User talk:Hwy43/Archive 5

This archive page includes discussions that began between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2013.

Edmonton glitches
Hey, do you get one those wonderful Wikimedia Foundation timeout error messages every time you save? Or is it just me. The Interior (Talk) 18:38, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I do, but not limited to here. Happens on other large articles as well. Hwy43 (talk) 20:58, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I thought I was the only one too. 117Avenue (talk) 01:18, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Of interest perhaps
After seeing the edit summary "Remove unnecessary column; "Ethnic group" rather than "Ethnicity" as White, Black, South Asian, Southeast Asian, Arab, etc. are groups of ethnicities rather than ethnicities themselves" - I see your also concerned about the changes (wording used). We are talking about the edits and thus the editor himself at User talk:Miesianiacal.Moxy (talk) 19:36, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Interesting. Explains a lot if true. Hwy43 (talk) 02:39, 26 January 2013 (UTC).

re: Requested move
Done! FWIW, if you believe a move is uncontroversial, and is required only for technical (i.e.: spelling) reasons, you can use the template at WP:RM/TR. Cheers! Resolute 19:50, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Jumbo elevation
that's the summit elevation of the resort, not the elevation of the townsite. Just FYI; I'll look the MoF pdf's later and try and locate the centrepoint, or the townsite location.....Skookum1 (talk) 09:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. The (future) townsite would be more appropriate. Hwy43 (talk) 09:44, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, suffice to say the RMOW's (Whistler's) elevation is at base, I think at Southside rather than the Village, not at the summit of Blackcomb....Skookum1 (talk) 18:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Caroline, Alberta
 I had edited Caroline, Alberta to add the Etymology of the village, and typed that it was named after Princess Louise Caroline Alberta. It was removed by you, as you stated from a book of the names of towns and cities of Alberta that Caroline was most likely named after Caroline Langley. I did some research on Caroline Langley and her father, Harvey Langley but found no results. From the Etymology on the wikipedia page of Alberta, it states that Caroline, among other places and landmarks, that the village of Caroline is named after Princess Louise. I would think so too, as The Province of Alberta, Lake Louise, Mount Alberta etc is named after Princess Louise as her full names are Louise Caroline Alberta. Louise was given to the beautiful lake, Alberta was given to the province, and Caroline was most likely given to the village. I also found that Princess Louise does have a connection to Canada as she was the wife of the Governor General, meaning she was the Vice Regal Consort. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.52.44.225 (talk) 23:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)


 * The book didn't say most likely. It said it was named after Caroline Langley. It is a very common misconception that the village is named after the princess. In fact, I thought myself it was named for the princess until 75.159.0.215 edited the page providing this as a reference. I wasn't sure the reference was reliable, so I found it in a book collecting dust on my shelf. It sounds like you did a web search. The web isn't the only source for information on Wikipedia. Without a reliable source that confirms Caroline was named after the princess (refuting the other reliable source's claim) we can't rely on speculation that Caroline had to be named after the princess because the province, mountain and lake are also named after the princess. I have fixed the Etymology section at Alberta. Hwy43 (talk) 03:19, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Jumbo Glacier, British Columbia
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Bypassing redirects
Ease off. I've nominated Hardisty, Magrath, and Mayerthorpe to be reverted. 117Avenue (talk) 05:25, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Saw that. Didn't check my watchlist until I got through Irricana and already decided to hold off before you messaged. Hwy43 (talk) 05:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * If you are ending at Mayerthorpe, I will continue with bypassing the balance. Please advise. Hwy43 (talk) 05:41, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes. I went through Skeezix1000's moves today, and I only oppose the three. 117Avenue (talk) 06:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I didn't mean to tell you to stop, only to "ease off", and not get carried away. 117Avenue (talk) 06:32, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I didn't stop because of the "ease off" comment. I stopped because I observed that we were both proceeding through alphabetically, where you were ahead of me, and I was not sure if you were through all of them yet. I didn't want to continue with the balance to save potential unnecessary edits in case you weren't finished your review, hence my question. Admittedly, I was a little put off by the usage of "ease off" though, as it can be interpreted with a negative tone, but understand tone is difficult to interpret in written form. I'm going to hold off on reverting all my Hardisty, Alberta bypass redirects for now, allowing for dust to settle in case a more formal move request is initiated. Last thing I want to do is revert all of them back for now, only to potentially have to revert the reverts if the outcome of a formal move request is to go with Hardisty. Hwy43 (talk) 21:21, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Calgary community moves
Hello Hwy43,

Move of Evergreen, Calgary to Evergreen Estates
I am very certain that the correct name of the entire community is "Evergreen Estates". The Assessment department has the most authoritative names IMHO, since they deal with the community names that the land titles are actually registered under.


 * The Assessment Department is not the most authoritative. The Planning Department is responsible for processing naming applications, which are approved through the Calgary Planning Commission for ultimate endorsement by City Council. See this for confirmation. Hwy43 (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

References supporting "Evergreen Estates":
 * Displays the entire area in question as "Evergreen Estates"; "Evergreen" is absent: (https://assessmentsearch.calgary.ca/Map/MapSearch.aspx)


 * I am unable to replicate the display you speak of. You'll need to provide more detailed directions on how to see this once entering the site. Hwy43 (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Lists "Evergreen Estates" as a community; "Evergreen" is absent: (http://www.calgary.ca/Aldermen/Pages/Ward-Offices/Ward-Communities.aspx)


 * Yes, and likely in error. If you then click the "Evergreen Estates" link, you'll arrive here, where it states "Evergreen". If you then click "View Map" to the right, it displays the neighbourhood as "Evergreen", consistent with the open data community boundaries available from the city and the 2012 civic census report. Hwy43 (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

References supporting "Evergreen":
 * Refers to the entire area as "Evergreen" (including the "Evergreen Estates" ares): (http://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/CNS/Pages/Social-research-policy-and-resources/Community-profiles/Community-Profiles.aspx)


 * This is in addition to the City's open data community boundaries and the 2012 civic census report. Hwy43 (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Inconsistent references:
 * Refers to the established "Evergreen Estates" area as "Evergreen" before the new "Evergreen area existed: (http://www.calgary.ca/PDA/LUPP/Documents/Publications/midnapore-3-community-plan.pdf)


 * This plan was originally adopted in 1997. It is possible the official name of the neighbourhood at that time was "Evergreen Estates", hence its appearance as such four times in the document. The sole instance of "Evergreen" is on page 8, bullet 5. This is revised content to the original 1997 plan document. It refers to "31-2000-22, CPC2003-166" at the end of the bullet, which reflects Council decisions in 2000 and 2003 that revised the plan. So, as of at least 2003, or possibly earlier as of 2000, the community has been referred to as "Evergreen". Hwy43 (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Refers to the total area as both "Evergreen Estates" and "Evergreen": (http://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/Fire/Pages/Fire-stations/Fire-Station-37.aspx)


 * Again, the first reference to "Evergreen Estates" is likely in error. As mentioned above, it appears to be the former original name. The City's fire department is not the authoritative source for neighbourhood names. Hwy43 (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply to this regarding this on my talk page. It was going to be difficult for me to respond to the above in one lump here, relating everything within it to each point above, so I've responded to each individually above. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Further to the above, I'm seeing that its community association has taken the name "Evergreen" rather than "Evergreen Estates". Hwy43 (talk) 20:08, 12 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Calgary's main interactive maps site also confirms "Evergreen'. Select the "Communities" as the category, check "Communities" and then update the map and zoom into Evergreen to confirm. Hwy43 (talk) 02:30, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I've yet to hear back regarding the above despite placing a talkback notice on February 12. Further to the above, a search for "Evergreen Estates" (with the quotes) at calgary.ca yields 4 results, while a search for "Evergreen" yields 44 results (including the 4 results for Evergreen Estates). Based on everything here, I have reinitiated my request at Evergreen, Calgary. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 08:35, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Move of MacEwan, Calgary to MacEwan Glen
Nope, it was my intention to move it where it is now at MacEwan Glen. I'm following the WP convention of selecting the shortest, correct, unambiguous name for the article. Since there was no page at MacEwan Glen, I moved it there and created redirects from both MacEwan, Calgary and MacEwan Glen, Calgary.


