Talk:Environment and Climate Change Canada

Federal identify program?

Why does the EC link to the FIP? This is confusing and I propose this be changed. Thanks Hu Gadarn 15:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

This reads like Harper wrote it himself. I came to this wiki to see what kind of damage bill-c38 really did to this country and all I get is Harper speak. What did this bill ACTUALLY do to the lakes, waterways and forests? 69.165.222.73 (talk) 05:21, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

the sub article is just vague. will close discussion. Mr.McCutcheon (talk) 20:09, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Quality scale for this article

Why is this article rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale? Is it because some content needs to be expanded a lot? Eyesnore 16:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Updates following the coming into force of Bill C-69 on August 28, 2019

For transparency purpose: I'm an employee of the Impact Assessment Agency

1) I would like to propose an update of the "6.1 Bill C-38" section of this page. Since most of the environment-related acts that underwent major changes under under Bill C-38, underwent another series of major changes under Bill C-69, I would like to propose a rewrite of this section with the following:

"Bill C-69, an Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts On February 8, 2018, the Government introduced Bill C-69, an Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts. Bill C-69 received Royal Assent on June 21, 2019. The Impact Assessment Act, the Canadian Energy Regulator Act and the Navigation Protection Act came into force August 28, 2019."

2) I would also like to propose removing the following sentence that use to appear under "Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (1992, c. 37)" in the list of Related legislation:

"The Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act (2000) "supports and promotes the protection, enhancement, and wise use of the environment. The Act's individual regulations cover a wide range of activities, from beverage container recycling and pesticide sales, potable water, to wastewater and storm drainage."[31]"

This sentence didn't have anything to do with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (1992, c. 37) in the first place.

Thank you for you consideration! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scleroux (talk • contribs) 14:12, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@Scleroux: Sounds good. I also inserted this after your edit. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 14:21, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

French translations

@WildComet: I'm not sure why you re-inserted French translations of this government department to the lead of the article. I removed them per MOS:FIRST and MOS:LEADLANG. Is this not "English" Wikipedia? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:08, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Magnolia677: this is English Wikipedia but French is an official language of Canada and thus the department. It is incorporated in both languages and both names are considered official. Per MOS:LEADLANG, "If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, a single foreign language equivalent name can be included in the lead sentence". Consensus at this page as well as what appears to be others in the Wikiproject as a whole, is that French is always included alongside the English names of government entities, as it meets the MOS criteria of being closely associated with the subject. Thanks —WildComet ^talk 20:36, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

@WildComet: The example at MOS:LEADLANG--of a city in the Ukraine--leads me to believe you may have misunderstood the policy. More importantly, the name of this department is clearly an English name. Just because the Canadian federal government offers services in English and French does not mean Wikipedia needs to add the translation. Please revert your edit. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:45, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Magnolia677: both languages share co-equal status and the enabling legislation which incorporates the department is in French as well as English.

The example about the Ukrainian city is just that - an example. I'm not sure it can be construed as applying strictly to geographic locations.

Every other article relating to a Canadian government department follows the "Name (French: French Name) sequence in the lead sentence and there is a clear consensus. If you feel it is not appropriate to include the French name in these kinds of articles, I encourage you to start a discussion over at Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board]. Thanks, —WildComet ^talk 21:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

@WildComet: First, you write that "both languages share co-equal status and the enabling legislation which incorporates the department". Could you point to a consensus on Wikipedia that states that when this occurs, Wikipedia must must add all languages to the lead of its articles? I've already shown you a webpage for the department that is English only. Also, the Northwest Territories Power Corporation is a Crown Corporation of the NWT government. As you know, the NWT has 11 official languages. Should the lead sentence of Northwest Territories Power Corporation include 10 non-English translations? Magnolia677 (talk) 21:29, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Magnolia677:

My understanding of WP:EDITCONSENSUS is that "An edit has presumed consensus until it is disputed or reverted". Inclusion of the French titles spans hundreds of edits.

