User talk:Mjlarochelle

Broadcasting

Exactly what is it that you view as the problem with calling the city of Greater Sudbury by its actual proper name? Bearcat 05:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

As I've pointed out in previous iterations of this debate, the city of Greater Sudbury is not divided into a "Sudbury portion" and a "not-Sudbury portion". From my parents' house in Whitefish, I can call friends in Chelmsford, say "Hey, I'm in Sudbury", meaning that I'm sitting in my parents' basement, and not be the least bit misunderstood. The name "Sudbury" does not designate a specific part of the city to the exclusion of other parts. People in the area just don't use "Sudbury" to mean "old city of Sudbury as opposed to Val Caron or Garson"; the word is never used that way. If people need to be more specific than "anywhere in the entire city of Greater Sudbury", they say "Gatchell" or "Minnow Lake" or "Lo-Ellen" or "Copper Cliff" or "New Sudbury", not "Sudbury". You can say "Sudbury" to mean "Sudbury as opposed to North Bay"; you can't say it to mean "old City of Sudbury as opposed to Garson or Skead". It's virtually the same situation that applies in Toronto — while you can still get away with saying "Scarborough", "Etobicoke" or "North York", if you mean the old city of Toronto you have to say something else, not just "Toronto", to actually make it understood what you really mean, because "Toronto" doesn't necessarily convey that you're not standing at the corner of Yonge and Finch.

Furthermore, a radio or television station is always licensed to the official name of the municipality as it exists at the time of licensing, not to a specific community within a municipal boundary. Any differences that exist between CRTC licensing and official municipal names result from usage lags that occur when a municipal name change takes place after the CRTC license is issued, not from any CRTC convention permitting stations to be licensed to a specific community within a municipality.

Plus I find it quite instructive that every single Wikipedia contributor I'm aware of who comes from the Sudbury area has insisted on the usage "Greater Sudbury" — the only objections to it that I've ever seen have come from people who have no connection to the city whatsoever and often don't even know that the municipal amalgamation ever took place.

But the bottom line is that "Sudbury" and "Greater Sudbury" are, for all practical purposes, interchangeable names for the whole thing, not nested entities where the shorter name refers to one specific part, or excludes other parts, of the longer one. Bearcat 00:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and incidentally, most of the "corrections" you listed on my talk page are replacing the actual city of license with the geographical location of the transmitter, which doesn't even approach being the same thing as what I'm talking about. Ottawa has not been amalgamated into Chelsea, Toronto has not been amalgamated into Grimsby, and Vancouver has not been amalgamated into West Van or Capital G. There's a big difference between using the actual name of a station's city of license when that has changed, and replacing the city of license with a transmitter location that's outside the actual boundaries of that city. Bearcat 20:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

At some point, Wikipedia has to strike a balance somewhere between common understanding and actual reality — else we'd end up pretending that municipal amalgamations never happened, that Kanata isn't part of Ottawa, that Scarborough isn't part of Toronto, that St. Boniface isn't part of Winnipeg, that Hamilton is part of the Greater Toronto Area, that Cobourg is in Eastern Ontario, and that the easternmost Canadian province is called Newfoundland rather than Newfoundland and Labrador. I disagree with you about where the balance between those two imperatives happens to lie, but you're also right that it's not worth picking a fight about.

But you're still conflating two very distinct issues. I'm not disagreeing with you about the point that people generally say "Sudbury" rather than "Greater Sudbury"; that's quite obviously true. What I'm saying is that unlike "Paris" vs. "Brant", "Sudbury" does not denote one specific community within "Greater Sudbury". Yes, people drop the "Greater" in conversation, but the unmodified name doesn't actually mean anything different than the modified name does. It's a distinction with about as much practical significance as Sheshatshiu vs. Sheshatshit. Bearcat 06:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 04:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CBWFT1982.png

Thanks for uploading Image:CBWFT1982.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:45, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CBXT1982.png

Thanks for uploading Image:CBXT1982.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:CBOT1982.png

Thanks for uploading Image:CBOT1982.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Is this how I contact you?

I contacted someone once and apparently the method I used was considered rude of vandalism or something. Anyway I saw your contribution to the Riverside Drive article and was wondering where you got your info. It might be best to list the source and I'd like to know out of interest.

Minshullj (talk) 16:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cbot-2000.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Cbot-2000.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cw50.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Cw50.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Cbxt-2000.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Cbxt-2000.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:WUAB1984.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:WUAB1984.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Cbltnews2000.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Cbltnews2000.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. NotifyBot (talk) 13:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:CKCO3 1977.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:CKCO3 1977.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 23:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Cbot-2000.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cbot-2000.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 04:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:CBOT1982.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:CBOT1982.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 17:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Oakridge doc in the works

Heyo! I'm chasing bread crumbs from your old Geocities site about Oakridge Mall. Hoping you can get in touch via oakridgemovie.ca. Many thanks! - Scott @ Cygnals