User talk:Hwy43/Archive 2

This archive page includes discussions that began between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2010.

Mass deletion of non-hamlets in Alberta

Thank you for the information. I actually suggested a redirect of one as being a possibility. I'll make the suggested changes if you have not already to Bearberry and the others. Bearian (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

College Heights, Alberta

I cut and paste, with minor edits, your information. Thank you. Bearian (talk) 20:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank for the edits. Bearian (talk) 04:31, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Edmonton

Thanks for helping improve the article and adding the cites. Cheers--Kyle1278 21:46, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Smith-Dorrian Trail

I have restarted the discussion at User talk:Qyd#List of Alberta provincial highways. 117Avenue (talk) 00:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Alberta municipal elections, 2010 (Pt. 1)

Hi,
Thanks for your contributions to Alberta municipal elections, 2010, I have however reverted most of them. I thought that the article would be better sorted with the two out of five special municipalities in with the top populous regional municipalities, for simplicity and what is commonly thought. Aren't special municipalities a type of regional municipalities, like the rural municipalities? I made the list of which towns and RMs to include while I was completing the results for Alberta municipal elections, 2007, (for some reason the results hadn't been completed until September 2009!) I chose to include Beaumont and not Banff and Edson because I found results for Beaumont, but not Banff or Edson, thus the cut off is 8,500. I chose to include Yellowhead County and not Mackenzie County because I found results for Yellowhead, but not Mackenzie, unfortunately there is no round number between 10,002 and 10,045, so I used 10,000 since it was so close. I hope to remedy this error this year by one of three things happening: 1. a Yellowhead census shows a number higher than a round number, 2. a Mackenzie census shows a number lower than 10,000, or 3. the Mackenzie website is renovated to say the election results. I hope you understand. 117Avenue (talk) 02:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi 117Ave, I reverted most of your reverts before receiving this message. Let me review and respond to your message thoroughly before we continue going around in circles of reversion. Cheers, --Hwy43 (talk) 02:35, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

• It is a common misconception that regional municipality is a type of municipality in Alberta, but that is not the case. The Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo is a specialized municipality despite its official name. It just so happens that this specialized municipality chose to brand itself as a regional municipalitiy in its official name as opposed to branding itself as Specialized Municipality of Wood Buffalo, Municipality of Wood Buffalo (for a short time it was branded as this) or Wood Buffalo County. This misconception was so widespread that even Statistics Canada thought regional municipality was a municipality type in Alberta for the 2006 Census of Canada. Fortunately, StatCan has since rectified this in preparation of the 2011 Census.
• On a related matter, it is also a common misconception that specialized municipalities are a type of rural municipality in Alberta. This is not the case however. As you can see from here and here (scroll to bottom), urban, rural and specialized municipalities are the three different types of municipalities in Alberta. I suggest we be consistent with what Alberta Municipal Affairs (AMA) recognizes and publishes. By recognizing specialized municipalities as an equivalent municipal status type to urban and rural municipalities in Alberta on various Wikipedia articles, perhaps the common misconception will eventually become a less-common misconception (at least to Wikipedia users).
• Beaumont, Hinton and Whitecourt all have official populations in excess of 9,000 recognized by AMA – the same ministry that oversees municipal elections. I suggest that presenting a 9,000 threshold is a more logical than a 8,500 threshold.
• I can look into finding info on Mackenzie County (specialized municipality). I've done some work for this municipality recently and will be doing some more again soon. In the meantime, we can use the 20,000 threshold for specialized municipalities. Coincidentally, Mackenzie County is performing a census this year. Considering it grew by over 1,100 people between 2001 and 2006, momentum will likely show us that the 2010 municipal census will show an increase rather than a decrease.

--Hwy43 (talk) 02:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

In doing research I too ran into the AMA page with dead links, it looks like after the elections the results were available for every community, but have since been taken down. Its too bad no one took the initiative in 2007 or 2008 to finish writing the article. When I wrote it I didn't have your Beaumont population, it has greatly increased. 117Avenue (talk) 06:25, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Update: In hopes that I can grab all the results from the AMA website after the election, I have dropped the threshold to 8,000 for all statuses. Do you know if Drumheller will have a census this year? 117Avenue (talk) 17:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Searches of its official website, its council agendas and minutes on its FilePro site and the Drumheller Mail all show no indication that the Town of Drumheller will conduct a census in 2010. --Hwy43 (talk) 04:31, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Unincorporated communities

Hi. Thanks for following up on the non-hamlets, by removing that mention, and that category. But didn't we say that we would keep them in the Category:Settlements in Alberta by putting them in the Category:Designated places in Alberta or Category:Former municipalities of Alberta? 117Avenue (talk) 05:31, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I vaguely recall a discussion where that was proposed. I don't recall committing to anything, my response to the proposal or if I responded at all. Can you refresh my memory?