Regarding NWT Power, it does not appear to offer services in 11 languages. Including all 11 languages would not align with MOS:LEADLANG, which prescribes "a single foreign language".

You mentioned previously that the department offers services in French. This would meet the "closely associated" requirement to include it as outlined in LEADLANG. —WildComet ^talk 21:44, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

I agree the French name should be included in parentheses after the bolded English name. It's the other half of the official name and is likely to come up to potential searchers in a wide variety of contexts. Dan Carkner (talk) 22:13, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

If it's the other half of the official name, why isn't the title here: "Environment and Climate Change Canada/Environnement et Changement climatique Canada"? Clearly, the very department in question has one official name, which is translated identically into two languages. Why does English Wikipedia feel compelled to provide the translated name...in the lead? If readers wish to know the translated name, let them visit the department's website. Even there, they'd have to hunt for it. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:40, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Remove non English text from lead. What is the point of cluttering the first sentence with non understandable language for our readers as per MOS:LEADSENTENCE.... this not some sort of alternative name but just a translation MOS:BOLDSYN. When doing FA reviews the lead jumble is usually removed removed....that said the lead clutter frequently makes it back in like Order of Canada. Remember a few years ago indigenous names were spammed everywhere as well. Accessibility should be our primary concern over filling the lead with text that is non-understandable to the vast majority of English readers. Moxy- 23:26, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

I agree that the French should be included in parentheses, per MOS:LEADLANG: "If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, a single foreign language equivalent name can be included in the lead sentence, usually in parentheses." Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the Official Languages Act, all federal government institutions are bilingual, and both the French and the English names are official. The French name for the department is a "closely associated" non-English term, and should be included. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:11, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Magnolia677: "I've already shown you a webpage for the department that is English only."

Reply: If you look at the upper right corner, there is the link to the French version, identical in content. The one you happen to land on depends on which language you're using, but the English webpage has no more status than the French one. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:11, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Magnolia677: "If it's the other half of the official name, why isn't the title here: "Environment and Climate Change Canada/Environnement et Changement climatique Canada"? Clearly, the very department in question has one official name, which is translated identically into two languages."

Reply: The federal government provides services in English and in French, not generally dual in one webpage, to make it more convenient for the reader. However, the name of the department is bilingual, under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Official Languages Act. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:11, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Magnolia677: "If readers wish to know the translated name, let them visit the department's website. Even there, they'd have to hunt for it."

Reply: the French version is not the "translated name" — it's an equally authoritative French name, of exactly the same status as the English name, as set out by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Official Languages Act. Nor do they have to hunt for the French name: all federal government websites have a button to toggle to the French version of the website, normally located in the upper right-hand corner, as in this case. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:14, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

You seem to have confused the policies of the Canadian government, with the policies of Wikipedia. They are not the same. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:25, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

The WP policy is: "If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, a single foreign language equivalent name can be included in the lead sentence". To determine if there is close association with a non-English language, you look at the usage. Since as a matter of Canadian constitutional and statutory law (note, not simply policy), both the English and French versions of the name of a federal department have equal authority, that means there is a "close association" between the French and English versions for the purposes of the WP policy. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

The example given right after that at MOS:LEADLANG is: "Chernivtsi Oblast (Ukrainian: Чернівецька область, Chernivetska oblast) is an oblast (province) in western Ukraine, bordering on Romania and Moldova". Magnolia677 (talk) 14:18, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

You keep referring to that, but I don’t see the significance. Can you elaborate, please? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:34, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