 * &#9773; Zippanova  18:35, 12 February 2013 (UTC)


 * No page at MacEwan Glen does not necessarily mean it is the primary topic. There may be one or more places in the world named the same where one of them may qualify as the primary topic over this, or all may require disambiguation as none can be confirmed as the primary topic. Did you conduct research to confirm this? This may be moot as personally I doubt there is another MacEwan Glen, whereas there is likely numerous communities named "Evergreen Estates". Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 19:27, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Athabasca Landing
Of the history of "Athabasca Landing", it was a town for 2 years, village for 6 years, and settlement for 28 years. But I see you have reworded it to avoid the term. 117Avenue (talk) 06:30, 7 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes. After the initial revert, I thought some more and saw it from the perspective you summarized above, hence the rewording. Hwy43 (talk) 06:32, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Maps?
I seem to recall you having some map skills. I've started a draft for the Centennial Range in Yukon (User:The Interior/Centennial Range‎), and it could do with a map (especially since I can't seem to track down any images). Category:Maps_of_Yukon has some. I'm not up on how to add markers. (You could also jump in on the article if you want, there's some interesting stuff related to the 1967 Centennial). Might take it to DYK if it gets long enough. Advice or help appreciated, best The Interior  (Talk) 18:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I do have them skills but I've yet to apply them to WP. Hope you find the help you are seeking by other means. Hwy43 (talk) 02:52, 17 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I should probably learn me some maps skills myself, but the mental hard drive is at capacity with school things. Best,  The Interior  (Talk) 16:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Ottawa Demos
That would be great! But remember, before the RMOC was created in 1969, you have to use the population of Carleton County + Cumberland Twp (in Prescott & Russell, or just Russell County) to get the present boundaries. -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:11, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Western Cordillera refs for Geography of Canada section
I don't have time to transfer them now, but all the necessary cites for the Western Cordillera section can be found on Canadian Cordillera, the primary one for BC is Landforms of British Columbia by Stuart Holland, which is the basis of the BC Names toponymy system/terms; the same is the basis for the material where List of landforms of British Columbia redirects to (a subsection of Geography of British Columbia.Skookum1 (talk) 05:53, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Just so you know, my edit summary wasn't intended to single you out. Your edit made me realize how deficient the entire Physical geography section is of references. Looking forward to you transferring refs for the Western Cordillera. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 03:44, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I realized that, as it wasn't just the Western Cordillera section that you marked unreferenced; my additions/emendations to it were based on my knowledge of the subject and the refs pointed at; I don't have time to do the legwork on the refs....I"m living in Thailand, trying to make my way with webwriting here, can't spend too much time here, it's a bad enough habit as it is. The cites are out there, not saying YOU have to do them, but they're readily available for anyone with the time to copy them over.Skookum1 (talk) 03:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Glad you realized it. I know you were dealing with some adversity yesterday and didn't want the edit summary to have been accidentally misinterpreted at an inopportune time. Looks like it wasn't. Glad to see Skookum appears to be headed for a consensus keep at its AfD. Hwy43 (talk) 05:30, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * That was inevitable because or the nature and pervasiveness of "skookum" items......but those proposing it just wanted to go by what wasn't on the article, and weren't prepared to do research or expand the article as they should have done if they weren't happy with it. So much wiki-energy put at deletions, not enough on creations and expansions IMO.Skookum1 (talk) 06:06, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Parishes of New Brunswick
The reason I numbered the Parishes of New Brunswick is that we could easily see how many there are as some of them on government websites are not listed as official Parishes and some are Local Service Districts, easier to count. But if you think it is harmful to have them numbered then ok. Hogie75 22:12, 30 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I suspected that was the case after some thought shortly after the revert, hence the subsequent edits. As the key here was to figure out exactly how many there are, I trust the expanded section lead now satisfies this. I didn't think the numbers were harmful, just that all but the last number (the total count) didn't provide any value. Hwy43 (talk) 05:00, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Delineration
as far as I can tell, delineration refers to where the lines or borders are. I didn't come up with it, I just kept going with it when I found the page that someone had made for it in an attempt to create consistancy across all parishes in New Brunswick.Delineration Link Hogie75 02:52, 8 April 2013

Meso West, Alberta
Hello:

I have made a change to the Meso west, Alberta entry. The subdivision is just a little west and north of where it was originally indicated.

Rdmerl (talk) 00:58, 19 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for correcting the error. I've further adjusted and changed the coordinates as well. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 06:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Westholme
Re this, read Westholme's article.....Skookum1 (talk) 06:46, 21 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Looked at the wrong Cowichan entry at StatCan's SGC. Hwy43 (talk) 07:03, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Indian reserves and StatCan
Hello. Are you following the discussion at User talk:117Avenue? 117Avenue (talk) 03:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Yep. Got a kick out of this about 154A and 154 being apart when it was 154B and 154 in question. Hwy43 (talk) 04:47, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Backspace and I had it out a long time ago, when he was adding RD cats to any geographic object in BC; long story, but notions of place and location vary from user to user; I'll be adding more to my comments somewhere recently about oh yeah, the List of communities page, re cites featuring MoF regions as opposed to RD boundaries; yo'ull find those on RD-commissioned research, but on most it's by MoF or MoE region. Or just by region, in the old sense (before RDs were created).Skookum1 (talk) 07:43, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Tsinstikeptum Indian Reserve No. 9 population
re this, as you'll see on the talkpage, it's for the moment hard to cite that because StatsCan's census subdivision info contains nothing on the aboriginal/non-aboriginal posting which is really weird because this is an IR. But like all federal departments, things are getting weird huh? I'd think maybe the RDCO might have some data; the development region info on databc might......that census data has all kinds of empty fields for languages with '0' speakers, but nothing on the composition of the population .... hell even visible minority isn't there.....this is all gonna get worse because of the cancellation of the long-form census, but in this case it's something like an absurdity. There's 784 band members, on five or so reserves, and 20,000 residents split between two of those reserves. I know 2+2=4 is original research in Wikipedia terms.....but with the "reforms" to the census and StatsCan's new politically-defined role(s), we're gonna have to dig in other sources that are less.....confining.....Skookum1 (talk) 01:27, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


 * It is easy to cite. The first part of the sentence can be referenced from the 2011 census results, while the second part of the sentence can be referenced from the IR's 2006 census community profile until the first set of results from the 2011 National Household Survey (NHS) are released (a mere 35 hours from now no less). Hwy43 (talk) 03:22, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


