Jump to content

User talk:Hwy43/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This archive page includes discussions that began between January 1, 2017 and December 31, 2017.

Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11→Archive 15


Canadian geo

Hi! Well, you won me over in the Manitoba municipal amalgamation discussion. Kudos! Since you seem to be interested in this kinda thing, I have done/hope to do some more tinkering and wanted to ask your opinion on them, as well.

Thank you for any opinions/precedences you may have to offer. FUNgus guy (talk) 06:08, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Fungus Guy, thanks for the reach out. You've done some very good work in the past few months from what I've had the time to review in my watchlist. Not as active as I once was, though I should be productive over the break.

Let me think about the unorganized census subdivisions for a while. Admittedly, StatCan's awkward naming convention for these bugged me for quite some time.

For municipalities, the "No." should stay in all names where the "No." is enshrined within their official legal names. This is the case for Alberta's municipal districts where "No. XY" instances have not yet been officially dropped for some remaining municipalities. The same official legal name situation applies to Saskatchewan's RMs (no name changes have occurred yet to drop any "No. XY" instances yet). I have a theory that Manitoba's RMs once had the "No. XY" as part of their official legal names but were removed through legislation decades ago. I could be wrong (and maybe you could confirm or refute).

For census divisions, the "No." should similarly stay in all names where the "No." is enshrined within their official names. It is recognized that StatCan applies these naming conventions and thus they don't have the same legal weight as official legal names of municipalities.

As for First Nations reserves, we need to look into this. StatCan omits the "No.", presumably because it is not included in their official legal names. INAC's First Nations Profiles seem to use a naming convention that is consistent with StatCan's naming convention, which provides some support to the assumption. However, is there an official legal document associated with the creation of each reserve that uses "No." in the reserve's official legal name? I will look at survey plans of random reserves in Alberta once SPIN 2 returns from its nightly outage.

Overall, my guess is "No." stays in cases where it is present in official legal names/official names and is excluded when it is not. Hwy43 (talk) 06:52, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the reserves, survey plans for every one I've reviewed in Alberta thus far have the "No." included, whether in the early 1900s or the early 2000s (note these two links may not work during their source website's daily outages). Survey plans would not be the primary and definitive source of the official legal names of reserves, but were most likely informed by the primary and definitive federal sources that established their official legal names. Admittedly I don't know where to locate the official legal documents that formed each reserve. Hwy43 (talk) 02:52, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Found this where every reserve has "No." in their titles. A Google search for "Loon Lake Indian Reserve No. 235" returns a number of hits, including this federal order in council and this provincial order in council that use "No." as part of the official legal name. Hwy43 (talk) 03:04, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Also, as you share interest in Canadian geography, you may find the following discussions interesting relative to municipality and article names, which are tangential to this discussion.
Hwy43 (talk) 21:23, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your response and links! As per "No."s, I still think they are superfluous for wikipage titles. It's a typographical shorthand, just like "#", and in some cases are interchangeable (the logo for Corman Park 344 reads "RM of Corman Park #344"). If it is part of the "legal" name, then I think that should be noted in the |official_name= field, similar to what I have done to Obadjiwan IR No. 15E and Algoma, Unorganized, North Part. I'm also still leaning towards simplifying RM titles to just Corman Park 344, but I'll look through those links first (thanks again!). Cheers! FUNgus guy (talk) 00:42, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Fungus Guy, I would oppose removal of any "No." instances for RMs in SK and MDs in AB. In the case of the Corman Park, it would be nearly impossible to provide substantive evidence to confirm its WP:COMMONNAME among its so many variants, such as Rural Municipality of Corman Park No. 344, RM of Corman Park No. 344, R.M. of Corman Park No. 344, Corman Park No. 344, Rural Municipality of Corman Park #344, RM of Corman Park #344, R.M. of Corman Park #344, Corman Park #344, Rural Municipality of Corman Park 344, RM of Corman Park 344, R.M. of Corman Park 344, Corman Park 344, Rural Municipality of Corman Park, RM of Corman Park, R.M. of Corman Park and Corman Park, just to name over a dozen. Add in more with the ", Saskatchewan" disambiguator from the previous approach and the potential "(rural municipality)" disambiguator you've suggested, and then multiply this by 296 RMs (and a couple dozen MDs in AB), it will be impossible to determine a consistent COMMONNAME consensus for every RM in SK and every MD in AB. This is why the current approach to default the article names to the complete official legal names of these municipalities has been applied. Also, the current approach also successfully avoids usage of any disambiguator as there is no possible other topic in the world for the "Rural Municipality of Foo No. XYZ".

