This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Winnipeg article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
![]() | Winnipeg is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 26, 2016. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
There has been some disputes to have flag icons in the infobox on various cities WP:INFOBOXFLAG states: "Human geographic articles – for example settlements and administrative subdivisions – may have flags of the country and first-level administrative subdivision in infoboxes; however, physical geographic articles – for example, mountains, valleys, rivers, lakes, and swamps – should not. Where a single article covers both human and physical geographic subjects (e.g. Manhattan), or where the status of the territory is subject to a political dispute, the consensus of editors at that article will determine whether flag use in the infobox is preferred or not." Meaning that cities, being human geographic articles could potentially be permitted to have flag icons. In addition there are many other articles such as New York City, Moncton, Fredericton, Las Vegas, etc. that have flags in the infoboxes. I am interested to see you input. Thanks. Vaselineeeeeeee ( talk) 00:14, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
It is currently disputed by Nikkimaria whether File:Flag of Winnipeg.svg and File:Crest of Winnipeg.svg are free-content images. For this reason, they have taken it upon themselves to police these three articles in refusing to allow their use of these images. To further this, they have uploaded low-resolution PNG versions ( [1] & [2]) under non-free content licenses and will only allow their usage on these articles. I therefore ask the community to decide if we should use the files from Commons or not. Fry1989 eh? 21:24, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Support for using the images from Commons
I see no valid reason against using the Commons files. Fry1989 eh? 21:24, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
The trust between the English Wikipedia and the wikimedia commons? Interesting, it's a bit loaded, but interesting. You follow this up with a Argumentum ad Jimbonem. Then you obligate Nikkimaria to conduct some activity off Wikipedia and then suggest if she does otherwise this simply wouldn't be about copyright at all. The commons handles it's copyright affairs and Wikipedia just trusts it? Sure but could you link me this policy? If this question is the utmost important question being ignored could you do something to put some weight behind it. New to this dispute, being brought here for the first time by the RFC bot, this sounds like a new argument and you have not offered much that I would consider this with any weight. Could you drop the hostility, please? It's not helpful. You keep casting aspersions without doing anything to back them up. This reads like a conspiracy theory. Nikkimaria and all the Admins are out to get you and you will take it to Jimbo. Nikkimaria has at least offered a case. -Serialjoepsycho- ( talk) 22:12, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Again you continue and again you have not shown the policy. I've said that you appeal to emotion and tradition because I've read your responses. You have offered no means to verify any supposed policy that you are discussing. Show the policy that says that the English wikipedia should ignore it's own policies regarding copyright and leave it to the Commons. Make it a serious issue by justifying it with policy. Nikkimaria has pointed out that the image is improperly licensed. Nick-D, along with others, pointed out that it was improperly licensed in the above linked ANI. You can click on the picture and review the license and see that it is improperly licensed. File:Flag_of_Winnipeg.svg This is a derivative work, the creator isn't the original creator of this flag. If it was public domain before this recreation it remained public domain after its creation. The creator can not release a public domain work into the public domain and also can not release a derivative work into the public domain as they do not own the copyright. File:Crest_of_Winnipeg.svg presents the same error. It also provides that this crest is in the public domain. There is no way to verify this. You do not argue against these points. You only argue that we should defer to the commons. Again if we should defer to the commons and this represents policy, as you suggest it does, then please just link the policy so we can verify. You are suggesting that something is being done wrong here yet you don't actually show this. Show it. -Serialjoepsycho- ( talk) 08:33, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
WP:NFCC#1 would apply. If there was a free equivalent available. There is no evidence that there is a free image available. Your evidence is that there is one on the commons. This is not evidence it is free. This is evidence provided that this is on the commons. The license is wrong. It does not comply with Wikipedia. The burden of proof lies with you. Again your proof is that it is in the commons. Yes I see this. Everyone see's this. We aren't asking that it be proved that it is in the commons but that it is proved that the image is free. Beyond proving that it is in the commons you have proved nothing at all. You done so in a rather hostile manner and you have been very verbose. -Serialjoepsycho- ( talk) 07:29, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Opposition to using the images from Commons
