User talk:Jord/Archive01

Hi! Images that should be deleted should be listed at images for deletion. I moved Image:223.jpeg to there. Regards, Thue | talk 19:23, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi from your fellow Canadian troublemaker at the 08 US election page. :) You might want to consider joining the Canadian community at Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board, as I just have. Cheers! Samaritan 21:56, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Gary Hart

Well the source I found indicates he was a candidate officially from mid April 1987 [1] to the first week of May, when the Miami Herald story broke. Are you saying he re-entered the race after that? I don't recall that happening at all (I worked for his campaign in 1983 in D.C. and New Hampshire, but not during the second run. When I started with him, he was an asterisk in the polls and his hq was above a fried chicken outlet in the worst part of DC). -- Decumanus 00:44, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

Yes, I see he did and got 4% in New Hampshire. I must have blocked that out, considering all the canvassing I did for him up there in 83. My, my. -- Decumanus 01:13, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

I am also a bit hesitant about this and agree it would have been best if you had first sought some sort of consensus somewhere and/or posted this in a common area. Also, I am sorry if this sounds paranoid, but I am a little concerned, and find it suspect, that the information at Wikipedia:Multi-licensing has been almost entirely authored by you. I am going to refrain from making a decision until I can see some consensus about whether or not this is a good idea. I am by no means an intellectual property expert, but my nose smells fish. - Jord 01:21, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

By all means feel paranoid, and if you choose not to multi-license, then don't. Actually the multi-licensing page is heavily based on the page on meta, which I did not author. I did add additional information and was hoping that others would contribute to it as well. At this point many people have looked over it, so it has been reviewed. As I mentioned on a talk page, I asked the first 400 people without using the bot and got at most 1 complaint about the message. In a sense, that was a form of consensus from those users who perform the most edits here. And right now we are having a discussion about it, which is constructive. And the bot is not doing anything while we discuss this. – Ram-Man ^{(comment) (talk)}[[]] 01:27, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

"Canadian politics" template

Maybe we can discuss this on the talk page for the template, I don't mind a re-design, but let me know what you have in mind, maybe we can do this collaboratively. I based it on the New Zealand politics template. Spinboy 06:11, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It was fun working with you. If there are any other articles you'd like to collaborate on, let me know. Spinboy 07:29, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

That reminds me, don't forget to vote for a Canadian collaboration of the week. Spinboy 07:30, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Governor Whitman

Sorry for not giving an immediate response I'm in and out. I took the notice off the article as it had been improved to some extent. Thank you for your work on the article and well wishes. :) Arminius on Vacation 00:41, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Canadian federal election, 2005

I just updated it based on your comments. As for the talk page comment, I think probably nobody noticed it (can you honestly say you always notice these things? *grin*) Bearcat 19:10, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

British Columbia Unity Party

That was a fair question. I had to search for a bit to find the source,and it is not the best source available, but it seems to be alright: letter from delaney I would prefer something more concrete, but it seems that these BC fringe parties are really slack about updating their websites.Kevintoronto 15:40, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I've been looking at the BCCP/Unity fiasco from the other angle: BCCP gives up its long-established name, one that will have new value now that there is a federal party of the same name, but they get what? The numerically stronger Unity Party people would end up dominating the new party. I don't what the BCCP's stand on social issues is, but if they are Red Tories, being taken over by Unity, which seems to be largely old Family Coalition types, seem to be a bad idea - maybe they'd be better off in DRBC. On the other hand, there really doesn't seem to be much future for a tiny Conservative party anyway anyway. What is it about BC that causes it to produce far more political parties than any other province? Kevintoronto

British House of Commons

I liked the table that you made for the British House of Commons and have used it in a page called Seating Plan of British House of Commons however it looks as if it will be deleted. I am trying to save it and have reformed to be more appeasing. It is now on the page Party Comparison of British House of Commons. If you support this page then please voice your opinion if it too is threatened by deletion.

