User talk:M-A Gagnier

You need to add real sources to demonstrate that there's actually a community in Nunavut that actually identifies with the appelation "Anglo-Nunavoise". It's not sufficient to create a list of people from Nunavut who happen to have English-sounding names; we require actual sources to demonstrate that there's actually a significant and self-identified "Anglo-Nunavut" community for us to write about, and sources to demonstrate that the people you want to add to the list actually identify with it.

For example, we have Anglo-Quebecer because there's an actual community of anglophones in Quebec who specifically identify as "Anglo-Quebecers"; we have Franco-Ontarian because there's an actual community in Ontario that actually identifies itself that way. But that doesn't mean we necessarily need to create "anglo" and "franco" lists and categories for every individual province and territory in Canada — they're only warranted if the terms can be properly sourced as being in actual use by the community themselves.

As well, much of the content you were adding to the article simply doesn't make any sense anyway: "In Nunavut, no one English in nunavut founded one plebeian of anglo-nunavoise flag, all as the francophones flag of everywhere en provincials and territory of Canada"? "The station of television anglophone east only dont what CFFB-TV (CBC) au Canal 8 (Iqaluit)"? Those sentences don't even scan as good French, let alone good English.

And while we're at it, what's your source for claiming Willard Phelps as either Franco-Columbian or Franco-Yukonnais, or Norman Doyle as a Franco-Newfoundlander? We can't make unsourced claims about people's ethnicity; if it isn't immediately apparent from the person's name alone, then you need to add sources which explicitly state that they're of French descent. Bearcat (talk) 22:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Éric Gagnier for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. The highly esteemed CBW presents the Talk Page! 16:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet. (blocked by –MuZemike 18:00, 2 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]
You may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Language categories

I obviously need to explain this again, though I have very little confidence that you're actually going to read and/or understand this: linguistic and/or ethnic categories are only subdivided by province or territory in the rare instance that the intersection actually constitutes an organized community of people who actually identify that way. There is an actual community of Franco-Ontarians whose existence, identity, history, community institutions, etc., can be verified in reliable sources, for instance, and an actual community of Anglo-Quebecers whose existence, identity, history, community institutions, etc., can be verified in reliable sources. There is not, however, an organized community of "Anglo-Nunavummiut", or an organized community of "English Ontarians". They're terms that simply do not exist.

Bottom line: if you have to invent a term that isn't in actual use in the real world to identify an actual linguistic or ethnic community that actually identifies itself with that term, then do not start an article or category. In fact, every single such "ethnic provincial" group that actually exists in the real world already has an article and associated category — so in reality, there isn't any such group you could possibly create now that won't get deleted as an original research invention. So you need to just stop it. Bearcat (talk) 18:21, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]