User talk:117Avenue/Archives/2010.2

This is an archive of past discussions about User:117Avenue. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Can you change that back on a temporary basis. It's caused the climate box to break where n/a or {{ref|1|1}} was used, see Cape Dorset, Nunavut and Cambridge Bay, Nunavut for example. I'll try and figure out which ones are the problem and fix them. At the same time Environment Canada have changed the way they report the sunshine for some stations. Places like Iqaluit still have the "Total Hours" but others like Cape Dorset now have only the "Extreme Daily". Thanks. The highly esteemed CBW presents the Talk Page! 22:02, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Why are you using n/a for months the sun doesn't rise, shouldn't it be 0? 117Avenue (talk) 15:41, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Not exactly. Looking at Cambridge Bay, Nunavut. The sun sets November 30 and rises January 11/12. So December is 0. By the end of January we get just over 5 hours of possible sun a day. However, for most of the month the sun is low in the sky and the Campbell-Stokes recorder would have such a heavy coat of frost that the sun would not be able to burn the card. The source, which has since changed, just left January blank but used a 0 for December. Which means I could have done the same! I find it interesting that EC was able to remove the sun recordings for several sites but didn't correct some of the really obvious errors that I pointed out to them last year. Look at the maximum temperature for January in Rankin Inlet. The highly esteemed CBW presents the Talk Page! 17:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

LOL, 23 in January. Why then isn't the Wikipedia article correct? 117Avenue (talk) 23:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I used the extreme for both the wind chill and the humidex. If you're rewriting the template there's a minor thing that you may be able to fix. Look at Cambridge Bay, Nunavut#Climate. If you look at the two sources the first one is numbered 12 and the second 11 but the first should be 11 and the second should be 12. It's not a major thing and not an error but it's odd. On the other hand if you look at Edmonton#Climate the first source is used prior to the climate box so they appear in the correct sequence. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 14:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The reason why I removed {{DEFAULTSORT}} is because the discography article is generally for the actual TV series not the actual Hannah Montana character. Hence why I added Category:Film and television discographies. That is what the Miley Cyrus discography page is for. But its whatever you want to do. QuasyBoy (talk) 18:40, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I got you know. 117Avenue (talk) 23:37, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

You know what, I like the way you did it. [1] This way the category listing can compliment the fictional character and the TV series. :) QuasyBoy (talk) 17:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Did you ever have a problem getting an image in a Edmonton Light Rail Transit station article to show up where you thought you had located it? I moved the route diagram template to the bottom of each article because it disrupts the entire layout if placed at the top. Look at the result of you undoing the move in South Campus (ETS). The effect is the same in all the other articles; which is indicated by the [edit] tags all being pushed down together beside the template and images not positioning properly on the page. Now move the template back to the bottom. Do you see the difference? The page is now properly formatted and the [edit] tags line up with the headings. This was happening before, except nobody knew why left aligned images would not position properly. But we know. Secondarywaltz (talk) 16:56, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

You must not be using Safari, because it looks fine on my Mac. 117Avenue (talk) 02:08, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, I am using IE and it looks bad. I will check it out on a Mac. Secondarywaltz (talk) 02:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, what map do you have that has these communities placed on them? I'd like to check it out if they are readily available. Cheers, --Hwy43 (talk) 01:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Well I just spent the last while searching for where we discussed this before, and I haven't been able to find it. I thought that you said the Alberta Sustainable Resource Development map that I am using isn't always right, because sometimes departments within the government don't talk to each other. If this discussion sounds familiar to you, please remind me of where you said that, its bugging me. 117Avenue (talk) 03:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

That past discussion is located here.

I executed a place name search for both names at Statistics Canada's GeoSearch2006 and Natural Resources Canada's GeoNames Query. At both locations, no results were returned for Enoch while only the overall reserve's name (Siksika 146) was the only return for Siksika. This may not be the be all, end all however, which is why I'm interested in trying to find the map that shows the locations of these. --Hwy43 (talk) 05:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that, I forgot about the template talk, I was looking though the article talk. I still haven’t changed my opinion since January, and this is just a point to my case. All the reserve’s articles are stubs, and all the settlements are stubs. The settlements should be discussed on the reserves’ pages. A first nation’s settlement can span across a reserve, and often the settlement name is synonymous with the reserve as a whole. It shouldn’t be compared to hamlets or ghost towns, which are smaller than a square mile section of land. 117Avenue (talk) 14:24, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Fortunately the topic was one of the reasons that compelled me to set up an account and it was one of my first edits, so I looked back at my earliest contributions. I've been addicted ever since! --Hwy43 (talk) 04:08, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Me too, I am coming up on one year. 117Avenue (talk) 05:30, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with everything you mentioned in your point above. I'm just looking at it from the different perspectives of density/built-form and officially named places, which is what they have in common with hamlets and ghost towns. I'm no longer overly concerned at this point. If I ever think about this further and end up have any revelations, I'll let you know. Cheers, --Hwy43 (talk) 04:08, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Are settlement, and non-settlement living differentiated by the nations? Do your population numbers for settlements include only those living in a certain area, or the whole reserve? 117Avenue (talk) 05:30, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I did miss this in a past flurry of edits and I don't have an answer. I've coincidentally been validating my past population research for unincorporated places, with 1961 through 1976 complete thus far. Once done up to 1991 (could be a month or many months away), I'll get back to you with my observations. Cheers --Hwy43 (talk) 08:45, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. 117Avenue (talk) 23:23, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm new at this. I updated the page, and you reverted it. Would you kindly explain how I could have done it correctly? Robert Hurdman (talk) 16:15, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I tried again. I expect it is acceptable now. If not, I still hope for guidance. Robert Hurdman (talk) 17:25, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