2005 New Brunswick New Democratic Party leadership race

Jord, how would you feel about changing the name of this article to "New Brunswick New Democratic Party leadership convention, 2005"? I have changed the federal Liberal, PC, Cons and Ontario parties articles to this format because: 1) it is consistent with the "Canadian federal lection, YYYY" format, and 2) a race is an athletic event. The word has been brought into the political sphere by analogy, and therefore really is not formal enough for an encyclopedia entry. I have changed the above-mentioned articles to "convention" or "election" as appropriate, although many of them already refered to one or the other. Your thoughts? Kevintoronto 18:00, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I have been moving the date to the end to be consistent with the election article title format. This is even mentioned briefly in the Wikipedia naming convention guide as the preferred format, although the guide does acknowledge that some people put the year first. I recognize that the articles on leadership conventions/elections cover more than just the actual event, but the same is true of all of the election articles. An election is the act of casting ballots to choose a winner. The period before is the campaign, and not the election per se, but the convention has been that we have named the articles after the event that is the culmination of the the period covered by the article. I'm not crazy about "contest" either: it sounds like something on the back of a cereal box that you send in a ballot for to win a trip or a bike. So, actually I guess it sounds like a bigger prize than just the leadership of the NB NDP. I would using "election" until they decide what form it is going to take and moving the article to "convention" if they go to a delegated convention. There are my two cents' worth. Regards, Kevintoronto 21:29, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Jord. I've now moved it to New Brunswick New Democratic Party leadership election, 2005, and added a link to the page from leadership conventions.Kevintoronto 14:41, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

MV Abegweit

Jord, this article is up for deletion. The text needs to be imporved, and the pictures are way too big. I figured as a New Brunswicker you might be able to help out. By the way, when they held a vote in PEI on joining the island to New Brunswick by bridge, was there also a vote held in New Brunswick on whether NBers wanted to be joined to PEI? It would only seem fair. Regards, Kevintoronto 16:40, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on this. We seemed to have saved it. I was only joking about the NB vote, by the way. Thanks also for catching my mistake on the 2005 budget. I had 2004 on the brain because I had come to the budget articles from the 2005 election article in which someone had put a link to the 2004 budget from the timeline, instead of to the 2005 budget, which is what had been intended. Kevintoronto 19:22, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Next Canadian election

With the budget backed by the Conservatives it is almost certain there will be no election in 2005, so 2005 Canadian election is a misnomer. - SimonP 17:22, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Good point, I have altered the naming conventions. - SimonP 18:32, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Our conventions are not written in stone. They were written by users with no more authority than you or I. Our choice is between having a title that is inconsistent or having one that is ungainly and factually questionable. Personally I will always sacrifice consistency for accuracy and usability. - SimonP 21:47, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Ottawa Wikipedia Meetup

Hey, just a quick note to let you know there is an Ottawa Wikipedia Meetup coming up this Saturday @ 2pm. If you can make it, please drop by the Meetup website and RSVP. If you can't, join up anyway, so you can find out about future Ottawa Wikipedia Meetups! --Spinboy 20:54, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

In Ottawa we haven't had a Wikipedia Meetup before, but from the other Meetups I have been to, we basically discuss Wikipedia, or whatever else comes to mind. It's a great opportunity to meet the other people frm Ottawa who also edit on Wikipedia. :-) --Spinboy 21:07, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image source

Thank you for uploading Image:Nbelection1995.GIF, Image:Nbelection1999.GIF, and Image:Nbelection2003.GIF. Its copyright status is unclear, so it may have to be deleted. Please leave a note on the image page about the source of the image. Thank you. -- cohesion ☎ 19:04, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

That applies to Image:Carolynparrish.jpg as well. You need to add a image tag. It is currently {{unverified}}. If you don't know how to fix this, ask for help on my talk page. Superm401-Talk 04:25, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

Elections tables

thanks again, Jord.

