognized by the United States, Britain and obviously the Netherlands for their success.

= Draft: Ontario Temperance Act =

Government Legislation and Public Drinking
Following the Ontario Temperance Act Ontario lobbied for liquor control instead of absolute temperance, enacting the Liquor Control Act of 1927, replacing the Ontario Temperance Act after 9 years of Prohibition. For many Canadian provinces, Prohibition was a reaction to wartime resource scarcity enacted by the Dominion government. Due to this wartime reaction, several provinces rescinded prohibition as soon as possible. Quebec allowed sales of alcoholic beverages in 1919, and reintroduced public drinking in 1921, British Columbia and Yukon Territory by 1921, Manitoba in 1923, Alberta in 1924, and Saskatchewan in 1925 all manage to implement public drinking management faster than Ontario’s Liquor Control Act of 1927. Although it was forbidden to drink regular-strength beer in public for another 7 years under the Liquor Control Act (LCA) of 1927, it remained legal to drink in a loosely defined "private dwelling place" as "any building or part of a building or tent where a person resides,"

The Board of License Commissioners (BLC) was created in 1915 to centralize liquor law authority and precedes the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO) during the decade of Prohibition prior to LCBO’s creation. The BLC made sure to enforce the Ontario Temperance Act and manage the distribution of liquor for medical and industrial needs. To enforce the Ontario Temperance Act, the BLC was in charge of supervising the manufacture and sale of liquor and inspection and licensing of hotels. The BLC used this authority to create a new label for accommodation enterprise: the Standard Hotel. The Standard Hotel must meet BLC guidelines on number of rooms, services provided and quality of structure. For accommodation enterprises that are granted the Standard Hotel license, it was permitted to have extra lucrative services such as selling tobacco or operating restaurants without further fees imposed by the BLC. Bureaucratization of liquor control in the 1930s surrounding the Liquor Control Act (LCA) of 1927 and 1934 was surrounded by both political and moral issues. On one hand, being more strict with liquor control would appease the temperance movement in Ontario but could promote the rise of a liquor black market, and being more passive in liquor legislation could cause greater social chaos and give the temperance movement more evidence to empower themselves. Historians have differing views on the purpose of liquor control legislation, some argue it is for the need to control deviants, others argue that liquor control was an example of moral regulation through legislation to control a "problematic substance", or an attempt to facilitate temperance and balance the need for drinking.

Following the enactment of the LCA of 1934, the government confined public drinking to hotels based on a long-standing relationship between drinking places and living space. This relationship is a result of government legislation such as the “Act to Amend the Liquor License Laws,” of 1906 which adds restrictions to the number of public drinking spaces permitted. This 1906 legislation defined the “tavern” as “an hotel, inn or other public house of entertainment kept for the purpose of providing refreshment and accommodation”. In addition to this, an “Act to Amend the Liquor License Laws,” of 1909 designated that no liquor license would be given to any tavern or similar enterprise without proper accommodation, thus a tavern without rooms for rent would not necessarily receive such a license. These sets of pre-Temperance legislation created a strong connection between hotel beverage rooms and drinking culture. In a bid to profit on the new rules created by the LCBO regarding alcoholic beverages, over one thousand proprietors of hotels sent in applications to the LCBO to obtain beer authority or beer and wine authority. Although beverage rooms were met with much popularity before the LCA (1934), the LCA (1934) was restrictive and the LCBO included a wide variety of regulations to govern many aspects of hotel operation; singing, dancing, and playing or listening to music was prohibited in hotel beverage rooms. The LCBO, through the enactment of the LCA, built cultural authority wherein a new attitude of public responsibility and respect was cultivated.

RCR Museum Artifact:
This cross marks the grave site of 13 members of the 1st Canadian Infantry Battalion who died during the first day of the Vimy Ridge battle on April 9th, 1917. This artifact represents the Canadian sacrifice upon being called for war by the British, and the development of Canadian nationalism and self-identity. In Chapter 6.3, Belshaw describes the incredible heroism of the combined strength of the Canadian Expeditionary Force to accomplish a next to impossible task: the siege of Vimy Ridge under Central Powers bombardment. This cross supports Belshaw's view of developing Canadian self-identity and separation from British influence because the cross was kept in France, until its unknown return to London Ontario signifying the separation of identity from British subjects to a unique and identifiable nation. The cross also represents the misconception of war and how it would be fought. The mortality rates of the Great War are terrifyingly high, and this cross reminds us of this fact. Belshaw points out that many politicians when advocating for war did not believe it could be so drawn-out, or even so gruesome. Facing the first day of the Vimy Ridge battle, these 13 members of the 1st Canadian Infantry Battalion gave their lives so that a the greater context of an abstract war could be realized, perhaps without knowing it would be so terrifying.