When it comes to articles like this, on future elections, it is important to maintain a high level of references to reliable sources, because anyone can say someone is or is not running before the official list comes out in September. It also helps me weed out vandalism, since I am in Edmonton, and I don't hear Calgary news. 117Avenue (talk) 23:37, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

With respect, when a newspaper article says two incumbents won't run again, that means the other five will. From personal conversations, I know that to be the case. However, the way you have presented the information is also acceptable, so I will not make further changes. Robert Hurdman (talk) 02:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you should also read WP:NOTCRYSTAL. A newspaper, close friends, or anyone, can't predict the personal decisions or issues a person will have in the next four months. 117Avenue (talk) 03:53, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Robert Hurdman (talk) 21:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello 117Avenue, I see you have reverted my edit changing the wording from freeway to highway on the Wayne Gretzky Drive article. Although the highway does have a few controlled interchanges, it has both at grade, and traffic light intersections which make it a highway. A freeway will have only controlled interchanges and usually a speed limit above 80km/h (50mph) like on the 400-series highways or the Interstate Highway System. Having freeway style interchanges for a small 2 mile stretch doesn't grant the entire "drive" freeway status. I think you may be confusing the provincial "highway designation" with the wording "highway". The word highway doesn't necessarily mean it is a recognized provincial highway, it just means it is a highway by definition. UrbanNerd (talk) 14:35, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Wayne Gretzky Drive is not defined or numbered as a highway by Alberta Transportation, the provincial ministry responsible for highways in Alberta. Freeway may not be the proper term to describe it in its entirety either since a portion of it has signalized at-grade intersections. What is correct is the City of Edmonton classifies it, in its entirety, as an arterial road. --Hwy43 (talk) 19:06, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I think you may be meaning expressway instead of highway, which is a divided artery. A highway travels between cities, and is maintained by the province, which includes all the 400-series and interstate highways. Wayne Gretzky Drive has a speed limit of 80km/h, which is the speed of freeways in Edmonton, and traffic in Edmonton isn't like the traffic in Toronto, traffic on the Capilano Bridge actually free flows at 80km/h during rush hour (can you say that about all the "Freeway" sections of the 400-series?). The length of a road doesn't define its class, Sherwood Park Freeway is only 5.8km long, the City of Edmonton just doesn't like the name "Freeway" (Whitemud and Manning were previously named freeway). Although the city classifies it as an artery, that is the highest classification by the City of Edmonton, the Map Art map of Edmonton colours it blue, which means freeway. 117Avenue (talk) 23:57, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

No, I definitely mean freeway. Expressways and highways can be undivided and have intersections, freeways cannot. Definition : "freeways, by definition, have no at-grade intersections with other roads, railroads or multi-use trails.". Highways can be anything from a major 10 lane interstate to a narrow country farm road. The term has no solid definition. Also, large traffic jams have nothing to do with the term freeway. The "free flowing" ideology refers to not needing to stop at traffic lights, train crossings, etc. not free from slow traffic. Although the 401 may slow to a crawl during rush hour, the 407 flies along at incredible speeds, usually above 120-140 km/h. If Edmonton refers to these small portions of road as freeways it may be beneficial to include in the article something about Edmonton labeling freeways differently than the rest of North America. Maybe something like "Although Edmonton labels these arterial roads freeways, outside of Edmonton these would be considered highways or arterial roads." It would end any confussion on the issue. UrbanNerd (talk) 00:36, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

You mention that there is no solid definition of a highway. The same can be said about the definitions of freeway and expressway. Each national, provincial/state or municipal jurisdiction may define them differently, or not define them at all. The freeway definition provided above appears to be a Wikipedia definition achieved by consensus after vigourous debate among WikiUsers. Interestingly, Wikipedia’s definition of expressway describes it as being divided. There is no mention in this article that it can be either divided or undivided.

The City of Edmonton’s Transportation Master Plan (TMP) sets out a hierarchal road classification system of arterial, collector and local roads (see Sections 3.1 and 7.1). Section 7.1 further outlines a high standard arterial road network within the City of Edmonton as shown in Figure 7.1 and then highlights three types of major road facilities – Anthony Henday Drive, the Inner Ring Road, and Highway Connectors. Finally, the TMP defines all six preceding italicized terms above in its glossary (note the definition of Anthony Henday Drive is under Outer Ring Road). The TMP and the Transportation System Bylaw (TSB) do not define or include references to expressway or freeway, outside of the use of the latter in the one official road name mentioned by 117Avenue above (Sherwood Park Freeway).

Ultimately, the TSB, its associated map and the TMP together officially classify Wayne Gretzky Drive as an arterial road that forms part of the Inner Ring Road.

Would the following, or a variant of the following, resolve this?