I have a couple of questions before I get started:

1. What happened to the "block" of colour at the beginning of the line? There now only seemd to be a thin line.

2. All of the tables except the 2004 one have a column for the # of candidates. Can this be incorporated?

3. What's with the funky spacing?

I haven't tried to muck around with it myself, because I'm afraid that you might be doing so at the moment. Kevintoronto 21:52, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Okay.... I'm not sure what's going on. When I view the page in the "difference" mode, the table looks fine -- problems 1 and 3 go away. But when I view it in normal mode, the block of colour appears only as a thin line, and each row is double-height with all of the text except for the last coloumn centred. The data from that last column is at the top of the space. Any ideas? Kevintoronto 22:07, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

New Wikiproject

Hi there, just a quick note to let you know that we've started a new wikiproject! WikiProject Ottawa aims to expand the amount of articles in Ottawa, and of the articles that are there, take them from stubs to something worthy of being a feature article. We hope you'll stop by and sign up! --Spinboy 03:47, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

More election template fun.

I'm sure your watchlist has already pinged, but just thought I'd draw your attention to my latest attempt at a step-reducing template for those riding-by-riding breakdowns. It's on Talk:Canadian_federal_election_results_since_1867. My awayedness meant I missed much of the earlier parts of the debate, so I hope you won't mind me playing the role of Johnny-come-lately. -The Tom 03:11, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Quebec

If you are interested in more Quebec-related collaboration, there is a Quebec wikipedians notice board and a Quebec collaboration of the week. Circeus 19:18, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)

Bloc targets

I've run similar numbers (pause for nerdy laughter), but to be fair, there won't be a uniform swing as those massive Liberal majority-ridings are overwhelmingly federalist. Anyway, I thought that considering the Bloc only contests 75 ridings (and doesn't hold only 21 of the ones it contests), holding it to the same standards for "top targets" as the national parties was a bit odd. -The Tom 22:03, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Your input, please

Some more ideas here on formatting of elections tables. I hope these won't be controversial. Ground Zero 19:54, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

You have been blocked from editing because of this edit, which is total vandalism. Radiant! ¸ 20:26, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) Senseless comment made by ¸

• Thanks for pointing that out, I've reported this vandal to AN/I. We really need a policy that allows us to sock-check these people. Radiant_* 07:07, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

CoR colours

I imagine your recollection of CoR's colouration in NB is better than everyone else's, so thanks for switching it over to green. The thing is, I have a feeling that the CoR federal colour (moccasin, I think) was selected some time ago purely because that end of the colour wheel was unclaimed and there was no solid info of any actual colouration. That makes me wonder if we should, barring evidence to the contrary, use the NB colours nationally. (As an added bonus, it would stop the clash between CoR-Ontario and the Family Coalition Party that's on the charts at the moment). The amount of free colour space is getting a little tight around the green end of the spectrum (GPC, Socreds, Libertarian and Reform all cohabitated in that era, unfortunately) which might complicate things a little, though. Thoughts? -The Tom 23:52, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

COTW Project

You voted for History of Quebec, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

Federal elections

I hope that you don't mind that I've gone ahead and done a bunch more federal election table conversions. I figure that you don't seem to have much time to do them, so I'd go ahead. Regards, Ground Zero 21:35, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

BC election

have you blocked me on MSN? -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:26, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

oh, sorry -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:32, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Senatorial divisions

I'm running to the biggest political geography nuts I know of for a hand here. I'm rather displeased with the article at Canadian Senate Divisions which strongly seems to imply Senate divisions are anything more than political ephemera that dance in the minds of Senators. It was anonymously assembled, and on further examination it seems someone called Cloveious is now putting together articles like Calgary Senate division which perpetuate the mistake on the first article and treat senate tags as if they were ridings--"created from" older divisions on certain dates, and so on. That definately seems VfDish. Just wondering if you had any commentary for the Talk page -The Tom 18:46, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Decima Research