Article Evaluation: Quebec Conference, 1864
This Wikipedia page on the Quebec Conference, 1864 provided a brief but detailed summary of what the conference was about. All the information there is relevant and presented in a non-biased way.

However, I feel as though the article could be expanded and certain points could be explained in further detail to give the readers a greater understanding and give more context to what they are reading. For example, the article states that British Columbia did not participate in the conference but provides no further information or links to other articles as to why they did not participate.

This happens multiple times throughout the article where facts about the conference are accurately stated however I feel as if there is a disconnect between the article and the reader and the reader is left guessing as to why events happened as there is no explanation provided it is just stated. I feel as if this is a good article to give someone a basic understanding of what happened in the Quebec Conference given that they already have some previous knowledge in the subject.

For someone with no knowledge on the Quebec Conference of 1864 I believe this could be a challenging article as people, places and terms are mentioned that are not common knowledge.

I think the viewpoints in the article were not equally written about, I believe that one viewpoint was overrepresented while the other was underrepresented. I believe the article more heavily talked about those who favoured a unitary state rather than those who opposed and wished for stronger provincial rights. The article mainly focuses on the unitary state while mentionning Sir John A. Macdonald while only writing two sentences about those who wished for stronger provincial rights and not providing a notable person who supported this cause until alluding to them later in the article.

The conclusion gave a clear and concise understanding of the final outcome of the conference. It provided a lot of useful information such as dates, places, people and other events that helped pull the whole article together and referring back to points previously talked about.

The Citations all were working and deemed reliable sources to gather information from as well. It is part of WikiProject Canada. and a B-Class on the quality scale with a mild importance on the importance scale.

What I found interesting in the "Talk" section was that someone commented something similar to the downsides that I wrote about in this evaluation in that the article gives a good basic summary but does not provide enough information in some aspects of the article. The article mentions points briefly that are not general knowledge to an average person however they do not go into further detail on it so additional research would have to be done.

Overall I enjoyed reading this article and learning more about the Quebec Conference of 1864 but would have to say that there is many opportunities of expansion in the article.

Potential Article Topics
Quebec nationalism - expand on the section 1840’s-1950’s as the book I did my review on, "The Empire Within" specifically explores Quebec in the 1960’s while paying attention to the huge movement of the decolonization ideology that is not even mentioned in this wikipedia article. Also tension between the Francophones and Anglophones are not mentioned as well. I can also touch on what life was like for Quebec Francophones and aboriginal peoples under the extremely Anglicized regime they were under in their own province.

Québécois people - this is a very short article, I can expand on Quebecois people and in particular their struggles throughout the 1960's through the book I read, " The Empire Within."

Draft Article
Sections are added to the original Wikipedia Page of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_nationalism

Quebec Nationalism
Quebec Nationalism was first known as French Canadian Nationalism. It would not be until the age of the Quiet Revolution, that the word Quebec Nationalism, and Québécois people, would replace the longstanding previously used word French Canadian. French Canadian’s roots are derived from the people who were born here in Canada with parents of French descent. The term would later change in the 1960’s and stick to what it is known today as, Quebec Nationalism.

New France
This settlement made up of 7 regions spanned far and wide, reaching from the Maritimes to the Rockies and from the Hudson Bay to the Gulf of Mexico. Although this landscape would be vast, Canada would be at it’s core. The colonists of New France after the 17th century learned how to adapt to their new land that was accompanied by the Native People’s, cold climate and new transportation methods. The French immersed themselves into their new identities of being Canadian, adopting accents and making up new legends and stories. During this time the identity of Canada was split between 95 percent of the settlers being Francophones and the other 5 percent being Anglophones. However, this would prove to be problematic. The Francophones were Catholic and poor whilst the Anglophones were Protestant and wealthy. This imbalance of socio-economic status and all of the repercussions that came along with it for the would spark a feud between the Francophones and Anglophones that still remains.