Wayne Gretzky Drive is an arterial road in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada that forms part of the city’s Inner Ring Road.(insert TMP and TSB references). The portion between 98 Avenue NW and 116 Avenue NW is generally regarded as a freeway due to the presence of two grade separated junctions that facilitate free-flow traffic between these two points. Originally Capilano Drive, it was…

Thoughts? --Hwy43 (talk) 05:45, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

The purpose of calling it a freeway in the lead sentence was to establish its notability, and as an explanation as to why it is included in the freeway section of the navbox, it is explained later that the freeway portion is only 3.4km, but an article under the name "Wayne Gretzky Drive" must include its entire length. Manning, Ray Gibbon, and Terwillegar Drives also mention freeway in their leads, because their right of ways are wide enough to someday become freeways. UrbanNerd your problem seems to be with the length of this road, you need to realize that all freeways have to have a start and an end, in this case it is at-grade traffic lights. It appears that the shortest 400-series highway is Ontario Highway 420, which is only 3.8km, starts and ends at traffic lights, and is entirely within one city, but is still a freeway. Because the prairies are much less dense than southern Ontario, all of the freeways west of Ontario are in cities, except for the highway connecting Edmonton and Calgary. Highways do have a definition, they are recognized as such by the province, and you're right, they can range from the busiest road in the province, to a gravel grid road. 117Avenue (talk) 00:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Ontario Highway 420 starts at a freeway to freeway interchange at the QEW. It does turn into a "roadway" at its eastern end when it becomes Roberts Street. As for W.Gretzky drive it is a "roadway" which becomes "freeway-like" for a short distance and reverts back to a roadway. Hardly a freeway. If it is a roadway for the majority of it's length it should be labeled as such, otherwise it is misleading. UrbanNerd (talk) 15:01, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

3.4 of 4.8 is majority. 117Avenue (talk) 23:34, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

It continues on in both directions as a road for many kilometers. The map of edmonton on the Wayne Gretzky Drive article doesn't show it as a dark orange freeway. It's misleading, period. UrbanNerd (talk) 02:25, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Excellent work on the infobox. It looks much better. Cheers. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 10:54, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. 117Avenue (talk) 21:52, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I gave it a "half-ass support" because I don't like the show any more and so I'm not even all that attached to the article. It ticks all the right boxes though. I was actually going to nominate Mother and Child Reunion (Degrassi: The Next Generation) as I like the prose much more, for the 19th. Problem is that it was promoted in September of 08, which would have lost a point for not being 2+ years. Matthewedwards :  Chat  15:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Would October 14 be too early for another Degrassi TFA, or perhaps wait till October 2011 for the tenth anniversary? 117Avenue (talk) 18:17, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I've actually pulled the speedy trigger on 41th Ontario general election instead of letting the prod ride out. Initially I endorsed your prod notice, but then I noticed that the article was according fourth-place status to the "Prescott Russell Party" — there's a banned sockfarm, blocked under the name User:Éric Gagnier, whose long list of wikisins includes an amusing determination to portray the Ontario county of Prescott and Russell as one of three things: (a) an entirely independent country, (b) a separate province, or (c) a hotbed of separatism which is shortly to become an independent country or a separate province. And he's done this here, on fr: and on es:, to boot. So I killed the article and blocked the creator.

Unfortunately, though, he's been a really persistent and unkillable little pest. Could you let me know as soon as possible if you come across anything pertaining to Ontario politics that smells a little fishy (and even faster if it comes within spitting distance of the words Prescott and Russell)? Thanks. Bearcat (talk) 02:47, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I tracked down a number of election articles he created that day. 117Avenue (talk) 06:06, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Greetings, I'm not sure if you've seen 70.109.177.178's edits to Lake Louise, Alberta and Lake Louise (Alberta) that propose a merger between these two articles. It appears the user may have not proposed the merger correctly. I've added my two cents to each article's respective talk page, but I don't know if these are the correct locations to express my opposition. If not the correct location, please point me in the right direction. Cheers, --Hwy43 (talk) 05:29, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to disregard the above. I have removed the proposed merger tags from the two articles per this discussion. --Hwy43 (talk) 05:55, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Rightfully so, they're on different things, and neither are stubs. 117Avenue (talk) 07:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, nice work on Fred Figglehorn. One thing I can't figure out from the article (and I've never heard the term before): what are "sorted episodes"? Sorted how? By whom? Etc. (I don't mean to say an explanation needs to be in the article, because maybe I'm the last dope to hear this term, but I'd at least like to know, personally.) Thanks. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 09:42, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

When a video gets added to YouTube, it pretty much just becomes part of the user's upload library, and I have every video currently uploaded to the Fred channel listed. But not every video is considered "official" or "cannon" Fred series, so I have the videos listed by Cruikshank himself, in the referenced link, coloured and numbered, and called then sorted. I don't know, is there a better way to explain what Cruikshank considers Fred series? 117Avenue (talk) 14:05, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. "The word "canon" (one "n") might be best. Well, "canonical"? "Official"? Do I understand correctly that Cruikshank uploaded Fred videos, but he doesn't call them official? What are they, outtakes? — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 15:18, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have known only one "n". I'm going to sound like an expert here, but I didn't start watching Fred until around January '09, and I didn't get a YouTube account until about a month ago. Eight episodes were filmed before Lucas got the Fred channel, and were uploaded to the JKL channel (hence I not knowing the release dates), one is a fake movie trailer, three are music videos, one is a TV spot, and three are mostly talk, with no story line. How's my rewrite? 117Avenue (talk) 23:48, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Looks good. I've boldly added a link to canon; hope you don't mind. Happily enough for myself, I don't have the incentive to go find out too much about those scraggly non-numbered episodes.

