Jump to content

Talk:Canadians: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
BattyBot (talk | contribs)
Bots
1,920,195 edits
→‎top: Fixed WikiProject template(s) to remove page from Category:WikiProject templates with unknown parameters or a sub-category, plus general fixes
(39 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{skip to talk}}
{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header}}
{{add|Add a new discussion section}}
{{talk header}}
{{Canadian English}}
{{Article history
{{ArticleHistory
|action1=GAN
|action1=GAN
|action1date=01:28, 19 January 2011
|action1date=01:28, 19 January 2011
Line 10: Line 10:
|currentstatus=GA
|currentstatus=GA
|topic=Culture and society
|topic=Culture and society
⚫
}}
⚫
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|1=
⚫
{{WikiProject Canada|importance=Top}}
⚫
{{WikiProject Ethnic groups|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject North America|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia}}
}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
Line 20: Line 26:
| algo = old(180d)
| algo = old(180d)
}}
}}
== Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2022 ==
{{Talk Spoken Wikipedia|En-canadians-article.ogg|583991565}}

{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{edit semi-protected|Canadians|answered=yes}}
⚫
{{WikiProject Canada|class=GA|importance=Top|selected-article=y}}
Delete the parts of the article about Canadian culture being "heavily" influenced by US culture. This is a common misconception (typically perpetuated by non-Canadians and/or those with weak knowledge of Canada) and easily debunked when even taking a cursory glance at the culture, politics, and society of both countries (especially these days, with america's pronounced and flamboyant shift to the far-right). Actual Canadians cringe whenever they hear this falsehood in wiki articles (and other weak sources of information) in the same way that Irish people cringe at English media's ignorant depictions of their country, or Ukrainians cringe at russian state-controlled media's depiction of their country.
⚫
{{Ethnic groups|class=GA|importance=High}}

⚫
{{WikiProject North America|class=GA|importance=High}}
Thank you for making the correction. [[Special:Contributions/24.68.120.175|24.68.120.175]] ([[User talk:24.68.120.175|talk]]) 16:36, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
⚫
}}
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:''' please provide [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] that support the change you want to be made.<!-- Template:ESp --> [[User:BilCat|BilCat]] ([[User talk:BilCat|talk]]) 17:17, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
{{Canadian English}}
::[https://opentextbc.ca/postconfederation/chapter/10-14-a-culture-under-seige/ A Culture under Siege?].<span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue">[[User:Moxy|Moxy]]</span>-[[File:Maple Leaf (Pantone).svg|15px|link=User talk:Moxy]] 18:48, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
{{Outline of knowledge coverage|Canada}}

== Semi-protected edit request on 24 November 2022 ==

{{edit semi-protected|Canadians|answered=yes}}
Please update 2015 number for Canadians living in Pakistan in the infobox with 2019 number provided below. And list them below Italy.


Please change 17,320 to 30,000-50,000<ref>{{Cite web|title=HC highlights growing ties between Canada, Pakistan|url=https://www.dawn.com/news/1500450|last=Hasan|first=Shazia|date=2019-08-20|website=DAWN.COM|language=en|access-date=2020-04-30}}</ref> in the infobox for Pakistan.
== Definition of a ''Canadian'' (within Canada and Internationally (UN)) ==


A person who is a citizen/national of Canada. [[User:Mechanical Keyboarder|Mechanical Keyboarder]] ([[User talk:Mechanical Keyboarder|talk]]) 03:13, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks [[Special:Contributions/119.157.244.136|119.157.244.136]] ([[User talk:119.157.244.136|talk]]) 06:42, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
: {{done}} '''[[User:TheGoodAndHolyLord|<span style="background:#222;color:gold;padding:1px 3px;">TG</span>]][[User talk:TheGoodAndHolyLord|<span style="background:gold;color:#111;padding:1px 3px;">HL&nbsp;↗</span>]]'''&nbsp;🍁 17:02, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
:Sorry, but you do not get to arbitrarily change the definition to one that you prefer. The current definition has been stable, so it's up to you to attempt to get consensus for anew definition. It's not a minor change, and it's most definitively not minor when you have already been undone. [[User:Meters|Meters]] ([[User talk:Meters|talk]]) 03:25, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
::The change is question is [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Canadians&diff=1008988052&oldid=1008981927]. The current lead starts off: "Canadians (French: Canadiens) are people identified with the country of Canada. This connection may be residential, legal, historical or cultural. For most Canadians, many (or all) of these connections exist and are collectively the source of their being Canadian." For years this article has started with this or some close variant of it. A citizenship-only definition is a major change, and one that I do not agree with. [[User:Meters|Meters]] ([[User talk:Meters|talk]]) 03:33, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
::: {{ping|Mechanical Keyboarder}} I'm the one who reverted the change you made. Thanks for explaining your terse definition. It was initially because you gutted a long-standing lead. It it achieved a silent consensus. A few minutes of checking would have shown you that it's been there for a long time. When you find things like that in well-edited and maintained articles, it's usually a good idea to check before you make major changes to the lead. Other areas are less likely to have such an effect on the nature of the article. I was initially going to take the revert to this talk page, but then I realized the you linked citizen to citizenship, not even [[:Canadian nationality law]], and that you completely ignored [[:Wikipedia:Short description]], I felt that you were in over your head. Sorry for causing such a commotion.
::: I see you state it's the UN definition. Do you have a link to that definition?
::: Your proposed definition lines-up quite well with the [https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/operational-bulletins-manuals/canadian-citizenship/overview/who-canadian-citizen.html Canadian Government definition of a Canadian citizen], but this article is not about citizenship. This article is about more than that. Meters, and I'm sure others will make counter-points to yours. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 09:12, 26 February 2021 (UTC)