 * This is worth a read, just found it over morning coffee....I have work to do today but will try and take a few moments to see if the RDCO or the Thompson-Okanagan development region info at StatsBC has anything....I know (or assume) the band won't be forthcoming....maybe they will, dunno, I'll get around to asking....but they probably wouldn't have a citable publication or link.Skookum1 (talk) 02:03, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes the NHS was controversial and will always have its critics (I am one), but its results to be released over the next four months will be the best data available. Hwy43 (talk) 03:22, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Indian reserve vs First Nations reserve
Just noting that various subcats of Category:First Nations reserves in Canada are now "Indian reserve", and their main articles are "List of Indian reserves of FOO"...not all of them have such a list or main article; the main article for Category;First Nations reserves is Indian reserve....I'm tempted to get them speedied to normal usage, but there's a long ago CfD or CANTALK discussion where the use of "First Nations reserve" was endorsed/underscored even though it's a neologism and rarely seen in print.....I've always been of the opinion that "Indian Reserve" should be capitalized even in the plural; it's a formal land designation, not a vague term for "reserve community"....which is why I've been populating those categories with redirects to either the locality, or to the band article in question as needed....BC Names uses "Indian Reserve" with caps btw. It may be time for that speedy, now that I understand more about this "main article=category name" guideline.......but not all subcats of Category:First Nations reserve have a main article...it may be enough that the parent article and larger categories already have "Indian reserve" in their titles; I'd be content with Category:Indian reserves though would prefer Category:Indian Reserves due to the legal name/formal title of the actual individual land units. thorny stuff maybe, and I've had my fill or RMs and CfDs for now......though pondering "FOO people" back to "FOO" on those ethno articles where +people was unnecessarily added.Skookum1 (talk) 05:57, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I won't be wading into the IRs v. FNRs or category stuff in general. I'm focused on other things that are more engaging for me (note I do intended to get back to List of communities in British Columbia btw). I recognize where you stand regarding Indian Reserve v. Indian reserve and that BC Names utilizes the former. Just so you know, I will continue to use the latter as it appears to be the consensus within the Canada WikiProject. If a discussion ensues regarding which to use at CANTALK and the consensus is "Indian Reserve", then I will respect it. Hwy43 (talk) 06:12, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


 * "lower case-ism" held sway last time...as did the neologism, despite lack of cites for same.....I'll leave it for now, I'm more concerned about the "FOO people" construction and the confusions it causes. Later, time for lujnch (1:20 pm here).Skookum1 (talk) 06:17, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay, and later as well. I have to get up with the monozygotics in seven hours, so I guess it is time to pack it in. Hwy43 (talk) 06:21, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Pop density
Sorry for the delay but I've added a precision parameter to pop density. J IM ptalk·cont 06:52, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

List of municipalities in Ontario
I see you removed quite a lot of my edits from this page. I am trying to get the page to FA status, and used the List of cities and towns in California as a template. I kept the paragraph structure consistent, but you deleted the brief geography and demographic history section which was found in the California article and allowed it to get to FA status. I would really like to include those prior to submitting for FA status. I'm also working on creating a table (see my sandbox) that matches the California page. As it stands now, it's very difficult to view the cities being in so many subcategories. Mattximus (talk) 14:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Mattximus. I now understand your intention. List of municipalities in British Columbia also has FA status, yet doesn't include any information on the province's overall geography, history and demographics, which is more appropriate for the British Columbia article. I still think inclusion of the information added is superfluous for List of municipalities in Ontario, and that it could still achieve FA without that info just like the BC equivalent. If anything, this article should rather focus on the geographic distribution, history and demographics of Ontario's municipalities (themselves and in general) and the province's existing and historical municipal structure. I recently created the following Ontario community lists: cities, towns, villages and township municipalities. I've been meaning to overhaul both this and List of communities in Ontario to align, as I have done for equivalent lists within other provinces, but the current state of each has discouraged me thus far (as well as the complexity of Ontario's municipal structure system). What are you thoughts on modeling after the BC equivalent and leveraging the efforts from the other Ontario lists? Hwy43 (talk) 20:24, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * PS - hope you don't mind I boldly added something to your sandbox for consideration. Hwy43 (talk) 22:12, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Great suggestions! I understand your concern now about the intro. Although I still like the extra information, I'm no longer opposed to removing the entire second paragraph. I really like your list added to my sandbox, and I much prefer it to the multiple lists found in the BC article. Would it be reasonable to merge all those list pages you mention above (or at least some), into one page? There seems to be lots of forking in the current format (especially list of township municipalities). What do you think? We could then feed the individual municipality pages into this one master list as a "see also".


