User talk:Fralambert

--Merovingian (t) (c) (e) 05:25, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Saguenay population...
I just saw that you edited Saguenay, Quebec infobox. Do you have any source for those numbers? I'm asking because I'm not sure how the "urban" and "metro" area are defined (especially since the "urban" population adds up to less than the Chicoutimi and Jonquière populations, not even counting La Baie).--Boffob (talk) 01:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Gatineau Park
Voir http://www.gatineauparc.ca/home_en.html pour documents relatifs au parc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoneacres (talk • contribs) 02:29, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

fr.wiki
Do you have an account on fr.wiki? --MaxAMSC (talk) 01:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oui, ici. Mais ne faites pas plus de faux-nez.Jasper Deng (talk) 05:16, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Je ne pensais pas à avoir à répondre à ce genre de truc, surtout qu'il y a un lien direct vers ma page fr. (Il qu'il s'agit aussi de mon compte global.) --Fralambert (talk) 12:45, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Vérificateur d'adresses IP pour MaxAMSC (CheckUser for MaxAMSC)
Français (fr-1): Il a dit-moi ces comptes Teachdude et fr:User:Teacupholder ne sont pas ses fauz-nez, mais son collègue. Je voudrais une vérificateur d'adresses IP sur frwiki pour MaxAMSC, mais je ne sais pas très bonne comment j'irais faire une demande. English (en-N): He has told me that the accounts Teachdude and fr:User:Teacupholder are not his sock puppets, but his colleague's. I'd like a CheckUser on frwiki for MaxAMSC, but I don't know very well how I'd make a demand.Jasper Deng (talk) 03:28, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Apparently they already done a IP CheckUser and it was positive . I hope I help you. --Fralambert (talk) 23:31, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * What about his other account?Jasper Deng (talk) 23:46, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't find anyting about the second account. --Fralambert (talk) 00:34, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedian idiots! Live your life through your screen. Accomplish nothing more than useless contributions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxAMSC (talk • contribs) 21:22, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ça ne me dit rien, MaxAMSC. Puis, pourquoi est-ce que Wikipédia est le plus grand encyclopædia du monde?Jasper Deng (talk) 21:29, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Moving photos
Hi Fralambert. I'd appreciate if it you would allow me to move photos I took to the Commons. As it is, the file history makes it appear as though you are the author of the images. Yoho2001 (talk) 22:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Mont-Laurier Comment
Salut! Je comprends ce que tu veut dire, mais c'est comique de lire ton commentaire, car "traduce" n'est pas un mot anglais pour « traduire », mais plutôt « calomnier »! (Voir la définition.) Je ne m'aventure pas comme d'autres a corriger les commentaires des autres, mais je voulais simplement te le faire savoir. J'espère que tu n'a pas trouvé ça sur un traducteur automatique.--UnQuébécois (talk) 00:32, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation newsletter
Hey. I'm dropping you a note because you used to (or still do!) patrol new pages. This is just to let you know that we've deployed and developed Page Curation, which augments and supersedes Special:NewPages - there are a lot of interesting new features :). There's some help documentation here if you want to familiarise yourself with the system and start using it. If you find any bugs or have requests for new features, let us know here. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:34, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikidata and Interwiki links
You are receiving this as you have recently added an interwiki link to a page!

Wikidata has been deployed to the English Wikipedia. Wikidata manages interwiki links on a separate project on pages such as this. This means that on Wikipedia articles there is now a language bar on the left hand side of your screen where you can edit and add links rather than adding them into the articles themselves.

If you have any questions regarding Wikidata please use the talk page Wikipedia talk:Wikidata.

 ·Add§hore·  Talk To Me! 12:02, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Carrière des Nerviens Regional Nature Reserve
Hello Fralambert, I am very happy to see you on the EN WP. Thank you for having changed the name of the page. Cordially. Christian COGNEAUX (talk) 07:30, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of historic places in Côte-Nord, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sept-Îles (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:27, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Category rename
You recently renamed a category to Category:Heritage immovables of Quebec, but that title is meaningless in English and I think it should probably have been translated to Category:Heritage buildings in Quebec. Secondarywaltz (talk) 03:30, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, the name come from the english version of the Cultural Heritage Act, who take in force in 2012. The «immeuble» in question take is reference from the for the Civil Code and is about a immovable property, not a buildings. «Heritage buildings» is a non existant term in the act. --Fralambert (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. I could not find that expression, and now I have learned somthing. Secondarywaltz (talk) 04:31, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It should be noted that this terminology is only used in Québec English, as it's translated by French speakers who have no practical knowledge of English. Just because it's "law" doesn't make it correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NotWillyWonka (talk • contribs) 19:57‎, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * It is more a civil law term that bad English, I found today the Federal Real Property and Federal Immovables Act, that make the difference between the two. --Fralambert (talk) 03:17, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Castle Hill
Castle Hill is a hill not a fort!--Harfang (talk) 07:33, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * : It is not a hill neither. You shoud use argument instead of unsreferenced argument. Like Castle Hill is actually a group of three forts . --Fralambert (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