One aspect I'm confident of however in terms of common approach is the usage of "No." in the article titles. An overwhelming majority of RMs and MDs use the "No." from its official name in its websites, communications, brands, etc., as do their provincial governments when speaking of them. The usage of "No." is perpetuated into further widespread use due to StatCan's choice to shorthand their official legal names into their CSD names for census purposes to "Foo No. XYZ". By all means the usage of "No." is common and should not be removed, and I feel the same way about numbered census divisions. Had I noticed the "No." was dropped from each census division in NL, I would have opposed likely by reverting or discussion. Hwy43 (talk) 18:04, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I still think a simplified title would be best for RMs, but I certainly don't want to slog through all that mess, so I shall drop it. I will work to revert my removals of "No." from NL and MB census division pages. What do you think of the subdivisions? Subdivision No. 1A, Newfoundland and Labrador or Division No. 1, Subdivision A, Newfoundland and Labrador? I think that the StatsCan abbreviation "Subd." should not be used in titles. As for reserves, there seems to be a divide in consensus, Sydney 28A vs. Aitchelitch Indian Reserve No. 9. I prefer the former, and have applied it to new Ontario reserve pages (e.g., Northwest Angle 34C & 37B). The term "Indian Reserve" is outdated, and both INAC and StatsCan tend to use the "Foo XYZ" names. FUNgus guy (talk) 00:30, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Fungus Guy, these are good questions, some of which I've somewhat pondered myself before. I think before even trying to arrive at the proper name format of article names for NL's unorganized subdivisions, a question should be raised at WP:CANSTYLE to determine if they are notable enough for articles in the first place or if they should just be redirects. Same with regional district electoral areas in BC, county municipality subdivisions in NS and unorganized areas in QC, ON, MB, SK, YT, NT, and NU. None of these are "incorporated municipalities" or even "communities" in and of themselves. Rather, they are subdivisions of municipalities, unorganized areas, etc. for statistical, electoral and/or other purposes that often have numerous unincorporated communities within them. Therefore, WP:CANSTYLE#Article or redirect? does not appear to support articles for these. I did ask a related question there before on this topic. See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Canada-related articles/Archive 1#Incorporated municipalities or census subdivisions?, which may be partially helpful. I also think a separate discussion should be initiated to attempt to arrive at a naming convention solution for the IRs. If you initiate both of these discussions, I'll certainly chime in when I have a free moment. Hwy43 (talk) 05:32, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
I feel that subdivisions of unorganized areas should get pages, for the same reason you gave to keep the former RMs in MB: they have notability in that they have StatsCan data. I will initiate a discussion re: reserves. Thanks for suffering through my incessant questions! FUNgus guy (talk) 21:13, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
While they may appear similar, they are quite different in my view. There is a lot of documentation out there on the former municipalities that complete articles can be created, whereas there is very little out there for these unique sets of census subdivisions beyond that they have census profiles published by StatCan. I'm torn. I've seen your post regarding reserves. Though less explicit in my last reply, I look forward to seeing a separate discussion on the unique census subdivisions some day as well. Hwy43 (talk) 04:32, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Topographic map of Alberta

So you're the Alberta map guy! I've been running into your work for years, and I never realized it all came from the same source. Phenomenal! And we're even in the same county :-)

Your work is really what made me try and teach myself GIS - a couple years ago, I would use the MS Paint bucket fill tool on your county maps to create a bunch of silly fictional scenarios, and I thought "there must be a better way to do this...".

Basically, I'm interested in creating a really nice, complete topographic map for the entire province, like this one: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Scotland_topographic_map-fr.jpg But I'm fairly new to Wiki, so I'd like to know if there are any ongoing projects similar to this, or if I'm missing anything obvious, or if there's anything big to watch out for (like, say, licensing problems with federal government data).

Here's some of my work from the last month: the fictional city of Sundance, a labeled Sask RM map, Metro Vancouver.