1950’s
During the 1950’s the ideology of Nationalism swept across the province with different groups being for and against the idea. A large group of people who declared themselves anti-nationalists were Quebec’s upper class. Nationalism at this time meant restoring the old regime and going back to the concept of a French-Canadian nation built upon Catholicism as it was in the past. It also represented tradition, and in that, not being influenced by the outside world but rather staying within their own borders without room for exploration. However, in the 1960’s a new ideology would emerge along with a Revolution that would question the old ways.

1960’s
Nationalism in the 1960’s represented a completely new mantra unlike the aged significance placed upon it in the 1950’s. A main difference was the secularization of the Catholic Church, practiced by most French Canadians from the province itself. The shift gained the province its own independence. Another change of nationalism in the 1960’s was the new openness the province now had towards the outside world. The province sought out new ideas and concepts on a global scale rather than shutting themselves in like what was done a decade ago.

The 1960’s in Quebec was a period of the Quiet Revolution, the Liberal Party of Canada the election of the Parti Québécois, a site of a thriving economy and the beginning of a variety of independent movements. During this time Quebec was a place of enlightenment, there were changes in their society, values, and economy. This was a time of radical thinking, culture and ideologies, one ideology would finally emerge after centuries of dormancy. It was also at this time that the tension between the Francophones and Anglophones was particularly high do to the new ideology of decolonization. Quebec nationalism for the Francophones was on the rise at this time not only within the province but on a global scale as well. Quebec nationalism in the 1960’s stemmed from the ideology of decolonization and a new type of nationalism took the  province by storm being based off ideas that were happening on a global scale. There were many issues that the province had during this time do to the imbalance between the Francophones and Anglophones on a variety of levels. Even though the Francophones outnumbered the Anglophones the Francophones were still seen as a minority. Action took place and the people who called Quebec their home being oppressed. This oppression however dated further back than just the 1960’s. The province has a history of colonization and conquest that is complex and multi layered. The past history of this province can be seen in city’s landscape marked with a variety of memoir commemorating the overtaking powers. The province’s Francophones as well as ethic and racial minority groups did not have any power, they were living in the poorest parts of cities. It was hard for these groups to progress in their careers or climb the socio-economic ladder. For Francophones it was difficult because success was geared towards the English speaker and prestigious institutions were English speaking and devalued the culture and language of the French. Avocation of the new form of nationalism was used to address the drastic conditions in the work place as well as living conditions. This was most apparent between the Francophones who believed in the new 1960’s idea of nationalism and the predominantly English anti-nationalists. The goal of the new society was to overcome injustices for minority groups in everyday life. This sparked a number of movements that were mainly seen in working-class neighbourhoods which gained publicity when journals, conferences and advocates fed into this movement. A movement of a new Quebec with a new meaning behind the word Nationalism that would continue to change and progress overtime with the 1960’s being the start of the this change.

Present Day Nationalism
A discrepancy in nationalism today and what it means to Quebecers will be different based on the individual. Nationalism today is more open that what it has been in the past in a multitude of ways. There is not as big of a divide of what it means to be a nationalist in Quebec as seen in past years. A common theme that can be seen is the patriotism Quebecois have towards their province and their country. They are still very patriotic and many identify as a Quebecer first and a Canadian second.

Canadian RCR Museum
The photo of this female United Nations Officer is to represent the evolution of opportunities given to women explained throughout chapter six in Belshaw’s book. Specifically in 6.2  when Robert Borden became prime minister, there was a lack of evidence to show that he was a supporter of women’s suffrage. However, his wife Laura Bond was a suffragette and even President of the Local Council of Women of Halifax. The first new change in women’s rights that Borden enacted was their ability to vote. Although they were only allowed to do this under particular circumstances, it was a step forward for women’s rights. However, women were wanting more than just the right to vote and in the 19th century they fought for the legal right to own land, the end of alcohol sales and the start of female enfranchisement. Women were finally making a difference and seeing results for their actions. During the time of the first World War women got to take on a new role as workers in factories instead of fulfilling their traditional maternal practices. By the time of the second World War, women were ready to return to the factories with the encouragement of “Rosie the Riveter.” Although in the 1920’s, women were helping the war from home by working in factories, there was finally a shift for opportunities for women to serve on the front in the 1940’s. By 1944, 21, 600 women signed on for the Canadian Women’s Army Corps, 23000 joined the RCAF (Women’s division) and the Women’s Royal Canadian Naval Service  and over 5000 served as nurses. Women were finally able to fight for their country; their progress had come a long way from when they were first just allowed a restricted opportunity to vote. The progression of women’s rights continues to this day providing women with all kinds of opportunities such as in the military and being given the opportunity to be a female United Nations officer such as the female pictured in the photo.