New topic: I don't feel strongly enough about it to argue either way, but why did you make the title non-sortable? — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 01:39, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking about adding the link, but I wasn't sure, I guess its a question of how smart we think the audience is. The reason I choose a sorted table is exactly the reason we've been talking about, the list of numbered, and unnumbered videos. The way I see it, is that there are three ways of listing the videos, by date (which is the default), by series number (the 1 to 41), and by episode number (for some strange reason Cruikshank placed Halloween & Halloween 2 at the end of season 1), the sortable table allows readers to list them in the order they choose. Unfortunately the {{sort}} template used in the episode number column breaks the table, so the asterisk items, when sorted by episode number, aren't always in the order I'd like. 117Avenue (talk) 06:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I just realized I didn't read your question properly, I thought you were asking why did I use a sortable table. I made the title column unsoratable because I thought there was no use for an alphabetic list of videos. Can you think of a reason? 117Avenue (talk) 17:14, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

No, exactly why I asked. I'd have left it sortable, I'm pretty sure, but I'll leave it entirely to you (or whatever next editor happens by and wants to change it). — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 22:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Since you regularly update the 28th Alberta election article, I am letting you know I updated the constituency candidate table based on the final boundaries report. Aside from Okotoks-High River and Calgary-South East that have existed as districts in the past I am not going to create the new district articles until the bill is given Royal Assent, whenever that is.--Þadius (talk) 00:27, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Of course, you're doing a great job organizing all the districts and MLAs. 117Avenue (talk) 04:30, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Is about to go live on the main page. Ready for the shit to hit the fan? :) Matthewedwards :  Chat  23:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure you don't want to protect the pages? 117Avenue (talk) 23:26, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

No. Current practice is not to automatically semi-protect just because it's on the main page. It used to be like that, but now they're not, except for pages that were already semi-protected, then it remains. If things get heavy, it can be protected for an hour or two, and then maybe longer if required. Matthewedwards :  Chat  00:10, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

It might be worth adding the links that appear on the main page to your watchlist for the day. Teen drama just got hit! XD Matthewedwards :  Chat  00:45, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

All ready done. Thanks, 117Avenue (talk) 01:43, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I just edited today's featured article for the first time. I had no idea that there was a massive page notice on them. Now it makes a bit more sense why they aren't protected. 117Avenue (talk) 02:18, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Heh, yeah. Seems like the article survived pretty much intact. Still not sure what to do with renaming. Two major WP:FILM and TV editors have offered their 2c worth. One agrees with me, the other with you! Still, there's no WP:DEADLINE, so for now we could leave things as they are. By the way, who added a Blue Ray column to the table at the "List of" page? Since nothing is out on Blu Ray, it seems pointless to have it. Matthewedwards :  Chat  23:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I added the column when one user added the DVD date for season 9, and added to the season 9 article that it would also be released in blu-ray. Then this weekend someone removed the blu-ray release date, and I followed the source before reverting, I found that according to Amazon there will be a blu-ray release, but with no set date. But being only a day away there must be a source elsewhere. I think we can assume they all will be released in blu-ray at some point, we just don't know the dates. It looks like the new title sequence was leaked on YouTube, but I was stuck with dial-up this weekend. I watched it, and it confirms the name change. I'll implement it after I sift through all the vandalism I missed. The movie friday showed Bing bird's eye view, and mentioned Drake as a famous rapper, which means it didn't take place in 2008, so I'll also be implementing a floating timeline. 117Avenue (talk) 02:52, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Why do you keep reverting my edit about the 101 episodes produced? - Alec2011 (talk) 16:49, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Just like SilverGoat said, it is an unverified document, and the fact that 85 + 12 is 97, makes me think that your source is wrong. Since the 97 can't be verified either, I am removing the controversial, and keeping only what is known. 117Avenue (talk) 20:39, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

How is my source wrong? It's directly from the Disney Channel Press Release site. Besides the fact that this press release was released AFTER the article that said there was a total of 12 episodes so Disney probably extended the season since that interview. - Alec2011 (talk) 23:22, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Can you find a source that says so? Maybe the 101 number counted the episodes differently then we do. 117Avenue (talk) 00:26, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Silly mistake I made a list in AWB of pages that needed tags added, but in the meantime, Hannah Montana Forever (soundtrack) was deleted three days ago, while my list was processing. This is just something that happens very occasionally. There is a bot that goes by deleting/tagging talk pages of non-existent articles as I recall, so you can certainly tag it {{db-reason}}, but even if you don't, it will get deleted nonetheless. Thanks for the post to my talk; please respond there if you have more to say on this topic. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:54, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the initiative to move Municipal District of Lesser Slave River No. 124, Alberta back to Lesser Slave River No. 124, Alberta to align with the convention used for other municipal districts. Everytime I came across this article, its name beginning with Municipal District of made me shudder.

I'm curious to know though why Taber, Alberta (municipal district) was moved to Municipal District of Taber, Alberta though. I am wondering if the original article name was more appropriate as its format was consistent with the convention used for other municipalities/communities in Alberta requiring disambiguation, such as Fairview, Alberta (town) and Fairview, Alberta (hamlet). Instead of moving it, I would have preferred to see Taber, Alberta moved to Taber, Alberta (town) so that we had all four municipalities/communities following the same disambiguation convention.

At the end of the day, we now still have one MD in Alberta with an article name that leads with Municipal District of.

Also, how did you facilitate the removal of the Lesser Slave River No. 124, Alberta destination article without initiating the move via a proposal on Municipal District of Lesser Slave River No. 124, Alberta's talk page? And how was it determined by the wikiuser that this move would be uncontroversial? Hwy43 (talk) 02:12, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

You're right that the Lesser Slave River move I couldn't do my self, but I read Wikipedia:Requested moves#Uncontroversial requests, which told me to place {{db-move}} on the redirect that was occupying the space. Then Alexf came along, saw it had a short revision history, that it was qualified for speedy deletion, and deleted it, which freed the space up for my move. The Municipal District of Taber is an interesting one, from what I can tell its official name is "Municipal District of Taber", which makes it different than the others with Municipal District in their name, that also have a number in the official name. From what I have seen with disambiguates on Wikipedia, is that parenthesis are only used when the official name of two things are the same, in this case the official name is "Municipal District of Taber", and it should be used. We have only used the name of the community, without the "<status> of" for cities, towns, villages, and hamlets, so I don't think we need to treat this like Fairview. Another argument is that we are using common names for the municipal districts for the titles we have shortened, in this case we can't, and must use the full official name. 117Avenue (talk) 02:43, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation of the MD of LSR124 move.