 * For the table you put on my sandbox, I really think we should add it to the current page. I would like to make make just a few changes (which I can do).
 * 1. Wikilink the counties (as they are technically municipalities), which I can automate
 * 2. Give some recognition to the government seats using the similar graphics from the California article (green?)
 * 3. Keep the picture format from the California article over the BC one.
 * 4. I'm not sure the list is complete, there seem to be a few missing, but I can work on finding those.
 * What do you think, should we add it? Mattximus (talk) 15:36, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * In response to the above four changes:
 * Sure, and districts too. Ideally only the first instance of each county and district should be linked to avoid overlinking.
 * Sure.
 * Sure, as there are no pictures on the BC article.
 * The list should be complete in terms of single and lower-tier municipalities. Those that are missing should be the upper-tier municipalities. Yes. Missing 91 from here – 38 lower-tiers, 23 single-tiers and 30 upper-tiers. Not included in my previous efforts yet presumably because their census subdivision type (or municipal sub-type) is not city, town, village or township according to the StatCan 2011 census. I suggest this upper-municipalities be done within its own table in a separate section titled "Upper-tier municipalities" or something similar, while the existing table be located within a "Lower and single-tier municipalities" section or something similar.
 * I'll get back to you later about the balance of your comments above. Work commitments beckon (overtiming through the night as well) and may not be able to get back to you until tomorrow. Hwy43 (talk) 20:47, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Tables look great! I do feel that the entire pop 2006 column is a bit too much information(especially if we keep the pop change column, and call it Change (2006-2011 %), but I'm not sure how easy it is to remove a column in wikiepdia... otherwise I'll fix the broken links and upload as is? I'll probably add a few more pictures. Thanks for your help, please let me know if there is something I can do. Mattximus (talk) 13:52, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I've got a fairly nifty way to expedite table preparation in Excel and have been rolling across the country with it. The 2006 column is beneficial to allow the reader to compare how municipalities rank now to how to they ranked at the previous interval. Secondarily, it also confirms the percent change column. I'll let you know what else you can do once things settle down. Hwy43 (talk) 02:45, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Just deleted what I believe you referred to above as the second paragraph. Still not fond of the first paragraph per previous reasons provided. I can look into a way to blend some of the content from the first paragraph though into a revised overall lead section. I'll do it in a sandbox and have you review it once it is ready. On another item, it may be worth splitting the second table into separate tables for single-tiers and lower-tiers. As for merging/forks, let us discuss at a later time after we are done with this article. Too many WP efforts on the front-burner right now (2013 Alberta floods and our ON munis collaboration). Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 02:45, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Mattximus, check out the proposed revised lead and the proposed section leads at User:Hwy43/sandbox/Ontario municipalities and advise of your feedback. In the article lead, Ontario's rank in terms of population and land area is retained, as well as references to Toronto and Ottawa. References to the Great Lakes, Ontario being within central Canada, and the proportion of population living within urban areas have been removed as this content is relevant to the province as a whole rather than its municipal government structure and more appropriate for the Ontario article (wikilinked in lead) or its sub-articles (Geography of Ontario and Demographics of Ontario). Hwy43 (talk) 05:31, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I've made a few friendly edits to your sandbox. I think we can go ahead with this introduction as is. However, I would like to keep the Single and lower-tier municipalities together in one table, as they function in a rather similar manner and benefit from the sort function. I will go ahead and use the new lead. I still believe the 2006 pop is redundant if the pop change is there, but I'll compromise on that point. I'll add a few more images to the right. Do you think this page is approaching featured list status? Mattximus (talk) 16:49, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Your friendlies were well-received. A few minor edits and additions. Feel free to transfer the new lead and the two section leads. By comparing it to the BC equivalent that is already a FL, then I would say yes. But frankly never been involved in a FL proposal and review before. Been meaning to try one out on the numerous community lists I've worked on. Hwy43 (talk) 07:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for transferring. Can you elaborate on the false facts assertion? I can assure they are true. Hwy43 (talk) 17:11, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your work! I'm wondering if you know what guidelines are set (if any) that make a place a township vs a town vs a city? That distinction might be important to include prior to nominating for Featured Lisit. The false factoid: Sudbury is the largest city in Ontario by population :). I could not figure out the utility of many of the notes. Especially the redundant "The Barrie CMA is formed around Barrie", and the factoid "Brampton is Canada's ninth-largest city". I decided to remove them, would you object? Mattximus (talk) 23:28, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * And likewise to you! Ah yes. Should have been largest by area. No objections to removal. The notes were appropriate to List of cities in Canada, which was recently revamped. Its pre-revamped state included "Remarks" columns that inconsistently informed of largest/smallest cities, applicable CMAs and the like by province. The revamp respected these remarks, but applied greater consistency among provinces. Good question about the guidelines. My understanding is that the guidelines were dissolved when the latest provincial legislation came into effect (The Municipal Act, 2001) designating municipalities as one of the three tier types. I'd love to get my hands on the previous legislation to confirm the differences between the city, town, village and township statuses. Hwy43 (talk) 04:47, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Found The Municipal Act, 1990 that defined "township", "town" and "village". Refer to Section 10(3)-(5). Still looking for confirmation of the former "city" definition, which I believe involved population of 10,000 and greater. Hwy43 (talk) 05:27, 26 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I think you are correct, it seems the latest municipal act dropped the population requirements. I edited the references to meet the standard, so I think it's now ready to be submitted for featured list. What do you think? If so, would you like the honour or would you like me to submit? Mattximus (talk) 22:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I also suspect that the former population requirement for cities must have been within Section 10(2) that was repealed in 1994. Just did some final fine-toothed combing. You do the honour. I'll watch and learn for the next one. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 06:28, 28 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi there. I have a question about a sentence you wrote in this article. You said "Ontario has 173 single-tier municipalities including 9 cities and 2 towns in southern Ontario.". By my count there are quite a few more single-tier cities in Southern Ontario, close to 20. I'm not sure where my mistake has been...! Mattximus (talk) 15:48, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


 * That was derived from this where 11 are listed following the paragraph, but I see now that list includes Greater Sudbury which we know isn't in southern Ontario. The paragraph refers to a "Northern list" that may validate the amount not in southern Ontario, but such a list has yet to be found at the AMO website. Without anything concrete, I suggest we just change it to "Ontario has 173 single-tier municipalities." Thoughts? Hwy43 (talk) 17:51, 11 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Agree completely. Thanks for the discussion. Mattximus (talk) 18:18, 11 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I have a quick question about the statement: municipalities "cover only 17% of the province's land mass yet are home to 99% of its population". I'm under the impression that municipalities cover 100% of the land mass (based on the source provided, the area of all municipalities adds up to the total land area of Ontario). Thanks! Mattximus (talk) 04:26, 29 July 2013 (UTC)


 * The majority of Ontario's land mass is covered by unincorporated districts. See Census divisions of Ontario. Hwy43 (talk) 05:47, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Chinook Cove climate extremes data
Chinook Cove is a locality near Barriere, north of Kamloops, that weather station I don't think is in Environment Canada's system, it may be in the Ministry of Forests system or an MoT figure (airport) or could just be a brag from the thermometer at the Chinook Cove Golf Course, which is mentioned on Barriere's article.....Barriere's own record is 41.9 see here.Skookum1 (talk) 05:08, 22 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Probably the latter. Maybe the thermometer was placed a couple feet above a lit BBQ at the annual men's open tournament to boot. Hwy43 (talk) 07:12, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * It gets pretty hot anywhere in the Thompson Country......but there's no way of knowing, even if there were a citation from e.g. the Golf Course, if the thermometer was properly shaded in a weather box.Skookum1 (talk) 07:55, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * the "LILLOOET CEDAR FALLS" Environment Canada station turns out to be at Texas Creek, I googlemap-searched it; I don't think it's the same as the monitoring station at Texas Creek Ranch which is on those wine study PDFs on Talk:Lillooet, British Columbia. That's gonna be the next commercial winery there, though the Texas Creek Ranch has a long history of its own.Skookum1 (talk) 07:57, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

If Barriere managed to reach 41.1 degrees in 1956, then it almost certainly reached 44.4 in 1941 at Chinook Cove. If anything the 41.1 temperature in Barriere is more likely to be an error. I've heard meteorologists such as Mark Madryga reference Chinook Cove, but since most people don't know where Chinook Cove is, it is easier to simply drop the third reference. Besides, Lillooet and Lytton were both 44.4 degrees for 2 days in a row instead of just one, so the tie should go to them. Remember that 1941 was by far the most extreme heatwave to hit BC. If you look up to the north of Barriere, there is a weather station in the community of Vavenby with data stretching back 100 years. In 1956 when Barriere recorded 41.1, Vavenby was only 35.0; in 1941 Vavenby was 41.1, which is a full 6 degrees higher.