|
Fry has stated that "I am not opposed to locally-hosted SVGs and would cease my pressure on this matter once they were uploaded". This has been done and the PNGs have been replaced in the article with the locally-hosted SVGs. This should resolve this matter. Nikkimaria ( talk) 21:28, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
I recall that featured articles should not have subsections that are blank, or simply a link to another page as we do here for "notable people". Either way it does not look very appropriate, I wonder if we can either write a short paragraph with the key notable people, or relegate the link to the see also section. As is, I'm not sure it's appropriate for a featured article. Mattximus ( talk) 21:34, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Per MOS:INFOBOX, "The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. Of necessity, some infoboxes contain more than just a few fields; however, wherever possible, present information in short form, and exclude any unnecessary content". Other, more local MOS guidelines suggest a more expansive approach, but in this particular case shorter is sweeter. Nikkimaria ( talk) 02:50, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
|name=
, |official name=
, and |settlement type=
parameters in the settlement infobox for Canadian cities. This is the third time in less than two years that she has drawn her line in the sand against consensus. The consensus at
WP:CANSTYLE#Infoboxes in
August 2014 before this all started was "All articles on Canadian cities should use the following model for name fields:|name = Sample |official_name = City of Sample |settlement_type = City
Dissatisfied, over a year later, Nikkimaria initiated a formal
RfC asking "Should use of all of |name=
, |official name=
, and |settlement type=
be required for all Canadian cities?" With the except of her, all commenters answered yes. The outcome of the RfC, closed a mere 4.5 months ago, was "There is consensus that the all of the perimeters [sic] should be used for all Canadian cities. The majority opinion is that it is best to be consistant [sic] and that the fields are useful."
Now the belligerence about this has resurfaced once again despite the pre-existing consensus being twice upheld within the span of the last year and a half. When does this stop? Will it ever stop? Nikkimaria may not like it, but there should be no removal of usage of all three parameters due to the longstanding and and twice recently reinforced consensus on this matter. Hwy43 ( talk) 03:30, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
There has been a recent push by at least one user to convert all the pushpin maps to relief maps. I am not sure how I feel about this to be honest but I really do believe we should lean away from the alternative map and stick to the original. The relief map has its place, but in the infoboxes it becomes particularly busy and noisy. Most noticeably in a city infobox which is already filled with montages, seals, flags, etc. I think best to keep it simple but thought I would listen to others first. I also have the topic for discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Manitoba#Relief maps. Krazytea( talk) 00:01, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
The consensus is include a list of federal and provincial politicians in the infobox. Cunard ( talk) 06:11, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
In Canadian city/municipality infoboxes, a collapsible list of federal and provincial politicians (or the respective electoral districts) are provided. Currently Winnipeg does not have this. I added the list but there is no consensus on its inclusion. Is there consensus for it be included? Canadianpoliticalwatcher ( talk) 20:40, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Not sure listing sports team in the lead is good thing. Definitely not the norm especially in an FA article about a place to list every team.-- Moxy ( talk) 15:21, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
-they can welcome you in different languages like spanish, french there are many more — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.194.17.85 ( talk) 15:37, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have added 3 links. The first indicates that CBC New acknowledges that Winnipeg is called #Murderpeg, that Winnipeg has the "label of Murderpeg" and a MacLean's article that Winnipeg is "nicknamed "Murderpeg"'.
Winnipeg is routinely the most violent city in Canada and Brian Bowman is seeking Provincial and Federal aid to deal with this problem.
https://beta.ctvnews.ca/local/winnipeg/2019/11/7/1_4675720.html
Ignoring that Winnipeg is nicknamed "Murderpeg" will never help in resolving this (often fatal) issue.
There is also a 4th New York times reference indicating that Winnipeg is called Murderpeg, but I removed it because a subscription is required to view the article, which seems against the spirit of Wikipedia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Winnie3737 ( talk • contribs) 14:22, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Dear Vaselineeeeeeee,
Interestingly, the top two links that indicated that Winnipeg is called "The Gateway to The West" were both dead links. The current link indicates that we claimed that we were "The Gateway to the West" in 1912, not in the present day.
