User talk:Kelownian

Electoral District conventions

Hi. I see you've entered the fray, so to speak. Reversed a couple of your changes this morning due to existing Wiki conventions it took me a little while to get told about/figure out myself:

when you added the defunct BC provincial ridings category to the List of BC ridings it was redundant, according to Wiki practice, because the defunct-BC category is already a subcategory of the Canadian electoral districts category (or rather it's a subcat of the BC provincial electoral districts cat, which is a subcat of BC electoral districts, which is a subcat of Canadian electoral districts)
"North Okanagan electoral district" didn't need to be created as North Okanagan already existed; and there's no federal riding of the same name (the federal riding is Okanagan North. If it did need creating, the titling convention is "North Okanagan (electoral district)". That, as a link, would refer to the provincial list IF there was a "North Okanagan" page that was the federal district page; the in-brackets qualifier is only added to sort things out if they need sorting out; hence with Yale-Lillooet, Grand Forks-Greenwood and Nelson-Creston there's no need to put anything in about it being an electoral district; it's not anything else so doesn't need the qualifier. And it's only if there's electoral districts of the same name that there's a need for "(provincial electoral district)" in a page title, e.g. Victoria City (electoral district) and Victoria City (provincial electoral district) or Yale and Yale (provincial electoral district). Victoria City's federal riding needed "electoral district" because there's an article/page on the HongKong neighbourhood of Victoria City that's primary; with the Vancouver City federal riding it wasn't necessary because there's nowhere else that would get the "Vancouver City" title; the provincial riding of the same name is Vancouver City (electoral district) to distinguish it from its federal counterpart; similarly in the case of the provincial constituency Lillooet (electoral district) there's no federal equivalent so "provincial" isn't necessary.
Otherwise welcome to the project. If you're interested there's a whole bunch of candidate/MLA/MP profiles that could use writing, at least as skeleton articles. I've just finished completing election tables from 1871 to 1966 showing House seating after elections, and nearly all riding pages have results tables; I linked any winning candidate and there's a bunch that need bios written. Doesn't have anything to do with the current campaign but I see you're an Okanaganian and thought you might find it interesting, e.g. Kenneth Cattanach MacDonald in Okanagan North. I "winged it" with John Andrew Mara and Forbes George Vernon based on sketchy cross-references in Dictionary of Canadian Biography Online. See any of the List of British Columbia general elections Skookum1 19:17, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize. It appears I was quite confused when I did make that page. Thank you for clarifying. For now, I would like to concentrate my efforts on Federal Okanagan Ridings and clarifying what areas they consisted of. One question, is it a goal to have pages for all MLA's and MP's?--Kelownian 21:25, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No need for apology, and the confusion is understandable; took me a while to learn all the kinks, too. And yes, it is a goal, ultimately, to have pages fror all MLAs and MPs; current most important, then historical.

As for riding boundaries I think you'll find the Elections Canada descriptions a bit mind-boggling; easy enough when they make mention of streams, etc. but when they start citing Land District boundaries and Township Ranges that it becomes necessary to have land maps to go with the description. At least Elections Canada has the old boundary revisions on-line; can't say the same for Elections BC. And just to keep things simple I'll finish making the historical federal ridings; if you know of any I've missed see Okanagan (electoral districts) and please add them in the appropriate spot on that page; when I see the redlink (unmade article) I'll go ahead and make it.

One thing that does need doing is the historical data on existing ridings, i.e. the current election tables go back to '91 or so but no farther; I've added in some historical data on prominent ridings (Victoria City (electoral district) but not on the Okanagan ridings (so far).Skookum1 21:31, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Let me also welcome you to the project. Please note that federal ridings use an "m dash" when more than one place name appears, not a hyphen. This is the convention developed by Elections Canada. It is also used on Wikipedia, so I have moved Kelowna-Lake Country back to Kelowna—Lake Country. On their website here, you will see that Elections Canada indicates the m-dash with two hyphens. The reason for this is that place names with more than one word are hyphenated in French, so Electiosn canada uses the m-dash to indicate that two places names are being joined. This convention is not used in BC for provincial rdings, though: they use a regular hyphen. Again, welcome to the project. Ground Zero | t 15:06, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record there's a federal Kelowna—Lake Country and a provincial Kelowna-Lake Country (provincial electoral district), with the hyphen and m-dash currently in the right places. Why the redistribution folks have to come with the same riding names - for ridings which doubtless have different boundaries - is anybody's guess. Lack of imagination I'd guess. When "Lake Country" first started showing up in Govt blurbs and in their semiofficial echo at Global TV, I wasn't quite sure what they meant; I guess they mean Mabel Lake in the equation too; otherwise why not just call it Okanagan-Shuswap?Skookum1 18:49, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re Kelowna-Lake Country

