Talk:New Brunswick

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Vandalismo 2 Older 3 German 4 The whole article and Politics section 5 Shawn Graham 6 Length of article 7 Just wondering... 8 Moncton Rad! 9 Proposal: New Colonial Era article 10 Languages 11 Official Bilingualism

[edit] Vandalismo

It amazes me that someone thinks that the lengthy "Shame of Confederation" vandalism is so clever that they're willing to return day after day to do it. I suspect whoever it is doesn't understand the power of the "watch" button. Geoff NoNick 15:23, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Older

Yes, there is a Canadian province by this name, but there is also a city in New Jersey called New Brunswick.... so.... refer to both!

--

There is a New Brunswick, New Jersey article. I think the Canadian province is a lot more well known than the city. Kirjtc2 20:46 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I added a disamb note to the bottom. - Montréalais 04:27, 12 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

Can somebody add an Official Languages section in the province table to the right? For NB, they should be English and French.--142.166.97.102 15:23, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I just did. (Alphaboi867 05:27, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC))

The template should be changed back. It should list the offcial langauges and Premier should link to Premier of New Brunswick, same for lieutentant governor. (Alphaboi867 20:06, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC))

As a German: New Brunswick = Neu-Braunschweig. --Saperaud 02:34, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] German

Why is the name given in German in the introduction? The article doesn't go on to refer to German as an official, minority or historical language of the province. I presume it has to do with the etymology of the province, but if so, shouldn't it dealt with as etymology rather than as an alternative language name for the province? TheGrappler 23:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I've heard pretentious profs at UBC call it Neubraunschweig on numerous occasions. It is used; therefore, it should be listed here.

[edit] The whole article and Politics section

Good work on the article people. It's the first time I've seen it. Lot's of good stuff here. People obviously worked hard on it. A couple of comments/questions from the Politics section. What does: "The governing party normally (my emphasisis added) is the party that wins the most seats in the provincial election" mean? Other than the February 1917 election (27 Lib vs 21 Cons), have there been other (more recent?) cases where the governing party has had fewer seats than the opposition? Can't we excise that normally? Also, I have a couple of comments about this: "The New Democratic Party has held seats in the Legislative Assembly, but has never been overly popular with the electorate" (again, my emphasis added). First, I am not too sure that that phrase ("...has never been too popular...") is neutral. Second, I took a look at the election results since the 50th (1982) election. The NDP has consistently polled approximately 10% of the vote (sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less). Over those six elections (50, 51, 52, 53, 54 & 55), I would argue that 10% of the vote is not only a trend, it's a significant trend. Since I am new to this page, I don't want to step on too many toes, so, I decided to write here first before changing the text. How about something like: "While consistently polling approximately 10% of the electoral vote since the early 1980s, the NDP have elected few members to the Legislative Assembly" or simply, "The New Democratic Party has held few seats in the Legislative Assembly"? Comments would be appreciated.DDD DDD 05:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shawn Graham

The table to the right says Sean Graham is the premier of the province. However, technically, he has not yet assumed power, AFAIK. Shouldn't the acting premiers name be there in place of Shawns?

[edit] Length of article

This NB article is WAY to long. I've begun to edit it for redundant wiki links. The geography, history, cities, education sections need someone to go through and cut away. The history section is definitely in need of this. Why not make a History of NB article? Also, I'm wondering why there's a municipality list and later a cities list. I know the two are not the same, but it seems redundant. There are also two different per capita figures: one in the table for $31, 552 and one in the facts section for $20, 883. The table itself seems too long or too big. Finally, the map at the end of the page, why not include it in the actual geography section. DDD DDD 08:02, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Removing the redundant links I mentioned above, the municipalities table, changing lists to paragraphs and thinning out the historical section reduced the article from 42 kilobytes to 36 kilobytes. It's still over the recommended 32 kilobytes. More needs to be done. I created the History of New Brunswick article by copying what was originally here. That article, though could be greatly enhanced with pictures, drawings, early maps, and so on. I would also suggest much more editing/thinning of the written language throughout the article and adding colourful photos instead, but still reducing the article to the appropriate 32 kilobytes. I would also suggest creating a main article for the Politics of New Brunswick and so on.DDD DDD 00:42, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I made that History of New Brunswick article but it needs work. As does this NB article, still. However, I have managed to trim it to 31K with an added gallery in the tourism section. I still think the econ. section is too short, it needs work. It's definitely not my area of expertise so I'll pass the baton on that one. And, the history section is still too long. I doubt most people are interested in reading 1500+ words on NB history, since we can find that in the NB history section. DDD DDD 12:36, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Just wondering...