The links indicating that Winnipeg is called "The Peg" and "Winterpeg" are from 2011 and 2012. Since then, the crystal methamphetamine crisis has overtaken Winnipeg, and now "Murderpeg" is a very common nickname for this city. The references that I cite are from as recently as the November, 2019 killing spree, and are much more contemporaneous than the decade old references for the other provided "nicknames".
As well, none of the other references use the specific phrasing that Winnipeg is nicknamed "The Peg", "Winterpeg", or "The Gateway to the West", like the provided MacLean's article. This was Magnolia's intial contention about the CBC News Article (which stated that Winnipeg is called #Murderpeg, but not "nicknamed" Murderpeg). Similarly, the provided references for the other "nicknames" are all from less credible sources than CBC News and MacLean's magazine.
If you would like remove "Murderpeg" as a nickname, please provide some data or citations that indicate that the other three suggested nicknames are more common and credible in present-day Winnipeg than "Murderpeg" is.
Sincerely,
Winnie3737 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winnie3737 ( talk • contribs) 15:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Two of the citations that you provide are just duplicates of the same article, and that article doesn't even mention "Winterpeg". Therefore, you have three remaining citations, which is not evidence that "Winterpeg" is a more common, valid or broadly accepted nickname than "Murderpeg". If you would like to keep removing "Murderpeg" as a nickname, please provide any evidence that it is a less common or valid nickname than Winterpeg, and not duplicated citations that don't support your premise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winnie3737 ( talk • contribs) 14:57, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Based on Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Scrolling lists and collapsible content and the fact that the "[show]" button does not work on some browsers I removed the "|state=collapsed". This was reverted based on Talk:Winnipeg/Archive 5#Historic Population Table from 2014. I don't think that a seven year old discussion by three people is sufficient to override the MOS and hide material. Ping the three editors from that discussion Hwy43, Mattximus and Nikkimaria. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 08:38, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I think that the image of the Esplanade Riel in the info box should be changed to an image of the exchange district. My reasoning for this is that I plan on taking pictures including the Esplanade Riel in another a picture once 300 main is complete. The image I had in mind instead of the Esplanade Riel image is titled Exchange downtown.png 21pegedi89 ( talk) 02:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
I’m not making an argument. I’m simply proposing an idea. However, you are right in saying that I should wait until the image is actually taken. I guess I will wait until 300 main is completed in order for you to fully understand what I’m suggesting. 21pegedi89 ( talk) 18:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
The introductory image is currently a photo of the University of Winnipeg. This is not an image that best captures Winnipeg. It does not show Winnipeg’s unique skyline, or Portage and Main, or really anything that is a major physical facet of the city.
Frankly it’s strange and poor choice for the introductory image for the Wikipedia article for Winnipeg and I suggest that we pick something else. HALitosis 9K ( talk) 16:07, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
I’m not sure if I can show you on here, but on the Wikipedia app, the introductory image - the very top image, the first thing users would see - is a stand alone photo of the University of Winnipeg campus. I think one of the skyline photos of downtown with the Riel Esplanade bridge would be good for the introductory image, but I’m open to other ideas. HALitosis 9K ( talk) 23:44, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
OK! Thanks Nikkimaria. I can see that when I swipe left and right, it goes the other images of the collage. However, when I exit out of photo view, the U of W image returns to the top of the article page. Strange that this would be happening.