{{tref}}
== Colours and flags ==


== This information is wrong ==
Hello {{u|Moxy}}! I'm sorry for calling you here. I'd like you to tell why you think we should replace flags with colours. This is the only page about an ethnicity where someone has done it (as far as I know). In my opinion, we should use flags instead of colours, just as it is done on other pages on ethnic groups. − [[User:Allice Hunter|<span style="font-family:Helvetica; color:#4B0082;">'''''Allice Hunter'''''</span>]] [[User talk:Allice Hunter|<span style="color:#7B68EE; font-style:oblique;"><sup>(Inbox)</sup></span>]] 22:53, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
: Oh, I see. You made [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Canadians&diff=1018601349&oldid=1018586834 this] edit in violation of [[:MOS:FLAGICON]] and Moxy correctly reverted it. Now you're claiming that other articles ignore FLAGICON and you'd like us to do so as well? Perhaps a better option would be to point us to those articles and raise that on the talk page of the manual of style instead. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 23:12, 19 April 2021 (UTC)


More than 1 million Indians live in Canada. [[Special:Contributions/2405:201:500B:61:C1F9:51A6:3B25:F5E8|2405:201:500B:61:C1F9:51A6:3B25:F5E8]] ([[User talk:2405:201:500B:61:C1F9:51A6:3B25:F5E8|talk]]) 03:50, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
== 100 ==


