Talk:Cambridge, Ontario
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
|
 |
Contents |
[edit] City of ghosts
This page http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/August2005/05/c7500.html says that Toyota employs 4,000 people? Not a big difference between 3,500, but I wonder if 4,000 is more accurate. I heard the plant expanded some time ago... dave 16:19, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
I'm writing here to debate the towns nickname currently stated as "city of ghosts" on the citys wiki. I find that being a long time resident of Cambridge and its three down town cores that i can accuratelly portray this city. I recently on the eight of april, removed the City of ghosts reference and included a more accurate depiction of what the towns real nickname could be, which is such a silly thing in the first place. Someone then labeled my updates as "scum" and "unfounded", While i can say the exact same about the latter. As a long standing resident of cambridge ive been deeply involved with the community in many angles for quite some time. So i find it quite absurd to even give the town a quasi-offical nickname. That being said, i feel the reasons other users of the wiki may feel that City of ghosts is more appropiate than Crackbridge as a nickname to maintain the fruitful false-reality people seem to enjoy enveloping themselves in. Wikipedia is to provide unbiased fact instead of personal fullfilment that some people seem to be set on. I hope you folks can reconsider such a obvious mistake of judgement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.39.18 (talk • contribs)
- The whole ‘City of Ghosts’ thing seems dodgy enough to me as it is, but your ‘nickname’ is merely silly — can you provide references to support your view of the town? David Arthur 23:05, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
- Is it possible that the City of Ghosts comment was may have mistakenly been intended for Cambridge, UK? I know that there are books written on that topic. The only on line reference I could find regarding Cambridge as the 'City of Ghosts' was from a restaurant listing site - hardly a credible source. That being said, I hardly feel that 'crackbridge' is fair or accurate description of the city either. Might I suggest removing any text referring to either of these 'nicknames' until a more credible source can be found? --Ithinkhelikesit 22:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I was watching Jeopardy, and the question was "This city has the highest number of coffee shops per capita in all of Canada", The answer was "Cambridge, Ontario" of course. I have been there, and there are a LOT of coffee shops, but I haven't been able to find any documented proof of this claim. Anyone else have any ideas? --Dave S 21:26, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
I've lived in Cambridge for 15 years and I know for sure it is the town with the most Tim Horton's coffee shops across Canada. I know of 14 locations within preston and Galt. That is not including Hespler. These three parts of town make up Cambridge. I was searching to see if there were any cemeteries that existed at any point in time around Blair Road (where I live). This is because I think my house is haunted. And then when I heard other people commenting on the "City of ghost" nickname, I started to get scared.
[edit] Update
I just updated the info box to meet the Canadian City Standard box. If anyone has access to a copy of the City's flag, that would be helpful. I am also having difficulty tracking down the City's motto, so its a "?" until I can. --Ithinkhelikesit 20:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Intro
It seems like this article needs better organisation. I'm not saying to complain, I'd like to try to do it, but I'm not sure where to start. The first para or so is a fine opener, but the last several in the opener seem disjointed - more like trivia, with no connecting narrative. The first real section (with a title) should be a history or overview section, don't you think? Any thoughts? --Yahoo!Sirius 09:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Cambridge, Ontario Coat of Arms.jpg
Image:Cambridge, Ontario Coat of Arms.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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.BetacommandBot 19:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Entertainment
I removed the part re: The "Wrestling" League. Wikipedia isn't a soapbox to be used for advertising non-notworthy events ie. that wrestling league. The Cambridge page doesn't need to include every single event that takes place: my yard sale, or my neighbor's BBQ party.
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:CambridgeOntarioLogo.gif
Image:CambridgeOntarioLogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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.
BetacommandBot 04:38, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