I’ll try to report the bug, but I may return here to get some help on how to do that. HALitosis 9K ( talk) 19:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Please update this with the 2021 census data that was released on 10/26/2022. 209.104.249.26 ( talk) 18:01, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
I wanted to learn something about the Template:Infobox_settlement as used on the article's page, so I copied the entire template invocation onto a sandbox page on my user pages, and in the map display it throws an error. So maybe it doesn't work on user pages, so I tried the sandbox in the main namespace, and it still throws an error. Let me demonstrate (ignore the missing footnotes):
Winnipeg | |
---|---|
City | |
City of Winnipeg | |
From top, left to right: Winnipeg panorama featuring the
Canadian Museum for Human Rights, Wesley Hall at the
University of Winnipeg,
Downtown Winnipeg,
Saint Boniface Cathedral,
Esplanade Riel bridge, and the
Manitoba Legislative Building | |
Nicknames: | |
Motto(s): | |
Interactive map of Winnipeg | |
Coordinates: 49°53′4″N 97°8′47″W / 49.88444°N 97.14639°W | |
Country | Canada |
Province | Manitoba |
Region | Winnipeg Metropolitan Region |
Incorporated | 1873 |
Named for | Lake Winnipeg |
Government | |
• Mayor | Scott Gillingham |
• Governing body | Winnipeg City Council |
Area | |
• Land | 461.78 km2 (178.29 sq mi) |
• Metro | 5,285.46 km2 (2,040.73 sq mi) |
Elevation | 239 m (784 ft) |
Population | |
• City | 749,607 ( 6th) |
• Density | 1,430/km2 (3,700/sq mi) |
• Urban | 758,515 ( 7th) |
• Urban density | 1,429/km2 (3,700/sq mi) |
• Metro | 834,678 ( 8th) |
• Metro density | 157.90/km2 (409.0/sq mi) |
Demonym | Winnipegger |
Time zone | UTC−6 ( CST) |
• Summer ( DST) | UTC−5 ( CDT [7]) |
Area code(s) | 204, 431, 584 |
As you can see, it won't show the map except on the main Winnipeg page, and nowhere else. I looked at that macro/template, and I don't find any reference to {{PAGENAME}}, like this: Winnipeg. But since that reads "Winnipeg" it must also be referencing {{NAMESPACE}}, like this: Talk, or both together, e.g. {{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}, like this: Talk:Winnipeg. I'm just trying to figure out how and/or why it does this.
"Understanding of things by me is only made possible by viewers (of my comments) like you."
Thank you.
Paul Robinson
Rfc1394 (
talk)
11:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
normals
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).2021CityCensus
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Winnipeg article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
![]() | Winnipeg is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 26, 2016. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
There has been some disputes to have flag icons in the infobox on various cities WP:INFOBOXFLAG states: "Human geographic articles – for example settlements and administrative subdivisions – may have flags of the country and first-level administrative subdivision in infoboxes; however, physical geographic articles – for example, mountains, valleys, rivers, lakes, and swamps – should not. Where a single article covers both human and physical geographic subjects (e.g. Manhattan), or where the status of the territory is subject to a political dispute, the consensus of editors at that article will determine whether flag use in the infobox is preferred or not." Meaning that cities, being human geographic articles could potentially be permitted to have flag icons. In addition there are many other articles such as New York City, Moncton, Fredericton, Las Vegas, etc. that have flags in the infoboxes. I am interested to see you input. Thanks. Vaselineeeeeeee ( talk) 00:14, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
It is currently disputed by Nikkimaria whether File:Flag of Winnipeg.svg and File:Crest of Winnipeg.svg are free-content images. For this reason, they have taken it upon themselves to police these three articles in refusing to allow their use of these images. To further this, they have uploaded low-resolution PNG versions ( [1] & [2]) under non-free content licenses and will only allow their usage on these articles. I therefore ask the community to decide if we should use the files from Commons or not. Fry1989 eh? 21:24, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Support for using the images from Commons
I see no valid reason against using the Commons files. Fry1989 eh? 21:24, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