John Macdonald's Summer Home
Hi Fralambert. I was just about to add John Macdonald's Summer Residence to the list of NHS's in Quebec, but you beat me to it by a single day (argh!) hehe. What was your first indication of its creation...the footnoted Federal Directory? And when? I had some difficulty tracking information on this, and it was only just announced on June 5, 2015. I'm curious if and how you heard of it sooner. A source indicates the designation was in 2014, which is odd, because I didn't see anything announced prior to last week. Thanks. Yoho2001 (talk) 09:36, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi, Yoho2001. Actually I see the montion of John Macdonald's Summer Residence directly on the directory. I check once in a while for if I can see new inscription. I do the same for Répertoire du patrimoine culturel du Québec. For the non-anoncement, I am not surprised, since the commission don't seem to be as fast as Quebec for new designation. Note that i already created the article in french. I used "house" for the article since it's the term used by the Canadian Heritage of Quebec, the owner of the house. --Fralambert (talk) 22:15, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for creating a page for this site so quickly. Which directory do you make a habit of checking--the Federal Directory of Heritage Designations, or the listing at HistoricPlaces.ca? How do you search to find new listings, just type in "2014" or "2015"? I monitor the news releases, except they have been moved without notice, and so there was a gap of several weeks. I only just discovered its new location, found the news release about this site, and went to post it when...voila! I found you had posted it not even 24 hours earlier. I had been trying to get news on new sites since early May. What a coincidence.
 * As far as the date of designation, I'm puzzled. It's first announced as having been approved in June 2015. But the date in the Federal Directory says December 5, 2014. Yoho2001 (talk) 07:39, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, I was just lucky. I check this page once in a while. For the difference about the date it's probably that the commission decided to designate the house in december, but the minister only validate the designation in june. Goverment are sometime slow. --Fralambert (talk) 01:52, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Lucky indeed. I had gotten into the habit of checking for news every few days, but there was a lapse of several weeks when they decided to move all news releases to a new page. My inquiries as to where news was to be found was only answered this month. That's when I discovered the JAM Summer Home--just hours after you had posted it! What a coincidence.
 * Designations can only come from the minister, regardless of when the Board might recommend one, so the double dates are confusing. If a NHS is announced in 2015 by the minister, then it's a 2015 designation, unless she designated it but did not announce it in 2014. Odd.
 * Meantime, a previously-designated NHS has now joined the national park system: Wrecks of HMS Erebus and HMS Terror. Parks Canada now says the national count in the park system is 168 (although we know it's higher, with Beausoleil Island and possibly others). Yoho2001 (talk) 11:08, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Kensington Market
My apology for reverting your edit. Completely my error. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:47, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Eeyou Istchee James Bay Territory
Hey, did you see the apology I left you on the Talk:Eeyou Istchee James Bay Territory page? I also left my understanding of the territorial and governmental divisions on Nord-du-Quebec, and I need to know if I was correct? --Criticalthinker (talk) 11:59, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Did you see my last message? I just wanted to make sure that my understanding of EIJB is correct so that I can rewrite the English article. --Criticalthinker (talk) 10:50, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

I just realized reading back through the page that I had a question about something left there that I'm not sure is true. Though the unconstitued localities appear to have some level of local governance, does Institut de la statistique du Québec or Statistics Canada treat them as administratively seperate from Eeyou Istchee James Bay Regional Government for statistical purposes, or do they not have defined boundaries in any sense? I currently have the page as saying that Eeyou Istchee James Bay Regional Government covers any territory not located in the four enclosed municipalities, the Cree communities, and also the unconsituted localities, but I'm actually not sure about that last part. My gut tells me to erase that part about it not including the unconstituted localities, but I can find no source one way or the other saying this, and in fact the implication seems to be that they are in fact just settlements that are part of the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Regional Government. --Criticalthinker (talk) 05:35, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * If I remmember the last municipal elections, there is 3 «localité» who have a local council in the the municipality, Valcanton (who include the villages of Val-Paradis and Beaucanton), Villebois and Radisson. The president of the local council of these three localities are also councilors of the EIJBRG. These are included in the Eeyou Istchee James Bay Regional Government territory. I imagine they are like borough in the south. Saddly, I don't see any statistics about theses places in Institut de la statistique du Québec website. I hope it help a little. --Fralambert (talk) 02:15, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I decided to change the page after reading that they were considered a constituent part of the previous municipality, meaning that their territory and population was counted in that of the municipality. So they are, in fact, administratively a part of EIJBRG unlike the Cree communities and and seperated municipalities. --Criticalthinker (talk) 03:57, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Lacolle Mills Blockhouse
Hello, I think the LMB belongs to the Canadian Register of Historic Places. There is an article about it at Wikipedia Canadian Register of Historic Places. Please revert your changes to the article. Thank you Blockhouse321 (talk) 15:42, 1 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Can the LMB belong to both the CRHP and the Répertoire du patrimoine culturel du Québec ?? Blockhouse321 (talk) 15:44, 1 February 2020 (UTC)


