Loading AI tools
2005-2015
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:WayeMason. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hello WayeMason/Archive1, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Editing tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! Tobycat 02:00, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
Thanks! Unfortunately the method of finding templates is not intuitive using the search engine. The template {{Music of Canada}} can be found at Template:Music of Canada. It can be edited there. It looks like there are about two dozen articles that use the template so keep in mind that all will display the edits you make.
FYI, there are two ways to include a template. Method 1 is what you are seeing in the Music of Canada article where the template name is in curly brackets by itself. This method results in dynamic changes to the template being propagated to the article each time the template changes. Method 2 converts the template into static content on the destination. Once inserted, changes to the template will not propagate to the destination article. This is how I inserted the welcome message onto your talk page. It is accomplished by adding "subst:" prior to the template name. For example {{subst:Music of Canada}}. Tobycat 18:08, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
Good work so far cleaning up that article. It's a big job. I think your strategy of moving the reviews off into their own articles makes sense. This is common practice, actually, when articles get too long. What happens is that the detailed content gets its own page and then the higher level page mentions that content but at a more general level.
As a matter of process, what you propose should work just fine. I recommend making clear what you're doing, though, since somebody might come across the new unrevised pages and tag them for cleanup. Similarly, if you start cutting content out of the main article somebody might incorrectly infer that it is vandalism. To avoid misunderstandings there are a few things you can do during the process to keep other editors up to date on what is going on:
- outline the plan on the talk page of the article and any new articles you create
- comment out, rather than delete, the content you cut from the main article and note what you are doing. You'd delete it once the process is complete but by temporarily commeting it out people who review the history differences can read your messages.
- post a notice on top of the article flagging it as under revision.
- {{inuseuntil|August 15}} posts a message reserving the article until that date for you to edit. You can check out how that displays using the sandbox. It is helpful if you want to take a few hours or days to finish the project. You can put any text in place of the date.
- post your own cleanup tags
- post really clear summaries in the edit summary
I'm not suggesting you do ALL of these things, which would be overkill. The idea is simply to ensure that others who find the article know what's going on. Tobycat 18:08, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
Quite interested in helping out with the buck pages. Not too knowledgable but would be happy to proof read and do some minor research Pluke 19:11, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I'd be more than happy to have a look at the articles you mentioned. I'll also make a point of fine tuning any other NS articles I see that need improving. - Haunti 14:31, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
PS- When you make a note in someone's talk page, don't forget to sign it with four tildes (~~~~). Doing so makes it a lot easier to find out who left the message.
Hi Waye,
No worries - I was just browsing the counties category last evening and noticed CBRM was added so got around to reading and editing, as my random surfing usually leads to these impromptu edit sessions. I completely agree on the wording I had been using being incorrect - they were/are municipalities and are thus incorporated using the offical title "Municipality of the County of <insert name here>". I'll go back and find where in the HRM and CBRM pages I've used the "unincorporated" terminology and try to bring it in line.
As for HRM vs. "Halifax" - you're preaching to the choir. I've been after the major contributors for over a year, stating that it is a regional municipality now and that the "cities", "town" and "county" municipalities pre-1996 no longer exist as jurisdictions. Alas, I have no idea if they will ever be swayed as even HRM'ers often have no clue about how their municipal gov't is implemented. At any rate, it is a disservice to those not living within the former City of Halifax boundaries to have all that information about their communities placed under the "Halifax, Nova Scotia" entry.