I know the vast majority of these non-hamlets do not qualify for Category:Designated places in Alberta, as defined by Statistics Canada, and likely all won't qualify for Category:Former municipalities of Alberta (I think that category is complete from a former urban municipality persepctive except for a few that don't have articles yet whatsoever). I'm opposed to hastily replacing these with Category:Settlements in Alberta as there are multiple definitions for unincorporated non-hamlet settlements in Alberta. Let's discuss unincorporated non-hamlet settlements further once I'm done with purging the non-hamlets from Category:Hamlets in Alberta. I'll also put refinement of Category:Designated places in Alberta on my to-do list. --Hwy43 (talk) 05:45, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, maybe we didn't say that. But I do think that they should be in Category:Settlements in Alberta, and since it is a category requiring diffusion, perhaps the subcategory Category:Unincorporated communities in Alberta should be created. What is Category:Designated places in Alberta for then? 117Avenue (talk) 00:14, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

They could be in a subcategory, but let me do a little research first. There is a particular term used to best describe some of these places but it slips my memory at the moment. I'll get back to you as soon as I reacquaint myself with what I've seen in the past. Here are all of Alberta’s designated places as of the 2006 federal census. Here is the definition of a designated place and more info on designated places is available here. --Hwy43 (talk) 03:48, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting. So it is different and separate than Alberta's definitions. 117Avenue (talk) 05:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

As far as I know, Alberta has no definition for designated place. If it does and you know where I can learn more, please advise. (I am aware that Alberta Finance and Enterprise is the ministry that Statistics Canada works with to establish designated places in Alberta. Considering this relationship, I would hope AF&E uses the StatCan definition.) --Hwy43 (talk) 05:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Vulcan, Alberta

Based on WP:NOTNEWS, I understand your undo. I was not previously aware that this would qualify as WP:NOTNEWS. I simply noticed Kmsiever undid 68.147.31.125's edits based on a rationale of unsourced story and, although I wouldn't normally do this, I volunteered to source it since I was familiar with the story. Cheers, --Hwy43 (talk) 05:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Not a problem. I realized that Kmsiever reverted it because it was unsourced. At first glance I would have just sourced it too since I too am very familiar with the story and am fairly close to it (knowing Town personnel and having lived in Vulcan for several years). But then I looked at the edit further and noticed that it did not meet WP criteria for inclusion since it was unencyclopedic news. For Vulcanites the story is certainly notable, however. I may even try to make it to the event. Cheers.  BC  _{talk to me} 05:42, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Phoenix, Alberta‎

Do you have any sources mentioning Phoenix, Alberta‎ as a real former municipality? My proposed deletion was contested. 117Avenue (talk) 14:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Upon viewing this article, I was immediately suspicious. It definately is not a former incorporated municipality.

As for being a former unincorporated community/settlement/locality, I just went through all of my usual research resources (searching StatCan's Community Profiles and GeoSearch2006, my StatCan unincorporated places research from the 1956 through 1991 censuses, Canada Post postal codes and the Canadian Geographical Names Data Base, as well as my Alberta road maps from the 1920s and 1930s) and found no evidence of this community's prior existence whatsoever.

However, I did a "Phoenix, Alberta" search (with the opening and closing quotes) at Google Books, per Phil Bridger's edit comment, and the following preview text came up under the search result for The Canadian field-naturalist, Volumes 50-52‎ - Page 86 (the ninth result on the first search result page):

During the same winter (1932-33) Dr. Rowan received two pygmy owls from Phoenix, Alberta, a coal mining town a few miles east of Nordegg, and approximately ...