Article Evaluation: Quebec Conference, 1864
This Wikipedia page on the Quebec Conference, 1864 provided a brief but detailed summary of what the conference was about. All the information there is relevant and presented in a non-biased way.

However, I feel as though the article could be expanded and certain points could be explained in further detail to give the readers a greater understanding and give more context to what they are reading. For example, the article states that British Columbia did not participate in the conference but provides no further information or links to other articles as to why they did not participate.

This happens multiple times throughout the article where facts about the conference are accurately stated however I feel as if there is a disconnect between the article and the reader and the reader is left guessing as to why events happened as there is no explanation provided it is just stated. I feel as if this is a good article to give someone a basic understanding of what happened in the Quebec Conference given that they already have some previous knowledge in the subject.

For someone with no knowledge on the Quebec Conference of 1864 I believe this could be a challenging article as people, places and terms are mentioned that are not common knowledge.

I think the viewpoints in the article were not equally written about, I believe that one viewpoint was overrepresented while the other was underrepresented. I believe the article more heavily talked about those who favoured a unitary state rather than those who opposed and wished for stronger provincial rights. The article mainly focuses on the unitary state while mentionning Sir John A. Macdonald while only writing two sentences about those who wished for stronger provincial rights and not providing a notable person who supported this cause until alluding to them later in the article.

The conclusion gave a clear and concise understanding of the final outcome of the conference. It provided a lot of useful information such as dates, places, people and other events that helped pull the whole article together and referring back to points previously talked about.

The Citations all were working and deemed reliable sources to gather information from as well. It is part of WikiProject Canada. and a B-Class on the quality scale with a mild importance on the importance scale.

What I found interesting in the "Talk" section was that someone commented something similar to the downsides that I wrote about in this evaluation in that the article gives a good basic summary but does not provide enough information in some aspects of the article. The article mentions points briefly that are not general knowledge to an average person however they do not go into further detail on it so additional research would have to be done.

Overall I enjoyed reading this article and learning more about the Quebec Conference of 1864 but would have to say that there is many opportunities of expansion in the article.

Potential Article Topics
Quebec nationalism - expand on the section 1840’s-1950’s as the book I did my review on, "The Empire Within" specifically explores Quebec in the 1960’s while paying attention to the huge movement of the decolonization ideology that is not even mentioned in this wikipedia article. Also tension between the Francophones and Anglophones are not mentioned as well. I can also touch on what life was like for Quebec Francophones and aboriginal peoples under the extremely Anglicized regime they were under in their own province.

Québécois people - this is a very short article, I can expand on Quebecois people and in particular their struggles throughout the 1960's through the book I read, " The Empire Within."

Draft Article
Sections are added to the original Wikipedia Page of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_nationalism

Quebec Nationalism
Quebec Nationalism was first known as French Canadian Nationalism. It would not be until the age of the Quiet Revolution, that the word Quebec Nationalism, and Québécois people, would replace the longstanding previously used word French Canadian. French Canadian’s roots are derived from the people who were born here in Canada with parents of French descent. The term would later change in the 1960’s and stick to what it is known today as, Quebec Nationalism.

New France
This settlement made up of 7 regions spanned far and wide, reaching from the Maritimes to the Rockies and from the Hudson Bay to the Gulf of Mexico. Although this landscape would be vast, Canada would be at it’s core. The colonists of New France after the 17th century learned how to adapt to their new land that was accompanied by the Native People’s, cold climate and new transportation methods. The French immersed themselves into their new identities of being Canadian, adopting accents and making up new legends and stories. During this time the identity of Canada was split between 95 percent of the settlers being Francophones and the other 5 percent being Anglophones. However, this would prove to be problematic. The Francophones were Catholic and poor whilst the Anglophones were Protestant and wealthy. This imbalance of socio-economic status and all of the repercussions that came along with it for the would spark a feud between the Francophones and Anglophones that still remains.

1950’s
During the 1950’s the ideology of Nationalism swept across the province with different groups being for and against the idea. A large group of people who declared themselves anti-nationalists were Quebec’s upper class. Nationalism at this time meant restoring the old regime and going back to the concept of a French-Canadian nation built upon Catholicism as it was in the past. It also represented tradition, and in that, not being influenced by the outside world but rather staying within their own borders without room for exploration. However, in the 1960’s a new ideology would emerge along with a Revolution that would question the old ways.