Cheers,Plasma east 19:46, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
Personally it's my opinion that it doesn't matter what the legal status of Dartmouth, Bedford, etc, are, if those terms are still in common use among local residents (and having been to Halifax many times, I know with 100% certainty that they are), then they should still be used. IMO the HRM page should just be about the HRM government, while the history/climate/etc sections of special interest to those not from the area (i.e. the ones who wouldn't know about the whole HRM deal and would just look under Halifax) should go under Halifax. Anything specific to Dartmouth or the smaller suburbs should go under their own articles. It's all about ease of use. Kirjtc2 22:46, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
And do you really think that it is appropriate that *you* decide that Halifax, Novo Scotia is Halifax? Oh what a coincidence, you live there! Anyway, Halifax is a substantial town in Yorkshire which has precedence over the others named after it which it outdates the others and people refer to it simply as "Halifax", whereas Halifax, Nova Scotia is referred to as Halifax, Nova Scotia. Dunc|☺ 19:18, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- Actually I looked into the issue on the page history. It was originally a dab page that you screwed up. It makes more sense for the ignorant fools who don't know any geography for it to be a dab page don't you think? Remember the 3RR. Dunc|☺ 19:28, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
- Wow, I'll have a look at this one tomorrow I think. -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:49, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
Despite being on Wik for quite a while, I haven't pursued becoming an administrator yet (don't have enough time to devote to it), so won't be able to help you there. I've had help before from User:Adam Bishop before, so you might want to consult with him. Cheers, Plasma east 16:01, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
hi there. it may be the case the name Halifax Commons (in the plural form) gets currency in Halifax for there apparently originally being two commons, a North Common and a South Common. it just a conjecture based on an interesting vandalization of the wiki page you started Halifax Common by a user who despite vandalizing the page (perhaps inadvertedly) wrote of there being two commons. i reverted the vandalization but put in what the apparent vandal said. Regards, -Mayumashu 16:57, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
To be honest, I'm in the middle of re-stubbing many articles, so the attention I pay to one article is minimal - sufficient to ensure the new stub is appropriate, and to fix formatting mistakes I find. I also quickly scan the length of the article to judge if it should remain a stub or not. I just read the article, and I think there's still some info that can be added - give me a few days and I'll look for something to add... Mindmatrix 19:35, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
- Of course, you can be bold and remove the stub notice; I don't have any control over the article, nor should I. Since you have more familliarity with the subject, you'd know better than I what constitutes a comprehensive article about it. Mindmatrix 19:42, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
They look great! Nice to have them to illustrate the changes, both geographically and politically. Plasma east 13:35, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
After several edit sessions on various HRM-related entries, I'm currently looking at some way to standardize the content and appearance of the community articles. As a first step, I'm looking into designing a sidebar for all HRM communities/neighbourhoods which will somewhat follow the Halifax/Dartmouth info boxes already present in those articles. Ideas include having HRM at the top as the main link, with an inset map showing community location, lat/long, population info (if available - most is grouped under census subdivisions), neighbouring/adjoining communities/neighbourhoods, etc. Any suggestions would be welcome! Cheers,Plasma east 21:37, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
- I agree, the Islam template is simple yet very attractive. I'd be looking at something similar for HRM. Both the Canadian Navy template and Canadian Air Force template are also useful - thus my reason for looking at doing something for HRM communities/neighbourhoods.
- Re. maps - I have access to software and data as well. What I was envisioning was a standard map look/feel for the outlying rural communities that are in the former county part, highlighted by a single point. The neighbourhoods of Halifax and Dartmouth could have a zoom-in of the former city or surrounding area with a similar simple point. Where lat/longs exist for communities officially referenced in the Canadian Gazeteer or on nsplacenames.ca, we can include those lat/longs, otherwise leave it blank since there is no officially defined "centre" for South End or North End or West End Halifax nor North End Dartmouth, etc.
- Again, my thought was looking more at the importance of having standardized entries for various areas of the county and the neighbourhoods of the former cities. We can also use the planning areas I guess - although I that these boundaries and names have changed several times since amalgamation. I don't really have a problem with them as they're convenient geographic areas for grouping various regions/communities.
- I wouldn't sweat getting something organized ASAP, I just wanted to see if we can look into coordinating on these items as I've noticed others have placed neighbourhood and community articles, some of which are lacking. I can devise a draft template this week and then maybe we can work on it from there. BTW - how did you get the planning area boundaries?
- Re. the main HRM article, I think we may need to start creating separate sub-articles on geography, economy, transportation, culture, and building/structure info to keep it from getting too unwieldy!
- Cheers,Plasma east 13:51, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- I hear you on the Wiki-burnout issue. I'm pretty busy right now, travelling on work but should be back to the Merry-times next week so will devote time to it then. I'm envisioning such projects as long-term - I'll try to make some maps incorporating the planning districts... Plasma east 04:49, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for your kind words re: my Metro Transit article. The article presently is something I'm tinkering with; I'm preparing to put it up on the Metro Transit page to add to the great stuff that's already there. Public transit is a huge interest/passion/obsession of mine, specifically the local system here in Halifax and it's bus fleet.
