![]() | List of municipalities in New Brunswick is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured list on March 21, 2022. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FL-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I reverted the recent addition of financial information for several reasons. First, it seems to run afoul of WP:TRIVIA, as it is not directly related to the list in question. As another user pointed out "If we are going to start including financials, then where does it end? Number of employees? Kilometre lengths of roads, water pipes, sewers, etc.?". Also the table was very confusing and included numbers with no definition of what the numbers meant outside of the text, and also contained bare links to pdfs. It will also make this article quite a bit different in form and style to all the other provinces/state list of local government pages. I think if this information is to stay on wikipedia, it could be given it's own article " Municipal debts of New Brunswick municipalities" or something like that, but it does not belong in this list. Mattximus ( talk) 20:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
For me, the issue isn't the content that you are adding, I actually think it does belong on wikipedia, and deserves it's own page. My issue is that it doesn't really fit well in this page. This page is just a list with very basic demographic information, and that's it. Any addition would be trivial relative to the purpose of this list. Should we add another section on number of lakes? Hospitals? Schools? There are separate pages for many of those. It doesn't make sense to put everything in one list. But we can link a new page from here for sure. Would that be an acceptable compromise? Mattximus ( talk) 20:40, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
47.54.9.44 and Mattximus, I have created a sandbox with two options. Each option includes my suggested edits, comments and requests for citations and clarifications. You can view it at User:Hwy43/List of municipalities in New Brunswick/sandbox. I look forward to your comments. The more I have thought about this, I am leaning to Option 2. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 06:47, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
@ Mattximus: feel up to the task of updating this list article to reflect incorporation of Haut-Madawaska? Need new entry in the table for this new rural community, plus removal of four villages. Prose in the Rural community and Village sections would also require updating, as well as likely the overall article lead. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 06:56, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
Per this Government of NB page Types of Local Governments, the following are legally defined:
Anybody (1/3 of the population) not in one of the three above types is in an LSD, administered by the Minister of Environment and Local Government. This should be made clear in the prose, and a linked to Local service district (New Brunswick) and List of local service districts in New Brunswick. I suggest that the page be organized to reflect that. I gives undue weight to the distinction (which is what?) between towns, villages, and cities, and should give some context about LSDs. -- Cornellier ( talk) 21:14, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
The Municipalities Act, which enables incorporation of local governments (i.e. municipalities) in the province, is long in the tooth. Upon review, it dates back to at least 1973 and possibly further back to 1967. It is evident that, back then, there were only three different status types of municipalities – cities, towns and villages – with different incorporation requirements. In 2005, the Act was amended to provide the opportunity to pursue a fourth incorporated local government or municipal status type – rural community. In 2013, it was amended again to enable a fifth incorporated local government or municipal status type – regional municipality. Thus there are five status types enabled by the Municipalities Act that all walk and talk like incorporated local governments (i.e. municipalities). It is unfortunate that semantics in both the Act and the webpage make this confusing. It is evident that the spirit and intent is that there are five different municipal status types providing local government in the province, and such is acknowledged by Statistics Canada and the Canada Revenue Agency.
As for the minor reorganization, see how it deviates from the standardized organization implemented for the equivalent featured lists of municipalities in AB, BC, MB, NB, NL, NS, ON, SK, NT, NU, and YK as well as the currently nominated PE featured list and the final remaining QC that will eventually follow. To achieve the goal of making the "List of municipalities in province/territory" family of list articles a featured topic, clear similarity among all lists will be important. Hwy43 ( talk) 05:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
If we think about the casual readers that visit this article that aren't as knowledgeable as us about the intricacies of municipalities in NB, the following article heading organization would create further confusion.
I understand and really like the preferred format used for MB. If the GoNB and/or the Act explicitly differentiated the three original types as 'urban municipalities' instead of the ambiguous 'municipalities', I'd be all-in immediately like done for MB as well as SK and AB. However, if we do institute the slightly adjusted below, are we violating WP:OR, specifically WP:SYNTH?