1960’s
Nationalism in the 1960’s represented a completely new mantra unlike the aged significance placed upon it in the 1950’s. A main difference was the secularization of the Catholic Church, practiced by most French Canadians from the province itself. The shift gained the province its own independence. Another change of nationalism in the 1960’s was the new openness the province now had towards the outside world. The province sought out new ideas and concepts on a global scale rather than shutting themselves in like what was done a decade ago.

The 1960’s in Quebec was a period of the Quiet Revolution, the Liberal Party of Canada the election of the Parti Québécois, a site of a thriving economy and the beginning of a variety of independent movements. During this time Quebec was a place of enlightenment, there were changes in their society, values, and economy. This was a time of radical thinking, culture and ideologies, one ideology would finally emerge after centuries of dormancy. It was also at this time that the tension between the Francophones and Anglophones was particularly high do to the new ideology of decolonization. Quebec nationalism for the Francophones was on the rise at this time not only within the province but on a global scale as well. Quebec nationalism in the 1960’s stemmed from the ideology of decolonization and a new type of nationalism took the  province by storm being based off ideas that were happening on a global scale. There were many issues that the province had during this time do to the imbalance between the Francophones and Anglophones on a variety of levels. Even though the Francophones outnumbered the Anglophones the Francophones were still seen as a minority. Action took place and the people who called Quebec their home being oppressed. This oppression however dated further back than just the 1960’s. The province has a history of colonization and conquest that is complex and multi layered. The past history of this province can be seen in city’s landscape marked with a variety of memoir commemorating the overtaking powers. The province’s Francophones as well as ethic and racial minority groups did not have any power, they were living in the poorest parts of cities. It was hard for these groups to progress in their careers or climb the socio-economic ladder. For Francophones it was difficult because success was geared towards the English speaker and prestigious institutions were English speaking and devalued the culture and language of the French. Avocation of the new form of nationalism was used to address the drastic conditions in the work place as well as living conditions. This was most apparent between the Francophones who believed in the new 1960’s idea of nationalism and the predominantly English anti-nationalists. The goal of the new society was to overcome injustices for minority groups in everyday life. This sparked a number of movements that were mainly seen in working-class neighbourhoods which gained publicity when journals, conferences and advocates fed into this movement. A movement of a new Quebec with a new meaning behind the word Nationalism that would continue to change and progress overtime with the 1960’s being the start of the this change.

Present Day Nationalism
A discrepancy in nationalism today and what it means to Quebecers will be different based on the individual. Nationalism today is more open that what it has been in the past in a multitude of ways. There is not as big of a divide of what it means to be a nationalist in Quebec as seen in past years. A common theme that can be seen is the patriotism Quebecois have towards their province and their country. They are still very patriotic and many identify as a Quebecer first and a Canadian second.

Canadian RCR Museum
The photo of this female United Nations Officer is to represent the evolution of opportunities given to women explained throughout chapter six in Belshaw’s book. Specifically in 6.2  when Robert Borden became prime minister, there was a lack of evidence to show that he was a supporter of women’s suffrage. However, his wife Laura Bond was a suffragette and even President of the Local Council of Women of Halifax. The first new change in women’s rights that Borden enacted was their ability to vote. Although they were only allowed to do this under particular circumstances, it was a step forward for women’s rights. However, women were wanting more than just the right to vote and in the 19th century they fought for the legal right to own land, the end of alcohol sales and the start of female enfranchisement. Women were finally making a difference and seeing results for their actions. During the time of the first World War women got to take on a new role as workers in factories instead of fulfilling their traditional maternal practices. By the time of the second World War, women were ready to return to the factories with the encouragement of “Rosie the Riveter.” Although in the 1920’s, women were helping the war from home by working in factories, there was finally a shift for opportunities for women to serve on the front in the 1940’s. By 1944, 21, 600 women signed on for the Canadian Women’s Army Corps, 23000 joined the RCAF (Women’s division) and the Women’s Royal Canadian Naval Service  and over 5000 served as nurses. Women were finally able to fight for their country; their progress had come a long way from when they were first just allowed a restricted opportunity to vote. The progression of women’s rights continues to this day providing women with all kinds of opportunities such as in the military and being given the opportunity to be a female United Nations officer such as the female pictured in the photo.