The trust between the English Wikipedia and the wikimedia commons? Interesting, it's a bit loaded, but interesting. You follow this up with a Argumentum ad Jimbonem. Then you obligate Nikkimaria to conduct some activity off Wikipedia and then suggest if she does otherwise this simply wouldn't be about copyright at all. The commons handles it's copyright affairs and Wikipedia just trusts it? Sure but could you link me this policy? If this question is the utmost important question being ignored could you do something to put some weight behind it. New to this dispute, being brought here for the first time by the RFC bot, this sounds like a new argument and you have not offered much that I would consider this with any weight. Could you drop the hostility, please? It's not helpful. You keep casting aspersions without doing anything to back them up. This reads like a conspiracy theory. Nikkimaria and all the Admins are out to get you and you will take it to Jimbo. Nikkimaria has at least offered a case. -Serialjoepsycho- ( talk) 22:12, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Again you continue and again you have not shown the policy. I've said that you appeal to emotion and tradition because I've read your responses. You have offered no means to verify any supposed policy that you are discussing. Show the policy that says that the English wikipedia should ignore it's own policies regarding copyright and leave it to the Commons. Make it a serious issue by justifying it with policy. Nikkimaria has pointed out that the image is improperly licensed. Nick-D, along with others, pointed out that it was improperly licensed in the above linked ANI. You can click on the picture and review the license and see that it is improperly licensed. File:Flag_of_Winnipeg.svg This is a derivative work, the creator isn't the original creator of this flag. If it was public domain before this recreation it remained public domain after its creation. The creator can not release a public domain work into the public domain and also can not release a derivative work into the public domain as they do not own the copyright. File:Crest_of_Winnipeg.svg presents the same error. It also provides that this crest is in the public domain. There is no way to verify this. You do not argue against these points. You only argue that we should defer to the commons. Again if we should defer to the commons and this represents policy, as you suggest it does, then please just link the policy so we can verify. You are suggesting that something is being done wrong here yet you don't actually show this. Show it. -Serialjoepsycho- ( talk) 08:33, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
WP:NFCC#1 would apply. If there was a free equivalent available. There is no evidence that there is a free image available. Your evidence is that there is one on the commons. This is not evidence it is free. This is evidence provided that this is on the commons. The license is wrong. It does not comply with Wikipedia. The burden of proof lies with you. Again your proof is that it is in the commons. Yes I see this. Everyone see's this. We aren't asking that it be proved that it is in the commons but that it is proved that the image is free. Beyond proving that it is in the commons you have proved nothing at all. You done so in a rather hostile manner and you have been very verbose. -Serialjoepsycho- ( talk) 07:29, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Opposition to using the images from Commons
|
Fry has stated that "I am not opposed to locally-hosted SVGs and would cease my pressure on this matter once they were uploaded". This has been done and the PNGs have been replaced in the article with the locally-hosted SVGs. This should resolve this matter. Nikkimaria ( talk) 21:28, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
I recall that featured articles should not have subsections that are blank, or simply a link to another page as we do here for "notable people". Either way it does not look very appropriate, I wonder if we can either write a short paragraph with the key notable people, or relegate the link to the see also section. As is, I'm not sure it's appropriate for a featured article. Mattximus ( talk) 21:34, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Per MOS:INFOBOX, "The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. Of necessity, some infoboxes contain more than just a few fields; however, wherever possible, present information in short form, and exclude any unnecessary content". Other, more local MOS guidelines suggest a more expansive approach, but in this particular case shorter is sweeter. Nikkimaria ( talk) 02:50, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
|name=
, |official name=
, and |settlement type=
parameters in the settlement infobox for Canadian cities. This is the third time in less than two years that she has drawn her line in the sand against consensus. The consensus at
WP:CANSTYLE#Infoboxes in
August 2014 before this all started was "All articles on Canadian cities should use the following model for name fields:|name = Sample |official_name = City of Sample |settlement_type = City
Dissatisfied, over a year later, Nikkimaria initiated a formal
RfC asking "Should use of all of |name=
, |official name=
, and |settlement type=
be required for all Canadian cities?" With the except of her, all commenters answered yes. The outcome of the RfC, closed a mere 4.5 months ago, was "There is consensus that the all of the perimeters [sic] should be used for all Canadian cities. The majority opinion is that it is best to be consistant [sic] and that the fields are useful."