I tried to create a little article on Decima Research to get rid of the redlink at 39th CFE, but it was almost immediately hit with a "request for significance" notice threatening a VfD if I couldn't provide a reason for the article to be there. Can you help out? Ground Zero 19:13, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Liberal Party of Canada leadership convention, 1968

I have recently been working on polishing Liberal Party of Canada leadership convention, 1968 with the hopes of bringing it up to featured article quality in the near future. I have just listed it on peer review for comment. I know you are one of the most active Wikipedians in these areas and I would much appreciate to hear any comments or criticisms you might have. - SimonP 14:01, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Polls

Hello, I see you just put 14% for the Bloc under the May 20 Ipsos-Reid count. Where did you get this number from? -- Earl Andrew - talk 01:52, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I suppose I can trust you ;-) It's just that I was unable to find the data. Then again, I didnt check their website. -- Earl Andrew - talk 01:57, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cool website! Love the name ;-) -- Earl Andrew - talk 02:30, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Canadian senate divisions

I'd like your comments at Talk:Canadian Senate Divisions. I'm attempting to re-write the article. See Talk:Canadian Senate Division/Temp. Thanks. Ground Zero 13:54, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nice one, Jord!. Ground Zero 14:27, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It's been good working with you, nosy one. I've nominated three article for VfD, although I coudn't quite figure out how to do a proper group nomination. Coincidentally, as I am typing this, my first ever VfD nomination was just successfully closed. I feel powerful. I may just have to hand in my inclusionist club card and become a deletionist. Nah, that wouldn't be as much fun. Regards, Ground Zero 19:54, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yep, speedy on the temp page was a good move. Ground Zero 20:01, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Jord, could you check my edit on Grandville (Senate division). Have I gone too far? Ground Zero 14:34, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Check out List of Quebec senators. I think that pretty well covers (in one place) what those 24 articles might possibly cover. That's why I deleted the links. Since the boundaries will never change, I can't imagine what else could be added. Ground Zero 17:43, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Aldéa Landry

I stubbed Aldéa Landry this afternoon on account of her appointment to the Privy Council. Anyway, I know someone else's alley when I see it :) -The Tom 20:05, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

NB election

I don't mind the word order -- I just think that adding links in the bold section of the first line junks it up. Also, the Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Article titles says:

"If possible, make the title the subject of the first sentence of the article (as opposed to putting it in the predicate). In any case, the title should appear as early as possible in the article — preferably in the first sentence. The first time the title is mentioned in the article, put it in bold using three apostrophes. Here's an example: article title produces article title. You should not put links in the title."

Great article, though! Ground Zero 19:44, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

PC Party links

if you know how to make a master list, feel free. I would have if I knew how. Pellaken 20:03, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

thats not what I ment. what I wanted was one of these:

This user is a Liberal.

or one of these:

why do these parties get these and the tories dont. smells like bias POV to me.

the parties are all PC parties, and those that are not, are the largest "conservative" parties in their province. as I said I feel this is bias and POV the reason that one does not already exist.

a compromise perhaps?

in AB, SK, MB, ON, NB, NS, PE, and NL, there ARE "Progressive Conserevative Parties" That's not misleading. BC and YK parties were once called PC, and I beleive you can add them to the same list, just by adding a disclaimer that they've since changed their names. You could then build a second list of "Other Major Provincial Conservative Parties in Canada" which would include BCL, SaskP, and the ADQ, possibly even the PLQ that would be tacked onto the bottom of the PC list, like how LPO, LPQ, LPA, and BCL are tacked onto the bottom of the liberal list. I dont think this is confusing, POV, or anything. Pellaken 22:37, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I figured out how to make one myself.

{{Major_Canadian_Conservative_Parties}}

Pellaken 22:55, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I've done exactly what I intented to do, and still dont see how you can call a template which has links to all the canadian conservative parties as being misleading. I beleive what I've done to be NPOV and will defend it as such if you try to delete it or make edits that would remove parties such as the saskatchewan party.