The format of the official name of the M.D of Taber is no different than any of the other 17 MDs in Alberta that brand themselves as municipal districts in their official names (opposed to those that brand themselves as counties in their official names). All 18 of them use the format of "Municipal District of <common name>", as seen here (sort by the Legal Name column to see all 18 together). Therefore we are using the name of the community, without the "<status> of" for 17 of 18 articles for the municipal districts branded as municipal districts in their official name.

The format of the official names of these 18 MDs is the same as the format — <status> of <common name> — used for the official names of cities, towns, etc (e.g., Town of Fairview, Hamlet of Fairview, Town of Taber and Municipal District of Taber).

I don't see how WP:COMMONNAME applies to this situation since Taber is the common name that applies to both the town and municipal district, and their official names follow the same format. This help page is silent on how to handle two communities with the same common name within the same province, state or country.

I understand your intentions, but I don't think it is the best solution to have this article being the only one of 678 Alberta community articles — 16 cities, three specialized municipalities (Municipalities of Crowsnest Pass and Jasper, and R.M. of Wood Buffalo), 18 municipal districts (those branded as MDs), 109 towns, 97 villages, 51 summer villages — to not follow the "<common name>, Alberta" convention, when there is already a variant convention — <common name>, Alberta (<status>) — for those requiring disambiguation.

Would you be willing to undertake the same process you described above for the recent MD of LSR124 move to revert the MD of Taber move and either you or I will move Taber, Alberta to Taber, Alberta (town) to consistently disambiguate by article title, like in the case of the two Fairviews, and convert Taber, Alberta to a dab page for both.

Alternately, we could lobby MD Council to change the municipality's official name to Taber County to resolve the awkwardness of this on Wikipedia! Perhaps we can get them to add it as a plebiscite to the forthcoming municipal election. ;o) — Hwy43 (talk) 05:08, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

While I do like that last idea, I don't know how effective two guys can be (while we're at it we should get the County of Lethbridge to change the name of the Hamlet of Fairview, and AMA to change the MD status to County to reflect most of the names). I think the biggest concern about the 18 MDs is that they are all the same. When considering commonname, the question is why is including numbers the appropriate thing to do; like "Wainwright No. 61, Alberta" or "Barrhead County No. 11, Alberta", who calls them that? If the word County is to be included (which I think it should since a lot are named after towns), then perhaps Municipal District should also be included. Jasper should stay, since that's obvious the commonname, but the RM of Wood Buffalo and Municipality of Crowsnest Pass I am unsure about. Currently Wood Buffalo redirects to the municipality, but there is enough uses to create a disambiguation page (which is what I would do if it got moved); Crowsnest Pass is still thought of as a town by many, its move should convey the fact that it is now a larger area, engulfing the surrounding hamlets. 117Avenue (talk) 05:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

The more I think about it, the more I think MD should be included in the article title, like the ones with county. What do you think of this mass move:

It turns out to be 32, exactly half. Now I see your argument for the MD of Taber, because it is the same as the MD of Big Lakes. 117Avenue (talk) 22:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't like your idea. When I want to look up Bonnyville, I do not want to look under the M's. When I want to look up Paintearth, I do not want to look under the C's. When I want to look up The Beatles, I do not want to look under the T's. It's as simple as that. I wouldn't mind it if they dropped all the county numbers though. I can't remember what they are anyway. Backspace (talk) 00:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean look up? In the list article they are already alphabetical, and defaultsort will be used for the categories. 117Avenue (talk) 00:06, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

When I use the Search box in the upper right hand corner to look up "Bonnyv", my autocomplete process will immediately display all articles beginning with those letters, from which I can pick "Bonnyville No. 87, Alberta". How am I supposed to know to type in "Municipal District of" before that? For all I know, it could very well be "County of" or some other such designation. I know Bonnyville is Bonnyville, but I don't know whether it is a city, county, municipal district, province, state, or whatnot. If I type in "County of Bonnyv" I will get absolutely nothing. Backspace (talk) 01:56, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

As it is now, how would you be able to tell between the town and the MD? 117Avenue (talk) 03:11, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm assuming that you're referring to cases such as Taber, Alberta vs. Taber, Alberta (municipal district), which is the case as it now stands. In the first case Taber, Alberta would be left just as it is, and most people would assume that (by the format) it is either a city, town, village, or other such urban community. In the second case, Taber, Alberta (municipal district) could be either left as is (probably preferable), or called Taber Municipal District, Alberta (not the official name, but keeping in line with many county names, which are officially "County of Podunk", etc.). In no case would I prefer the "official" name of "Municipal District of Taber, Alberta". How would anyone who did not know that it was a municipal district look for it? No one would ever think to look for Taber under the letter M if they didn't know whether it was a city, town, county, or whatever. The "official" name of many communities is "City of X", Town of Y", or "Village of Z". If they were named this way alphabetically, you wouldn't be able to find a place unless you first knew what category it fell under. Backspace (talk) 05:59, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

No, I was talking about your example, Bonnyville. And as I explained above, Sturgeon County uses its official name, so why not the County of Lethbridge? 117Avenue (talk) 06:04, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Bonnyville is identical to Taber, if we drop the "No. 87" from its name. The "official" name of the place most of us call San Francisco, California is the "City and County of San Francisco". Do you really think that anybody in the world is going to type that into Wikipedia when they want to look it up? Put it under the S's where it belongs, official or not. Backspace (talk) 06:27, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

My argument for the MD of Taber has nothing to do with it sharing the same official name format with the MD of Big Lakes.