Therefore, it does look like it is legit. It appears Phoenix is a nearly forgotten ghost town in Alberta. I'm going to edit this article slightly so it reads more factual. --Hwy43 (talk) 04:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I ran my search without the quotes. When I see one source I think spelling mistake. 117Avenue (talk) 00:07, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about its status or history, but it certainly is/was an existing place (as opposed to a fictional creation). I was able to find official geocoordinates for it at the Canadian Geographical Names Data Base, although they seem rather general, with only degrees and minutes, but no seconds (as they normally do for small places. I found that it's located in Clearwater County, Alberta. Backspace (talk) 09:51, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the further confirmation. Hwy43 (talk) 15:08, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

So what are they, is it near Alexo? 117Avenue (talk) 21:56, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Not really. It appears to be more remote than Alexo, southeast of it, off of the main highway (David Thompson), on or near the North Saskatchewan River. The nearest locality that I can find is Horburg (for which we have no article), which it is west of. The article on Phoenix, Alberta has already been updated with the geocoordinates as given by CGNDB. Backspace (talk) 04:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, and sorry, I guess I didn't clue in when I saw that on my watchlist, not remembering that we didn't know the location of it. 117Avenue (talk) 07:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Hawk's Landing

If an article is being categorized incorrectly, the proper solution is to replace it with a more correct category — it's never acceptable to simply remove the category so that the article is left uncategorized. Bearcat (talk) 16:23, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I have to admit that, as a result of my edit, I was planning to engage in this discussion with you and 117Avenue on how to arrive at proper categorization for this type of unincorporated geography and other similar types of unincorporated geographies (e.g., country residential communities) as they do not neatly fit under the previously established geography categories for Alberta. I simply haven't gotten around to it yet.

An appropriate category for this type of development has not yet been created for Alberta. The use of a conventional geographic category like Settlements in Alberta is inaccurate. It is a golf course community. I feel Unincorporated communities in Alberta is too broad for this specific type of unique community.

How about establishing a new Golf course communities in Alberta category to resolve this (and a Country residential communities in Alberta category to capture articles on these types of subdivisions)? Such a category would allow golf course communities in both urban and rural settings to be categorized similarly. For example, Potter Greens, Edmonton could not be unified with Hawk's Landing under the Unincorporated communities in Alberta category because it is located within an urban municipality. Thoughts? If you agree, shall we take this to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion?

The other thing that I dislike about the Unincorporated communities in Alberta category is it is nearly impossible to complete since there are thousands of them across the province in terms of localities, named locations, golf course communities in rural areas, country residential subdivisions, etc, that are not already sub-categorized. I have been doing some research to complete the types of sub-categories so that all unincorporated communities in Alberta fall under a sub-category of Unincorporated communities in Alberta, but am not yet ready to arrive at a recommendation. --Hwy43 (talk) 21:16, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't see the problem with calling them all unincorporated communities in Alberta. Isn't that why we created that category, for everything that doesn't fit in anything else? If there are enough notable golf course communities they could have their own sub. 117Avenue (talk) 00:11, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Bearcat, to respond directly to the comment that started this, I will endeavour to do exactly as you described. I agree with the principle behind it. Out of curiousity however, is what you speak of an official WP guideline, or more a convention that you and others practice? If the former, please point me to the WP-link where I can learn more.

117Avenue, I agree there will always be outliers. However, I believe the less outliers at the top-level and the more sub-categories, the better. There are definately enough golf course communities to have their own sub, but the key question is are they notable? When I first saw that this article was created, I felt it was possible that the motivator for creating this article was not so much notability of a new subdivision, but moreso marketing a new subdivision and its developer.

Looking at the contribution history of the article's founder, the only other edit made to date was relating to the same company that developed Copperfield, Calgary. If the motivator was to market Hawk's Landing, its developer and its partners (homebuilders), would the article's creation then be contrary to WP standards?

If Hawk's Landing is agreed to be notable, then there would be no problem compiling a list of other golf course communities in Alberta that would rationalize their own sub. The amount of communities would be third in most articles per sub behind hamlets and designated places. --Hwy43 (talk) 04:56, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Alberta municipal elections, 2010 (Pt. 2)

Thanks for agreeing to compromise on Alberta municipal elections, 2010. The next concern is Cold Lake, by the looks of this news the province has denied the dissolve request. I can imagine it will be a big issue if they go ahead with a city election. 117Avenue (talk) 04:47, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Although I haven't seen any attempts yet, I would like to prevent premature edits to the Lacombe, Alberta, List of cities in Alberta, List of towns in Alberta and similar articles until, at very least, the Order in Council is passed. --Hwy43 (talk) 06:35, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Of course, it is always wise to wait until its for sure. 117Avenue (talk) 06:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. --Hwy43 (talk) 06:54, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