As for LSDs, they are not incorporated municipalities, whereas LGDs in MB are incorporated municipalities. This is why LSDs are not included in this article. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 22:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
The second idea can't work because villages are not urban. You asked "how many types of incorporated municipalities, as the concept generally known and understood by society, exist in NB?" Well the NB government answers that at Types of Local Governments. There are three.
We should present it as the government does. Anything else, justified by not confusing the "casual reader", could be "violating WP:OR, specifically WP:SYNTH". -- Cornellier ( talk) 10:41, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Based on Timothy's advisement (thank you) about the new Local Governance Act (LGA), I am going to try to re-articulate a different way to reveal that both Cornellier and I are correct in different ways. At Municipality, it states "In Canada, municipalities are local governments established through provincial and territorial legislation...". The terms municipality and local government are effectively synonymous in Canada. Drilling down however to the New Brunswick context, according to the LGA, "local government" means a municipality, rural community or regional municipality and "municipality" means a city, town or village. This means that they are not synonymous according to New Brunswick legislation, so I now understand, more than previously, where Cornellier is coming from. Rather, "local government" is an umbrella term above "municipality" instead.
In Canada in general: | Municipalities = local governments | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
In New Brunswick per its LGA: | |||||
Local governments | |||||
Municipalities | Rural communities | Regional municipalities | |||
Cities | Towns | Villages |
Ultimately, we are tasked with determining if the organization of the list article should fully match the legislative hierarchy/definitions or what is generally understood in the Canadian context. If there is consensus to do the former, I have put some thought together on how to do so while respecting the theme and approach applied across all provincial/territorial entries in the scope of the List of municipalities in Canada topic. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 05:19, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Hwy43. What do you think about having an all-encompassing list like this:
Name | CSD type | Governance | County | Population | Land area km2 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aberdeen Parish | Parish | LSD | Carleton | 781 | 446.2 |
Addington | Parish | LSD | Restigouche | 656 | 935.17 |
Alma Parish | Parish | LSD | Albert | 5 | 222.62 |
Alma | Village | Village | Albert | 213 | 47.6 |
Aroostook | Village | Village | Victoria | 306 | 2.23 |
Bathurst | City | City | Gloucester | 11897 | 92.04 |
Big Hole Tract 8 (South Half) | Indian reserve | Band government | Northumberland | 48 | 27.86 |
Might not be too onerous to build the first time if I take a CSV file from the governement site and do a scripted transform into a wikitable. Obviously this will create more maintenance work for the WP:GNOMEs but that could be offset by removing one or two of the many other place lists that exist for NB. -- Cornellier ( talk) 13:25, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
I think the best solution to take the load off gnomes from having to update with, for example, new census info that would need to be repeated on two or more articles of slightly different scope is to build a template. Say you build the above table for all CSDs in NB as a template instead. It could then be placed on List of communities in New Brunswick in its entirety (your proposed table is most appropriate there because that list article's scope is both incorporated and unincorporated communities). It would be built with invokable parameters to only display cities, towns, villages, rural communities and regional municipalities for use when placing the template on List of municipalities in New Brunswick, and then only the cities parameter invoked for display at List of cities in New Brunswick. The gnomes then only have to update the template once every five years in one location rather than updating in three different tables every five years. Compound this across all provinces and territories and their statuses, a huge load would be lifted. This is something I want to do, though I have never created a template before and am not familiar with its necessary additional coding.