For argument's sake let's assume that the 1956 temperature in Barriere didn't reach 41.1. Instead, let's compare two extreme heat waves - 1994 and 1941. Barriere was 40 in 1994 versus 37 in Vavenby. Now if Vavenby can manage to exceed 41 degrees in 1941, it's not unimaginable for Barriere to exceed 44 degrees. Heck, the 1941 heat wave was so extreme that high elevation places such as Big Creek and Bralorne exceeded 37 degrees while even coastal areas such Nanaimo exceeded 40 degrees. There's typically a 6.5 to 10 degree drop per 1000 m climb in elevation. During extreme heatwaves it's closer to the 10 degree drop. Big Creek is 700 m higher than Barriere, so adding 7 degrees to 37 brings us to 44 degrees. Tatlayoko (talk) 14:22, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

ITN credit
ThaddeusB (talk) 18:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

BC valleys as community names
I'm pretty sure you covered all these on the communities of BC list.....but noting at Category_talk:Valleys_of_British_Columbia in the last post at the bottom a search for "% valley" on BC Names which I just linked; I'd looked up Robson Valley to get its coords and citation......some are listed only as valleys which were/are also communities or private settlements, e.g. Barkley Valley in the one case, Venables Valley in another (that's a ranch valley between Ashcroft and Spences Bridge, uphill from the Trans-Canada.....some valleys don't have listings but are local-usage, like Hat Creek Valley and such, but where there are other placenames as in that case with Lower Hat Creek and Upper Hat Creek; Lower Hat Creek is actually in the Bonaparte Valley, at the mouth of Hat Creek.`Skookum1 (talk) 05:19, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * All communities, recreational communities and localities with names ending in "Valley" (28 in total) as of the BCGNIS-derived BC Gazetteer spreadsheet I obtained GeoBC in late April are included in the list article. Tricky thing you've stumbled upon in that category. Hwy43 (talk) 07:04, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Rogue IPs...
I haven't looked at this one's "user contributions" yet but IMO all these should be tracked, as I've said elsewhere, and repeated examples of overt POV censorship should be blocked.Skookum1 (talk) 06:45, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * That one's a singleton, just checked it, they're using a relay server in Portugal...have seen other political edits originating in Australia, and the US, some on Campbell's article traced to military contractors in the US....Skookum1 (talk) 06:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I support Bearcat's idea that IP edits should be disallowed, even though that still leaves the creation of WP:SPAs an issue, and less traceable. But would deter many such pieces of cr*p.Skookum1 (talk) 06:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hasn't been a regular problem on the Geography of Canada article. Not familiar with the problem or Bearcat's idea. Hwy43 (talk) 07:08, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Alberta flood map
Do you think it would be useful to create a map that overlays communities that declared states of emergency on top of a map of Alberta's rivers? I think it would help give people unfamiliar with Alberta's geography a good visual aid as to the scope of the disaster. And since I am completely terrible at MSPainting maps, I figured I'd ask you since you're an expert and all. Cheers! Resolute 16:50, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Resolute. I'll take a stab at it. It may be slow-going though due to the work week. I'll start by inquiring with the Province asking to confirm all municipalities that declared SoLEs. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 19:17, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * In the meantime, found this list of affected communities (31 in total). Hwy43 (talk) 19:36, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Awesome, thanks! That list looks close, though I know Devon declared as well for precautionary reasons, and I am not sure that Banff ever did. Saturday's Calgary Herald had a list of 24 communities that declared a SOLE by late Friday: Black Diamond, Calgary, Canmore, Lethbridge, Red Deer, Crowsnest Pass, Cypress Country, High River, Kananaskis, Lethbridge County, MD of Bighills including Exshaw, MD of Foothills, Medicine Hat, Mountainview Country, Okotoks, Red Deer County, Rocky View County, Siksika FN, Stoney FN, Tsuu T'ina FN, Sundre, Fort MacLeod, Turner Valley and Vulcan.   Medicine Hat and Drumheller later declared one, but I am not sure who else.  Odd that I am struggling to find an actual list. Resolute 22:27, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * No confirmation on Banff's website of a SOLE, but there were evacuations. I think the map should be an affected communities map featuring locations of SOLEs and evacuations. Hwy43 (talk) 23:41, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Official websites, official twitter accounts, local online weeklies, etc. confirm Redcliff, Willow Creek, Ranchland, etc. Hwy43 (talk)


 * Good point, and agreed. Resolute 23:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Excellent. Been compiling a list of rivers to feature. May start tonight. Hwy43 (talk) 23:54, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Here is the list of rivers I intend to include based on all the coverage I've read: Bow, Crowsnest, Elbow, Highwood, Little Bow, North Saskatchewan, Oldman, Sheep and South Saskatchewan. Let me know if there are any of the more significant rivers missing (don't need every tributary obviously). Hwy43 (talk) 05:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I think that's all of them. Other than perhaps Cougar Creek, none of the other affected bodies of water are significant, or did significant damage that I can recall. Resolute 22:22, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. I'll try to incorporate Cougar Creek if scale allows. If I'm feeling motivated, I'll also include dams as well. Hwy43 (talk) 22:25, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Resolute, here is a first cut at the map. Labelling is forthcoming and the image border is missing. A possible inset of the area west and south of Calgary may be in order. Communities that experienced SoLEs are based on this source. Let me know of your thoughts. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 04:14, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Looks great, thanks! Resolute 22:57, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks :)
Thanks for thanking me :) How did you do that?  D u s t i *poke* 04:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

WP:NEST by an admin who should know better
That these all happen to be connected through the evangelical movement is incidental, that they are all grossly overwritten and full of completely meaningless "she was at such-and-so" and "he likes so-and-so music" calls into question the value of an adminship, which are handed out for "humility" and obsequiousness like toilet paper IMO, with no regard to real-world knowledge of a sense of proportion. Tara Teng is the longest to date, others are linked from here, including a "male beauty pageant" winner who is also part of the same evangelicals-for-a-just-cause bandwagon. All have or had extraneous Wikiprojects added to them....e.g. WP:CRIME and WP:LAW and WP:Humanrights and such........I have a few watchlisted, and some of the remaining ones I've winnowed of their ridiculously-overblown content; there's so much on Tara Teng that I weary of the thought of taking weed-whacker to it...someone else stopped by Talk:Tara Teng and was wary of deleting parts of teh article "since an admin created it". When will the madness stop?Skookum1 (talk) 10:14, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * For example, just in the passage that the changes in this edit, do we really need to know what "Tara" means, what she says about Langley, and whether or not she likes green curry? Last I looked this wasn't People magazine, or Sweet 16, either.Skookum1 (talk) 10:59, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

My conduct on Wikipedia
Hi Hwy43,

I am the administrator discussed in the messages above. I do not believe that the assessment of my conduct is accurate, but I would be grateful if you would look over my edits and the articles I have created to make your own assessments. Feel free to start discussions or AfDs as you see fit. My edits and article creations have been in good faith and I would be glad to have more input on the articles I have been working on. The Tara Teng article mentioned above is a long article because I have been attempting to follow User:Casliber's FA recipe:

With that article, I have been working on stages 1 and 2, but I would be glad for your help with stages 3 and 4 if you have the time.