Does anyone take the time to read the discussion page? Suddenly the article is over 32kb again. What's up with that? And why to people insist on linking place names again and again and again.DDD DDD 00:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

No, I guess no one reads here. Shame. Anyway, I looked at the article again today and it was back up to 37kb. What the...? 'CONCISE IS GOOD!' Please, understand that. And aim for that. I've stated before and will again, no one wants to read 3000 word essays on whatever unless they really have to. Less writing and more images would be better. Also, we should work on writing connecting articles: Geography of New Brunswick, History of New Brunswick, Politics of New Brunswick, New Brunswick Economy, Education in New Brunswick, Culture in New Brunswick, etc. I started the Geography of New Brunswick as you can see. I went to an older edit of the NB page and copied what was there and moved it over. There is lot's to do on the new geo page... parks, historical locations, rivers, lakes, etc.

[edit] Moncton Rad!

Are you not aware that we have created main articles for Geography of New Brunswick and History of New Brunswick? If you want to add trivial details, I think it would be better to add them there instead of this NB page.

Also, I REALLY wish you'd make your user page so we can discuss these problems there, not here.

Finally, looking at your last edits, they included biased (non-neutral) vocabulary. Here are some of the words & phrases you used:

• "remarkably equivalent" - while Moncton & Saint John have similar metro population figures, the population of Fredericton is only 60% of the others (130,000 * 60%). So, the three cities' metro populations are really then not *THAT* similar and so not really remarkable, either.
• "quite unusual" - Canada ONLY has ten provinces. What happens in one is really not that unusal. And, as I noted above, NB really has TWO large urban centres and then another, 60% less in size.
• "so underdeveloped" - that *so* is pretty scary looking. So, compared with... And where is the data?
• "more so than it does in any other province" - again, SHOW ME THE DATA. Apart from Alberta, Canadian provinces usually elect a party for 1, 2 or 3 terms, then they dump them for another party. This seems to reflect federal politics.
• "relatively long tenures" - well, first off, relative to what? Then, let's look at the data for the previous 6 premiers - Lord (7 years), Thériault (1 year), Frenette (8 months), McKenna (10 years), Hatfield (17 years), Robichaud (10 years). Are there any patterns? I don't see any. Completely random numbers, it seems.And these are long terms?

Look, I understand you are trying to make this article better, and quite frankly, thank you for that. But, I ask you, go look at the geography page. There is MUCH work (rivers, lakes, parks, etc) to be done there. Your help there would be greatly appreciated. DDD DDD 05:39, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

DDD DDD - I do look at the discussion pages although I do admit that I have not looked at the New Brunswick discussion page in quite some time.

Moncton Rad, thanks for taking the time to respond. Hopefully, we can come to an agreement on these. We are both trying to make the article better. I've written more of my comments below to each point you addressed.

In response to your criticisms above:

(1 & 2) - New Brunswick is unusual in Canada in that there truly is no single dominant urban centre. Look at most other provinces, Vancouver and BC, Toronto and Ontario, Montreal and Quebec etc. In most provinces there is a single dominant metropolis that is able to exercise political control over the legislature. This leads to much resentment in the more rural areas of those provinces. I know, I used to live in Nova Scotia and you wouldn't believe how jealous Cape Bretoners are over the advantages enjoyed by Halifax. New Brunswick is entirely different. There are two roughly equivalent dominant cities and neither one is the capital! Fredericton is really not that far behind in population and any disadvantage there is negated by the fact that that city is the capital and is home to the provincial university.