I'm quite interested in what you all are doing with the HRM page; if you need transit info (specifically Metro Transit), I guess I'm your guy! Let me know if I can help, or just grab what you need! I'm new to the whole wiki thing, so this is all weird and new and weird and somewhat new to me, all at the same time. Chris 02:56, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
Sounds good. I've gotten sidetracked with real work from contributing to the HRM Communities project but hope to put some hours in over the holidays. I recently created maps for all 67 townships in PEI and hope to do the same for parishes, districts and municipalities in PEI, NS and NB in the coming weeks as well.Plasma east 16:57, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me as well, although I'm new at "projects". Is it just a page with certain tasks for the members to focus on? Anyway, I'm in, just let me know what I have to do. Nice job on the HRM merging situation, by the way. Ouuplas 03:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
- Alright I'm willing to join as well. I'm also new at this project thing but I'm sure that it'll work out, if you just tell me what to do then I'll be fine. Theyab 16:28, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Should be merged back into the main HRM, in my opinion. Just a thought, I don't mind lists (like the buildings one) being moved into seperate articles, but the HRM article doesn't have enough solid text.
Hi there! I'd like to invite you to explore Wikimedia Canada, and create a list of people interested in forming a local chapter for our nation. A local chapter will help promote and improve the organization, within our great nation. We'd also like to encourage everyone to suggest projects for our national chapter to participate in. Hope to see you there! -- user:zanimum
Yes I know, I just added the short dab-elaboration due to the similarity between the singular and plural: just an s. ;) //Big Adamsky 12:07, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
I clarified the licenses on Image:Map of Nova Scotia Highlighting HRM.png and Image:Map of Nova Scotia.png. Could you just confirm that I chose the right licenses (one is PD and the other is GFDL) and that you are the creator of these images? Thanks Matt 11:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Halifax isn't really that large a place, I know both Steve and MA at Collideascope, and especially the illustrious James B. Nicholson. No doubt we've probably met somewhere. I'm still fairly new to the Wikipedia and I'm trying not to make too many mistakes. BTW: OldCommentator=Mark Laing. --OldCommentator 03:17, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
I just read the article about State of Palestine (which I visited as a reader curious about political oddities, not as somebody especially concerned about this area).
I noticed you filled a complete info box, similar as that of a fully sovereign state, which is not obviously relevant, due to the very special situation of Palestine.
There had been a discussion on Talk:State_of_Palestine in June 2005 (mostly sections 7 and 8 on this page) and a decision seemed to have been admitted with no special difficulties : nothing about area or maps, nothing like TLD or Calling Codes. I would like to revert to the situation of the article (a very rudimentary infobox) as it was in mid-January 2006. I prefer to take a few days to ask about your opinion on this matter before destroying your creation : are you strongly supportive of a complete infobox, or did you fill it just to give help, but with no deep fondness for your work ? French Tourist 21:38, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Kudos on the letter I saw in The Coast a few weeks ago. Well-written and well-said. The Chief 05:17, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Buck65vertex.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 11:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
People from other places seem to like linking to this page instead of Halifax Regional Municipality, Nova Scotia whenever possible, saying "when insert subject happened, it happened in the former city of Halifax (that is, peninsular Halifax)". What's your opinion? I mean, you don't see Tower of London linking to City of London (it links to London). Any thoughts on me possibly putting note or something on the Halifax disambiguation page suggesting a link to HRM instead of Halifax, Nova Scotia (former city)?
It's not that I don't think Halifax, Nova Scotia (former city) is useful, I just think that when someone clicks on a link that says "Halifax", they should probably see something more than the neighbourhoods on the peninsula. Plus the HRM page links to it in it's history section.
cheers, Ouuplas 02:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- Er, Tower of London was a bad example, but I think you'll get what I mean anyway.