And here's a more directly answerable question - when I passed through Fox Creek, I learned that the town is technically in the Virginia Hills (instead of the Swan Hills?), which is also the name of a page in my Backroad Mapbook... but these hills seem un-Googleable! Do you know anything about their exact extent? Awmcphee (talk) 17:21, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

I'll have to get back to you tomorrow in regard to everything above hopefully, but I'll do a quick brain dump on Virginia Hills. In my nearly 40 years of close connection to Fox Creek and Whitecourt, I've never heard or read that Fox Creek is within an area known as Virginia Hills. My understanding is, if this set of hills is truly a named range, then they are essentially foothills of the Swan Hills. They are due east of Fox Creek and northwest of Whitecourt. If you look at Google Street View, there is a significant lease road intersecting with a Highway 43 near the midpoint between Fox Creek and Whitecourt (not too far from the boundary between Greenview and Woodlands). For that intersection, you can see a green directional wayfinding sign approaching the intersection that says Virginia Hills is ~32 km down this road. There is also a similar intersection on Highway 32 south of the Town of Swan Hills directing that Virginia Hills is 20-something kilometres to the west. There is a gas plant up there if I recall correctly. My old man worked there for a period. More than anything, Virginia Hills may have just been the name of the plant and then the Virginia Hills name took on a life of its own. Not sure. I'll ask the old man when I see him in a couple weeks. Hwy43 (talk) 07:45, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Here is the location of the gas plant, which is 32 km SW of the Town of Swan Hills, 52 km north of Whitecourt and 64 km NE of Fox Creek. I searched "Virginia" within the "Geographic Names of Alberta" database I have on file and the only hit is a small dam listed at approximately 54.67, -115.85 (actually 54.662, -115.867), which is 9 km north of the gas plant. Hwy43 (talk) 06:55, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
OK, I went ahead and put it together anyway: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alberta_Topo_Labeled_90_dpi.png I'm still having a bit of trouble uploading the entire .svg, let me know if you notice any needs that this thing doesn't address properly :-) Awmcphee (talk) 07:22, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Awmcphee, pardon the two-week delay. I've reviewed your four maps and you certainly have a gift! Well done. In your Alberta topo map, I was impressed you acknowledged Thorsby as a town already, given it has been one for less the a month. A couple quick observations:

  • In the legend, consider replacing "County/Municipal District" with "Rural Municipality" so that it is inclusive of special areas and improvement districts;
  • Change "City" to "City/Urban Service Area" since Sherwood Park and Fort McMurray are urban service areas rather than cities;
  • Beaumont's urban area has more than doubled (its annexation came into effect on January 1; not sure if AltaLIS municipal boundary open data has been updated accordingly yet).

Your fictitious Sundance map reminds me of inventing and designing fictitious towns and cities on paper when I was young.

I spoke with my father about Virginia Hills. The gas plant was named for the hill formation of the same name. The footprint of the hill formation is unknown though. Given it is not acknowledged in the "Geographic Names of Alberta" database, I am skeptical of the accuracy in the Backroad Mapbook until a provincial verifiable source is found.

Keep up the good work! Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 07:01, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Awmcphee, on a sudden hunch, I found my 1969 Atlas of Alberta. No Virginia Hills. However, I found a few ranges that are missing from your map that are listed below, starting from NW and ending in SE corners of province in a grid-like fashion.
  • Cameron Hills
  • Ninishith Hills
  • Naylor Hills
  • Hawk Hills
  • Whitemud Hills
  • Saddle Hills
  • Birch Hills
  • Neutral Hills
  • Wintering Hills
  • The Middle Sand Hills
  • Milk River Ridge

If I find anything else in the atlas I'll let you know. Hwy43 (talk) 07:16, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for digging out the atlas! My 1984 edition is less comprehensive with the hill ranges, but I think I've managed to track this entire list down - I'm least confident about the Ninishiths, and I wasn't exactly sure what separates the Hawks and Naylors. Regardless of these three, the map has been updated.
My source for the Virginia Hills was the lady who was stationed at the Fox Creek visitor centre when I passed through - it reminded me of how my family in the Rocky Mountain Trench is very particular about which mountain range they consider themselves to be in (the RMT separates the Rockies and the Purcells - the claim is that, by convention, living in the Trench means you live in the Purcells).
I re-downloaded the muni boundaries from AltaLIS today, but Beaumont is still its original size - guess there's a bit more waiting to do here. For now I have plans to try doing a companion map for Saskatchewan. Thank you for your guidance! :-) Awmcphee (talk) 07:43, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Whitby

