Talk:Province of Canada
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Flag of the United Province of Canada
There is a painting that refers to the Flag of the United Province of Canada (1841-1867). The Flag consists of a canton containing a St. Georges Cross atop a reversed St. Andrews Cross, and a blue field (i.e., a British Blue Ensign). It commemorates the opening of the State of Massachusetts to the United Province of Canada Railway in the early 1850s.
ArmchairVexillologistDon 06:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] History section
As presently written August 2007, this section is not a history of the Province of Canada, but a rehash of Upper Canada, with lots of geography. Stick to 1841-1866 not what happened before these dates. The article on Upper Canada has or should have the history for the period 1791-1840. Also, the history must now cover both Canada East and Canada West, and cease being "Ontario-centric".
[edit] Districts
I am looking for some evidence for the claim made by User:ArmchairVexillologistDon that Canada West and Canada East had long form names "District of Canada West" and "District of Canada East". On his talk page, Don tries to construct an argument that these names existed because other British colonies were subdivided into districts. I am looking for evidence that these longform names actually existed and were used.
The Canadian Encyclopedia articles on the Act of Union (by Jacques Monet) and on the Province of Canada, 1841-67 by (JMS Careless) (both well-known Canadian historians) make no reference to "districts" and refer to Canadas East and West as "sections" of the Province of Canada. The construction of long form names on the basis that Don sets out on his talk page strikes me as being not only original research, but also counterfactual if these names were not used anywhere at the time.
Of course, if another good source or a constitutional or legal document from the era indicates that these long form names existed, then of course I will withdraw my objection. Ground Zero | t 22:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
- Until sources are provided, I will comment out "District of". There does not seem to be justification for including it. Ground Zero | t 13:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, well, well ... it would seems that Wikipedia itself supports the District names.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District
- Northwest Territories
- In western and northern Canada, the federal government created districts as subdivisions of the Northwest Territories 1870-1905, partly on the model of the districts created in the Province of Canada. The first district created was the District of Keewatin in 1876 followed by four more districts in 1882. Gradually, these districts became separate territories (such as Yukon Territory, separate provinces (such as Alberta and Saskatchewan) or were absorbed into other provinces.
ArmchairVexillologistDon (talk) 07:53, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
There is no question about the subdivisions of the Northwest Territories, Don. My question is about Canada West and Canada East, which were subdivisions of the Province of Canada, and not of NWT. It seems that it is your theory, unsupported by evidence, that the "district" name was ever applied to CW and CE. Ground Zero | t 13:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
- Hello GroundZero. Do you conceed that the United Province of Canada was divided into two Districts?
-
- "In western and northern Canada, the federal government created districts as subdivisions of the Northwest Territories 1870-1905, partly on the model of the districts created in the Province of Canada."
- ArmchairVexillologistDon (talk) 00:30, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I will agree with tht contention only if you provide a reliable source for it. Wikipedia's policy on verifiability has this to say on using Wikipedia as a source ofr itself: "Articles and posts on Wikipedia may not be used as sources." Why is that? I presume that it's because Wikipedia recognizes that anyone can edit an article, and therefore anyone with a pet theory to promote can post whatever they want, and it will remain unless is is challenged by another editor. The statement that you cite from District is unreferenced. Should we belive it just because someone posted it a long time ago and no one has challeneged it? That wouldn't make sense, would it? It seems that there just are not reliable sources to support this claim. On the other hand, two eminent Candain historians writing articles for the Canadian Encyclopedia chose not to call CW and CE "districts". Why did they leave that out if it were true? That, to me, is the most convincing evidence we have so far on this issue. Ground Zero | t 12:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Since there seems to be no evidence that is not original research, I will remove these statemenets from the article. Ground Zero | t 05:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)