I see you (GroundZero) have added "(provincial electoral district)"; I gather that the Kelowna-Lake Country (w. hyphen) goes to a redirect to the federal page....I'm trying to remember another case where the same name, other than the hyphen/dash applies, and they resolve to their respective provincial and federal pages. In any case, wouldn't "(electoral district)" be sufficient for the provincial-riding page, since there's no "(electoral district)" in the federal riding/name/page?Skookum1 20:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:BC-with-provincial-ridings_1922.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BC-with-provincial-ridings_1922.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Image legality questions. 22:18, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Kelowna-LakeCountryFed.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Kelowna-LakeCountryFed.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Shyam ^(T/C) 20:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Stuttgart.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Stuttgart.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:08, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial use of Image:RebeccaCoad.jpg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:RebeccaCoad.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:RebeccaCoad.jpg is an image licensed as "for non-commercial use only" or "used with permission for use on Wikipedia only" which was either uploaded on or after 2005-05-19 or is not used in any articles (CSD I3).

If you created this media file and want to use it on Wikipedia, you may re-upload it (or amend the image description if it has not yet been deleted) and use the license {{GFDL-self}} to license it under the GFDL, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}} to license it under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, or use {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain.

If you did not create this media file but want to use it on Wikipedia, there are two ways to proceed. First, you may choose one of the fair use tags from this list if you believe one of those fair use rationales applies to this file. Second, you may want to contact the copyright holder and request that they make the media available under a free license.

If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. This bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Image:RebeccaCoad.jpg itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. If you have any questions about what to do next or why your image was nominated for speedy deletion please ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thanks. --Android Mouse Bot 2 08:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:RebeccaCoad.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:RebeccaCoad.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 21:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 21:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca Coad photo

Hi, I added a tag that I think might be appropriate, but you might want to add the back story on the page about how you got the photo. -- Earl Andrew - talk 17:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I believe you need to provide the actual source of the image. Where did you get it from, and who specifically allowed you to use it? -- Earl Andrew - talk 02:49, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:RebeccaCoad.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:RebeccaCoad.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on Wikipedia (not on Commons), and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[Talk:Image:RebeccaCoad.jpg|the article's talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Hennessey, Patrick (talk) 07:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1922 map is not ridings

BC-with-provincial-ridings_1922.jpg is not of ridings. Has me wondering what it is; mining districts I'd guess, as I've seen an 1894 Land District map and it's not those. Still, the listing of Vancouver Island, Cassiar, Coast, Cariboo, Lillooet, Yale and Kootenay only seems to suggest this isn't mining districts either; I thought there were Similkameen and Boundary mining districts but maybe they were transient, or subdistricts the way Bridge River was within Lillooet. But for sure, its not the ridings; ref the riding list on British Columbia general election, 1920 and British Columbia general election, 1924. What's interesting on the map i, many places which don't even show up in the ghost town books/lists....Skookum1 (talk) 04:28, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image source problem with Image:BC-with-provincial-ridings 1922.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:BC-with-provincial-ridings 1922.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 17:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Lyrl^Talk _C 17:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Image:Edbroadbent.jpg, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). As a copyright violation, Image:Edbroadbent.jpg appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Image:Edbroadbent.jpg has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at [[Talk:Image:Edbroadbent.jpg]] and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at [[Talk:Image:Edbroadbent.jpg]] with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on [[Talk:Image:Edbroadbent.jpg]].

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you. --Padraic 23:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:March18-VancouverWarProtest.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:March18-VancouverWarProtest.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — ξ ^xplicit 20:11, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Election box expenditures

Template:Election box expenditures has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Mhiji 21:47, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Nord.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Nord.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:02, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kelowna-LakeCountryFed.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Kelowna-LakeCountryFed.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]