This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
WikiProject Saskatchewan communities page. |
|
Archives: 1 |
Canada: Saskatchewan / Communities / Saskatchewan communities Project‑class | ||||||||||||||||
|
Because this project was renamed without discussion, renaming of its categories did not meet the criteria for speedy renaming, the discussion is at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 April 6#WikiProject Saskatchewan Communities & Neighbourhoods. There are also sub-pages and templates that will to be moved as well, then all the links to these pages will need to be fixed. 117Avenue ( talk) 00:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
It appears there has been a longstanding misconception that all unincorporated communities in SK are considered hamlets. This is not the case. There are three types of hamlets recognized by the Govt of SK – " northern hamlets" (11 of them), " organized hamlets" (152) and generic " hamlets" (20). This can be verified by visiting the MDS Search site, selecting the one of these three statuses from the "Status" pull-down menu, and clicking "Search".
So I've recently fixed the cats of the 11 northern hamlets and 152 organized hamlets. They are no longer within the Category:Hamlets in Saskatchewan. They are in the new and accurate Category:Northern hamlets in Saskatchewan and Category:Organized hamlets in Saskatchewan respectively. This leaves 20 generic "hamlets", yet 282 entries remain at Category:Hamlets in Saskatchewan. I'm about to go through a long, tedious cleanup to remove this category from all the articles on communities that are not actually hamlets. Instead, they will be placed under Category:Unincorporated communities in Saskatchewan.
With the above information being provided, please avoid any further assumptions that all unincorporated communities are hamlets and avoid placing the incorrect categories when establishing new articles. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 18:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
So, the cats are now assigned according to official provincial designation. Now begins the even longer and more tedious task of cleaning up the articles to remove references to hamlets. Hwy43 ( talk) 03:55, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Once again we have good faith edits attempting to assert certain unincorporated communities are hamlets in their articles and associated RM articles. Some of this is being done without any supporting evidence that they are designated as hamlets, while others are being done based on incorrect information published by Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) and Statistics Canada (StatCan). The primary and definitive source for which unincorporated communities are in fact hamlets is the Government of Saskatchewan (GoS). It lists all northern hamlets, organized hamlets, resort hamlets, generic hamlets and special service areas in its comprehensive "Municipal Directory System" (MDS). If this direct link doesn't work, you can access the MDS here.
To see which are designated, select Entire Directory in the "Download in PDF Format" pull-down menu and click Generate PDF.
If you come across NRCan or StatCan information stating an unincorporated community is a hamlet, cross-reference with the GoS's "Municipal Directory System" (MDS) before giving any weight to what NRCan or StatCan state. If NRCan's/StatCan's entry checks out within the MDS, then NRCan's/StatCan's entry for that community is accurate. If it doesn't, dismiss NRCan's and StatCan's information as being incorrect. Their information may have been correct at one point, but can become out-of-date over time as hamlet designations are changed by the GoS and either NRCan/StatCan aren't apprised of the changes, or they just never get around to updating their databases despite being informed by the GoS.
I have informed the editor and hopefully the problematic editing behaviour is adjusted. It is suspected that the current editor is the same editor(s) responsible for good faith edits that created the problems the first time around. Attempts to communicate with these past editors have gone unheeded (i.e., no responses). If this behaviour continues, I suggest the assume good faith period has long since passed and such edits would constitute vandalism by way of persistent deliberate addition of factual errors. Hwy43 ( talk) 19:07, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject Saskatchewan communities and neighbourhoods ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.77.36 ( talk) 05:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
This is a proposal to move the following 296
rural municipality municipality articles to their common, undisambiguated names. The articles are currently at a short form name format applied by
Statistics Canada and are disambiguated by the province's name (i.e., Foo No. X, Saskatchewan) rather than their official and more common, undisambiguated names (i.e., Rural Municipality of Foo No. X).
Note: It is presumed StatCan applies its format to simply enable
alphabetical sorting of municipalities by the given component of their official legal names (i.e., "Aberdeen No. 373" rather than the "Rural Municipality of Aberdeen No. 373").
Unlike urban municipalities where usage of the given name is more common that the official legal name (e.g., "Foo" rather than "City/Town/Village/Resort Village of Foo"), rural municipalities are rarely referred to by "just" their given names (e.g., referring to the "Rural Municipality of Corman Park No. 344" as simply "Corman Park" or "Corman Park No. 344" is not widespread). Their official legal names are by far more common than the StatCan short forms and would also meet the
article naming criteria.
