Talk:Dominion of Newfoundland

message: 1934 was no doubt the year that Newfoundland ceased to be a self-governing country, but is is not necessarily the year that the Dominion of Newfoundland ceased to exist. As pointed out in the article, this is a unique occurrance so we have no examples to use. Newfoundland did not revert to a colony. According to Dr. Jeff Webb, Dept. of History at Memorial University of Newfoundland, Newfoundland remained a Dominion, if only in name, until 1949 when it joined Canada. The Commission which governed the country reported to the Dominions Office in London. See Webb's article at  for more detail. I think this is an important distinction that needs to be made in the article.Silverchemist 02:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates 

message: Shown as Union Jack (1931-34) but in article "List of members of the Commonwealth of Nations by name" - "Former Members" it is shown as a light-green/wite/light pink tricolour. Which is correct? Maybe it was the latter from 1934-1949. If so this should be shown in article - if not flag in commonwealth list needs correcting. Tiddy 05:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See the article on Newfoundland Tricolour. The Pink, White, and Green was developed in Newfoundland, and has been popular there for the past 160-odd years, but it was never the official flag of Newfoundland in any state --- colony, Dominion, or province. I'd recommend possibly keeping it, as it was used in some official capacity (i.e. it was displayed during the first official performance of the Ode to Newfoundland, the anthem of the Dominion, and was also displayed whenever royalty visited St. John's, so it has a semi-legitimacy), but maybe it should be clarified that it was never an official flag? Trollcollins 13:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag 

message: I applaud the great work done on the infobox here, but would it be possible to standarize it with the Template:Infobox Former Country?  The advantage of that template is it shows which states preceeded and suceeded the current one, helping to show the continuity between the Colony of Newfoundland (which we should create) and the modern province of Newfoundland and Labrador.  Thought? Kevlar67 19:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standardize  the Infobox? 

message: Should this entry not be merged with the History of Newfoundland, where it would supply some information regarding the 1920's  ?
:No, it shouldn't.  The History of Newfoundland and Labrador covers the period c1000 AD to the present, including the time period during which the Dominion of Newfoundland existed as a separate state.  The History article contains a link to the Dominion article, which provides more detail on the subject in question.Vulcan's Forge 22:44, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible Merge with [[History of Newfoundland and Labrador]]

message: Dominion status, when conferred in 1907, was not tantamount to independence. And as far as I can see, Newfoundland didn't do much towards adopting the Statute of Westminster towards further independence, in fact they took backwards steps. Perhaps a change in phrasing is needed -- MichiganCharms 06:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If there are no objections, I will edit it. -MichiganCharms 20:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "was a country" Not so fast... 

message: Should the section labeled "References" be renamed as "Suggested Reading" or "Additional Reading"?Silverchemist 03:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: The full size image does not appear to load.
--84.68.89.201 (talk) 22:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  No full size image 

message: In WWI did Newfoundland recruits have their ouwn dominion unit like the Canandians and Australians? And during WWII whose Army did they join - Canadian or British?
Starzaz (talk) 14:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Residents of Newfoundland served either in the British Army (as Newfoundland was a Dominion until joining Canada in 1949), more specifically in the []. See that article for more information.Cfagan1987 (talk) 02:43, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  during the world wars 

message: The image :Image:Greatsealofnewfoundland.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:45, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Greatsealofnewfoundland.jpg

message: hello, i like to know what is the relationship between Thomas Skinner and Thomas Skinner, Jr..
can't be major Skinner's father since he lived well beyond 1818. so i think Thomas Skinner may be major Skinner's uncle whom he mentioned in his autobiography as a military officer, but not his name.
thanks,--chanakal (talk) 03:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thomas Skinner, Jr. 

message: We know that Canada sent High Commissioners to Newfoundland.  Every other self-governing dominion also sent High Commissioners to London.  Did Newfoundland ever send out HCs to Ottawa or London? --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 21:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  External relations 

message: Could a long-form Name (1934-1949) be the Realm's Commissionerate of Newfoundland?  Any opinions?
ArmchairVexillologistDonLives! (talk) 03:01, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Realm's Commissionerate of Newfoundland (1934-1949) ? 

message: "Responsible government" is supported by the article text and seems most appropriate for this particular topic, regardless of what might be the case elsewhere. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:50, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What makes it the most appropriate, in your view? Graham (talk) 02:08, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It is sourced, and is widely used by reliable sources, in contrast to the current version. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:27, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't suspect verifiability is an issue with the current language. In terms of wide use, is it just as widely used in international comparative contexts (excluding simply intra-Commonwealth comparisons)? Graham (talk) 02:50, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find any non-wiki sourcing for the current language, whereas "responsible government" is used in international contexts. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:02, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Government type