Neelix (talk) 14:13, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Maps of Alberta regions
Hello. Just in case Wikipedia hasn't notified you, I posted a new message on the talk page of WikiProject Alberta about regions of Alberta. I asked some questions about what to do later about them. It would be nice if somebody answer it so we can solve this problem. :) --— Foldo Squirrel (nuts?) 10:48, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello. I added an answer to the talk so we can solve this problem quickly enough. Any reply is welcome. :) — Foldo Squirrel (nuts?) 15:38, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Borden-Carleton
To: Hwy43 - I'm having trouble finding the link to the news article that saids its now a town, But it says on the town's website that they are a town: Also on there Official Facebook page:. From: Kburke559 —Preceding undated comment added 22:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

See full discussion at User talk:Kburke559. Hwy43 (talk) 07:16, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Regarding "Canadian provinces and territories by area" edit (Spbone)
I don't understand why you removed my edit from the page "List of Canadian provinces and territories by area". I know you gave me a reason for it, but I do not understand the reason. My edit to the page "List of Canadian provinces and territories by area" added comparable countries for each province/territory. It was based on something similar done to the page "List of U.S. states and territories by area" by user Reelcheeper. Now your reasons for deleting my content was that it was "original research". I added my content and I got the information from the article "List of countries and dependencies by area" 70.54.13.69 (talk) 21:25, 30 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi 70.54.13.69/Spbone, What Reelcheeper has done at the US-equivalent article is original research by synthesizing published material. Combining a reliable source of areas of US states (or Canadian provinces and territories) with a separate reliable source of areas of independent nations for the purpose of comparison is known as "combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say". Unless there is a reliable source out there that explicitly verifies that the most comparable country to British Columbia in terms of area is Saudi Arabia, and so on for the other 12 entries, then there is no basis to consider inclusion of comparable counties in this article or the US-equivalent. Even if a reliable source were to exist however, such information is trivia, being "information that is not important to the subject it is being presented in relation to." Essentially, inclusion of trivia is generally discouraged. In this case, it is not important to know on List of Canadian provinces and territories by area that Brunei is Prince Edward Island's most comparable country in terms of area. Sure, this information may be of interest to some readers, but this trivia is not relevant enough to be included within the article and by no means does it make the article more complete. Hope this makes sense. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 22:52, 2 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with all above - guess work. To that end Talk:List of U.S. states and territories by area -- Moxy (talk) 20:52, 7 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay...so are you going to also remove Reelcheeper's edits from the American article? I bet a lot of users won't like that. Anyways, Sorry if I caused trouble. I won't be doing that edit again. 70.54.13.69 (talk) 02:09, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Moxy has initiated a discussion there. Looking at previous discussions on its talk page, inclusion of comparable countries has been a source of contention there for over two years with three discussions dedicated to it prior to Moxy's new one. Hwy43 (talk) 02:37, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


 * the only citable comparison I can think of, and I'm sorry I don't know where and when I read it, is BC being roughly equivalent to France, West Germany and Britain (or was it England only) in area. That might have been a school text long ago.  There were definitely comparisons in the Vancouver Sun during the Delgamuukw v the Queen trial of the territorial claims of the Gitxsan-Wet'su-we'ten Confederacy being equivalent to the size of Nova Scotia.Skookum1 (talk) 06:33, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

National Capital Region
Unfortunately there's no way to easily verify whether they directly mirrored our content as their own; the text is obviously very similar and has patches where it's absolutely identical, but there are other spots where it's just different enough to maintain plausible deniability. But it's quite clearly an advertising site that's not showing its sources at all, and it still lists Larry O'Brien as the current mayor (which means they don't put a lot of effort into keeping it updated, considering he got turfed out 2.5 years ago now) — so it's definitely not an acceptable reliable source regardless of whether it's a mirror of our content or not. Bearcat (talk) 06:41, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

See balance of discussion at User talk:Bearcat. Hwy43 (talk) 07:16, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Blue Quill dab page made
I just made it, given the Edmonton neighbourhoods and the college and stuff; don't know enough to fill in the Blue Quill (chief) link with even stub-content. Also there's that conservation area it was in CGNDB. Skookum1 (talk) 13:14, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Chicago Manual of Style vs Oxford MoS vs Wikipedia MoS - Article on Alberta
I was actually taking a break from the Brazilian hip hop article. I've just discovered the CMoS and Oxford so I'm like the kid at school with a new toy. Sorry about that. Sluffs (talk) 19:13, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * No worries. Thanks for cleaning up the article. Hwy43 (talk) 07:19, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Creating an article
Dear Hwy63:

My name is Sanjay Patel and I live in Fort McMurray, AB. I wanted to learn more about creating an article on Wikipedia. I am an author and have published a book on the Canadian Oil Sands book in the recent past. Please visit www.futureofoil.ca for more information about my book, if you wish.

I would appreciate if you can let me know whether you are available for chat for 5 minutes.

Thanks Sanjay Patel Process Manager Suncor Energy Inc.


 * Sanjay, please see WP:CREATE for how to create an article. For general assistance to new editors, visit WP:TEAHOUSE. I have added a welcome template to your talk page as well that may be of assistance in getting you started here on Wikipedia. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 04:30, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Municipalities in Manitoba next FL?
I just created the List of municipalities in Manitoba page and wanted to see what you thought! Mattximus (talk) 15:43, 10 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Just did some quick edits. I'll look more closely tonight. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 16:53, 10 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Wow thanks for the edits. Think it is nearing featured list status? Would it difficult to make a map with the urban, and a map with the rural municipalities? Mattximus (talk) 15:06, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * No problem. Don't think it is near FL nomination status yet based on the recent Ontario FL effort. My edits thus far have been technical and I've yet to look at the prose in detail, which will need some work. Will do so soon, as well as generate maps. I have a busy 7 days ahead of me, so it may take awhile. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 19:40, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Sounds great. Please let me know if there is something I can do for you. Mattximus (talk) 19:42, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Can you do a web search for a complete list of municipal incorporation dates? If not found, please post an inquiry at the Manitoba WikiProject to see if they know where such information for all municipalities could be found. Hwy43 (talk) 01:11, 13 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Looks like I found where we could get most if not all of them. See here. I therefore revise my request for help. Would you mind mining this website for the incorporation dates of the 197 municipalities in an Excel spreadsheet? If you can email me, I can send you an Excel file with the necessary fields to complete. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 04:16, 13 September 2013 (UTC)


 * File sent. Hwy43 (talk) 03:09, 14 September 2013 (UTC)


 * A lead paragraph for the urban municipalities section, similar to that at List of municipalities in Ontario, would also be appreciated. Hwy43 (talk) 06:11, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

I think we are good to go once two or three maps are added and the RM incorporation dates are added. I'll likely start on the maps tomorrow. Please peer review the article in the meantime if you have the time. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 05:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry I've been very busy this week, and will continue into the next, but still plan on mining that site for you, it will, however be a little while yet. Just briefly glanced at the page and it looks near ready for FL! Mattximus (talk) 18:58, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


 * No worries. You can call off the effort. Started the RMs a couple of hours ago and only have 32 to go. I'll wrap those up tomorrow and add the dates to the article. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 05:57, 22 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Consider it nominated! Hwy43 (talk) 03:27, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Congrats on another excellent featured list!! Mattximus (talk) 18:02, 26 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and thank you for getting it started and your contributions. Looking forward to collaborating on the next few. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 02:30, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

A reference problem
Hi! has been working hard on Category:Pages with broken reference names, and I've been helping out a bit.

