User talk:Myminpins

Hi Ashley - plane to Finland. Awesome!! So you are in Halifax. Good to know. I'm in Dartmouth (LOL - that's a huge contention here)

Yes, you're right. Not worth arguing with some people. I own miniature pinschers. I've tried cleaning up that page many times then just gave up. Dogs are a huge huge huge bone of contention for some people who think they know everything so I just moved on.

I've never been to the Halifax Archives in person and, online, they seem to have changed everything. I tried looking through them but, as time goes on, more and more government things make it harder and harder to find any information about.

For instance, you used to have all the phone numbers of all the departments in the gov't in the phone book. Now you have one number and good luck getting anywhere with it. We could call the Dept of Transportation stations - the warehouses - and talk to the men in charge of your area of plowing. Now it's 9 to 5, Mon to Fri and nothing else.

Anyway... thanks for the feedback. :)

Brenda Myminpins (talk) 12:36, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi there. Sorry I didn't get back to you until now - I just about ended up on a plane to Finland over the weekend, but that's a different story. However, it didn't leave me much Wikipedia time!

However, Wow! I have to tell you, that's the neatest thing I've learned this week. Awesome! (I only moved to Halifax 3 years ago, so I'm still learning my curses and legends!) That's definitely a simple fact-fail that you cleaned up successfully. ...And doing that kind of research is invaluable. Maybe you and I should collect a list of things we're wondering about, or that need sources here on Wikipedia, then make a date to go dig around in the NS Archives at some point.

I understand that you've got a bit of a conccern about people just crassly reverting what you do, but I don't think you should be too worried about it. Here's my rough strategy:
 * 1) Make change.
 * 2) Someone reverts it.
 * 3) Decide whether I care / have the time.
 * a) If yes, then start the discussion on the article's "Talk" page.
 * b) If not, head to other parts of Wikipedia where my contributions will be welcomed.

I think you'll find that strategy a) is often productive - it's possible the person who reverted your work didn't realise you were being serious, doesn't know what they're talking about, or just never returns to the discussion (in which case, after a few days, it's fine to make your change again.) But, of course, it's seldom necessary. Until or unless you wander into a particluarly contentious area (Middle Eastern politics, say, or NFL football team names - or, until lately, the name of the article for our city!) I think that you'll find most folks happy to have someone contributing more accuracy to the project. AshleyMorton (talk) 12:10, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ashley: After a ton of searching, I found this story but cannot find it in a place I can cite - just in a forum. It supposedly is in the Halifax archives but I cannot find it. This is the story:

Three times a bridge over these waves shall rise, built by the pale face, so strong and wise, three times shall fall like a dying breath, in storm, in silence, and last in death.

(Halifax Herald/N.S. Archives)

On April 2, 1955 the Mi'kmaq curse put on the crossing of the narrows, over the harbour was removed in a ceremony during the commemoration of the opening of theAngus L. Macdonald Bridge, the third attempt at building a bridge to cross the harbour. Mi'kmaq chiefs were invited by the bridge commission to remove the curse. The ceremony included a dancer who danced to the middle of the bridge, while the chiefs prayed and sang in their Mi'kmaq language.

To this day, the third bridge, has remained standing.

And now young sirs you know the tale Of the Narrows bridge; Once in storm and gale, It fell with a crash and then again, In silence it fell, neither storm or rain, In death, says the legend, the bridge shall fall, No matter how solid they build the wall.

(Halifax Herald/N.S. Archives)

Legend has it that a Mi'kmaq curse was placed over the waters of the bedford basin known as the narrows. Indeed three attempts were made to build a bridge across the narrows and the first two attempts failed. In l955, the bridge commission invited Mi'kmaq chiefs to remove the curse.

Libby Meuse an elder from Indianbrook First Nation, Shubenacadie attended the ceremony when the curse was removed. She was born in l928, so she would have been 27 years old. She offered the following information:

"I remember attending the ceremony where they removed the curse from the bridge. My mother and father were invited to attend. My father, was Martin Sack, my uncle Joe Sack also went with them. They had to wear Indian clothes and my mother and father went into the long building afterwards for the feast or dinner. Old William Paul, Dowie Howe we called him, Chief Joe Julian from Millbrook, Chief Ben Christmas and his daughter Mary from Membertou, and Jim Paul from Indianbrook were there. Jim Paul was the youngest and they told him to perform the dance while they sang hymns and prayed in Mi'kmaq, in our tribal way. It was the respectable way to show people this is an honour to be asked to do this. They sang and prayed while Jim Paul danced up to the middle of the bridge and back.