- Heh, at first I thought naming it "History of the former city of Halifax" would be a little extreme, but I guess it would eliminate the problem. I'm all for it. I wish the city would rename HRM to something simpler like "Greater Halifax", or better yet, "Halifax". Ouuplas 04:08, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
It's at the bottom of the Wikiproject Nova Scotia talk page. I'd turn it into a template but I don't know how. Cheers. OldCommentator--OldCommentator 14:54, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Hey Waye, nice to see you around Wikipedia. I'll join the Nova Scotia project too; I see you've been busy. CraigBurley 17:49, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Waye, should I proceed and move the three relevant articles to Míkmaq, Míkmaq language, and Míkmaq hieroglyphic writing? Or should we have a formal proposal? Unfortunately I suspect that such a "vote" will end up confirming the confusing Mi'kmaq/Mi’kmaq/Mi´kmaq because of relative frequency of the fallback representation, since many Wikipedians think that quantity trumps quality. What do you think? Evertype 08:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- Waye, the article is currently at Mi'kmaq where it belongs. That is the correct spelling and there is nothing wrong with it and no reason to "fix" it. The whole issue over what the apostrophe looks like is a total non-issue, there is no practical or foreseeable problem caused by it being at Mi'kmaq. I have pointed this out repeatedly and many people have pointed out that Mi'kmaq is the most common and correct variant used both by Mi'kmaqs and others in Canada, but all this has fallen on Evertype's deaf ears as he is convinced that nothing will be acceptable short of convincing everyone that it should be moved to "Míkmaq" (note the wierd looking accent over the i instead of an apostrophe.) He moved it once after everyone already told him that Mi'kmaq is the most common, I moved it back and asked him not to move it without due process, but I think he is still trying to get around it somehow. Even though almost nobody but him ever actually uses this form. It's too bad more Mi'kmaw aren't online or into computers to voice an opinion on this. If he wants to use the accents on other Mi'kmewey words, it is not such a big deal, but the name of The People is and always has been Mi'kmaq (with the apostrophe). ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 01:24, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Hey Waye - saw the bit on you in the latest Halifax! magazine. --RobHutten 02:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
An image you uploaded, Image:Capebretonsymbol.jpg, was tagged with the {{coatofarms}} copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as {{seal}}. If you have any questions, ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 15:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:CBRMCoatOfArms.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
I have responded to a MedCab case regarding Mi'kmaq language. If you are interested in participating in the discussion, I believe that the editorial differences regarding this topic can be resolved at Talk:Mi'kmaq language. Your contribution would be appreciated. Thanks! Serpent's Choice 05:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Don't worry about having to have the magic idea or anything...the article's been a mess for a long time already, another week or two won't kill it. I just want to get some brainstorming going — I have about as much idea where to start as you do, but somebody has to start somewhere with it. So any ideas you can contribute would be helpful, even just small ones to get the ball rolling.
And I've moved the Pop Explosion back to the general music festivals category per your request — but as other genre categories are created, a festival can be in any number of appropriate subcategories, so it would be perfectly acceptable to file HPE in pop and rock and folk and hip hop categories if and when those all exist. For what it's worth, anyway. Bearcat 00:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- Works for me...I'd go with the titles Canadian folk music (more consistent with the subtopic articles that already exist) and History of music in Canada, though. For what it's worth, I've already started a vague outline of a separate folk music article at User:Bearcat/Canadian folk music — it needs to be a lot more thorough than what I've sketched out so far, obviously, but it's certainly useful as a start. Bearcat 00:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I've protected the article to give you guys some time to cool down. You are both good editors and skirting that close to being blocked for 3RR over what is in the disambiguation header is not cool. Blocking both of you does not allow you to discuss the problem so go to Talk:Halifax, Nova Scotia and sort it out. Don't come to my talk page and try to discuss with me the "correct" version because I don't really care what it says. This identical notice has been posted at User talk:Lonewolf BC. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 20:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, I've been active off and on for the past year but I've been trying to avoid getting involved in the Wikipedia quagmire re. editing the Halifax Regional Municipality and Halifax, Nova Scotia articles. I saw the change to the latter a few months back but chose to stay out of it. I have no problem removing the (former city) qualifier, IF (and only if), HRM-related information doesn't make its way into the article, AND, the article doesn't state that it is a city - it should be clear that the location was once incorporated and is now dissolved and amalgamated, just like every other location in Halifax County.
The big problem we have is too little Wikipedia involvement from Maritimers, Nova Scotians and HRM residents in particular... Re. the status of the "City of Halifax" - it is plain ignorance of the indisputable legal facts. If they (ie. other Wikipedians) want to butcher and ruin what we see as the "correct" arrangement (the way we edited it last year), then that's unfortunate but there isn't a whole lot that can be done. If the guy from BC is insistent upon using a dictionary definition for the place, rather than what legally exists, then it's wrong but the egg is on his face.