Hi! I wonder if this edit was perhaps meant for here? Hope this helps; best wishes DBaK (talk) 01:14, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

DBaK, you wondered correctly. I've fixed the inbound link that took me to the wrong article. Thanks for the heads up. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 01:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Brilliant! Thank you very much for sorting this out. If you are ever over here, I can strongly recommend a look at the Yorkshire one. :) Cheers DBaK (talk) 18:52, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

NB municipalities map

Hey - just one more change to the NB municipalities map. The rural community of St-Andre should include the former surrounding local service district of St-Andre as well (similar to the Kedgwick situation). Just north of Town of Grand Falls. Mrwalis99 (talk) 15:26, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Mrwalis99, was this the status change you alluded to happening sometime in 2017 when you reached out last year? If so, can you send me a source to review? Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 17:26, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

No this one is different- it happened a few years ago. Take a look at the map on this page (left side). This map has the new boundaries in green. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madawaska_County,_New_Brunswick Mrwalis99 (talk) 13:35, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Which is the master?

Hi, do you remember which SPI this guy is from, how you mention here? Thanks a lot. Air.light (talk) 06:51, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Air.light, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/UrbanNerd. Hwy43 (talk) 08:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

CSS styling in templates

Hello everyone, and sincere apologies if you're getting this message more than once. Just a heads-up that there is currently work on an extension in order to enable CSS styling in templates. Please check the document on mediawiki.org to discuss best storage methods and what we need to avoid with implementation. Thanks, m:User:Melamrawy (WMF), 09:11, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Land area source?

Hi, sorry to bug you with this question again, but for consistency, I'm wondering what source we should use for land area? Here is the 2016 census [1] and the 2011 census [2] and they both give different land area values for Ontario. I assume this would be the case for other provinces. Should I go through the list pages and use only the new 2016 land area value? What do you think? Mattximus (talk) 15:09, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Always use the same vintage of data as the population data, which in this case is 2016. All provinces and territories are affected by negligible land area changes between the 2011 and 2016 censuses for whatever methodological reason. We've speculated about that elsewhere with CambridgeBayWeather. For the opening paragraphs in the municipality lists, where the population and land area is ranked among the other provinces/territories, use this instead of this. The former allows the comparison among other provinces/territories whereas the latter only allows comparison with Nova Scoita's census subdivisions and Canada. However, the latter supports everything else in the article. I made a mistake last night and didn't use the former in the NS article, which I will fix right now. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 17:45, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
Agreed, I'll slowly get to all the provinces/territories that you haven't got too first. I kinda like the table format you made for the Nova Scotia list, would you mind if I applied that to all lists? (Specifically having only 1 reference for all 4 final columns). Mattximus (talk) 18:17, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
By all means of course. Carry forward any efficiencies that have evolved and emerged over time. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 20:12, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

The Selkirkinator

Just FYI, I looked into the past vandalism you mentioned re Selkirk, and you're right that the patterns were the same: unsourced changes to Selkirk's census population, downgrading Selkirk from city to town status, and weird nonsense about transit buses. And, in fact, that blocked user's past sock IDs have also included more than one name that had "Riley" in it, to boot. Accordingly, I've gone ahead and blocked him on WP:DUCK grounds. Thanks for the heads up. Bearcat (talk) 23:34, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Bearcat. I didn't have the time to start a new SPI at that moment. Enjoy the nickname you bestowed. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 17:46, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Ancaster, Hamilton, Ontario