:Source? [[User:BilCat|BilCat]] ([[User talk:BilCat|talk]]) 04:00, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
I fixed a link from a redirect so that it redirects to the main article. It is true not all links to redirects need to be fixed; however, the canadian lists were the only series of lists that listed 100 in their titles. I fixed the links so that they would match their current titles. Sometimes it is ok to leave the links as they are. This isn't the case for these links. For example, it is ok to leave the link for the binomial name of dog in instances where the scientific name is discussed. [[User:Catchpoke|Catchpoke]] ([[User talk:Catchpoke|talk]]) 17:37, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
: It is not necessary to change redirects. You've been told this by two different editors. Linking to a redirect is not a problem because it is [[:WP:NOTBROKEN]]. I will revert one more time and we will both be at [[:WP:3RR]] as a result. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 22:55, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
:: To be specific, the change you are making is from this <nowiki>[[List of the 100 largest metropolitan areas in Canada|major urban centres]]</nowiki> to this <nowiki>[[List of census metropolitan areas and agglomerations in Canada|major urban centres]]</nowiki>. What the reader saw before your change was ''major urban centres'' and what they see after is was ''major urban centres''. The target for the first is a redirect to List of census metropolitan areas and agglomerations in Canada. So, in short, your "fix" is not, it is the very reason that NOTBROKEN was established. A piped redirect is the worst thing to fix as it makes no difference to the reader. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 23:03, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
::: But hovering over the link will reveal the "true" target for the page... [[User:Catchpoke|Catchpoke]] ([[User talk:Catchpoke|talk]]) 23:13, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
:::: Not the point. The link is NOTBROKEN. If you get that changed, you may change this link. If not, you can explain your actions to admins. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 03:50, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
:::::What a disingenuous comment. [[User:Catchpoke|Catchpoke]] ([[User talk:Catchpoke|talk]]) 22:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
:::::: Not really, no. Please take your concern to NOTBROKEN. You either do not appreciate or have any deference to the guideline and feel that you have an exception—one that two other, more experienced editors do not accept. You should get that clearly accepted at the guideline and codified in such a way that I and the other edit do not trouble you going forward. Without that, you will continue to glean warnings on your talk page. This, of course, may lead to your eventual removal from the project. If you don not have the sense to understand that and would rather continue to blame others, go ahead, but you will not get your way on this article unless you get more editors to agree with your claimed exception. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 23:05, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
:::::::This is simply [[WP:WIKILAWYERING]]. What meritable reason do you have to keep the redirect? [[User:Catchpoke|Catchpoke]] ([[User talk:Catchpoke|talk]]) 23:31, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
:::::::: Thank you for admitting that you are simply WIKILAWYERING, but to answer your question, NOTBROKEN is the only reasonable reason to keep the redirect. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 00:31, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
:::::::::Take a look at your block log: This is simply a troll post. [[User:Catchpoke|Catchpoke]] ([[User talk:Catchpoke|talk]]) 02:40, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
:::::::::: Take a look at my contributions. I generally make more edits in a week than you have in your entire time. If you keep showing poor behaviour (self-admitted wikilawyering and trolling), you could render this discussion moot. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 04:45, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
:::::::::::Another hypocrite. [[User:Catchpoke|Catchpoke]] ([[User talk:Catchpoke|talk]]) 19:18, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
::::::::::::Despite Catchpoke's ''[[WP:ad hominem|ad hominem]]'' argument, I have to agree with Walter Görlitz here. Bypassing redirects in this way is clearly at odds with [[WP:NOTBROKEN]]. If you feel that the guideline should be changed, please suggest improvements. If you feel that the guideline, although generally sound, should not apply here, please explain why this case is special. Otherwise, I recommend following that advice from multiple experienced editors. <small>(Does anyone else see the irony in calling everyone else a hypocrite?)</small> [[User:Certes|Certes]] ([[User talk:Certes|talk]]) 22:33, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Already warned Catchpoke for personal attacks. User immediately deleted warning and showed up on my talk page to ask which comments... I would say there's some irony in calling someone else "disingenuous" too. Note that the user continues to rapidly bypass similar redirects on multiple articles. [[User:Meters|Meters]] ([[User talk:Meters|talk]]) 22:57, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
{{outdent|:::::::::::::}} Catchpoke's recent edit history is full of "bypass redirect". The red flag occurred when the editor hit two BC city articles I watch. I have opened [[:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#NOTBROKEN or NOTHERE]]. [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] ([[User talk:Walter Görlitz|talk]]) 23:11, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
:I'm here due to watching [[Brampton]] and [[Edmonton]] (to [[WP:BPAT|fix]] incoming links meant for [[Brampton, Carlisle]]; [[Edmonton, London]]; etc.) but I had already started a conversation at [[User talk:Catchpoke]] following similar edits elsewhere. [[User:Certes|Certes]] ([[User talk:Certes|talk]]) 23:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:38, 10 April 2024

Good articleCanadians has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 19, 2011Good article nomineeListed

Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2022

Delete the parts of the article about Canadian culture being "heavily" influenced by US culture. This is a common misconception (typically perpetuated by non-Canadians and/or those with weak knowledge of Canada) and easily debunked when even taking a cursory glance at the culture, politics, and society of both countries (especially these days, with america's pronounced and flamboyant shift to the far-right). Actual Canadians cringe whenever they hear this falsehood in wiki articles (and other weak sources of information) in the same way that Irish people cringe at English media's ignorant depictions of their country, or Ukrainians cringe at russian state-controlled media's depiction of their country.

Thank you for making the correction. 24.68.120.175 (talk) 16:36, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. BilCat (talk) 17:17, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A Culture under Siege?.Moxy- 18:48, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 November 2022

Please update 2015 number for Canadians living in Pakistan in the infobox with 2019 number provided below. And list them below Italy.

Please change 17,320 to 30,000-50,000[1] in the infobox for Pakistan.

Thanks 119.157.244.136 (talk) 06:42, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done TGHL ↗ 🍁 17:02, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Hasan, Shazia (2019-08-20). "HC highlights growing ties between Canada, Pakistan". DAWN.COM. Retrieved 2020-04-30.

This information is wrong

More than 1 million Indians live in Canada. 2405:201:500B:61:C1F9:51A6:3B25:F5E8 (talk) 03:50, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source? BilCat (talk) 04:00, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Canadians&oldid=1218270717"