I think Magnolia is trying to say that the name is Ukranian, and the English version holds virtually no weight in Ukraine, as opposed to the English version in this case, which seems to be the de facto name and holds significant weight in Canada. Cessaune (talk) 05:25, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually, no. A translated name should be added to the lead when the article is primarily about a non-English topic. For example, a city in a non-English speaking country like Ukraine. This article is not about a non-English topic. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:37, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Reply to Cessaune: No, this is not a de facto name. I don't know how many times I have to repeat: as a matter of Canadian constitutional law, and federal statute law, a federal ministry is required to operate in both English and French. The English and French names of a federal department are equally authoritative and are used equally by the federal government, depending on the language of the Canadian they are dealing with. A francophone Canadian has the constitutional and statutory right to have communications with the federal government in French, and an anglophone Canadian has the constitutional and statutory right to have communications with the federal government in English. The names of the federal departments are dual, to fulfill those obligations. Both the English and the French names hold "significant weight" in Canada. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 18:15, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Reply to Magnolia 677: I'm not sure what you mean by a "non-English topic". Federal departments are required to operate in both languages. This article is therefore about an English and a French topic, and the name of the department in both languages should be included. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 18:15, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Just by way of comparison, take a look at the following wikipages about the Republic of Ireland, another bilingual country. Where the name of the article is in English, the Irish equivalent is given in the lead line. It's exactly the same here in Canada, and the Wikipedia articles should reflect it: Constitution of Ireland; President of Ireland; Government of Ireland; Health Service Executive; Garda Síochána;[[ Defence Forces (Ireland); Revenue Commissioners; Irish Prison Service. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 20:51, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

And then, coming back to Canada and looking at Wikipedia articles on other federal institutions, there is the same pattern of the French name being included in the lead line. Here's some top-level examples: Constitution of Canada; Parliament of Canada; Government of Canada; Supreme Court of Canada; Prime Minister of Canada; Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The same principle applies here, where the French name of the department, with equal authority as the English name, should be included in the lead line. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 21:37, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Based on this, put the French name in there. Cessaune (talk) 00:22, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

RfC about French translation in lead

Should the first sentence of the lead contain a French translation? Magnolia677 (talk) 14:41, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

• No - This article is about a department of the government of Canada, a country where federal services are offered in both English and French. The department's website reflects this, offering an English version and a French version. However, their Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Instagram appear only in English ([1][2][3][4]), with no mention of the French name for their department.

Yes per MOS:LEADLANG. This is a Canadian government service which is provided in English and French. — ^Clyde!_Franklin! 04:42, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

MOS:LEADLANG states: "If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, a single foreign language equivalent name can be included in the lead sentence, usually in parentheses", and the example given is a city located in an non-English speaking county. However, when examining the content of this article, Environment and Climate Change Canada, there is nothing to suggest any unique association with the French language or the French-speaking people of Canada.

MOS:FIRST tells editors to "Be wary of cluttering the first sentence with a long parenthesis containing alternative spellings, pronunciations, etc., which can make the sentence difficult to actually read; this information should be placed elsewhere."

These French translations are ubiquitous on articles related to Canada: Toronto-Dominion Bank mentions Quebec just once, yet has a French translation in the lead.

My concern is that at Wikipedia, we establish our own policies about what does and does not get included in our articles, and the language policies of any particular government or company should not automatically be interpreted as a Wikipedia requirement. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:46, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

• Yes, for a few reasons.

Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC; French: Environnement et Changement climatique Canada), is the department of the Government of Canada responsible for coordinating environmental policies and programs, as well as preserving and enhancing the natural environment and renewable resources.

1. MOS:LEADLANG states: If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, a single foreign language equivalent name can be included in the lead sentence, usually in parentheses. Canada's official languages are English and French. This is a department of the Government of Canada, therefore both the English and French names are on an equal playing field. The subject of the article is clearly associated with a non-English language (French), therefore I think this satisfies the first part.
2. MOS:LEADLANG states: Do not include foreign equivalents in the text of the lead sentence for alternative names or for particularly lengthy names, as this clutters the lead sentence and impairs readability. The current sentence, IMO, is not lengthy enough to impair readability.
3. When I looked over the page structure of the Canadian federal government, all but one of the departments listed from A to N (I was too lazy to look at the rest) included the French title in parenthesis. Infrastructure Canada, the outlier, contains the French name in a note as opposed to directly in the text.