I just wish that the Savage Gov't had amalgamated only the urban area out to the county line at the airport, and made the western part of the county into the St. Margaret's Municipal District and eastern part into the Eastern Shore Municipal District. Then put in an enforced green belt of no development for a 10-15 km buffer around the urban area and be done with it. As for naming the urban area, a spade is a spade and call it the City of Chebucto or some other nonesense. As it stands now, it doesn't make sense to be editing the Halifax, Nova Scotia article and calling it a city, when there is no legal or statistical supporting information for it. I think the HRM article is quite fine and Halifax, Nova Scotia should remain categorized as a community of HRM, just the same as Mushaboom, Africville, Ecum Secum or Moose River Gold Mines are... But you can't argue with people who don't live and experience this place and the local politics...
As for Mainland Halifax, etc. - I'd say "go fer it". It's part of the local lingo and in the media and press releases, etc. Politicians, bureaucrats, and academics are trying to place a post-modern paintbrush over the entire region and it is part of the modern-day history of the municipal unit, so the story needs to be told. If there are some who want to stick with antiquated definitions and terminology, then we should try to work around them.
I ran into several frustrating edit conflicts over the years since I started on Wikipedia in 2004, namely with a guy named Spinboy. One involved whether or not the Atlantic School of Theology was a university or not, and whether St. Thomas University in Fredericton was a private university - very frustrating when dealing with people who have agendas and are not willing to look at the facts as they are established. I pointed out the Maritime Provinces Higher Education Commission until I was blue in the face to no avail. It was only after the guy got chewed out by other Wikipedians over his attitude on other sites that he left for good. The same will happen with this guy. I don't like the way he's gone about this and forced you in a corner with the 3RR policy and he is not correct under this province's legal definition of the status of "Halifax", but so what? We can help in other ways on other parts of the HRM-related articles and build them up. The edit conflict over Halifax is stupid and petty on the BC guy's part and eventually he'll go away just like Spinboy and others.
Anyway, keep up the work and drop me a line now and then about what needs to be done. I can make maps, etc. or research for content - whatever. Plasma east 13:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Hrm-bedforddets.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:10, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I like your work in creating Template:Infobox HRM Planning Area - well done--Sonyuser 02:57, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for experimenting with the page Halifax, Nova Scotia on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. dcandeto 16:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey there. Thanks for letting me know about what is happening with this page. I m wondering is HRM is now the official capital of the province. The user you mentioned who keeps reverting edits referring to Halifax as a former city also sees the former city as the current capital, something that I find hard to imagine as true. I ve tried e-mailing HRM and am waiting for a reply, partly delayed I m sure because of Easter. Best regards, Mayumashu 14:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I just got back and looked over the page, Wikipedia:Three-revert rule only applies in a 24 hour period so I have done the only other thing possible and protected the page again. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 20:20, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- That's the trouble with page protection, it's always the The Wrong Version. I just protected the version that I found to stop people reverting. As to the RFC\User, if you feel that is what is needed then do so. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 21:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry I misunderstood you. Yes the RFC is the next step. Look at Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. By the way I just left a not about the page protection at Talk:Halifax, Nova Scotia. I had a couple of questions that you might want to look at. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I can't believe that nobody mentioned this before but could you use [ ] rather than <ref></ref> that way you get which is clickable but [1] isn't without a <references/> at the bottom of the page. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Colchester.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:07, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I see you have created the Politics of Nova Scotia template - I just wondered whether you thought it might be a better idea to standardised it (see Category:"Politics of" templates) - these are side boxes which I think tend to look better on the page, otherwise you end up with a clutter of boxes at the end! Number 57 11:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, the old version does look far better. There are examples of two boxes being used in Israeli articles (one Israelis box and one Politics of box), but they are aligned one above the other so they don't fill the page width-wise. As for it being standard for Canadian provinces, all other non-national entities use sidebar templates (e.g. Catalonia, Galicia, Scotland, Wales and all the French departments). Perhaps we should discuss this with Tompw - I think the sidebards are far superior to the boxes at the foot of a page and give better scope for placing other templates there. Number 57 12:17, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I shall discuss it with Tompw. As for the Assembly/election pages, for now it might be a good idea just to have the year link on the template go straight to the assembly page rather than a bypass. Number 57 13:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- Tompw has given the go ahead, so feel free to revert the format to sidebox. I might have a go at a couple too. Number 57 14:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've now done Template:Politics of Ontario. I think it is better to have them at the "Politics of ..." location as this is standard for all the others. Number 57 15:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- Which elections templates did you audit for the colours? I've made all of them from the same template! Number 57 17:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- Not an issue, but just your statement about auditing was quite confusing - it seemed as if you had found evidence that other election template colours matched the other templates for that country, whereas all the election templates are identical in colour and are totally unrelated to other national templates! Number 57 17:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- Which elections templates did you audit for the colours? I've made all of them from the same template! Number 57 17:05, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've now done Template:Politics of Ontario. I think it is better to have them at the "Politics of ..." location as this is standard for all the others. Number 57 15:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- Tompw has given the go ahead, so feel free to revert the format to sidebox. I might have a go at a couple too. Number 57 14:51, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I shall discuss it with Tompw. As for the Assembly/election pages, for now it might be a good idea just to have the year link on the template go straight to the assembly page rather than a bypass. Number 57 13:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi, the recent edit you made to Lieutenant Governors of Nova Scotia has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks – Gurch 15:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
I was killing a double redirect between Viceroys_of_Nova_Scotia and teh page you tagged. It cannot be called Lieutenant_Governors_of_Nova_Scotia as it includes a list of pre-confederation full Governors, and it is also really confusing that there is a article called Lieutenant_Governor_of_Nova_Scotia so I changed it. Thanks, though I may suggest you institute a 5 minute pause before reverting something like that... :) WayeMason 15:55, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- Hi. Your explanation is fine – but at the time, I had no way of knowing any of that. All I saw was a user blanking a page with no explanation whatsoever. In future, please fill in the edit summary when doing something as drastic as erasing an entire page, otherwise it may be mistaken for vandalism. Thanks – Gurch 16:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
I didn't remove the politics infobox simply because of the article's appearance; it was because it did not conform to the format of the other nine provincial monarchy pages, which do not have politics infoboxes. This is because the articles in question do not really outline the role of the Crown in provincial politics - that's covered at each Lieutenant Governor's article and the central Monarchy in the Canadian provinces page. Further, the Nova Scotia politics infobox doesn't link to the Monarchy in Nova Scotia article, it links only to the article Lieutenant Governor of Nova Scotia. Are you really sure it's appropriate at Monarchy in Nova Scotia? If it's decided to include the infobox on one page, for consistency it will have to be inserted into all the others.--G2bambino 21:20, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, I see now that there is a link in the politics infobox to Monarchy in Nova Scotia - it wouldn't have linked to Monarchy in Nova Scotia from where I was looking because I was looking at the infobox on the Monarchy in Nova Scotia page itself! This is what happens when I spend Sunday at work.
- Well, if the infoboxes are going to link to the monarchy articles, then it seems logical that they should be included on the monarchy pages themselves. However, there really is little information on the role of the Crown in Nova Scotian government at Monarchy in Nova Scotia; because it's essentially the same for every province, that info was centralised at Monarchy in the Canadian provinces, with the Monarchy in [Province] pages being mostly for provincial specifics such as history, symbols, awards, etc. Should each provincial political infobox not therefore link to Monarchy in the Canadian provinces, from where readers can go on to their specific province, rather than vice versa?
- As for the image - currently, if it's put to the left it pushes the article contents box all over the place, making things look a mess. It really should just be replaced with something better. I seem to recall that was on my list of things to do some time back, but obviously I never got around to it.--G2bambino 21:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
Howdy. Can you check and see if the map works for you now? I think I found a solution. Psyklek 00:43, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Whoa, the infobox is removed? Did you look at the article or the source code for it, cause my browser shows the infobox. Psyklek 01:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Wow. I'll try and solve it. I can't believe how much trouble this map is becoming, but I'll find a solution for it yet. Thanks for the notice on the userbox. Also, since I'm a newbie, what's the standard for removing stub status? Does it need to be reviewed, or can I just do it? Re: Parrsboro, Nova Scotia Psyklek 02:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Cool, thanks for the tip. The problem with the Cumberland page is that the map is set for a specific width. That was the initial problem, so I'll have to find a way to change that. Psyklek 02:14, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've had a look at it...I cannot make the height/width of the image any smaller because it will limit the number of towns I can add. Therefore, is there any point to adding an atlas to wikipedia? Psyklek 02:45, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Finally! :D Wasn't that the one that I put up on the Infobox request page? I forget... lol --Ampersand2006 ( talk · user page design ) 20:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Sounds like a plan! :) --Ampersand2006 ( talk · user page design ) 19:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
I actually know very little about NS (I'm from Vancouver) but I'm working on the project to create articles for everyone in the Canadian Dictionary of Biography and just happened to do the one on Alexander Croke and notice that some linking articles didn't seem to jive :) Stevecudmore 02:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Have you left a note for the other editor asking if he is no longer interested in the outcome? CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 06:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Amherstnovascotiacrest.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:17, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
The Hydrostone and Albro Lake, Nova Scotia.