Obviously there is a great deal of mystery around the true tale of the bridge. There are several versions of the curse.

The first one is the one which is found in the archives, with the poem in verse. This legend speaks about a pale face who was having an affair with an Indian woman who was married. She stole off into the night with him and her indian husband followed them down to the shores of the narrows, the basin. He was very upset and followed as they got into a canoe. He snuck up on them and attempted to kill the pale face, but instead killed his wife with his hatchet. He was so distraught that he cursed the pale face and said never shall they cross this water again.

The other version was that of a British Naval officer who was seeing an Indian woman the wife of a chief and she left him for the British Officer, and once again, a similiar thing happened which made him curse the water crossing by the white man.

Another version is about two braves who were in love with the same Indian Maiden. One was rich, one poor and she chose to marry the rich one. The poor one was distraught and snuck down the the shore the night before her wedding as she was washing and preparing herself for her wedding day, he killed her and then escaped. He escaped by cutting the canoes behind him as he crossed the waters. The canoes were all tied together in order for the people to use it as a bridge for carrying things across. The other brave, cursed the waters and said that no on will cross the waters again. etc. etc.

Another version always heard was that the daughter of chief was stolen from the shores of the basin by a sea captain and the father was so angry that he cursed the crossing of the whiteman ever again.

There is even suggestion that the curse was removed from the wrong area, because all of the curses were placed on the narrows which is where the new bridge stands.

There were three attempts to cross the water, and two were unsuccessful, and went as described in the poems, one in storm, one in silence. The third attempt is the MacDonald Bridge and the curse was removed.

In accordance with the curse, the first two attempts to bridge Chebucto did fail. In 1885, a wood and steel bridge was constructed. It was destroyed in 1891 in a hurricane, or in storm as the curse had foretold. Shortly after, a flimsy bridge was built. It also fell, "in silence"; on a calm summer night. The third attempt to build a bridge, the Angus L. Macdonald Bridge, was completed in l955. Prior to the opening, Mi'kmaq chiefs were invited by the province to remove the curse in a ceremony.

Myminpins (talk) 18:13, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ashley:

I don't have a lot of time today but thought I'd show this to you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noel_Knockwood

Yes, Noel Knockwood lifted the curse off a Bridge BUT it then says "the third bridge to be erected across The Narrows, a strait in Halifax Harbour following the fall of two others previously."

It was the Macdonald (yes, it's spelled with a small D) Bridge he lifted the curse off, not the MacKay. I'd correct it but they'd probably just change it back. I will change it but if you could keep an eye on this for me, I'd appreciate it. I removed the reference because it doesn't redirect properly.

Here's the Macdonald Bridge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_L._Macdonald_Bridge

MacKay Bridge: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._Murray_MacKay_Bridge

Myminpins (talk) 17:53, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ashley.

Thanks for the tips. I will sign stuff in the future. :)

Yup!!! I figured that one out!!! Thanks :)

Myminpins (talk) 22:38, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Brenda 71.7.132.96 (talk) 15:24, 22 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Oops - one other detail - you need to be logged in in order for it to really work! Otherwise it just shows your IP address. As you have just demonstrated! AshleyMorton (talk) 22:13, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Brenda!

Thanks for the kind words! Regarding being an "official editor" - there's no such thing, actually - or at least, we all are! I have been around for a while, though I have no special status. I just love the idea of Wikipedia, and try to help out other folks when I can be useful! There are admins, though those people have to be nominated, and generally are very committed. They have to deal with a lot of special bureaucratic tasks that neither your nor my account have the authority to do. I'm fine with that, because I come and go from Wikipedia - active for a few months, distracted by something else for a few months...