I think these are enough reasons. Cessaune (talk) 19:44, 25 November 2022 (UTC) Cessaune (talk) 19:44, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Pinging WildComet, Dan Carkner, Moxy, Mr Serjeant Buzfuz, from the previous discussion. Cessaune (talk) 19:47, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, for the same reasons Cessaune said above. I consider it unobtrusive on the article and the co-official French name is a likely source of interest or searches for a wide variety of reasons, including coming to Wikipedia to confirm information about what exactly a particular organizational name refers to. --Dan Carkner (talk) 20:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes. This is what has been done of every single article concerning the Canadian government, as all organizations have both English and French applied titles. The official name of the department is notable information. In addition to its French website, the department maintains a : Facebook page, Twitter page, YouTube channel and Instagram account in French. The departmental enabling legislation was also passed by Parliament in French and the logo features both languages. Inclusion aligns with the close association requirement outlined in Wikipedia's MOS:LEADLANG policy, which was created by editors and not the government. I'm not concerned with MOS:FIRST as LEADLANG was developed with reducing clutter in mind - limiting inclusion of foreign languages to a single language closely associated with the subject is a reasonable limitation. —WildComet ^talk 03:33, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

• comment - Previous discussions about the definition of "closely associated" (per MOS:LEADLANG) include:

• Talk:Kara-Khanid Khanate#RfC about the languages in the lead
• Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section/Archive 14#Foreign languages in lead section
• Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section#LEADLANG and number of languages
• Talk:Steinbach, Manitoba#Translation in lead
• Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lead section/Archive 18#Translations of topic
• Talk:British Columbia#Request for comment on first sentence of lead

A common theme in these discussions regards how closely the content of the article is associated with a non-English language. My concern with this article is that absolutely none of the content is about a non-English language. There is no text about Quebec, or about how this department uniquely impacts Canada's French people. This seems terribly unencyclopedic. The translation should be more than just cosmetic, and should indicate to readers that the translation actually has some significance within the article.

Aspirin has more French-Canadian content than this article, and according to Canadian federal law, its label must include Canadian French. Should the first sentence of Aspirin have a French translation?

The definition of "closely associated" needs clearer defining. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:26, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

1. We aren't changing the guideline in this RfC, we are simply deciding how to interpret it. Change it in a different RfC.
2. Really? Aspirin? Aspirin itself is not closely associated with French Canada in the way that a literal department of Canada's government is. Nobody thinks aspirin and thinks French Canada, or even Canada.
3. A common theme in these discussions regards how closely the content of the article is associated with a non-English language. My concern with this article is that absolutely none of the content is about a non-English language. Yes, but no. The content of the article comments on Canada. Not on English Canada, not on French Canada, but on Canada. The article isn't about French Canada, and it doesn't refer to French Canada, because it doesn't need to. The article is associated with French Canada, because it is associated with Canada, and as stated before, Canada is neither English nor French, but both (and more).

I don't know. These are my thoughts. Cessaune (talk) 12:05, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes. Because it's how people know it, because Canada is really bilingual when it comes to these things, and because that's how sources use it. Fad Ariff (talk) 13:14, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, per Cessaune and Wildcomet. I'll additionally draw attention to the logo, used on Wikipedia itself, that includes the ministry's name in both English and French — it's obvious that neither is intended to be the translation of the other, but equally official names, one for each of Canada's official languages. Moreover, this is standard practice for Canadian articles, so I'm not sure what this RfC is supposed to solve; what's the outcome if editors decide "No" here, that ECCC only lists the name in English but Department of Finance Canada et al keep their French name? If there's a question here, surely we should be asking it about all articles on Canada, not just this one specifically. — Kawnhr (talk) 16:53, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

I wrote above: "These French translations are ubiquitous on articles related to Canada: Toronto-Dominion Bank mentions Quebec just once, yet has a French translation in the lead." Magnolia677 (talk) 17:06, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