In [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_cities_and_towns_in_Newfoundland_and_Labrador&diff=prev&oldid=556700864 this edit from May], you added a new reference name "2011StatCanNL" but didn't define it. Since then, this has been showing as an error at the bottom of the article. I know it's been a few months, but can you take a look and work out what you were trying to do? -- John of Reading (talk) 20:11, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * ✅ Thanks for consulting. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 23:20, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

List of municipalities in Saskatchewan
Thanks for your edits on List of municipalities in Saskatchewan. How close do you think it is to nomination? If we split nominations we can have two in the featured list process at once. I'm wondering if you would be opposed to removing a few of the columns in the rural municipality list? Specifically, the RM no. as it's already found in the name, as well as the census division, which is a separate feature not really related to municipal governance. What do you think? Mattximus (talk) 23:36, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I recommend going through all comments received at the ON and MB nominations one-by-one and applying them to the SK article. Key things that are missing include incorporation dates for the urbans, which are readily available, and maps. The original (earliest) incorporation dates are probably most appropriate, regardless of status (like in MB). I won't have a chance to do much of this, or work further on the AB effort, until next week as I have two proposals due before the end of the week plus a wedding to attend out of town on the weekend. For the RM list, I recommend transcluding-out the RM No., SARM Div No. and Census Div. No. columns from the source table at List of rural municipalities in Saskatchewan. If you aren't sure how, take a look at how the and tags are applied to the third and fourth columns for every entry at List of cities in Alberta. This allows the Council size and Population (municipal census) columns to be omitted upon the table's tranclusion to List of cities in Canada. Hwy43 (talk) 02:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Have tried this out, but no luck yet on getting the onlyinclude to work! I do agree on transcluding out the three columns you mentioned. I have a little bit of time today to work on the prose of the Sask one and hopefully get that up to par too. Will the Alberta list be transferred to the List of municipalities in Alberta soon? I could help finding images of the big cities to match Ontario and Manitoba Mattximus (talk) 14:03, 1 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Got the onlyinclude to work, thanks! Do you know of an automated way of making the decimal places all the same? I recall that was an issue in both previous nominations. Otherwise, I think the prose is cleaned up. Do you think the article is now close to nomination? Mattximus (talk) 18:37, 2 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Haven't had a chance to look yet. No automated way I'm aware of to make all decimal places the same. I'll be transferring the Alberta page from my sandbox to replace the redirect either tonight or tomorrow. Hwy43 (talk) 22:59, 2 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Mattximus, List of municipalities in Alberta is live. Nomination will likely happen tomorrow and I can look at the Saskatchewan one again the day following. Hwy43 (talk) 06:47, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * List of municipalities in Alberta is now live and has been nominated. Please add more photos or replace existing photos with better ones. Hwy43 (talk) 04:24, 5 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Does Template:Round not work there?—Odysseus 1 4 7  9  02:30, 3 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the suggestion, but that template does not appear to work with the template we currently use. Any ideas? Mattximus (talk) 15:51, 3 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Template:Number table sorting is the pre-existing template in use. Unfortunately it doesn't have a precision parameter. Looking like a fine-toothed combing exercise is required to fix inconsistent precisions at the Saskatchewan list. I wish SK had 197 municipalities like Manitoba rather than a whopping 786. Hwy43 (talk) 06:47, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Most if not every precision inconsistency is now resolved. The most efficient way I found was to go to the source StatCan table and do a find for every instance of ".0" for the change and density columns and ".00", ".10", ".20", etc. for the land area column and then find the corresponding municipality in the wikicode to manually add the zeroes. Hwy43 (talk) 04:24, 5 November 2013 (UTC)


 * It looks like the Alberta one is sure to pass. Very nice work. Do you think it's time for Saskatechwan? It could use a few maps but other than that I'm thinking it's looking pretty good. What do you think? Should we wait for Alberta to finish? Mattximus (talk) 22:11, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Still haven't read the prose of SK's in detail. In lieu of that, I'd like to see city, town, village, resort village, northern town, northern village and northern hamlet sub-headings introduced with main article tags added below each sub-heading where applicable. Looking at the past three nominations, SK's lead is short compared to the others. Not sure if the FL review will look for a similar in-depth lead. I'll prepare three maps in a couple days - one each for the urbans, rurals and northerns. Hwy43 (talk) 23:53, 10 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Also, no need to wait for AB to finish IMO. Hwy43 (talk) 08:41, 11 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Created subheadings with main article tags. Not sure if it's worthwhile doing for the northern ones, as they are only a sentence or two and have no main articles (and would clutter up the TOC). I tried bullet points instead, what do you think? Once you think it's good to go I can submit to FLN as I believe only one user can submit at a time Mattximus (talk) 03:01, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the maps, they look great. Have you had a chance to do a quick look over of the text for the Sask list? The lead is much shorter than the other 3, so I will perhaps add a bit more information there. Looking forward to putting it up for featured review! Mattximus (talk) 15:29, 28 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I can find time this weekend to take a closer look. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 20:40, 29 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I just read your changes and they are excellent. Would you like me to co-nominate this article under both our names? I believe this is allowed, even if you have a separate nomination still under review. Mattximus (talk) 21:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I've yet to proof the balance of the prose, but at a cursory glance there appears to be enough prose for each section lead. Go ahead and nominate. Your call if you want to nominate or co-nominate. Before you do though, can you change the date formats in four of the references from YYYY-MM-DD to MDY like the balance? I'll proof the balance when I have time. Work has been hectic and less time to focus on detailed editing at moment, evidenced by taking four days to respond to all Alberta FLC comments. Hwy43 (talk) 19:27, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * No worries, there is no hurry. I'll get on this tomorrow night! Mattximus (talk) 21:34, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Changes made, nominated for featured list. Great work! Mattximus (talk) 23:17, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm not seeing the nomination on the featured list... hmmm... any ideas? Mattximus (talk) 23:53, 16 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Just seeing that you've yet to add the nomination to the list at WP:FLC. This is what you need to do here. Hwy43 (talk) 00:04, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Communities vs municipalities
I thought about saying communities in the caption of the Alberta map on List of cities in Canada, but then remembered the List of municipalities in Alberta featured list review, and this edit. As I understand communities can't be defined, so a community centered on Hinton or Whitecourt, summing over 10,000 people, could become a city. The map shows municipalities, not communities. 117Avenue (talk) 06:34, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Dang it, you're right, I thought I was covering Fort Mac and Sherwood Park. 117Avenue (talk) 06:38, 14 November 2013 (UTC)


 * All good. Hwy43 (talk) 07:37, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

And I make the same mistake on Shepard, Calgary. Speaking of Shepard, I don't think you'd have any opposition moving it back to Shepard, Alberta. 117Avenue (talk) 02:57, 20 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Correct. No opposition. Encourage it being moved back to original per its talk. ? Hwy43 (talk) 04:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

List of municipalities in British Columbia
Hi there. I'm wondering if I could get your input on cleaning up the List of municipalities in British Columbia. I find it to be quite a mess compared to Alberta, Manitoba, and Ontario lists. One place I would like to start is to amalgamate a few of the tables but wanted your insight on parsing them first. Several sections have a whole table for a single entry which is really strange/useless. There are not that many total, so I wonder if a single list would work. I can't see any obvious urban/rural divide which is my general preference. FYI here are the sections: Mattximus (talk) 18:51, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Cities
 * Towns
 * Villages
 * District municipalities
 * Indian government districts
 * Island municipalities
 * Mountain resort municipalities
 * Regional municipalities
 * Resort municipalities