 * In 1960, the blockhouse was designated a cultural heritage site and assigned with number 6386 in the Canadian Register of Historic Places. (Canada's Historic Places) Blockhouse321 (talk) 15:56, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, the Blochouse is no a national historic site of Canada. The only legal status the blockhouse have is one of Immeuble patrimonial classé (or classified heritage immovable). At the difference of the american one, the Canadian Register of Historic Places is more a mirror site of the provincial and federal ones. It's is mostly why some building have two, three or even four for the McAdam station, because rhe train station have four heritage statuses (National historic site, Heritage railway station, provincial heritage site and local historic site). The status on the Canadian Register of Historic Places is writen Monument historique classé, but the provincial law was changed in 2012 and the label is now Immeuble patrimonial classé. I hope it help you. --Fralambert (talk) 16:01, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I notice that Wikimedia reflects at the top that the blockhouse has both a federal and provincial historical plate numbers. If so, we can add both citations to the article. Do you disagree? Blockhouse321 (talk) 09:28, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Like the two registers are in the « Ressources relatives à l'architecture » in fr:Blockhaus de la Rivière-Lacolle. Il don't totally understand your question since they register ID and not plate number. The only plate on the site should be the one of the Ministry of Culture and Communications, if he have one, since the legal status of the building (« classified heritage immovable »). --Fralambert (talk) 13:13, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * For properties in the Répertoire du patrimoine culturel du Québec it has site identifier 92674-81402. For a cultural heritage site in Canada it is assigned with number 6386 in the Canadian Register of Historic Places.  Do you disagree with these citations?  I believe the two separate citations to be correct.  The article requires both the federal and provincial citations not just the provincial. Blockhouse321 (talk) 14:31, 5 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, I contacted the federal and provincial departments by email. The federal department advises that the blockhouse is recognized at the provincial level.  The blockhouse is recognized at the federal level from the following website: https://www.historicplaces.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=19509&pid=0 Blockhouse321 (talk) 20:51, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, the National Historic Site protect the site of the battle of Battle of Lacolle Mills (1814). An after verification, the perimeter of the NHSC seem to include de blockhouse. . Probably the best way to put it in the article of the blockhouse whoul be: « The blockhouse is included in the Battle of Lacolle National Historic Site, who was designated in 1923. » --Fralambert (talk) 00:36, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

"Sutton River" instead of North Branch Missisquoi River
The Sutton River is designated in English "Sutton River" on the geographic maps of Canada and "North Branch Missisquoi River" on the geographic maps of Vermont where the course of the river runs only 2.7 km. The name "Sutton River" is recognized by the Commission de toponymie du Québec. The Atlas of Canada (Toporama) does not include a toponym "North Branch Missisquoi River". The length of this watercourse being much greater in Canada, I recommend that the English title of the article be "Sutton River" instead of "North Branch Missisquoi River". - Veillg1 (talk) 11:05, 17 mai 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with Wikidata
Hello! Thank you for connecting the Gutiérrez Hubbell House to Wikidata. Wikidata is still quite mysterious to me, and I appreciate your help. Netherzone (talk) 02:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC)


 * No problem. Just ask help if you want help, I we be pleased to help you. Fralambert (talk) 02:34, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the offer, I appreciate it. BTW, I saw from your user page that you are from Trois-Rivières, I have several relatives from there. Be well, Netherzone (talk) 02:56, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Mohawk Island
theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 10:08, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Mohawk Island
theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:32, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Heritage buildings of Quebec
Our job here isn't to replicate government bureaucratese, it's to write in terms that our readership would actually understand. "Immovable" is simply not used that way: it's only an adjective in English, and isn't used as a class noun for a type of thing, so calling something that is simply not comprehensible to any reader who doesn't also know enough French to recognize it as a bad literal translation of the word immeuble. That is, an English speaker can say that a building is immovable in the context of discussing whether it's possible to move the building or not -- but they can't give you directions to your doctor's office by saying it's in the immovable across the street, because immovable is not a noun.

Our job here is to write in terms that will actually be understood by readers, not to replicate government officialese for the sake of government officialese -- so on Wikipedia, it has to be either "buildings" or "properties" on the grounds that those are the words that a reader would actually understand as meaning what the things in the category are, not "immovables" on the grounds that some bureaucrat wrote that in a government document. Our articles are written for the benefit of readers, not for the benefit of Quebec government bureaucrats, so we have to use terms that the average reader would actually understand. Bearcat (talk) 10:43, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * I was looking the Goode House by-law made by the city of Westmount and they did use heritage immovable (Aslo immovable lonely, because civil law language). The term is also use by the city website. As I check outside, Westmount Historical Association disd use heritage building, The Westmount Independant use "local heritage landmark" (see page 10)), term who was retaken by the Westmount Mag [https://www.westmountmag.ca/will-the-goode-house-stay-good-or-is-it-about-to-go-bad/. Global News use the term heritage status.
 * Heritage Property would be nice, but it was already use as a broader term that include immovable building, site, object and document. I thing we could use "heritage building", but it would be at least nice to include that the act use that term.
 * Finally, just check this immovable. Have nice day. Fralambert (talk) 23:43, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)