I dont even know where to report NPOV voilations, but I get the impression from the quality of the PC articles compared to the Liberal and NDP ones, that there's no hope in trying to fight any of this because no matter what, the tories get screwed over at wikipedia. so what do I care? its not like I can do anything about it.

I used to be a Liberal too, and even a dipper. I'm an ontario tory now. I kind of want someone to try and delete it, because I dont see any reason why the ADQ, Saskatchewan Party, CPC, and Ontario PC Party should not be any more then one click away from eachother. To the voters in these provinces, that is how they view things. Your spazzing over "official" things. China is "officially" a democracy, but that's not what wikipedia says about things. I dont see why we cant have a conservative link box that sees things De Facto rather then what's "tethnical".

as for me "lashing out" its more at the fact that the PEI NDP's website is better then the PEI PC Party's website, despite the fact that the PEI NDP got what, 1/25th of the votes of the PEI PC Party? I was in the PEI NDP at the time, I ran for them in district 11, and even despite that, I can see it's unfair. All the other parties have posters that go on patrol and improve and defend their articles. I dont want to be the only policeman in toryville. Pellaken 23:54, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

not website- wikipage

I'd prefer a box that links to the largest small C conservative party in each province. for AB, MB, ON, NB, NS, NL, and PE, that's the PC Party. for SK, and YK, that's the 'province' party. for PQ that's the ADQ. BC does not have one large and clear conservative party. if that's not there, then ok. but the Saskatchewan Party, ADQ, and Yukon Party, do mean something. If you know how, feel free. I'm at a loss. Pellaken 00:13, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

yes. that is ok. I'm a dit distracted as I found an excuse to link to myself and make a page on myself! :) Pellaken 00:43, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

NB PC logo

I was getting around to that :P

if you want to help though, can you help me beef-up the other PC ones to standard? I'm done Yukon, doing Saskatchewan, then am moving to Manitoba, PEI, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, and NB. if you want to and have the time, you can go backwards.

NB maps

I made PEI maps going back to 1900 in the spring of 04. when I moved to NB in the summer of 04, I made those maps :P I got the maps from elections NB. just e-mail them and request a map from that era. Pellaken 17:26, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

HELP!!

some ass has been going around tagging canadian election images like this one:

Image:Elec2004.PNG

for deletion! I dont want my maps that I put on the NB or PEI thing to get deleted! help, what do I do!! Pellaken 08:14, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

okay...

looking through your talk page, I found a link, etc etc etc, I think I got it all sorted out. Pellaken 08:31, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Sask Party

Hear is some more info on the Sask Party[2][3] Michaelm 03:04, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

I have proposed a revised intro paragraph for the artiicle that MichaelM has agreed to. It classifies the SP as a conservative party, and notes the membership of some Liberals and that the party is now trying to appeal to moderate voters. Please see Talk:Saskatchewan Party. I would appreciate your comments. Ground Zero 17:29, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

NB CoR

dunno if you've seen thsi yet: New_Brunswick_Confederation_of_Regions_Party

How to become an Advocate

As is written in the AMA home page you can become an active member of the Association of Members' Advocates just by inserting your name in the list of the current members, which is here. There are some rules you have to follow, of course, but that only matters if you want to get involved with the Mediation or the Arbitration Committees. These rules are here. I also suggest that you join our mailing list. I wish you good luck and I am sure you will be able to help many users in need in your capacity as Advocate.