It would be the same situation:

• if there was such a town in Alberta that went by the common name of Big Lakes, and
• if this town’s WP article was named Big Lakes, Alberta, and
• if the MD’s article was named Big Lakes, Alberta (municipal district) for disambiguation purposes, and
• if someone moved this article to Municipal District of Big Lakes, Alberta without first proposing the move on its talk page per WP:MOVE#Before moving a page to avoid potential controversy and to collaborate with others to determine the best page name.

The mass move proposed above is not the correct solution to resolve the consequence of a hasty MD of Taber move made without a discussion opportunity, for exactly all the reasons expressed by Backspace. There is nothing wrong with how these articles are named. They are readily searchable by common name, they are already disambiguated from any urban communities that share their names, and they follow the Statistics Canada (StatCan) short-form naming convention for census subdivisions in Canada. If the above mass move was executed, then the article naming convention would be inconsistent with the StatCan short-form naming conventions used in the article names for rural census subdivisions in other provinces, where these rural census subdivisions have official names that follow the “XYZ of common name No. X” format (i.e., see List of rural municipalities in Saskatchewan).

In the case of Sturgeon County vs. the County of Lethbridge, StatCan doesn’t shorten the former as shortening is unnecessary, while StatCan shortens the latter by removing the superfluous of and placing the County behind the common name to allow for absolute alphabetical sorting of all census subdivisions.

In the case of Bonnyville, the difference is told by the town’s article name being Bonnyville, Alberta and the MD’s article name being Bonnyville No. 87, Alberta. If the MD of Bonnyville No. 87 changes its name by just dropping its assigned number (to simply become MD of Bonnyville), instead of flipping the MD term for the County term, or instead of overhauling the name outright to Bonnyville County, then we will cross that bridge when we get there. Hopefully the outcome of what we are discussing here will inform that decision, and the outcome will also anticipate that other situations like this may arise in the future.

Including the No. X in the article names of those municipalities that still use them is appropriate because it is part of their official and common names and it is part of their history. In my line of work, many elected officials, administrators and residents of municipalities are quite attached and sensitive to the use of their official names and respectful of the past decisions of elected councils to honour their municipality’s past by retaining their historical assigned number or even the County/MD of common name format.

I recall you have a special personal interest in Beaver County. If the MD of Beaver No. 9 Council did not decide to change its name in 1999, perhaps you might be one of those that would be attached and sensitive to others intentionally or unintentionally referring to the municipality incorrectly.

Until the province requires all rural municipalities to modernize the format of their official names, or until all of them eventual change over themselves, their numbers are what they are, and right now, they are part of their official and common names.

The good news is that, in the past 11 years, 19 municipalities that once had numbers in their official/common names officially dropped them through the renaming process. Of the 64 municipal districts in Alberta, 36 of the have dropped their historical numbers to date. Based on these figures, it is very likely that the trend will continue, thereby decreasing the number of remaining municipal districts that will still have their historical numbers in their official names.

Considering all of the above, I suggest that a proposal to revert the move be placed on the MD of Taber’s talk page and, through that process, interested users can collaborate to determine if the former article name was the best possible article name for this one unique MD/town article disambiguation scenario in Alberta, or if there is a better article name solution. Hwy43 (talk) 06:28, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Alright, I won't go ahead with proposing the move of the counties because of the StatCan reasoning, I thought that "Lethbridge County" was incorrect, but if they say its official, then its official. And I won't go ahead with proposing the move of the MDs because of the Saskatchewan conventions. However, my remaining points in my case are: Alberta is the only province that allows their districts to name themselves whatever they want, in Saskatchewan they are all the same; and "Bonnyv" is a simple example, if you typed in "Acadia", the MD doesn't show on the auto complete, how would you know what to type in next? And perhaps you're right about my bias to Beaver County, I grew up there, and even worked for them for a summer, (p.s. it was County of Beaver No. 9 before '99, not MD). 117Avenue (talk) 08:39, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for reversing the move. I agree that it is frustrating that Alberta allows such a wide range of formats for official names when it comes to MDs and specialized municipalities. It is neither clean nor ideal and perpetuates confusion and a myth that there are more municipal statuses in Alberta than there really are. There are some goofy official names in Ontario as well. One in particular is the City of Kawartha Lakes. Can't explain the "Acadia" autocomplete observation. (maybe an article requires a certain number of hits to warrant an autocomplete record?) Also thanks for correcting the previous official name of Beaver County. In looking back in my records last night, I was so focused on getting the number right, I didn't even confirm what was before the of. Hwy43 (talk) 15:24, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

I think there is a maximum of ten entries displayed in autocomplete. There are just too many entries beginning with "Acadia", so it just lists the ten most (likely?/popular?). The same thing will result if you type in "Washington" or "Johnson". There are just too many articles beginning with these letters to list everything. If everything were listed it would be a mile long (or 1.609344 kilometres, if you will). Backspace (talk) 17:14, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that last edit. Of course, I knew where it was/is, but did it anyway. Too much going too fast on autopilot, I guess. Completely my fault. I'm actually embarrassed when I make these kinds of mistakes. If you find any more, be sure to let me know. I'm my own worst critic. Backspace (talk) 18:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I figured you were on autopilot, looking at your contributions. You've actually appeared in my watchlist so many times I haven't clicked on all your diffs. I appreciate all your work with categorizing, and removing false precision from coords, or adding missing ones. But I have a problem with you using a database, there could be errors, if I was doing it I would use Google earth, and choose a point in the center of town. 117Avenue (talk) 21:18, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

The satellite photos on Google Earth are significantly distorted. They are flat pictures placed on a round surface. I have much more confidence in CGNDB and GNIS databases, as validated by a careful eye using Google Earth and/or other applications, than arbitrarily picking what appears to be a centre point from just Google Earth or another application that is known to have distorted data. Hwy43 (talk) 06:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I've actually found a few errors on the CGNDB and GNIS databases, sometimes fixable because these databases are entered by someone who maybe hits "13" instead of "12" or something like that. Human beings are not perfect, after all. That's why when I enter geocoordinates, I generally will click on to the link to see where it actually goes. On their satellite view, Google maps will actually show a picture of an airport runway, for example. Then I can be more sure that I've gotten the correct coordinates.

