Wikipedia:WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada/Geography
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What are the implications of the borders? How best to describe, in words, how this electoral district differs from another. This includes a list of communities within it, the character of the communities (urban, suburban, rural), ethnicities, local issues (BSE cattle, drought, religion, pollution), local economy (resource-based, manufacturing), and so forth over the district's entire history, not just the most recent election. Is "Geography" the best title? This section is not intended to discuss the electoral district itself, rather the district's implications from where the borders were drawn.
- Technically this - geography - is really two concepts; as raw geography in its own state is the terrain and biosphere and hydrosphere in the area. Human geography addresses demographics as well as other issues such as lifestyle/culture, economy and more. But the demographics of each town and the way they interact (if they do, or if one huge one overrides all the smaller towns and rural areas encompassed in a riding, as is now typical and p.c.) and things like economics, all the human geography stuff, are overlain with the separate machinations of political geography; it is the interaction of the two, even though p.g. is a subset of h.g. - well, no historically it's not, not in academia it's not, though at least conceptually. I'm writing up Yale-Lillooet right now, and Coast Chilcotin, and there's heady geographic issues involved (see Paul St. Pierre) to be faced, and also gerrymanderlike reasons why the boundaries get drawn/ that's political geography; human geography is the infobase the political geographers - actually more like political geomancer-engineers - do their infamous work. PS notice how the STV vote and whatever else they'll cook up to fudge that ballet (so it never passes, as is the plan) has been shuffled aside on the issue of having to wait until the ridings are redrawn? yeah, right . . . .Skookum1 05:21, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
- The only reason the term "Geography" was used was because it was left behind in an empty stub. It is not to be taken literally. I was just curious as to what aspects of this topic would be relevant to an electoral district. After pondering the subject a bit, came to the opinion that if this section was used by itself it would only be a short blurb, and that it would be better discussed in a combined "history" and "geography" section...called
"histography""geostory"...well, I haven't thought it through quite yet, but a proposal can be found here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada/Geography&History --maclean25 09:56, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
- The only reason the term "Geography" was used was because it was left behind in an empty stub. It is not to be taken literally. I was just curious as to what aspects of this topic would be relevant to an electoral district. After pondering the subject a bit, came to the opinion that if this section was used by itself it would only be a short blurb, and that it would be better discussed in a combined "history" and "geography" section...called
-
-
- Well, "histography" is definitely wrong; that would mean writing using cell-tissue, or the un-ologistic charting of histological data. Cell biology for laymen? Dunno. Anyway, in BC, riding geography is a BIG issue, especially in the case of the so-called "rural" ridings ("wilderness" is a better term); I haven't finished Coast Chilcotin yet but it and other ridings like it are complex geographic entities which have a bearing on how the vote goes; there's also the political geography issue surrounding "balancing" the proportion of decided voters in each riding - essentially drawing boundaries to cancel out votes, rather than represent them. That's a political/constitutional issue that's not encyclopedia oriented, except by way of mention that it's an issue; but it's definitely "geography".Skookum1 22:09, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
-