 * I disagree with it being characterized as "quite a mess". Its presentation is simply different. It already has FL status and a significant amount of transclusion is already in place to make it what it currently is. I'd rather see the equivalents of the remaining five provinces and the territories built to the same standard as the four others (ON, MB, AB and SK) before a revisiting the BC equivalent. It's a make-work project, while improving the others would return more dividends at present. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 04:59, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Southern Canada
I see that kind of thing a lot, and also Vancouver being said to be in "southwestern Canada". I don't think it's just an American perspective, I think it comes from the British also...... another USian usage that amuses me is from Seattleites, or people new to Vancouver from the East, who refer to Whistler or Lillooet or Kamloops as "up North". RE this bit about Lake Winnipeg, is it really bigger than Lake Huron?Skookum1 (talk) 23:07, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Airports
Regarding your edits to St. Albert, Alberta, did you know that there's the articles List of airports in the Edmonton area (which I just updated), and List of airports in Alberta? 117Avenue (talk) 03:17, 2 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I likely passed through those a couple of times to avoid redirects but left them off my watchlist. Hwy43 (talk) 07:05, 2 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hmm, so does this mean planes no longer land there, or is it simply a name change that implies that is now only for helicopters? Hwy43 (talk) 07:12, 2 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The runway closed, and being a private heliport, it is only for Delta Helicopters aircraft. By the looks of List of heliports in Canada and List of airports in Alberta you have to have a licensed runway to use the name airport or aerodrome. 117Avenue (talk) 03:04, 4 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for confirming. Time to remove the St. Albert Airport wayfinding signs on Highway 2 north of St. Albert then. I had the (dis)pleasure of having to drive to Morinville for work three days in a row recently under nasty road conditions and recall seeing the sign. But then again, Windfall was abandoned well over 40 years ago yet its wayfinding sign still exists. Hwy43 (talk) 06:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Interesting, there must be some activity there, Google is showing train cars parked there. 117Avenue (talk) 06:37, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The gas plant continued operation, but it closed about five or so years ago. I'm counting what looks to be 16 tanker cars there. Looks like the photo vintage is 2006. Hwy43 (talk) 06:50, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Fileswap thing
all of the info from the excel file from fileswap isfrom the NHS profile which is says in the source... I did the file myself after going thru all the NHS profiles... its just all the settlements in one file to prove the statements, the source also had two links one being the NHS profile (saying info from there) and then the excel file. if it makes the file more "credible" I can post the source link right at the top of the file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by B23Rich (talk • contribs) 20:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)


 * For the "Canmore has the largest Japanese population ratio (2.7%) for any Canadian settlement with over 10,000 residents" assertion, did you have to download and splice all the NHS profile data together, or were you able to download the data for all census subdivisions in one fell swoop? What we need for this is a citation from a reliable source that confirms Canmore is in fact the highest among the others. A link to a direct download of this data for all census subdivisions from StatCan would satisfy this. The breakdown you provided can be re-added if you cite it directly to Canmore's NHS profile on the StatCan website. Hope this helps. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 06:03, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Well I found a list of all the Canadian settlements (by province/territory) and I went to every NHS profile with over 10,000 residents, plugged in the numbers and created formulas on the Excel files to find the %'s fast. All the info is from the StatCan site, but the excel table is my creation - with that data, as there is no actual table made by StatCan. The only reason I source it is because it shows that, "yes this is the settlement with the highest %". I mean it doesn't have to be sourced, but I source it because it backs up the statement (highest Japanese Canadian ratio). Literally 100% of the info is from the NHS profiles, but the file is there to show all the percentages in one list.

If it's still considered an "unreliable source", fair enough. But that is why I add it in the sources (what was typed above). This is how the source would look; If you or others feel it might be inaccurate because it was made by someone like me (average person who doesn't work for StatCan), then the statement could be changed to, "Canmore has one of the largest...". — Preceding unsigned comment added by B23Rich (talk • contribs) 21:10, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I appreciate the explanation and, as a census/demographics junkie, the time and effort you dedicated to generating the table. This is one of those grey areas in WP. We have facts from reliable sources combined to generate facts at a greater scale, that should be published by the same reliable source but simply aren't at this time. Without, it borders on original research. Same issue exists with List of Canadian census areas demographic extremes. I'd say go ahead. I may seek direction from the community on this grey area in the future, of which the outcome may affect the re-addition of this. If I do, I'll notify you of the discussion. Hwy43 (talk) 19:48, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about
this, we've got one of those on the loose again. Luke no 94 (tell Luke off here) 08:38, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * What is "one of those"? Hwy43 (talk) 09:00, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Impersonator trolls. (This one isn't an impersonator troll account; it's my alternate account for when I'm in a public place) :) Luke no 52  (tell Luke off here) (legitimate alternate account of Lukeno94) 10:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

National parks cats
Hi Hogie75, could you rename all the national park cats by province and territory to "National parks in X" rather than "National parks of X"? The "of" is possessive, and Canada's provinces and territories do not possess them. Rather, it is Canada that possesses them and they are geographically within or "in" its provinces and territories. Thanks, keep up the good work, and happy holidays to you! Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 00:52, 27 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok but I didn't start it "National parks of Quebec" was made before I categorized everything else. I will do it, so long as you are sure this is right.01:26, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm confident this is correct. I see has since created the corresponding cats for the four Atlantic provinces using "in". Changing the Quebec one from "of" to "in" might require some prerequisite research, and maybe even a move discussion. The provincial government there has historically referred to Quebec as a nation at times, which complicates things and may make a move controversial. For example, a provincial park in Manitoba may be considered a national park in Quebec, but that Quebec national park would not be a Canadian national park. Clear as mud? Hwy43 (talk) 22:46, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


 * LOL ok. I think 117Avenue has taken care of things.22:51, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see the speedy renaming proposed by 117 now. Looking at the Quebec cat, there is a disproportionate amount of pages (27) compared to the others, which makes me think that the majority are "provincial" national parks. Hwy43 (talk) 22:59, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

I nominated them for speedy renaming before seeing this discussion, because I also thought they were incorrectly named. But it looks like we'll have to open it for discussion, since it has been opposed. 117Avenue (talk) 23:33, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I've provided some comments there. I think there is just cause to speedy all except for Quebec. Hwy43 (talk) 23:49, 28 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Perhaps the speedy would go through if the Quebec entry was dropped? Hwy43 (talk) 00:01, 29 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I've thought about it some more, and changed my proposed name, the discussion is here. 117Avenue (talk) 23:20, 4 January 2014 (UTC)


 * It'll be interesting to see if "Parks" vs. "parks" will emerge as an issue and how it would play out. Hwy43 (talk) 10:36, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, they both seem sort of right, so it was difficult to choose. 117Avenue (talk) 20:38, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

If anyone is still watching this discussion, I've opened up a move request on Talk:National parks of Canada. 117Avenue (talk) 04:48, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Communities in census
When I added Tilley and New Norway to the village count on the census articles I started considering adding a statement to the lead section on the changes to municipalities since the previous year, like the municipal election articles, but I didn't know how to word it. Something like "On January 1, 2012, portions of Lac La Biche County and the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo formed Improvement District No. 349. Statistics Canada provided its 2011 census population as 0." and "In the 2011 federal census the Village of New Norway had a population of 283, below the requirement for village status of 300, it dissolved on November 1, 2012." What do you think? 117Avenue (talk) 21:50, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I think a brief mention of those municipalities that restructured between the annual census periods is a worthwhile mention. Not sure yet about mentioning their latest populations at the time of their restructurings though, unless a municipal census was conducted during the year of the restructuring. I'll take a stab at something. Hwy43 (talk) 04:46, 1 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Struggled through trying to work it in. Best I could do thus far is embed the dissolutions as notes. Hwy43 (talk) 06:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)