But, in the same respect, Edmonton and Calgary are similar in population size. Regina and Saskatoon, too. Charlottetown and Summerside, as well. Nunavut, for its size, has only one community over a 5000 and nine communities over 1000. Clearly, resources have to be carefully spread about there. So, just as some provinces only have one major urban city, others have two. Also, the three large cities you noted above are in provinces which have at least half a dozen mid-sized cities that act as a balance to the large ones. You did mention resentment... I'm sure that still exists in NB. The history of the province suggests that historically there was English/French resentment and urban/rural, too. Much of the criticism that Robichaud faced in anglophone communities was: robbing peter to pierre which ignored the fact that there were incredibly economically poor anglophone communities.

Also, and this is just important, EVEN IF, NB were the only province in Canada that had two large cities of equal size, one province out of ten is not that unusual. I mean, statistically, 10% is just that. If it were one state out of 50 (2%), well, then, I think that is significant.

Perhaps, a sentence like: "NB, like a few other provinces in Canada, has...'"

(3) - New Brunswick at that time was underdeveloped (compared to the southern colonies and to Nova Scotia). Because it was underdeveloped and poorly organized politically, it was merely a bywater during the revolutionary war. There was one rebellion at Fort Cumberland, led by Johnathan Eddy but this did not recieve any support from the Continental Congress, no doubt because they did not even know that it was going on. That is what I meant by this statement.

Well, at the time, NB was a part of NS... And yes, it was less developed than the others. My problem was/is with the word "so". It's a loaded word. Also, while I am not saying the info you wrote above is not important, I just think it's best to keep the summary on NB succinct. And then on the NB History page, we could add more important historical details.

(4) - New Brunswick politics ARE different than other provinces. Most provinces desperately try to ignore linguistic issues. This is not possible in New Brunswick. Most provinces have dominant regions that tend to recieve the majority of political largesse and patronage. Settlement in New Brunswick is more homogenous thus patronage tends to be spread out over the entire province. It is PRECISELY BECAUSE of these regional and linguistic issues that New Brunswick politics tends to be like federal politics.

If as your last sentence states: "... BECAUSE of these ..." is true, I do not think the article makes that clear. However, I object to the implication that other provinces do not have linguistic issues. Quebec certainly does. In the past 25-30 years, linguistic issues have also been raised in NS, Ont, Man., Al., NWT/+Nunavut and so on. Also, because of the large number of recent immigrants in the 3 large urban centres (Toronto, Montreal & Vancouver), linguistic/cultural issues are playing an important role.

Still, the way you explained the point above, I like. A lot. Perhaps, we could rewrite the paragraph by saying something like... "In many respects, politics in NB is a microcosm of politics in Canada. Many of the same issues that the federal goverment deals with, NB must also. These include: population dispersed in several areas, linguistic issues..."

(5) - Since 1960, New Brunswick has really been controlled by only four premiers, Robichaud, Hatfield, McKenna and Lord. Niether Frenette or Theriault really belong on the list as one was a caretaker premier and the other a lame duck. Yes, these are long terms. Most other provinces would have gone through twice the premiers than we have.

I agree. But caretaker/lame duck or not, they were there. And other provinces have had leaders for more than 1 term. Manitoba with Doer since 1999, before him Filmon for 11 years, Pawley for 7 years... Saskatchewan with Calvert since 2001, Romanov for 10, Devine for 9, Blakeney for 11... Alberta with Klein since 1992, Getty for 7, Lougheed for 14, Strom for 3 but then Manning for 25! Also, in Nunavut, Okalik - the only leader - since 1999.

Clearly some provinces have a dynamic electoral process and others do not. I do not think then that NB is unique.

DDD DDD - I do not think the article was too long, look at articles on other provinces and states and you will see what I mean.

It's not my intention to be a fascist about the 32k limit for articles. But that limit is there for a GOOD reason. Articles longer than that take too long to upload or do NOT upload at all for people with old(older) computers, small bandwidth, poor Internet connections, etc. Now personally, I'm using a very new iMac with a large bandwidth and a great Internet connection... but think about kids in a school. If the teacher had 30 kids in a computer class look at an article at the same time, they'd run into problems. And what about poorer students or others in developing nations where likely they have older commuters, little bandwidth, poor Internet connections, and so on. People in the developed nations have little problems finding other sources of information, but let's not take it for granted that the whole world has those same conveniences.