Would you have a moment to comment at Talk:Ancaster, Hamilton, Ontario#Ancaster, Ontario moved to Ancaster, Hamilton, Ontario. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Magnolia677, if I wanted to mail something to a resident or business in Ancaster, would the city line on the mailing address read "Ancaster, ON" or "Hamilton, ON"? This may seem like a trivial question, but believe it or not there is a consensus approach based on the answer. Hwy43 (talk) 17:43, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
I asked for your input because you appear to have expertise in Canadian geographic articles. Your response seems derisive, which I agree, makes your question trivial. Thank you for your time. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:24, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
No, no, no! Magnolia677, I am not trying to be derisive at all. Seriously, if the answer to the question is yes, then the consensus on Wikipedia is the article should follow the "City, Province" name format. I was just too busy at the time to confirm myself. I have the answer now. It is yes. The article should be moved back to Ancaster, Ontario per WP:CANSTYLE#Neighbourhoods/communities. Hwy43 (talk) 00:53, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Forgive me for misinerpreting your response. Most of my edits are to US towns and cities, but I occasionally edit Canadian settelments and I must say the Canadian naming guidelines are a bit complex. I expressed my feelings a while back at Talk:Pinawa. I'm not sure how bare names assist Wikipedia readers find articles, both in Wikipedia searched and in Google searches. I also think this site would be a better "go to" for place names than Canada Post (much like GNIS for US articles). Again, my apology. Magnolia677 (talk) 01:11, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
No worries. I can see how it, along with the curious question, could have led you to the misinterpretation. I recall seeing that Pinawa discussion. I once felt like you but I eventually embraced the Canadian WikiProject's consensus-based convention. See the move history and talk page of La Crete. Hwy43 (talk) 01:26, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Magnolia677, the Natural Resources directory is great for a lot of things — but it's not helpful in the context of determining what level of disambiguation a settlement should be located at. If I search for Ancaster, for example, the result tells me nothing about whether Ancaster is idiomatically understood as "Ancaster, Ontario" or "Ancaster, Hamilton" in actual everyday speech — and actual real-world usage, not "all places of X type must follow an invariably consistent dab format based on the class of topic", is what makes the decision one way or the other. That's why the Canada Post database is preferred for that purpose: the current or historical presence of a post office in that location is the most reliably predictive test of whether people would say "Ancaster, Ontario" or not. The base principle that we follow is that each place needs to be at the title that readers who are looking for it would be likeliest to expect — if they'd be likelier to expect comma-Ontario, then we put it there, and if they'd be likelier to expect comma-City, then we put it there. By comparison, nobody would ever expect the neighbourhood of Cabbagetown in Toronto to be at "Cabbagetown, Ontario" — that's not a thing people would say when referring to it, because the postal mailing address of a Cabbagetown resident is "Toronto, ON", not "Cabbagetown, ON". The core test is "what would people actually call it in the real world?" — and there are some places which, even though they're technically neighbourhoods within cities rather than standalone municipalities, would be called "Place, Ontario" rather than "Place, City" in the real world. Bearcat (talk) 17:09, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Hwy43, thank you for allowing me to respond on your talk page. User:Bearcat, I think its wonderful that the Canadian style attempts to disambiguate according to the idiomatic understanding of a settlement. This acknowledges the historical importance of a place, and demonstrates an effort to help Wikipedia readers find what they are looking for. My concern is that the well-intentioned Canadian style is overly complex, and is in fact quite subjective.

In the US, the standard rule (at least I think it's a rule) seems to be that if a neighborhood is located within a larger city, it gets disambiguated according to the larger city. No matter that Flushing, Queens was founded in 1645, or Bridgeport, Chicago in the early 1800s; the US style has little regard for the historical importance or idiomatic understanding of the place name, which makes it rigidly objective (something that seems to work quite well in certain places on Wikipedia).

OK...Ancaster is now located within Hamilton. But all the locals know it as "Ancaster, Ontario". Most important, the users of Wikipedia will probably be looking for "Ancaster, Ontario", not Ancaster in Hamilton. So as editors, let's create some sort of "test" to determine what to call this place, and that test will be whether is has a post office.

In fact, "Ancaster, ON" does show up as a real place at Canada Post, so it probably also has its own unique history, and should be disambiguated from all the other Ancasters as "Ancaster, Ontario".

My concern is that what appears to be objective--a recognition that this is a unique settlement according to Canada Post--is actually quite subjective.

Malton, Mississauga was settled in the early 1800s. Malton had a train station, an international airport, and its own post office for a while. It even had its own soccer team which competed against neighboring Elmbank. But "Malton, Ontario" did not pass the Canada Post test, and neither did "Flushing, New York" (no prize, pas cadeaux!).