As for Cold Lake, the writing appears to be on the wall, but I've yet to read anywhere that explicitly states that the Minister will not dissolve the city. The Global article first listed in the link provided is the closest to an explicit statement I've seen to date (...said he agrees with the reports recommendations ...), but I'm not quite comfortable enough yet to remove the various statements in Wikipedia stating that it may be dissolve. I think there is a letter coming from the Minister in the coming weeks or months in response to the Cuff report's recommendations however. Hopefully that letter will explicitly state that the province will not dissolve Cold Lake. Considering Cold Lake is planning for the election, it is safe to keep it listed as a city in Alberta municipal elections, 2010. --Hwy43 (talk) 06:35, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Since its still a developing issue, let's keep them all "considering dissolution". 117Avenue (talk) 06:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. --Hwy43 (talk) 06:54, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Good job

Thank-you for fixing all the See also sections. I knew it had to be done, but I hadn't the time. It would have been a good way to raise my edit count though.... 117Avenue (talk) 05:12, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I needed a rather mindless task to keep me occupied while I dream up my next creative effort. Hwy43 (talk) 05:49, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Municipal districts

Please join the conversation at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 August 2#Alberta municipal districts 117Avenue (talk) 05:37, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Moves

Hello again. Please comment on the requested moves of Lacombe and Sherwood Park. 117Avenue (talk) 04:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

My apologies to have not commented in time. I was undecided and then on went on holidays. I see your new proposal and will review that. Hwy43 (talk) 03:38, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Hwy43. You have new messages at Kelapstick's talk page.
Message added 15:54, 2 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Taber, Alberta

I guess not everyone feels the same about Taber, see Talk:Taber, Alberta#Proposed move. 117Avenue (talk) 05:44, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks as usual for the notice. Based on some of the discussions I've witnessed on subsequent similar proposed moves (Lacombe, Sherwood Park, etc.), I'm not exactly sure what way to go now. I've indicated neutrality for now until I have a chance to re-review the discussions regarding the subsequent similar proposed moves. Hwy43 (talk) 06:25, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know where that Alaska came from. Thanks for catching it. 69.3.72.9 (talk) 03:51, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Edmonton Capital Region

I wonder if perhaps the section on former municipalities should be reworded so that it is not implied the Edmonton Capital Region existed back in 1912. I would attempt it myself, but I don't know when Statistics Canada designated CMAs, or Alberta created its six regions. 117Avenue (talk) 13:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

I've coincidentally been thinking about this as well and will be removing it altogether. This content is really more about the history of Edmonton absorbing other municipalities and not necessarily appropriate to an article on the region as a whole as it exists today. I deleted similar content from the Calgary Region article a week or so ago. Hwy43 (talk) 14:42, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Alberta Highyway 2: Northern Alberta

"Notes" in Central Alberta and Calgary Region include destinations such as shopping centres and industrial parks, and was used a guide in adding notes in the Northern Alberta section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhalifu (talk • contribs) 21:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Looking back at the revision, I suspect you meant Destinations above instead of Notes. Thanks for pointing this out. I can assure you I looked at all sections before making the revision. It appears I missed the few precedents when numerous reviewing the rows and rows of information. Albeit less notable than CrossIron Mills, Gasoline Alley, etc., I would not object if you reintroduced the two shopping centres and the industrial park under the Destinations column for the applicable intersections in Slave Lake and Peace River. Hwy43 (talk) 06:18, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

List of ghost towns in Alberta#Bankhead

I figure being a list article it doesn't need sources, as long as all the info is added from the referenced article. Also, why do you put spaces before references? The no mention of it at WP:CITEFOOT. 117Avenue (talk) 00:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

WP:CANSTYLE#Population is pretty blunt that all population figures must be referenced. This guideline doesn't appear to suggest that populations within lists are exempt, whether they come from properly sourced main articles or not. I prefer to err on the side of caution instead of letting populations stand on their own with the appearance they contravene the guideline.

I put spaces before references only in the event that they don't fall within a sentence structure simply for aesthetic reasons. Within sentence structure, references usually follow a punctuation character, such as a period, comma, colon, etc. The punctuation character provides visual relief between the text within the sentence structure and the superscripted reference characters. In the absence of an intermediary punctuation character, I find the text and the reference to be too congested or cluttered, which is why I put a space between text and references within tables where there is no sentence structure (i.e., column headings, numeric data, etc.). This preference may have been influenced by observing others doing the same on WP, but my memory is foggy. Please advise if you come across any guideline which states a space between text and a reference is a contravention of this guideline under the scenario I described above. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 02:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah... I guess that's all good. 117Avenue (talk) 04:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Edmonton climate

Statistics for Edmonton City Centre Airport would compare to the station Winnipeg - The Forks, which like Edmonton City Centre is located in the central and urban portion of the City. Edmonton Int'l compares with Wpg Int'l both of which are located away from the urbanized area and do not enjoy the benefit of the urban heat island. In both cases, the mean averages for the Winnipeg stations are higher than for the respective Edmonton stations. Edmonton is Canada's coldest city with over 500,000 population. --24.77.41.241 (talk) 03:46, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Climates

