Talk:2023 New Brunswick local governance reform

Canada: New Brunswick / Geography / Communities Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject New Brunswick.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Geography of Canada.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian communities.

Plans for further expansion

The three bulleted lists are on my to do list for expansion into tables, similar to those previously prepared at 2015 Manitoba municipal amalgamations. There is a hidden infobox template that will be updated and unveiled at a later date per the hidden comment in the article. Also there is a hidden section for criticism if an interested editor is aware of any that can be summarized with reliable sources and a neutral tone. In the meantime, a peer review of grammar, spelling, etc. of current content in this list article from other interested editors would be appreciated. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 06:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I made a couple of minor corrections, which screwed up the column spacing for the RSCs. It's amusing that RSC 8 is getting the Kings Rural District after refusing to call itself the Royal RSC back when they could agree on anything. G. Timothy Walton (talk) 00:15, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The second source in the List of RSCs section has RSC 11 named as Capital Region Service Commission. The source is archived but the document itself is from 2021. Did they name themselves and then revert back due to naming remorse? Hwy43 (talk) 01:48, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Green Paper got it wrong, not its only error. RSC 11's website has the name right. Other than listing Lower Newcastle-Russellville as Ferry Road-Russellville nearly thirty years after it was renamed, most errors in the Green Paper are minor. G. Timothy Walton (talk) 02:16, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The map page gets the RSC names right. G. Timothy Walton (talk) 20:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I knew RSC8 was something of a mess but I've not heard the story of the original name. I'm quite curious to see how it functions without Hampton. DarkLanternBrigadier (talk) 10:30, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Added some tables I developed on a separate (redundant) page that now just redirects here. DarkLanternBrigadier (talk) 10:21, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I included summaries of the LSD changes in List of local service districts in New Brunswick at the start of June after the maps were released. G. Timothy Walton (talk) 13:56, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This reform implies revisions to 100s of NB pages

Hi. The 2023 reform means 100s of pages are out-of-date, redundant, or in need of creating or overhaul. This could be an opportunity to make the settlement pages more systematicly organized, structured, reconsider infoboxes, etc., as is done in other provinces e.g. Alberta and Quebec. Not sure this is the best place to have this conversion. If this is being discussed elsewhere please let me know. The following are rough estimates.

Several dozen new pages eventualy need creating for the new entities (a consensus on a template for these would be good).
236 LSDs no longer exist.
120 (many defunct or extended) municipalites need update.
Around 70 "other communities" and another about 400 permastubs probably need update, though lower priority?
Generally not sure about pop data and to what extent the new entities are contiguous with existing census areas.
150 "parish/LSD/CSD" pages need checking

Cornellier (talk) 15:25, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like more work than it really is – most of the changes will be "this changed and we don't have any new census data yet".

Leave the census data alone until StatsCan publishes updates. In the page text, note the sum totals where units were combined wholesale.

The LSD pages mostly overlap with civil parishes (which remain, as they fall under different legislation) or nonmunicipality communities (which remain); the few that are separate can be folded into the appropriate pages or converted. Community names, last I checked, remain in use by the 911 system and Canada Post even within new municipalities, as was done with rural communities created before 2023. I'm waiting on email confirmation about the community names so I can cite the proper documents/press releases.

Defunct municipality pages are easily converted to community pages. I'm working through those but having to update so many infoboxes on census records is slowing it down; I assumed whoever was updating the Demographics sections would update the infoboxes but some of the pages still use 2011 data. I'll have to split the task to speed it up.

Most of the community pages could easily be folded into municipality or parish pages; I've been informed by a British editor that smaller communities are handled that way but I haven't had reason to check many British pages. I've run across a few New Brunswick cases over the years where somebody just deleted a community's info, put in a redirect, then didn't copy any of the deleted data to the target page – definitely not the proper solution.

Parish pages can be handled by noting that governance units have changed. We don't know yet how the rural districts will be treated for CSD purposes or if the census divisions will switch over to the RSCs instead of using the counties, which also still exist in legislation. G. Timothy Walton (talk) 17:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Citing which LSDs were annexed

[https://www2.gnb.ca/content/gnb/en/corporate/promo/local-governance/maps.html Provincial government reforms maps page] links to all the new governance units, grouped by RSC; it can be used in conjunction with the regulation's wording that only states contiguous unincorporated areas. If somebody's tempted to delete anything that isn't cited instead of attach a citation needed template to the information, they can now easily find the proper information to add a citation.

I don't feel like playing whack-a-mole instead of completing a current task. G. Timothy Walton (talk) 19:28, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns about article looking too much like government promotional materials

The article reads more like a PR endeavour to handle the topic, walking the reader through the governing authority’s undertakings. I’m saddened by apparent ‘capture’ of the space for inventorying. I don’t think that when we look back at the Higgs Conservative’s reform undertakings we will see our experiences in this. the interests involved in the undertakings must somehow prevent taking a more worldly and down to earth view. Leave it to the administrators and bureaucrats! Spooninpot (talk) 12:08, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]