Thank you for using our help line. Next please! --Bill the Greek 09:35, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, there is no protocol, but maybe I should persuade someone to enact one. I don't know why, but I like protocols. Anyway, welcome to the club. --Bill the Greek 06:09, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Lord a Quebecois

Pages 237 to 243...
the right fight, bernard lord and the conservative dilemma
by Jaques Poitras
goose lane editions

this book is also the source for my CoR info. Pellaken 12:58, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

Jord: Thank you for supporting my nomination for adminship. I am honoured that you and others think highly enough of my contributions here to support the nomination. The admin powers will enable me to patrol for vandals more effectively, amongst other things. I promise to use my new powers for good, and not to inflict the retribution on my enemies that they so richly deserve, as tempting as that may be. ;-) By the way, are you an admin? Would you be interested in becoming one? Thanks again, Kevin. Ground Zero 12:46, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Kelly Lamrock

I deleted the copyvio article and moved in your temp stub. I thought you might like to know. -Aranel ("Sarah") 23:54, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Human Rights Servey on Wikipedia (The final post of I_sterbinski)

Dear all,

Wikipedia was recently a subject of intensive research of an huge international human right organization. A team of people from different nationalities and ages were acting on Wikipedia for 20 days, investigating previously noted anomalities of Wikipedia free editing and forming a final report, which (between the others similar reports) will later be a guide to all future moves of the organization concerning Wikipedia. Acting under an account of a real person, their privacy is to be held private. Therefore, very few private information will be revealed.

Also, this is a result of the lack of final possition of the organization concerning Wikipedia and human rights, which was still not formed.

The team's final post on Wikipedia, where they explain their actions can be found on the following addresses:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:I_sterbinski

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Macedonia#Human_Rights_Servey_on_Wikipedia_.28The_final_post_of_I_sterbinski.29

The team would like to thank to all the persons who took part in the correspondence with us.

We also want to appologise for keeping our identity secret for a longer period.

Best regards,

Aleksandar, Biljana, Asparuh, Christos, Valjon, Michael and Ana Luiza

I sterbinski 01:31, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Vancouver muni election

<form letter> I've posted something that may be of interest to you at Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board/discussion#Vancouver municipal election. Hope you can comment there. </form letter> -The Tom 22:14, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

NewBrunswickCopyright

It appears you created this template, used it for an image you uploaded, then moved it to the non-commercial section of the image tag page. If my impression is incorrect, please tell me. However, you definitely made several mistakes. First of all, you should never upload an image under a non-commercial tag because it is forbidden by Wikipedia policy. It appears that in order to do that, you created a non-commercial tag. Don't do that either. The deprecated tags are there only to let people know the status of existing images, which were uploaded by people who didn't know our image policy. Creating new deprecated tags only encourages their use, which is not allowed. I'm nominating your template for deletion, along with the image that uses it. You may object at WP:TFD and WP:IFD, respectively. If you have questions, ask on my talk. Superm401 | Talk 18:01, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

I know that there are other Canadian government templates, but they are not meant for use. They are there solely to identify a particular type of unacceptable image. The reason that license is unacceptable is that Wikipedia images must be available to third parties, some of which are commercial and may not be using the image for "educational purposes, private study, research, reporting, or in order to prepare a newspaper summary". Please don't upload images with Canadian Crown Copyright in the future. Superm401 | Talk 16:32, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

The acceptability of CanadaCopyright images is still a matter of debate. Fawcett5 02:17, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Queens

Careful Jord with the Queens electoral district articles, and hasty page moves. There WAS a federal Nova Scotia electoral district with that name. [4] You might care to investigate further, I think there are problems with the disambig page. You can use this link to help sort things out. Fawcett5 02:17, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Electoral district names

I think he says that they violate naming conventions, because I think I discussed this with him before. Basically, federal districts take precedence, and should not have "federal" in the disambiguation title. So, it should be something like this:

• Queen's (New Brunswick electoral district) - federal
• Queens (Nova Scotia electoral district) - federal
• Queen's (Prince Edward Island electoral district) - federal
• Queens (New Brunswick provincial electoral district)
• Queens (Nova Scotia provincial electoral district)
• Queens (Prince Edward Island provincial electoral district)