What are your thoughts on that being an ideal long-term solution? Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 21:26, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Note that as of 2023, according to this GNB page, the province is subdivided as follows:
-- Cornellier ( talk) 00:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
At some point, someone is going to be bold by editing the table that lists all municipalities to match the outcome of the recent local governance reforms. This would be problematic because we have no amended census data for those municipalities that experienced boundary changes. My suggestion is, instead of replacing or editing the existing table, simply adding a second table that lists the post-reform municipalities. More specifically, it would simply share the first four columns of the existing table but exclude the final five columns because no census data is available. This means the existing table goes untouched other than branding it as the pre-reform list of municipalities. I will implement this at some point. Once the 2026 census results come out in early 2027, we can return to having just one table. Happy to receive feedback on this suggestion in the meantime. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 08:12, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
I am of the opinion that @g Walton will continue to have a alternative motive (perhaps political or bureaucratic), and I would like to develop a test for this theory by requesting a consensus involving the community of contributors. But in the meantime, I am asking that a simple and current list of municipalities and perhaps near municipalities in New Brunswick be established without accompanying paraphernalia. Questions? Seconder? Spooninpot ( talk) 00:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Which question? G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 04:41, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
@ Hwy43: Do you think it would be reasonable to use some sort of markup in the table to indicate which municipalities weren't significantly affected by the reforms? G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 00:52, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Calculating 2021 population solely on municipalities affected is misleading in many cases due to the number of LSDs included. The 2021 census figures now list many of them with their parish CSDs and they should be included in calculations, marking those that are impossible to calculate due to the division of some LSDs by multiple new bodies. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 02:59, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
At a glance, it looks like types of communities and census data both appear in multiple citations. Could somebody with the time and inclination do whatever updates and mergers are necessary? Thanks. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 18:23, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
This article is transcluded from
List of communities in New Brunswick and
List of villages in Canada. Transclusion isn't working correctly at all, as both of these articles show duplicated sections and terrible layout. It seems like this article is meant to provide the <section name=towns>
for transclusion, but it looks like the end of the section is never detected and the balance of the article is transcluded instead -- disrupting the rest of the referencing article. I believe this used to work correctly, but I don't think there's a good way to figure out what change may have caused the problem.
Does anyone have insight into the way transclusion was meant to work here, before it was disrupted? -- Mikeblas ( talk) 20:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | List of municipalities in New Brunswick is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured list on March 21, 2022. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated FL-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I reverted the recent addition of financial information for several reasons. First, it seems to run afoul of WP:TRIVIA, as it is not directly related to the list in question. As another user pointed out "If we are going to start including financials, then where does it end? Number of employees? Kilometre lengths of roads, water pipes, sewers, etc.?". Also the table was very confusing and included numbers with no definition of what the numbers meant outside of the text, and also contained bare links to pdfs. It will also make this article quite a bit different in form and style to all the other provinces/state list of local government pages. I think if this information is to stay on wikipedia, it could be given it's own article " Municipal debts of New Brunswick municipalities" or something like that, but it does not belong in this list. Mattximus ( talk) 20:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
For me, the issue isn't the content that you are adding, I actually think it does belong on wikipedia, and deserves it's own page. My issue is that it doesn't really fit well in this page. This page is just a list with very basic demographic information, and that's it. Any addition would be trivial relative to the purpose of this list. Should we add another section on number of lakes? Hospitals? Schools? There are separate pages for many of those. It doesn't make sense to put everything in one list. But we can link a new page from here for sure. Would that be an acceptable compromise? Mattximus ( talk) 20:40, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
47.54.9.44 and Mattximus, I have created a sandbox with two options. Each option includes my suggested edits, comments and requests for citations and clarifications. You can view it at User:Hwy43/List of municipalities in New Brunswick/sandbox. I look forward to your comments. The more I have thought about this, I am leaning to Option 2. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 06:47, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
@ Mattximus: feel up to the task of updating this list article to reflect incorporation of Haut-Madawaska? Need new entry in the table for this new rural community, plus removal of four villages. Prose in the Rural community and Village sections would also require updating, as well as likely the overall article lead. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 06:56, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
Per this Government of NB page Types of Local Governments, the following are legally defined:
Anybody (1/3 of the population) not in one of the three above types is in an LSD, administered by the Minister of Environment and Local Government. This should be made clear in the prose, and a linked to Local service district (New Brunswick) and List of local service districts in New Brunswick. I suggest that the page be organized to reflect that. I gives undue weight to the distinction (which is what?) between towns, villages, and cities, and should give some context about LSDs. -- Cornellier ( talk) 21:14, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
The Municipalities Act, which enables incorporation of local governments (i.e. municipalities) in the province, is long in the tooth. Upon review, it dates back to at least 1973 and possibly further back to 1967. It is evident that, back then, there were only three different status types of municipalities – cities, towns and villages – with different incorporation requirements. In 2005, the Act was amended to provide the opportunity to pursue a fourth incorporated local government or municipal status type – rural community. In 2013, it was amended again to enable a fifth incorporated local government or municipal status type – regional municipality. Thus there are five status types enabled by the Municipalities Act that all walk and talk like incorporated local governments (i.e. municipalities). It is unfortunate that semantics in both the Act and the webpage make this confusing. It is evident that the spirit and intent is that there are five different municipal status types providing local government in the province, and such is acknowledged by Statistics Canada and the Canada Revenue Agency.