Here are some other thoughts:
 * Responding to messages - this is a perfectly acceptable way. In general, your "User talk:" page is for you and you alone to own and design. Hence, it can be organised however you want. However, whenever someone else edits it (like I did), you will receive a notification. For that reason, some people choose to edit the *other* person's "User talk:" page - then that other person will, for sure, know that you're talking to them. However, this can get tricky if it ever turns into a three-(or more!)way conversation - in those cases, it's usually better to keep the conversation in one place. As I said before - very few things are "wrong", except being a jerk, and if someone tells you differently, they're probably putting themselves into that latter category. You can look at my "User talk:" page (User_talk:AshleyMorton) for a more standard way of doing things, but far from the only one.
 * You should probably sign your posts on talk pages - even your own. You sign by using four tildes ( '~' x 4 ) - Wikipedia automatically recognises what you're trying to do, and replaces them with your username and a date stamp. There is an automated piece of software that goes around trying to catch unsigned posts, and attribute them properly, but it's imperfect, and generally doesn't work on "User talk" pages, only on "Article talk" pages. You don't have to, but it will help other people figure out who to talk to if they want to get ahold of you.
 * Unfortunately, people doing the work you're doing to improve the quality of writing are the true unsung heroes of Wikipedia. It's (relatively!) glamorous to argue about whether "Race" or "Ethnic origin" should be used in demographics articles, or to debate whether someone's extramarital affair should be included in their biographical article. ...But fixing the apostrophes and run-on sentences? That's what has the capability to really help us hold ourselves to better standards.
 * Have fun, and feel free to ask me questions at any point! AshleyMorton (talk) 14:31, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ashley. To be consistent, I'll keep it on top. Are you an official editor or something? If you are, I think you should clearly state this on your page (makes you more official LOL)

When you put it the way you've put it, that makes perfect sense. I completely agree with you. I try to edit articles mostly for punctuation, grammar, run-on sentences and clarity but frankly get discouraged sometimes at the lack of good English around these days.

Thank you very much for your comments and your way of stating things. It's very friendly and non-argumentative, making me inclined to agree with you rather than just argue for the sake of winning!! LOL Great way to put it. Thanks again for explaining rather than just changing it back.

P.S. Is this the way to respond to a message? Or is there some other way I'm supposed to do it? Took me forever to figure this part out yesterday!! LOL

Brenda

Hi! (I must admit, I'm used to putting newer stuff on the bottom, but there's nothing wrong with newest on top, too!)

First - let's be clear - nothing you did was wrong. I don't know how much Wikipedia experience you have, but my belief is that, as long as you're trying to make Wikipedia better, *nothing* is wrong. It's only when you're trying to be a jerk, or if "winning an argument" becomes more important than the value of the encyclopedia - that's when you might be doing something wrong. Your edits were constructive and in good faith, so please - keep doing them!

Second - You make some good points. a) The logo and name on the Municipality's own sites have not changed yet. That's a very good point that I hadn't thought of. Council has passed its resolution, so the stuff is *law*, but it still takes human effort to make the changes. Fair enough. b) The legal name of the thing will remain "Halifax Regional Municipality". This is true, but you notice that generally, we don't have full legal names in the titles of articles. For example, Toronto is not "The City of Toronto", and Mississauga is not "The Corporation of the City of Mississauga". This is dealt with by the Wikipedia policy WP:OFFICIALNAME. (I just learned about that one in the course of this discussion. So - I don't think this point is enough to keep the name, but I do think your first point is a good one.

Third - It is true that many references will be changed to Halifax. Personally, I think that's a good thing - flights go to "Halifax" not "HRM". Lists of the biggest places in Canada list "Halifax" not "HRM". The Halifax Soccer league is not the "HRM Soccer League". There will end up being a mix, I'm sure - and it won't be perfect, but it will be constantly improving!

Finally - There is currently a debate about what the article should be called (as its title). This is something that you should participate in, because you clearly know about the issue, and are interested in making the article better. Even if I haven't convinced you, please join the debate there. Your contribution would be welcome. If you go to the article's Talk page: Talk:Halifax_Regional_Municipality, and scroll down, you can see the debate at its current point - then you can add your bit!

Thanks again for your contributions. AshleyMorton (talk) 02:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello. I understand what you are saying but I still see Halifax Regional Municipality on all government pages AND it says that the LEGAL name of HRM will still be in place, it will just be "known" as Halifax. Does that matter? Or maybe they just haven't done the changes to all the pages yet? But it will come?

And if it is now indeed Halifax, shouldn't almost every reference to HRM be changed to Halifax?

Sorry - I wasn't trying to do anything wrong. Thank you for your response.

Hi there - I just reverted some of the changes you made to the Halifax Regional Municipality article, and I wanted to let you know what was going on. I'm sorry that the tool I was using didn't let me explain more in the edit summary. The basic concern is that the change to the name / identity of just "Halifax" *is*, in fact, complete. The Council has decided, and it's done. Here's the statement from Council:. On the other hand, some of the copyediting you did was really helpful. Hence, I'm going to try to restore the good work you did, but things like the logo should really stay. If you disagree, I'm certainly interested in listening to your thoughts on the matter. Cheers - 19:00, 21 April 2014 (UTC)