Hope this helps. Let me know if there something you feel is not right about this. -- Earl Andrew - talk 22:46, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, what you have done is changed a convention. If you want it changed, that means you are willing to change all the other disambiguations that have been set. My opinion is that, a federal district past or present supercedes a provincial one. However, if there were a vote on it or some more discussion, perhaps we could find a consensus. -- Earl Andrew - talk 19:55, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, perhaps not. I would just like to hear what other had to say on the topic. If most people agree with you, then fine. However, if not then we should keep things the same. You know, I was thinking of something today. We should probably get a Wikiproject going for either ridings or just Canadian politics in general. This would be a good place to discuss this. -- Earl Andrew - talk 05:08, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Only if you really want to. I don't mind doing it either. -- Earl Andrew - talk 05:13, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Electoral Districts

Looks like you beat me to the punch. I have been planning and designing for a couple weeks a brain storming session on federal electoral district articles (I'm usually not in any particular hurry). My plan is layed out here: User:Maclean25/Federal Electoral Districts. Please review it and let me know what you think. It may be complimentary to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada you created. However, it is intended for only federal ridings because I believe provincial debate would get bogged down in regional issues. --maclean25 07:14, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I knew that the districts were somehow synchronized, but I couldn't remember the reason behind it.

"On Wikipedia, someone always has an answer." - me, just now

Mindmatrix 23:56, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I added a section on The Strange Case of Ontario Ridings. I cut&pasted your explanation from Mindmatrix's talk page to it here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada/Ontario. Feel free to edit the page if you can make the issue clearer. --maclean25 06:36, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Template/Workshop

You, or any Wikipedia user, can contribute your suggestions and comments to the /Workshop page of any active arbitration case. Comments on evidence or proposals can help in understanding the import of evidence and in refining proposals. Proposed principles, findings of fact, or remedies may be listed on /Proposed decision and form part of the final decision. Fred Bauder 18:56, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Stubbing

Thanks for the stubbing of Rick Doucet but he is Canadian not British. I'll change it. - Jord 20:56, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Woops, sorry. Thanks for cleaning up after me! MosheZadka 20:58, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Re: British Columbia v. Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd. and Imperial Tobacco v. British Columbia

Hi Jord and PullUpYourSocks, I noticed that both articles are essentially on the same Supreme Court case. Hence, I hope that we can merge the two articles. Please share your thought in Talk:Imperial Tobacco v. British Columbia. Thank you for your attention. Regards, --Hurricane111 06:05, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Imperial Tobacco v. British Columbia

Ahh…that’s right. As the rule goes, names in the "style of cause" don’t switch on appeal. You would think that of all people, the Supreme Court would know that. They’ve followed the rule for most other cases so I’m at a loss why they named this case as they did. As far as I can see you were correct. I do apologize for jumping to conclusions on your naming choice. All the best. -PullUpYourSocks 23:17, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

2006 election

You're right. I got a little over-zealous on cleaning up. I should have left the bold in. Regards, Ground Zero | t 18:59, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada/Prototype

Thank you for participating in the WikiProject on Electoral districts in Canada. As you know there will be an election soon. So this may be the best time for the Canadian Wikipedia community to band together and write these articles on current federal electoral districts. Based on your comments, and the comments of others, I have put together a prototype layout at the above link. The prototype is not a final proposal. It is just a place to start from, where we can discuss and experiment. Please review it, comment but keep an open mind, and help form a concensus. --maclean25 01:06, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

polling charts

Yes I was actually, I just haven't got around to doing it yet. -- Earl Andrew - talk 19:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding Association of Members' Advocates

Hi, you are recieving this message because you have listed yourself as an active member of WP:AMA. If you aren't currently accepting inquiries for AMA, please de-list yourself from Wikipedia:AMA Advocates accepting inquiries, and consider noting it on the main list of members on WP:AMA. If you are, please consider tending to any new requests that may appear on Wikipedia:AMA_Requests_for_Assistance. We're going to put AMA on wheels. :) (please direct any responses to my talk page) --Phroziac _. o º ^{O (♥♥♥♥ chocolate!)} 22:46, 24 December 2005 (UTC)