Speaking of bad geocoordinates, some of the consistently worst I've seen on Wikipedia concern those locational pin-maps that we sometimes have on these articles. These are generally created from a different set of coordinates from the ones that we use as external links to the maps (those which I generally place at the upper right-hand corner of the article). These pin-map coordinates are invariably entered in decimal degrees. (Tons of examples can be found in the articles which I very recently just edited for Alberta. I will always enter my original data in degrees/minutes/seconds fashion, although I will correct an entry originally in decimal degrees by retaining that system.) In many cases I've found that, where the decimal degrees entered were, say, 54.3210, when I went to correct them, the actually locations, according to CGNDB, were 54° 32' 10" (Yikes!). Needless to say, for some reason, I rarely found a decimal degree entry with greater than xx.5959 degrees anywhere. How's that for non-randomness?

If we don't have some kind of "official" geocoordinates, such as those by CGNDB or GNIS, who is to say that my "center of town" coordinates, six feet away from yours, aren't better or worse? People could justify their new coordinates by saying they're six inches closer to the "geographical centre" or some such reason. Where does it all end? Backspace (talk) 23:30, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

The errors I am talking about is where your point is outside town, not just six feet. In regards to the inch accuracy for centre, as I mentioned above, false precision is to be avoided, seconds or four decimals, is good enough for hamlets. I have also notified Kyle who added all the decimal degrees incorrectly, but he never seems to respond to anything. 117Avenue (talk) 23:37, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

If you aren't already, would you please peer review this? Hwy43 (talk) 06:40, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes, the highways, I was planing on rewriting/cleaning all of them, but other stuff keeps coming up... 117Avenue (talk) 07:48, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I propose that we move these two categories to "Category:Kneehill County, Alberta" and "Category:Rocky View County, Alberta" to remain consistent with other county categories. All county categories in the United States are named this way, as are almost all in Canada. I recently created most of the Alberta "county" categories, but would not have created these two (pre-existing) categories under these names. On further matters, Category:Foothills, Alberta should be removed in favor of Category:Foothills No. 31, Alberta, and Category:Lac St. Anne County, Alberta should be removed in favor of Category:Lac Ste. Anne County, Alberta. Backspace (talk) 19:23, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I haven't actually run through all the categories to see to see if they all match with their article name. But it needs to be done, so go ahead, definitely the Lac Ste. Anne County one needs to be done. 117Avenue (talk) 20:56, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I've never actually moved or deleted a category. I believe that to move it would only involve the regular "Move" procedure, which I have done before with articles, but not categories. As far as deleting a whole category, I don't know how to do it procedure-wise, so I'll just leave it up to someone else to act upon my suggestion if they believe that it's the correct action. Backspace (talk) 03:41, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Done, I have listed them for discussion, then someone will move them, and all the articles in them. There is a work around we non-admins can use, but I have been warned against using it. 117Avenue (talk) 03:53, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

I generated the list of talkpages to create using AWB and the nested categories under Category:Television series by Canadian network - the redirect has been categorized, which is how it showed up in the list. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 05:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that - didn't mean to cause an issue. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 05:18, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks kindly - always happy to be of help. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 05:22, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I disagree with your edits to this character bio. Calling a transgender person by anything other than their chosen name is offensive. "Adam" is not a nickname, it is the character's real name. Although the character's birth name is almost definitely "Chelsea," his chosen name should be used in any context in which a cisgender person's birth name would be used. Also, writing "and identifies as male" is preferable to "but identifies as male" as the latter implies that the character has less right to call himself male than a cisgender man. I do not understand your strong objections to these edits. Would you please elaborate? ATgirl (talk) 02:08, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry I am not as close to the subject as you are, nor do I want to become an expert at it. But this character shouldn't be treated different than any other, J.T. never went by James Tiberius, or Sav by Savtaj. If we know the birth name (K.C. is the only one that hasn't been said on air), it is listed. Besides, the source[2] says that in 1016 Adam goes back to being Chelsea. Also, you agreed not to call Adam "he" more than once, or a "stepbrother", yet you re-added it, why? 117Avenue (talk) 05:23, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Even if you do no want to become an expert it is important when editing articles to use correct terms and pronouns. Teen Nick has linked to this guide [3] for how to write about a trans or genderqueer person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.172.129.154 (talk) 01:43, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I withdrew my objection to referring to Adam as a "biological female," as the terminology is debatable, but I don't recall ever implying that referring to Adam as "he" or "Drew's stepbrother" is a legitimate area of debate.

I still have several objections and I hope that you will reconsider your opinions. We seem to have reached an agreement on "stepbrother," so I will forgo any further debate on that point. However, I would like to refer you to the Wikipedia Manual of Style's Section on Identity. From this article, it is clear that Adam should be referred to as "he" just as any other male character:

"Any person whose gender might be questioned should be referred to using the gendered nouns, pronouns, and possessive adjectives that reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. This applies when referring to any phase of that person's life."