The "dot" on Albro will have to be adjusted as I am only guessing. If needed, I can explain how I did the infobox and how stuff works. There is a table that tries to explain most of the parameters at {{Infobox City}} (aka Infobox Settlement). I hope that you understand my reasoning for trying to provide a consistent look for all settlements. If you have any questions or suggestions let me know. I'll try and be around this weekend, but not too much with the sun shining and the temps in the 70s. —MJCdetroit 20:23, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 |
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
| I give you the Working Man's Barnstar for your tireless efforts in improving articles related to Halifax, Nova Scotia. The articles are much better and more factually correct now, and it is, I think, in large part thanks to you. Drop me a line anytime you like :)Thomasiscool 00:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC) |
 |
This file may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading Image:Queens-logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
|
This file may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading Image:HrmCcapitaldistrictlogo.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I just noticed your revision to my map of Nova Scotia from a few years ago. It looks excellent! If you still have the source, though, I'd like to suggest that you add French-language place names to it. - Montréalais 18:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
|
This file may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading Image:Town of Berwick Logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I've initiated a talk page discussion at the Canadian notice board regarding the current state of our articles on provincial lieutenant governors (including, but not limited to, your recent move of the Nova Scotia list to "Viceroys"). I understand the reasoning behind your move, but there's now a very serious consistency problem from province to province regarding how the lieutenant governor articles are formatted — the lists are now at three different title formats depending which province you look at, and while most provinces have a separate article on the position itself, for two provinces the main title exists only as a redirect to the list. We need to have a thorough discussion on how to ensure that the provincial lieutenant governors are all covered in the same way, with the same structures and naming formats across all ten provinces, so please do come offer some input into the discussion. Thanks. Bearcat 02:43, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Template:Politics of Nova Scotia has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Tompw (talk) (review) 22:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Two brief points:
- I don't understand what you mean by "disingenuous"
- The reasons I removed {{Politics of Nova Scotia}} were that it broke the page layout and the page already the {{Nova Scotia politics}} infobox. Tompw (talk) (review) 22:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Capebretonflag.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Himasaram 13:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Buck65vertex.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. After Midnight 0001 21:15, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
What's going on with the image for the template on the discussion pages? I know the template for the userbox uses Image:Ns-CoatOfArms.jpg, couldn't the other templates use the same? Andrew647 19:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Greetings, fellow WikiProject Nova Scotia member...creator...
Would you be interested in a WPNS Newsletter? I have a great sense of pride in my native province, and I believe that WPNS hasn't been as active as it could be. If a newsletter were to be created, would that stimulate contribution from WPNS members? I'd be willing to set aside some time to create/manage it.
Let me know what you think, if you have any input/advice/preferences, etc. Andrew647 21:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:CBRMCoatOfArms.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 09:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Lupo 09:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I've attempted to make a first draft of a new Halifax, Nova Scotia article, in my userspace here. It's in a very rough-and-ready form, and needs a lot of tidying, sorting, and being made consistent, as well as a proper opening, before it's ready. But it should give an idea as to what I believe that article should contain. Your thoughts would be appreciated! Thanks, --RFBailey 17:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Template:HRM Communities requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.
Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:27, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Halifaxregionlogo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Halifaxregionlogo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it may be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading Image:Halifaxregionlogo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 13:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Today I have received these three messages (below). I have only ever made 2 edits. One was a date of an ancestor of mine. Something like 1518 I changed to 1581. And one other about an actor on Gilligan's Island (I think). A couple years ago. Since I am on Dial-Up I doubt my cats could have done all this editing by sitting on my keyboard while I was out of the room. Also, since I am on Dial-Up, I don't have time to go around the system and learn how to send this message to you properly. And I have to also contact the other two. Funny, though, yours is about Metro Transit. I do live in Dartmouth and work for HRM Fire. I have never received a message from WIKI before. Now in one day I have three!!!