Now the belligerence about this has resurfaced once again despite the pre-existing consensus being twice upheld within the span of the last year and a half. When does this stop? Will it ever stop? Nikkimaria may not like it, but there should be no removal of usage of all three parameters due to the longstanding and and twice recently reinforced consensus on this matter. Hwy43 ( talk) 03:30, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
There has been a recent push by at least one user to convert all the pushpin maps to relief maps. I am not sure how I feel about this to be honest but I really do believe we should lean away from the alternative map and stick to the original. The relief map has its place, but in the infoboxes it becomes particularly busy and noisy. Most noticeably in a city infobox which is already filled with montages, seals, flags, etc. I think best to keep it simple but thought I would listen to others first. I also have the topic for discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Manitoba#Relief maps. Krazytea( talk) 00:01, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
The consensus is include a list of federal and provincial politicians in the infobox. Cunard ( talk) 06:11, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
In Canadian city/municipality infoboxes, a collapsible list of federal and provincial politicians (or the respective electoral districts) are provided. Currently Winnipeg does not have this. I added the list but there is no consensus on its inclusion. Is there consensus for it be included? Canadianpoliticalwatcher ( talk) 20:40, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Not sure listing sports team in the lead is good thing. Definitely not the norm especially in an FA article about a place to list every team.-- Moxy ( talk) 15:21, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
-they can welcome you in different languages like spanish, french there are many more — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.194.17.85 ( talk) 15:37, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have added 3 links. The first indicates that CBC New acknowledges that Winnipeg is called #Murderpeg, that Winnipeg has the "label of Murderpeg" and a MacLean's article that Winnipeg is "nicknamed "Murderpeg"'.
Winnipeg is routinely the most violent city in Canada and Brian Bowman is seeking Provincial and Federal aid to deal with this problem.
https://beta.ctvnews.ca/local/winnipeg/2019/11/7/1_4675720.html
Ignoring that Winnipeg is nicknamed "Murderpeg" will never help in resolving this (often fatal) issue.
There is also a 4th New York times reference indicating that Winnipeg is called Murderpeg, but I removed it because a subscription is required to view the article, which seems against the spirit of Wikipedia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Winnie3737 ( talk • contribs) 14:22, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Dear Vaselineeeeeeee,
Interestingly, the top two links that indicated that Winnipeg is called "The Gateway to The West" were both dead links. The current link indicates that we claimed that we were "The Gateway to the West" in 1912, not in the present day.
The links indicating that Winnipeg is called "The Peg" and "Winterpeg" are from 2011 and 2012. Since then, the crystal methamphetamine crisis has overtaken Winnipeg, and now "Murderpeg" is a very common nickname for this city. The references that I cite are from as recently as the November, 2019 killing spree, and are much more contemporaneous than the decade old references for the other provided "nicknames".
As well, none of the other references use the specific phrasing that Winnipeg is nicknamed "The Peg", "Winterpeg", or "The Gateway to the West", like the provided MacLean's article. This was Magnolia's intial contention about the CBC News Article (which stated that Winnipeg is called #Murderpeg, but not "nicknamed" Murderpeg). Similarly, the provided references for the other "nicknames" are all from less credible sources than CBC News and MacLean's magazine.
If you would like remove "Murderpeg" as a nickname, please provide some data or citations that indicate that the other three suggested nicknames are more common and credible in present-day Winnipeg than "Murderpeg" is.
Sincerely,
Winnie3737 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winnie3737 ( talk • contribs) 15:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Two of the citations that you provide are just duplicates of the same article, and that article doesn't even mention "Winterpeg". Therefore, you have three remaining citations, which is not evidence that "Winterpeg" is a more common, valid or broadly accepted nickname than "Murderpeg". If you would like to keep removing "Murderpeg" as a nickname, please provide any evidence that it is a less common or valid nickname than Winterpeg, and not duplicated citations that don't support your premise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winnie3737 ( talk • contribs) 14:57, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Based on Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Scrolling lists and collapsible content and the fact that the "[show]" button does not work on some browsers I removed the "|state=collapsed". This was reverted based on Talk:Winnipeg/Archive 5#Historic Population Table from 2014. I don't think that a seven year old discussion by three people is sufficient to override the MOS and hide material. Ping the three editors from that discussion Hwy43, Mattximus and Nikkimaria. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 08:38, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I think that the image of the Esplanade Riel in the info box should be changed to an image of the exchange district. My reasoning for this is that I plan on taking pictures including the Esplanade Riel in another a picture once 300 main is complete. The image I had in mind instead of the Esplanade Riel image is titled Exchange downtown.png 21pegedi89 ( talk) 02:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
I’m not making an argument. I’m simply proposing an idea. However, you are right in saying that I should wait until the image is actually taken. I guess I will wait until 300 main is completed in order for you to fully understand what I’m suggesting. 21pegedi89 ( talk) 18:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
The introductory image is currently a photo of the University of Winnipeg. This is not an image that best captures Winnipeg. It does not show Winnipeg’s unique skyline, or Portage and Main, or really anything that is a major physical facet of the city.