A second point - articles that have TOO much written text are unappealing to the unintiated. That's another reason why we should keep the main articles short and snappy. If people fall on the NB article by chance and then want to know more, they could click on the main history/politics/geography... article. And since we are cutting text from the main article, we could fill it up with other media - photos for example. Unfortunately, I live in Tokyo and visit NB only once a year so I cannot take photos as often as I'd like and of many of the places I like. I think though that when you look at wiki articles of places (city's, provinces/states, countries...), it's the photos that immediately catch your eye. Because they catch your eye, you start reading. So, good photos/images first, good text second.

Finally, regarding the size, I know that there are many articles that are WAY too long. (The province of Quebec is 41, Toronto is 43, Moncton - my next article to get to? - and Ontario are both 47, and Montreal is 60!!! but PEI, Halifax Regional Municipality, Saint John, St.John's and Newfoundland and Labrador are all within the 32k limit.) But it does NOT matter what the length of those other articles is. We are working on the NB article. Remember that REALLY annoying comment that parents asked us when we did something wrong: "Well, if your friends jump off a bridge, are you gonna jump too?"

I appreciate what you have done in creating new sub-articles (eg - History of New Brunswick) but you have to understand, not all readers of the New Brunswick article realize that these links exist, I know because I didn't see the links when I started some of my edits (I was not trying to step on your toes when I fleshed out some of the sections).

Not everyone sees them - I think that's ok. If what we have on the NB page is good, that'll keep their interest and they'll come back for more.

Nevertheless, I still think you are being too parsimonious with some of your edits. For example, You left the phrase "New Brunswick differs from its neighbours physiographically, ethnoculturally and climatologically" in the geography section but you removed everything else that was there to qualify this statement. As such, this statement has no frame of reference. New Brunswick differs from WHICH neighbours (the other maritime provinces), why does it differ (because it is removed from the Atlantic Ocean coastline). Without this frame of reference, what remains of the commentary is meaningless.

Fair enough. Still, I think the geography section AS IS remains too long.

I truly resent the fact that you have removed every single one of my edits.

I'd resent it, too, most likely. Still, you added to the history & geography sections what I felt was not necessary on the NB page or biased vocab as I already explained a couple of days ago. I have no problem with just about any trivial detail on the sub pages, but on the main, just the bare minimum is all that is necessary.

This amounts to nothing more than a hatchet job, and a relatively crude one at that. Surely some of my edits had SOME merit. I remind you, you do not OWN this article.

Whether it's a hatchet job or not, I don't think that is relevant. Be bold (is that it?) is the wiki editors motto. I was. ANd then, after I reverted all of it, I went page and re-edited a spelling miss that had you corrected and I re-edited subject-verb agreement in the politics section that you had edited. So in fact, I didn't revert all of your edits. And no, I don't think I own the article. But I have contributed enormously, not only to this article, but to MANY articles that are related to NB in English AND Frnech, and feel I have a significant stake in it (them).

I appreciate your sense of dedication to maintaining the quality of this article but you must remember that there are other Wikipedians that also take pride in their work. Please consider that the next time you delete someone's contribution. Sorry I didn't sign MonctonRad 23:32, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate yours. I am sure we will come to agree. We both have the same goal - make this good article. We are on our way. It is not my intention to be antagonistic - computers, for all their worth, have a hard time displaying meaning or intention of words.DDD DDD 07:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal: New Colonial Era article

Since New Brunswick existed as a British colony before it was a Canadian province, I propose creating a new page about the British colony as a seperate entity (perhpas New Brunswick (colony)). This compares with Ontario and Upper Canada, BC and Colonial BC, or Newfoundland and Labrador and Dominion of Newfoundland. It doesn't mean that this article can't mention the history before 1867, but that the new article could go into much more depth. Kevlar67 20:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Languages

There should be more in this article concerning the province's language policy, as it is the only one to be bilingual at the provincial level. Also, it would be nice to explain where the anglophones and francophones live in the province, and how they interact, and so forth. Basically, I think there should be a "Languages" section. Funnyhat 06:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Official Bilingualism

New Brunswick is not the only officially bilingual province - Manitoba is too. I edited this in the intro. User: terrywuerz 02:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)