Metro Transit
Hi! Out of curiousity, where'd you find the years of construction of the Halifax and Dartmouth III ferries? I couldn't find it anywhere online, and Metro Transit never emailed me back. Ouuplas 05:59, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Progesterone . It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Mwanner | Talk 13:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] September 2008
Your recent edit in Rush (band) is considered vandalism and has been undone. Further edits such as these will lead to you being blocked from editing. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:46, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
18myrtle (talk) 20:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)18myrtle
I have had further discussion on this with Fnlayson [please see his page for the full discussion] on this issue. Nutshell: I received the 3 messages at my IP address and then created the account "18myrtle" in order to respond to all three of you. I find it strange that your message to me, and the message from the Progesterone guy seem to have come in 2006, and the message from Fnlayson in 2008 - yet they all arrived today. At this point I consider that the so-called helpful edit that was apparently added to your article about the ferries was probably vandalism.
HOWEVER, I do work for HRM, in management at the Fire Dept, and can probably make a few phone calls for you and get that ferry info you want [or wanted back then?]. Let me know if you still need that. I will check back on this page, or there is probably another way for you to contact me since I have created an account, or you can send a message the same way the other one got to me.
Now, back to my genealogy research .... -Sandy 18myrtle (talk) 23:24, 25 September 2008 (UTC)18myrtle
Hi there, I have not idea what any of you are talking about I have not been participating in Wikipedia for about a year. WayeMason (talk) 01:10, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Map of Nova Scotia Highlighting Queens.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Hello WayeMason! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 698 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
- Joe Howe (footballer) - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 01:10, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Map of Nova Scotia Highlighting Annapolis Royal.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:28, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Map of Nova Scotia Highlighting Berwick.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:28, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi there. The situation with the structure of the Halifax, Nova Scotia articles has bugged me for about 5 years now, but I felt for a long time that it wasn't all that important to me. However, it appears that I may be about to move to the city (note - not capitalised!), and (probably perversely) that makes me more interested in having the situation improved. I realise that there have been several permutations. However, I don't think that the current situation is a good one. At it's core, it seems to me that the concept of the place of Halifax (including it's history, culture, transport links, connection to the sea, etc.) should be explained in the article placed at (and titled) Halifax, Nova Scotia. The current article that is at Halifax Regional Municipality should, in my mind, be moved to Halifax, Nova Scotia because it is the best current summary of information on the place. However, it should then be fleshed out a bit, because it seems almost unwilling to talk about things that happened before the amalgamation (so, the history should be expanded a bit), and it should change a number of references from "HRM" to "Halifax". For example, it seems odd to talk about the "climate of HRM", rather than the "climate of Halifax" - We don't say the "climate of the City of Toronto", or the "climate of the Corporation of the City of Vancouver", we just say "climate of Toronto", "climate of Vancouver". In fact, some of it is simply incorrect - the very first sentence talks about the "Urban Area of the HRM" - the StatsCan definition is specifically NOT HRM, it is Halifax - meaning it includes some areas outside the RM, and excludes some within. It seems to me that you're one of the people who's put some of the most time and effort into these articles, so I wouldn't make the move without chatting with you first, but I believe that the current situation is inappropriate. Looking forward to hearing back from you. AshleyMorton (talk) 23:25, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- I have just stumbled into the Halifax vs HRM debate, but am looking forward to perusing the various articles and hopefully helping out where needed. Good to know there are other Maritimers out there (Notice that I didn't say Haligonians...would that be an HRMer or a resident of the former city of Halifax? ;)HiFlyChick (talk) 03:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- I believe Halifax, Nova Scotia should be the Halifax Regional Municipality Article especially given the recent poll in Metro saying that a majority of people in HRM say they are from Halifax when they travel. WayeMason (talk) 22:26, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and the page that you created has been or soon will be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Mhiji (talk) 15:43, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Halifax, Nova Scotia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Halifax, Nova Scotia until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:05, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Halifax, Nova Scotia. Since you had some involvement with the Halifax, Nova Scotia redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). ‑Scottywong| prattle _ 18:14, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Buck65vertex.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.
If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
- make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
- Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 01:48, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:
is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:01, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
I am writing an article about the Disappearance_of_Kimberly_McAndrew and I would to have your feedback on this article, I feel it is part of our Canadian history of missing person in Nova Scotia. I would like to keep it on Wikipedia.jbignell (talk) 00:18, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
I think I jumped in on you on your editing of Halifax City Hall. I'll back off now and let you finish! Verne Equinox (talk) 14:00, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Template:Nsfocus has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:11, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