As for the minor reorganization, see how it deviates from the standardized organization implemented for the equivalent featured lists of municipalities in AB, BC, MB, NB, NL, NS, ON, SK, NT, NU, and YK as well as the currently nominated PE featured list and the final remaining QC that will eventually follow. To achieve the goal of making the "List of municipalities in province/territory" family of list articles a featured topic, clear similarity among all lists will be important. Hwy43 ( talk) 05:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
If we think about the casual readers that visit this article that aren't as knowledgeable as us about the intricacies of municipalities in NB, the following article heading organization would create further confusion.
I understand and really like the preferred format used for MB. If the GoNB and/or the Act explicitly differentiated the three original types as 'urban municipalities' instead of the ambiguous 'municipalities', I'd be all-in immediately like done for MB as well as SK and AB. However, if we do institute the slightly adjusted below, are we violating WP:OR, specifically WP:SYNTH?
As for LSDs, they are not incorporated municipalities, whereas LGDs in MB are incorporated municipalities. This is why LSDs are not included in this article. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 22:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
The second idea can't work because villages are not urban. You asked "how many types of incorporated municipalities, as the concept generally known and understood by society, exist in NB?" Well the NB government answers that at Types of Local Governments. There are three.
We should present it as the government does. Anything else, justified by not confusing the "casual reader", could be "violating WP:OR, specifically WP:SYNTH". -- Cornellier ( talk) 10:41, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Based on Timothy's advisement (thank you) about the new Local Governance Act (LGA), I am going to try to re-articulate a different way to reveal that both Cornellier and I are correct in different ways. At Municipality, it states "In Canada, municipalities are local governments established through provincial and territorial legislation...". The terms municipality and local government are effectively synonymous in Canada. Drilling down however to the New Brunswick context, according to the LGA, "local government" means a municipality, rural community or regional municipality and "municipality" means a city, town or village. This means that they are not synonymous according to New Brunswick legislation, so I now understand, more than previously, where Cornellier is coming from. Rather, "local government" is an umbrella term above "municipality" instead.