May I ask what the connection is between the article needing to discuss Quebec in the text and an official French name appearing in the intro? I don't see why one depends on the other. Dan Carkner (talk) 22:20, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Previous discussions about "close association" regard the content of the article, and this article has no content about anything French. See above. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:52, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes: the close association is that French is an official language of Canada (and the content of the article is about Canada), and the department makes its logo, website and even social media content equally available in both English and French. This meets MOS:LEADLANG. Separately, readability of the first sentence is low and this part should be made concise or at least split into two sentences: responsible for coordinating environmental policies and programs, as well as preserving and enhancing the natural environment and renewable resources. — Bilorv (talk) 23:00, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

@Bilorv: If the "close association" is simply that French is the official language of Canada, should every Wikipedia article about Canada have a French translation? Canadian Tire has 100 outlets in Quebec (sorry, Société Canadian Tire). Should it have a French translation here on English Wikipedia? Magnolia677 (talk) 23:18, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Maybe.

MOS:LEADLANG has been satisfied in the minds of most people in this RfC. Yes, there is a case to be made that the translation is unnecesssary, but the decision to remove it makes a trivial difference, IMO. If there isn't a problem, we shouldn't be trying to fix one. I don't see a problem big enough to warrant the removal of French from the lead pages of multiple articles (because yeah, that's the inevitable outcome if your proposal goes through). Cessaune (talk) 01:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

I can't answer the question because the premise is false. The close association is not simply that French is an official language of Canada: there is a second half to my first sentence. I've no idea what to do about Canadian Tire because I've never heard of it and made no effort to research it. — Bilorv (talk) 20:33, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Weak NO (invited by the bot) But either way is OK. It's an English enclyclopedia and a majority Enlish-speaking country (Canada) has an English name for it and I don't see a strong reason to include a Non-English name. I don't agree with arguments that the guidelines say "yes"....IMO what they are oriented for is mono-lingual non-english speaking countries where the non-English name is THE official name. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 15:37, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

• No - This article already exists in French and there is also no need to include the English name in the French article as far as I know Chidgk1 (talk) 14:09, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes The French name of the department should be included as currently set out, for the following reasons:

• The title of this RfC is factually inaccurate. The French version is not a "translation" of the name of the federal department; it is the name of the department. Both the French and the English versions of the department are official. Referring to it as a "translation" is misleading.
• As previously noted by WildComet, it is is wrong to say that the Department does not maintain French versions on Twitter, Facebook, etc. As shown by WildComet's links, the Department maintains French versions of all those media streams, parallel to the English media streams, as required by the Constitution of Canada and federal law.
• The Wikipedia policy of LEADLANG states: "If the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language", then it is appropriate to include the non-English language in the opening sentence.
• The subject of this article is a federal department which has a bilingual name, and which operates equally in both English and French across Canada, as required by the Constitution of Canada and federal statute. That means that the subject of the article is closely associated with a non-English language, in my opinion.
• The fact that Canada has a majority anglophone population is not relevant. The Constitution of Canada and federal law requires that the Department operate equally in both English and French, and provide its services in either language.
• It is irrelevant to say that there is nothing specifically about Quebec in this article. The article is about a federal Department which is required by the Constitution of Canada and federal law to provide services in either language to Canadians across the country. That constitutional and statutory mandate is not limited to Quebec.
• That does not mean that every article about Canada needs to have French in the lead. We're talking about including the full official name of federal departments in the lead, rather than just half the official name. That bilingual official name is required by the Constitution and federal law, which establishes a close association between the English and French names. That is not the case with other Canadian topics. A slippery slope argument has no place here.
• The argument that French should only be included if the article specifically refers to francophones is exactly the type of argument that led to the decision to entrench bilingualism in the Constitution of Canada. It used to be that the federal government operated primarily in English, and only provided services in French to French-speaking citizens if there was some particular French aspect; otherwise, French-speaking Canadians had to try to access services from their federal government in English. Wikipedia should not rely on arguments based on that type of linguistic prejudice and discrimination.

Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 13:31, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

• Yes as above: there's two equal, official titles, one in English and one in French. (FWIW: Swiss federal government pages...3 extra languages, not just 1). Cordialement, --Goldsztajn (talk) 13:32, 15 December 2022 (UTC)