Finally, using the official legal name format for non-urban municipalities is consistent with what is done for rural municipalities in Manitoba and
recently in Alberta (see
Category:Rural municipalities in Saskatchewan and
Category:Rural municipalities in Alberta and entries within its subcats). Also see the following upper-tier municipalities from Ontario at their official legal names:
If there is no consensus to move these from within this provincial WikiProject community, I will open a more formal RM. The following lists all 296 proposed moves. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 06:54, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
FYI, the above has been proposed for deletion. You can comment at the AfD discussion. Hwy43 ( talk) 07:01, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved. Ixfd64 ( talk) 00:29, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Saskatchewan communities and neighbourhoods → Wikipedia:WikiProject Saskatchewan communities – The current title of this WikiProject is verbose and redundant. "Community" is an umbrella term. A "neighbourhood" is a type of "community". The proposed title is concise and inclusive. If the consensus is to move as proposed, I will move the subpages to match. Hwy43 ( talk) 22:23, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
These articles are pretty much the same. Is there anything different about these two places? If not, I am suggesting a merge. Mr. C.C. Hey yo! I didn't do it! 08:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Strawberry Hills, Saskatchewan and Strawberry Ridge, Saskatchewan have been nominated for deletion. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strawberry Hills, Saskatchewan and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strawberry Ridge, Saskatchewan. Hwy43 ( talk) 05:29, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
FYI, the above has been proposed for deletion. You can comment at the AfD discussion. Hwy43 ( talk) 02:33, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej ( talk) 22:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Harej ( talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board#Proposal to redirect all Canadian project related talk pages...-- Moxy 🍁 22:39, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma ( talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello all, we have an IP-hopping editor that is warring at numerous rural municipality (county-equivalent) articles and lists, particularly at List of municipal districts in Alberta and List of rural municipalities in Saskatchewan, renaming the municipalities contrary to the consensus here for Alberta and the extrapolated approach of that consensus here for Saskatchewan. The IP editor finally reached out to me on my talk page here. Following my response, the editor evidently didn't like it and reverted me yet again with this edit with a strange and unfounded accusation. Would interested members of this WikiProject please watchlist List of municipal districts in Alberta and List of rural municipalities in Saskatchewan? I'm about to revert again and apply a level three warning on the editor's talk page. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 05:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.
)and turns it into something like
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{ cite web}}, {{ cite journal}} and {{ doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
WikiProject Saskatchewan communities page. |
|
Archives: 1 |
Canada: Saskatchewan / Communities / Saskatchewan communities Project‑class | ||||||||||||||||
|
Because this project was renamed without discussion, renaming of its categories did not meet the criteria for speedy renaming, the discussion is at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 April 6#WikiProject Saskatchewan Communities & Neighbourhoods. There are also sub-pages and templates that will to be moved as well, then all the links to these pages will need to be fixed. 117Avenue ( talk) 00:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
It appears there has been a longstanding misconception that all unincorporated communities in SK are considered hamlets. This is not the case. There are three types of hamlets recognized by the Govt of SK – " northern hamlets" (11 of them), " organized hamlets" (152) and generic " hamlets" (20). This can be verified by visiting the MDS Search site, selecting the one of these three statuses from the "Status" pull-down menu, and clicking "Search".
So I've recently fixed the cats of the 11 northern hamlets and 152 organized hamlets. They are no longer within the Category:Hamlets in Saskatchewan. They are in the new and accurate Category:Northern hamlets in Saskatchewan and Category:Organized hamlets in Saskatchewan respectively. This leaves 20 generic "hamlets", yet 282 entries remain at Category:Hamlets in Saskatchewan. I'm about to go through a long, tedious cleanup to remove this category from all the articles on communities that are not actually hamlets. Instead, they will be placed under Category:Unincorporated communities in Saskatchewan.
With the above information being provided, please avoid any further assumptions that all unincorporated communities are hamlets and avoid placing the incorrect categories when establishing new articles. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 18:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
So, the cats are now assigned according to official provincial designation. Now begins the even longer and more tedious task of cleaning up the articles to remove references to hamlets. Hwy43 ( talk) 03:55, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Once again we have good faith edits attempting to assert certain unincorporated communities are hamlets in their articles and associated RM articles. Some of this is being done without any supporting evidence that they are designated as hamlets, while others are being done based on incorrect information published by Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) and Statistics Canada (StatCan). The primary and definitive source for which unincorporated communities are in fact hamlets is the Government of Saskatchewan (GoS). It lists all northern hamlets, organized hamlets, resort hamlets, generic hamlets and special service areas in its comprehensive "Municipal Directory System" (MDS). If this direct link doesn't work, you can access the MDS here.