Please note that gendered pronouns AND nouns are included here. Names like "Gracie" and "Adam" are quite obviously gendered nouns.

It is a common and widely accepted practice to use a transgender person's target-gender name in the same way one would use a cisgender person's birth name. The idea that a transgender person's target-gender name (I avoid saying "chosen" because that's not always the case) is analogous to a cisgender person's nickname implies that transgender people are simply pretending to be their target genders. I could easily argue that this concept leads to harassment, violence, and murder, but that's not the point. It is simply inaccurate; Adam is a boy.

The use of a transgender person's birth name is seldom used to refer to that person outside of direct and intentional insults to that person's dignity. Applying quotation marks to gendered language (including names) associated with a transgender person's target gender is almost always intended as an insult. This is the first time I've ever seen quotation marks used in this way without clearly contemptuous intentions.

Further, I object to the sentence, "Adam is the show's first transgender character, being born female, however identifies as a male," as the use of the word "however" implies that it is contradictory for a person born with female anatomy to identify as male. I fully realize that the vast majority of individuals born with female anatomy do, in fact, identify as female, but not all do. Being born with female anatomy does not imply a female identity; it drastically increases the probability of female identity. Moreover, Adam was never entirely female (though the use of "biologically female" is marginally acceptable). In fact, he states, "I was never a girl" in "My Body is a Cage" Part I.

More importantly, every other character on that list is referred to using the gendered language associated with their target genders. This includes the use of names that are associated with and appropriate for persons of their target genders. No other character on the list has cause to interpret the use of their birth names as an insult. No other character considers a name other than their birth name to be their real name. No other character uses their birth name in the third person to refer the state of being in the closet about their true gender. The fact that their target genders are aligned with the genders they were assigned at birth does is trivial. I contend that you are treating Adam differently when you use his birth name or hesitate to use appropriately gendered language to refer to him. ATgirl (talk) 16:24, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply, I have been busy. Regrading your comments on the use of "brother", I must have misinterpreted this edit summary, but I reverted to Adam as a stepbrother once Drew used the term. Thank-you for pointing me to MOS:IDENTITY, watching the episode also helped convince me to use male terms. I guess I am too much of a fan of her work on Life with Derek, where she played a humble and lovable girl, to imagine her as a boy on Degrassi. My argument to always list birth name then preferred name, can be beaten by saying we haven't had to deal with someone changing their name, rather than going by a nickname. Overall, thank-you for the educational rewrite. 117Avenue (talk) 07:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Thank you for maintaining an open mind. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ATgirl (talk • contribs) 12:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the tip. I'm not familiar with how templates work, to be honest; I just copy and paste. But from what I've seen, it looks like {clear} does not change the size of the climate/weather boxes like div style does; maybe this is just my browser, I really don't know.1brettsnyder (talk) 01:21, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure that you have consensus to do what you're doing... Not every one of these articles needs to be treated in the same way. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:41, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

No interest in discussion, then? Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Your edit to the article about the actress Melissa McIntyre, seen here, which was a redirect to the character she portrays, Ashley Kerwin, has been reverted. This article has been through the deletion process at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melissa McIntyre and the result was no consensus. If you would like to renominate it for deletion, please see WP:AFD. Until that time, the article should not become a redirect, as there is other information listed which is more than about just the single character. By making it a redirect you are effectively deleting the article outside of process. Thanks. — MrDolomite • Talk 16:07, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, No consensus ≠ redirect. I am especially surprised you redirected the articles for Sarah Babble-Atishoo and Christina Schmidt. They were referenced, there are suitable references in other D:TNG articles that could have been inserted into their articles if they weren't already, as well as offline sources and stuff at Lexis Nexis, ProQuest, etc. Can you also let me know if/when you AfD more of these as I do have a bit of a vested interest. Thanks, Matthewedwards :  Chat  17:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

To quote someone at WT:TV,

To answer the original question, the standard is that multiple, independent, non-trivial mentions in reliable sources exist. Not that such references are currently included in the article, mind you. Herein lies much of the confusion--some see articles where it's obvious that the article doesn't reference sufficient sources and assume that the topic doesn't meet the guidelines for inclusion. The current state of an article is almost always inferior to its ideal state--even our best FAs have room for improvement. Jclemens (talk) 10:27 pm, 15 August 2010, last Sunday (5 days ago) (UTC−7)

Matthewedwards :  Chat  17:42, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I have also reverted Christina Schmidt per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christina Schmidt as no consensus. — MrDolomite • Talk 19:12, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Reverted Sam Earle per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Earle as well. — MrDolomite • Talk 19:15, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

And Dalmar Abuzeid per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dalmar Abuzeid. — MrDolomite • Talk 19:16, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

While many of the other Degrassi characters were redirected to List of Degrassi: The Next Generation characters, others had gone through the WP:AFD process and reached a consensus to redirect. The ones listed above were not, and as such, should be relisted. — MrDolomite • Talk 19:19, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

In each discussion a comment was made telling me that an AfD was not needed, and that I could follow normal editing processes, what then did Hullaballoo Wolfowitz mean? The first time I notified all creators and primary contributors, and listed them on the list of Television-related deletion discussions and the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions, the second time I listed it on the Canadian Wikipedians' notice board, I tried to get as many people involved as possible. 117Avenue (talk) 04:52, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Actors are not characters. By redirecting BLP pages to a list of fictitious creations, we're losing information that cannot/has not been put in the target page. Matthewedwards :  Chat  23:35, 22 August 2010 (UTC)