In Canada in general: | Municipalities = local governments | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
In New Brunswick per its LGA: | |||||
Local governments | |||||
Municipalities | Rural communities | Regional municipalities | |||
Cities | Towns | Villages |
Ultimately, we are tasked with determining if the organization of the list article should fully match the legislative hierarchy/definitions or what is generally understood in the Canadian context. If there is consensus to do the former, I have put some thought together on how to do so while respecting the theme and approach applied across all provincial/territorial entries in the scope of the List of municipalities in Canada topic. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 05:19, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Hwy43. What do you think about having an all-encompassing list like this:
Name | CSD type | Governance | County | Population | Land area km2 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aberdeen Parish | Parish | LSD | Carleton | 781 | 446.2 |
Addington | Parish | LSD | Restigouche | 656 | 935.17 |
Alma Parish | Parish | LSD | Albert | 5 | 222.62 |
Alma | Village | Village | Albert | 213 | 47.6 |
Aroostook | Village | Village | Victoria | 306 | 2.23 |
Bathurst | City | City | Gloucester | 11897 | 92.04 |
Big Hole Tract 8 (South Half) | Indian reserve | Band government | Northumberland | 48 | 27.86 |
Might not be too onerous to build the first time if I take a CSV file from the governement site and do a scripted transform into a wikitable. Obviously this will create more maintenance work for the WP:GNOMEs but that could be offset by removing one or two of the many other place lists that exist for NB. -- Cornellier ( talk) 13:25, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
I think the best solution to take the load off gnomes from having to update with, for example, new census info that would need to be repeated on two or more articles of slightly different scope is to build a template. Say you build the above table for all CSDs in NB as a template instead. It could then be placed on List of communities in New Brunswick in its entirety (your proposed table is most appropriate there because that list article's scope is both incorporated and unincorporated communities). It would be built with invokable parameters to only display cities, towns, villages, rural communities and regional municipalities for use when placing the template on List of municipalities in New Brunswick, and then only the cities parameter invoked for display at List of cities in New Brunswick. The gnomes then only have to update the template once every five years in one location rather than updating in three different tables every five years. Compound this across all provinces and territories and their statuses, a huge load would be lifted. This is something I want to do, though I have never created a template before and am not familiar with its necessary additional coding.
What are your thoughts on that being an ideal long-term solution? Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 21:26, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Note that as of 2023, according to this GNB page, the province is subdivided as follows:
-- Cornellier ( talk) 00:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
At some point, someone is going to be bold by editing the table that lists all municipalities to match the outcome of the recent local governance reforms. This would be problematic because we have no amended census data for those municipalities that experienced boundary changes. My suggestion is, instead of replacing or editing the existing table, simply adding a second table that lists the post-reform municipalities. More specifically, it would simply share the first four columns of the existing table but exclude the final five columns because no census data is available. This means the existing table goes untouched other than branding it as the pre-reform list of municipalities. I will implement this at some point. Once the 2026 census results come out in early 2027, we can return to having just one table. Happy to receive feedback on this suggestion in the meantime. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 08:12, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
I am of the opinion that @g Walton will continue to have a alternative motive (perhaps political or bureaucratic), and I would like to develop a test for this theory by requesting a consensus involving the community of contributors. But in the meantime, I am asking that a simple and current list of municipalities and perhaps near municipalities in New Brunswick be established without accompanying paraphernalia. Questions? Seconder? Spooninpot ( talk) 00:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Which question? G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 04:41, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
@ Hwy43: Do you think it would be reasonable to use some sort of markup in the table to indicate which municipalities weren't significantly affected by the reforms? G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 00:52, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Calculating 2021 population solely on municipalities affected is misleading in many cases due to the number of LSDs included. The 2021 census figures now list many of them with their parish CSDs and they should be included in calculations, marking those that are impossible to calculate due to the division of some LSDs by multiple new bodies. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 02:59, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
At a glance, it looks like types of communities and census data both appear in multiple citations. Could somebody with the time and inclination do whatever updates and mergers are necessary? Thanks. G. Timothy Walton ( talk) 18:23, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
This article is transcluded from
List of communities in New Brunswick and
List of villages in Canada. Transclusion isn't working correctly at all, as both of these articles show duplicated sections and terrible layout. It seems like this article is meant to provide the <section name=towns>
for transclusion, but it looks like the end of the section is never detected and the balance of the article is transcluded instead -- disrupting the rest of the referencing article. I believe this used to work correctly, but I don't think there's a good way to figure out what change may have caused the problem.
Does anyone have insight into the way transclusion was meant to work here, before it was disrupted? -- Mikeblas ( talk) 20:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)