I'm not trying to be a prickly pear. I've just been editing long enough to realize that some parts of Wikipedia are being held together with chicken wire, and I'd be willing to sacrifice an easy search for a simplified editing rule. Thank you! Magnolia677 (talk) 22:46, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Well, I don't think either Flushing or Bridgeport is really a good comparison. The Nanny was "working in a bridal shop in Flushing, Queens", not in "Flushing, New York", before she met Mr. Sheffield — and there's a second, independent non-Chicago Bridgeport at the opposite end of the state of Illinois competing for the "Bridgeport, Illinois" idiom. So they don't prove that how the place would be idiomatically referred to in real world speech is irrelevant to the matter — because for both of them, "Place, City" is how they would be referred to, so they are already at their idiomatic titles. And there are situations, even in the United States, where a neighbourhood within a city is dabbed with the state name rather than the city name; see, frex, North Omaha, Nebraska and South Omaha, Nebraska. Bearcat (talk) 16:08, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Serviceberry #43 in Alberta ("Weather's good there in the fall")

You "Redirected Serviceberry #43 to List of municipal districts in Alberta#Former municipal districts" (which IIRC requires a mention of the former within the latter article). You probably can provide, with less effort than any of the rest of us, (at least) info on a more specific current jurisdiction within which SB 43 lies. Thanks at least for your attention.
--Jerzy•t 19:21, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Serviceberry No. 43, Alberta redirects to List of municipal districts in Alberta#Former municipal districts. Within the table under the Dissolved subsection, there is the following entry.
Name
Earlier name(s) 		Incorporation date
(municipal district) 		Dissolution date Subsequent municipality(ies)
Serviceberry No. 43 January 1, 1955 Rocky View County
Wheatland County
Thus, what was once the MD of Serviceberry No. 43 now straddles what is currently Rocky View County and Wheatland County. I trust this is what you were looking for. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 00:03, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

List of municipalities in Manitoba question

I finally updated the Manitoba list for 2016 census (only 3 more to go!), but I noticed the second of your excellent maps says "79 urban municipalities", the first map seems to have far fewer, and the list has only 39. Was there a massive amalgamation effort recently that I missed? Mattximus (talk) 13:39, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Manitoba municipal amalgamations, 2015, which explains everything, is linked in the caption of the second map and in the See also section. The third map needs to be updated as a result. I'll put it on my to do list, but all of my free time has evaporated and this will be the case for months yet. Thanks for continuing to update the lists. Hwy43 (talk) 23:02, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Mattximus, found some time to update the map while watching Zack Kassian dismantle the San Jose Sharks. #GoOilersGo Hwy43 (talk) 05:11, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Haha wow, that was fast, yep I'll keep working on the lists, I'm half-done Ontario, so all that is missing is Saskatchewan and the mount Everest of our little project, Quebec. Mattximus (talk) 13:10, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Where do we get the climate charts for Ontario towns?

Good evening, User:Hwy43. Other editors and I have been improving the articles about villages, towns and cities. Many of them do not have the Climate chart. (Should that only be used for large communities?) Would you be able to instruct me on how to find such a chart for Kingston, Ontario, for example? Thanks, Peter K Burian (talk) 22:54, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Peter K Burian. I'm all thumbs when it comes to climate charts. Best is to approach a Canadian WikiProject member that is proficient in such. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/Members. CambridgeBayWeather is one that comes to mind. One thing I think I do know is the only real reliable and acceptable source for climate chart data for Canadian community articles, according to consensus, is Environment Canada. Hwy43 (talk) 05:12, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

TFL notification

Hi, Hwy43. I'm just posting to let you know that List of municipalities in the Northwest Territories – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for June 23. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 00:24, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Rosedale, Alberta (disambiguation)

The article Rosedale, Alberta (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:2DAB

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 117Avenue (talk) 02:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

No objection from me. Hwy43 (talk) 06:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Legacy, Calgary for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Legacy, Calgary is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legacy, Calgary until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 15:02, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Nolan Hill for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nolan Hill is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nolan Hill until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MB 00:52, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Sage Hill, Calgary for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sage Hill, Calgary is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sage Hill, Calgary until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MB 02:26, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