To see which are designated, select Entire Directory in the "Download in PDF Format" pull-down menu and click Generate PDF.
If you come across NRCan or StatCan information stating an unincorporated community is a hamlet, cross-reference with the GoS's "Municipal Directory System" (MDS) before giving any weight to what NRCan or StatCan state. If NRCan's/StatCan's entry checks out within the MDS, then NRCan's/StatCan's entry for that community is accurate. If it doesn't, dismiss NRCan's and StatCan's information as being incorrect. Their information may have been correct at one point, but can become out-of-date over time as hamlet designations are changed by the GoS and either NRCan/StatCan aren't apprised of the changes, or they just never get around to updating their databases despite being informed by the GoS.
I have informed the editor and hopefully the problematic editing behaviour is adjusted. It is suspected that the current editor is the same editor(s) responsible for good faith edits that created the problems the first time around. Attempts to communicate with these past editors have gone unheeded (i.e., no responses). If this behaviour continues, I suggest the assume good faith period has long since passed and such edits would constitute vandalism by way of persistent deliberate addition of factual errors. Hwy43 ( talk) 19:07, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Template:WikiProject Saskatchewan communities and neighbourhoods ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.77.36 ( talk) 05:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
This is a proposal to move the following 296
rural municipality municipality articles to their common, undisambiguated names. The articles are currently at a short form name format applied by
Statistics Canada and are disambiguated by the province's name (i.e., Foo No. X, Saskatchewan) rather than their official and more common, undisambiguated names (i.e., Rural Municipality of Foo No. X).
Note: It is presumed StatCan applies its format to simply enable
alphabetical sorting of municipalities by the given component of their official legal names (i.e., "Aberdeen No. 373" rather than the "Rural Municipality of Aberdeen No. 373").
Unlike urban municipalities where usage of the given name is more common that the official legal name (e.g., "Foo" rather than "City/Town/Village/Resort Village of Foo"), rural municipalities are rarely referred to by "just" their given names (e.g., referring to the "Rural Municipality of Corman Park No. 344" as simply "Corman Park" or "Corman Park No. 344" is not widespread). Their official legal names are by far more common than the StatCan short forms and would also meet the
article naming criteria.
Finally, using the official legal name format for non-urban municipalities is consistent with what is done for rural municipalities in Manitoba and
recently in Alberta (see
Category:Rural municipalities in Saskatchewan and
Category:Rural municipalities in Alberta and entries within its subcats). Also see the following upper-tier municipalities from Ontario at their official legal names:
If there is no consensus to move these from within this provincial WikiProject community, I will open a more formal RM. The following lists all 296 proposed moves. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 06:54, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
FYI, the above has been proposed for deletion. You can comment at the AfD discussion. Hwy43 ( talk) 07:01, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved. Ixfd64 ( talk) 00:29, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Saskatchewan communities and neighbourhoods → Wikipedia:WikiProject Saskatchewan communities – The current title of this WikiProject is verbose and redundant. "Community" is an umbrella term. A "neighbourhood" is a type of "community". The proposed title is concise and inclusive. If the consensus is to move as proposed, I will move the subpages to match. Hwy43 ( talk) 22:23, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
These articles are pretty much the same. Is there anything different about these two places? If not, I am suggesting a merge. Mr. C.C. Hey yo! I didn't do it! 08:02, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Strawberry Hills, Saskatchewan and Strawberry Ridge, Saskatchewan have been nominated for deletion. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strawberry Hills, Saskatchewan and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strawberry Ridge, Saskatchewan. Hwy43 ( talk) 05:29, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
FYI, the above has been proposed for deletion. You can comment at the AfD discussion. Hwy43 ( talk) 02:33, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej ( talk) 22:48, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Harej ( talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board#Proposal to redirect all Canadian project related talk pages...-- Moxy 🍁 22:39, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma ( talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello all, we have an IP-hopping editor that is warring at numerous rural municipality (county-equivalent) articles and lists, particularly at List of municipal districts in Alberta and List of rural municipalities in Saskatchewan, renaming the municipalities contrary to the consensus here for Alberta and the extrapolated approach of that consensus here for Saskatchewan. The IP editor finally reached out to me on my talk page here. Following my response, the editor evidently didn't like it and reverted me yet again with this edit with a strange and unfounded accusation. Would interested members of this WikiProject please watchlist List of municipal districts in Alberta and List of rural municipalities in Saskatchewan? I'm about to revert again and apply a level three warning on the editor's talk page. Cheers, Hwy43 ( talk) 05:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.
)and turns it into something like
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{ cite web}}, {{ cite journal}} and {{ doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)