Frankly it’s strange and poor choice for the introductory image for the Wikipedia article for Winnipeg and I suggest that we pick something else. HALitosis 9K ( talk) 16:07, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
I’m not sure if I can show you on here, but on the Wikipedia app, the introductory image - the very top image, the first thing users would see - is a stand alone photo of the University of Winnipeg campus. I think one of the skyline photos of downtown with the Riel Esplanade bridge would be good for the introductory image, but I’m open to other ideas. HALitosis 9K ( talk) 23:44, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
OK! Thanks Nikkimaria. I can see that when I swipe left and right, it goes the other images of the collage. However, when I exit out of photo view, the U of W image returns to the top of the article page. Strange that this would be happening.
I’ll try to report the bug, but I may return here to get some help on how to do that. HALitosis 9K ( talk) 19:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Please update this with the 2021 census data that was released on 10/26/2022. 209.104.249.26 ( talk) 18:01, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
I wanted to learn something about the Template:Infobox_settlement as used on the article's page, so I copied the entire template invocation onto a sandbox page on my user pages, and in the map display it throws an error. So maybe it doesn't work on user pages, so I tried the sandbox in the main namespace, and it still throws an error. Let me demonstrate (ignore the missing footnotes):
Winnipeg | |
---|---|
City | |
City of Winnipeg | |
From top, left to right: Winnipeg panorama featuring the
Canadian Museum for Human Rights, Wesley Hall at the
University of Winnipeg,
Downtown Winnipeg,
Saint Boniface Cathedral,
Esplanade Riel bridge, and the
Manitoba Legislative Building | |
Nicknames: | |
Motto(s): | |
Interactive map of Winnipeg | |
Coordinates: 49°53′4″N 97°8′47″W / 49.88444°N 97.14639°W | |
Country | Canada |
Province | Manitoba |
Region | Winnipeg Metropolitan Region |
Incorporated | 1873 |
Named for | Lake Winnipeg |
Government | |
• Mayor | Scott Gillingham |
• Governing body | Winnipeg City Council |
Area | |
• Land | 461.78 km2 (178.29 sq mi) |
• Metro | 5,285.46 km2 (2,040.73 sq mi) |
Elevation | 239 m (784 ft) |
Population | |
• City | 749,607 ( 6th) |
• Density | 1,430/km2 (3,700/sq mi) |
• Urban | 758,515 ( 7th) |
• Urban density | 1,429/km2 (3,700/sq mi) |
• Metro | 834,678 ( 8th) |
• Metro density | 157.90/km2 (409.0/sq mi) |
Demonym | Winnipegger |
Time zone | UTC−6 ( CST) |
• Summer ( DST) | UTC−5 ( CDT [7]) |
Area code(s) | 204, 431, 584 |
As you can see, it won't show the map except on the main Winnipeg page, and nowhere else. I looked at that macro/template, and I don't find any reference to {{PAGENAME}}, like this: Winnipeg. But since that reads "Winnipeg" it must also be referencing {{NAMESPACE}}, like this: Talk, or both together, e.g. {{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAME}}, like this: Talk:Winnipeg. I'm just trying to figure out how and/or why it does this.
"Understanding of things by me is only made possible by viewers (of my comments) like you."
Thank you.
Paul Robinson
Rfc1394 (
talk)
11:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
normals
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).2021CityCensus
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).