I left a message at User talk:G. Capo i will also leave one with User talk:1brettsnyder. These two editors seem to be the most knowledgeable about this subject and would most likely be able to explain this subject better than most of us could. I will leave the edits alone, and hopefully they will respond and this can get sorted out. I will leave a message with the IP as well explaining the situation. Cheers Kyle1278 00:10, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Wood Buffalo

For what it's worth, given that you have actual valid sources, it would be worth noting the census dispute; you could say something along the lines of "The municipality officially had a population of X in the Canada 2006 Census, although it disputed the figure as its own municipal census reported a figure of Y (source)". There's no reason why we have to limit ourselves only to StatsCan census data; as long as we have real sources for it, we can supplement the census data with other figures as well. Bearcat (talk) 06:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the primary bugaboo when it comes to population is unsourced changes (secondary being people who try to update only one municipality on the "Top 100" lists, obviously.) Regardless of whether it's coming from official estimates or municipally-based censuses, there's nothing wrong with reporting properly sourced updates between StatsCan counts. Although my favourite is still the guy who went around Embrun counting houses himself, then multiplied his number by an assumption about the average size of a family. This really did happen. Bearcat (talk) 06:51, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I've also changed the wording at WP:CANSTYLE a little bit so that it's more fully inclusive of both estimates and municipal census counts. Bearcat (talk) 06:59, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I've done things like that, too (especially when I was growing up and liked to pretend I had a bigger and cooler hometown than I really did.) But I'd never claim that kind of thing to be a valid source for encyclopedic purposes :-) Bearcat (talk) 07:22, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Municipal seats

I recall that when we were discussing municipal seats in April, you said the the Special Areas' seat was Hanna, with some uncertainty. When I went to write the three articles in July, I went to the Board website. There it lists three district offices, no municipal seat, and no indication that the Hanna office is the head. I think that the AAMD&C map could be wrong too. I would like to take the Board website as the primary source, and AAMD&C as secondary. 117Avenue (talk) 05:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I recalled the past discussion as well, but only after I tried to fix my original edit to the Special Area No. 2 article. The map I referred to then, and the same I refer to now, is not on the AAMDC web site, much to my chagrin. However, if you visit the AAMDC's interactive map, select 2 for AAMDC District 2, and then select 11 for Special Areas Board, the main address for the Special Areas Board is Hanna, which is consistent with my other map source. I haven't drilled down to all other members on the AAMDC interactive map, but I suspect all main addresses for each member point to their respective municipal seats. Some other rural and specialized municipalities have additional administrative offices outside their municipal seats (i.e., Mackenzie County, M.D. of Greenview, and Woodlands County have ones in La Crete, Grande Cache, and Fort Assiniboine respectively). I see the special area district offices in Consort and Oyen as being similar to these, yet perhaps slightly elevated since they are geographically located within different special areas recognized by the province. Hwy43 (talk) 06:14, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you're right. I am still confused with the governing there. On the Board main page, it looks like persons get elected to Advisory Councils in each area (or in this year's case, acclaimed 11 times out of 12). Which I am guessing meet in their respective districts. But, then there is the overseeing board, appointed by AMA, which would have to meet in a head office, right? 117Avenue (talk) 06:30, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Links

I don't recall a discussion about chamber of commerce links as such, though that doesn't mean there hasn't been one. But you're right, the specific link in question is definitely the kind of thing that WP:ELNO prohibits. Bearcat (talk) 07:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Chipman, AB article

Hi Hwy43,

Pride in Progress is a book that was published in 1982. It is subtitled "Chipman, St. Michael, Edna/Star & Districts" and includes historical contributions from citizens of Lamont County, who have shared stories about the history of government, agriculture, homesteading, traditions, surveying, etc. in Lamont County beginning in the 1890s, as well as individually written family histories. It appears that the several points tagged "citation needed" on the Chipman article were found in this book.

I made the brief reference with the intention of elaborating once I could find some information on the book but very little is available on the internet (the book isn't even available on amazon because, as a relative explained, they had to pre-sell the books in order to produce the book). Limited copies exist but I had access to a relative's copy.

You can remove the reference until I get the publisher's info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylematthewdiduck (talk • contribs) 23:08, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Kyle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylematthewdiduck (talk • contribs) 23:07, 29 December 2010 (UTC)