List of municipalities in Quebec

Hi Hwy43, it's been a while since we collaborated, hope all is well. I noticed in the text of List of municipalities in Quebec there are several sections that are invisible, and it looks like your work from the Saskatchewan article? I just finished updating the table and all numbers in the lead and body, but I didn't want to touch those paragraphs as I suspect they were yours from quite a long time ago. Perhaps there was a plan to update this page with the style of the Saskatchewan article? Only two more lists for me to update, then we are completely up to date with the 2016 census. Mattximus (talk) 14:41, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Your assumption about the plan was correct. More specifically, see the explanation in this edit summary. So long as this article is improved to the same level of quality as the other provincial municipality featured lists, it doesn't matter so much that this one exactly emulates Saskatchewan specifically, though I think we've done a careful enough job that all read and feel like each other. Thanks for your continued efforts. I haven't been following them closely. I'll continue to be inactive for a while yet. Once PEI's new MGA is proclaimed in force you may see me back temporarily to clean its municipality list up. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 02:55, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Hays Ridge, Edmonton for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hays Ridge, Edmonton is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hays Ridge, Edmonton until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SophisticatedSwampert let's talk about that 21:52, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Nominating Saboteurest as a sockpuppet of UrbanNerd

You should nominate Saboteurest as a sockpuppet, since you probably have the evidence. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:36, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

I can as early as tomorrow evening. Contributions of both users to Ottawa and Toronto are telling, as is most recent edit summary stating "Revert POV". As for the most obvious, see one of his blocked IP sock's comment at Talk:List of census metropolitan areas and agglomerations in Canada#City images error, which led to this block, and then Saboteurest eventual arrives to make this edit. If you want to expedite, feel free to get the ball rolling on my behalf. Hwy43 (talk) 01:38, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Saboteurest returned to Talk:Toronto. This would be a good opportunity to expedite the process of nominating him, especially since it's your claim, not mine. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 02:02, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

DRN case closed

This message template was placed here by Nihlus, a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. You recently filed a request or were a major party in the DRN case titled "Talk:Toronto#Changes to_the_First_Paragraph_of_the_Lead". The case is now closed: consensus has been reached If you are unsatisfied with this outcome, you may refile the DRN request or open a thread on another noticeboard as appropriate. If you have any questions please feel free to contact this volunteer at his/ her talk page or at the DRN talk page. Thank you! --Nihlus 14:48, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge award

The Silver Maple Leaf Award
This maple leaf is awarded to Hwy43 for writing a dozen new articles, making hundreds of census updates and many other quality improvements during The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 15:22, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Hwy43. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings

...to you and yours, from Canada's Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:03, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Hwy43.

As one of Wikipedia's most experienced editors,
Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 22:05, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Template:Edmonton neighbourhoods

A reminder that I pinged you at Template talk:Edmonton neighbourhoods#Geographic sector breakdown. 117Avenue (talk) 20:19, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Funny coincidence this comes in while trying to reconcile and reverting the edit at List of neighbourhoods in Edmonton. Thanks for the reminder. I'll put that in my to do list for this slow week. Back to work for a bit right now though. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 20:37, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Reviewing

Hello, Hwy43.
AfC submissions
Random submission
~6 weeks
1,033 pending submissions
Purge to update

I recently sent you an invitation to join NPP, but you also might be the right candidate for another related project, AfC, which is also extremely backlogged.
Would you please consider becoming an Articles for Creation reviewer? Articles for Creation reviewers help new users learn the ropes of creating their first articles, and identify whether topics are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Reviewing drafts doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia inclusion policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After requesting to be added to the project, reviewing is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the reviewing instructions before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 01:39, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Insertcleverphrasehere, thank you for the invites. I am not as active as I once was on here. If it weren't for the Canada 2016 Census results released back in February, this would have been my least active year to date. I don't have the free time to give back to the community in these capacities at this time due to my off-wiki commitments. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 04:15, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
That's totally fine. These invites were more about getting the word out that AfC and NPP need more active participants. If you don't have time, you don't have time. Cheers mate. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 04:18, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11→Archive 15
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hwy43/Archive_9&oldid=1143054473"