lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Kelowna—Lake Country (federal electoral district)

message: An anonymous editor reverts my changes without explanation. I adjusted the table headings to reflect the style that is used elsewhere. Insteading of haviong the riding name in each table heading, I created sub-heading grouping the elections in which the riding was called Kelowna, and the elections in which it was called Kelowna-Lake Country. I think that this approach is clearer and easier to follow than putting the riding name to the top of each table. What do other editors think? If there is no objection, I will revert it. Ground Zero | t 20:28, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: the picture is terrible, the green looks like the ridings  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.122.255.226 (talk) 06:38, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  picture 
Talk:Langley (federal electoral district)

message: I hesitate to see only the incumbent's bio on the page, given that the writ has been dropped; it's either all or none; don't forget that Wiki can be seen to have a political bias if it's not properly impartial; so it's the same as I suggested with headshot-pics on the election project discussion page just now; if you can't have them all, you should have none.  Otherwise it's a plug for the guy; free advertising.  Impartiality in bios once they're up is important too, obviously.Skookum1 08:45, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Nanaimo—Alberni

message: Why are the percentages for valid votes all %100.00, when there are always some rejected votes? Jfingers88 02:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Election percentages 
Talk:Newton—North Delta

message: I just changed the geography from "All but the eastern part of the City of Surrey" to "The western and central part of the City of Surrey". I really hope the original description wasn't from an official source, because it's way off. The riding doesn't include the southern third of Surrey, nor most of the Northern part.--Keefer4 16:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Geography
Talk:CollegeHumor

message: The Drawfee Show was sold to some of the former cast members of College Humour, and has been fully independent for just over two years
So it really shouldn't be on the page anymore 2A01:4B00:E20C:6A00:91B4:A8C8:9A86:6CA7 (talk) 09:57, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: In the historical context, Drawfee started with College Humor and was made in CH offices for years, but I'm surprised there isn't a separate page for it. The fact that "Drawfee" redirects here, with only the briefest of mentions on the page, could stand correction. I'll start looking for good sources to support a separate article for it. The Drawfee fan wikia currently has 441 pages but is short on references outside the show. https://drawfee.fandom.com/wiki/Drawfee_Wiki We would need to improve on that here. JimsMaher (talk) 16:36, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: bookmark dump: JimsMaher (talk) 07:10, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Or JimsMaher (talk) 07:11, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ok i was trying to drop the decent sources i found (14 links) here if anyone is interested. Not sure when i'd make an afternoon of writing an independent article for Drawfee, redirecting Drawfee Show too. It wouldn't be a stub with plenty to cite in describing the program/hosts/etc. JimsMaher (talk) 07:28, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that Drawfee should have a separate page since it has a large identity outside of the CH family nowadays. If you still have those sources I would be up for writing the new article. I’ve worked on the drawfee.fandom.com for years now. Wikipedria Editor (talk) 13:13, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not going to win a Pulitzer, but I've started something on my sandbox page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Snowman304/sandbox @JimsMaher Snowman304|talk 07:11, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting Proposal for The Drawfee Show
Talk:Prince Albert (federal electoral district)

message: This article repeats the information from the Parliamentary website that Robert Rae Manville won 7,534 votes in the Canadian federal election, 1940, placing second, as the candidate of the National Unity party, another name for the Parti national social chrétien. This sounds like an error to me. I think the Parliamentary site is wrong and that Manville was the National Government (i.e., Conservative) candidate. Can anyone verify this? - User:Ground Zero, 11:59, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Replying to a very old comment, but it appears that Manville used the National-unity label as an amalgam of the National Government and the Social Credit, according to the article National-Unity (candidate), so correct, not associated with the fascist National Unity Party (Canada). Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 09:07, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: 1940 election
Talk:Portage—Lisgar

message: The election results charts for 2008 and 2012 should read “Candace Bergen” as Conservative candidate, not as currently “Candace Hoeppner”. It appears a technical issue is preventing Wikipedia readers from self editing this section of the entry. 2001:569:BFC0:B00:E582:3A35:F5D1:8DB1 (talk) 18:14, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Her name was Candace Hoeppner at the time.-- Earl Andrew - talk 19:17, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errors 

message: On the line just below the "References" section heading we find "Government of Canada - Statistics Canada". It should say instead "Government of Canada – Statistics Canada", with an en-dash rather than a hyphen.
: wrong: Government of Canada - Statistics Canada
: right: Government of Canada – Statistics Canada
But I cannot figure out how to edit that line. Wikipedia is supposed to be editable. 2601:447:C601:3690:1D38:533D:F694:F78F (talk) 14:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper punctuation
Talk:Humber River—Black Creek (federal electoral district)

message: I'm giving an initial quality assessment of "B" because this article contains a good history of the way the Federal riding has been modified over the years, and relatively complete details of its election results. PKT (talk) 13:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Windsor West (federal electoral district)

message: This page has the exact same information and sentences as the following URL: (will someone looks into this???)
http://search.com.com/reference/Windsor_West
If this stays here, Wkipedia will look really bad.  One of these sites copied the other, word for word.
TangLab.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by TangLab (talk • contribs) 14:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Does anyone have info to add to this?
There's not a whole lot of info here, but I don't know how to add it in there properly.
Tangmeisterjr (talk) 17:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add info 

message: This page has the exact same information and sentences as the following URL: (will someone look into this???)
http://search.com.com/reference/Windsor_West
If this stays here, Wkipedia will look really bad. One of these sites copied the other, word for word.
Also,http://www.bookrags.com/wiki/Windsor,_Ontario is also a copycat. WILL SOMEONE LOOK INTO THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!????????????????????????Tangmeisterjr (talk) 20:40, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright info
Talk:Willowdale (federal electoral district)

message: This district was re-jigged in 2012 and this article is out of date. The current map is found here: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/images/maps/FED_CEF_2013/jpeg/35115.jpg 108.162.142.171 (talk) 20:27, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Out of Date

message: I'm giving this an initial quality assessment of "Start", although it might be a bit stingy of me.  I think with a reasonable amount of fleshing out the article could merit a "B". PKT (talk) 18:10, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Welland (electoral district)

message: The 2006 results are incorrect, as well as missing the MLPC candidate entirely.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.56.120 (talk) 22:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2006 results 

message: I have given this article a 'Start' rating, but I think it should be raised to 'B' as soon as the above-noted concern about the 2006 Federal results are fixed.  Note that the data on this article is different from this article.  PKT (talk) 22:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initial Quality Assessment
Talk:Trinity–Spadina

message: I recently obtained access to a map of polling stations from Elections Canada and had a look at the 2006 results.  Ianno actually narrowly carried Little Italy, that is polls 92, 98-101, 106-110 and 113, so either the author who made this claim has a different definition of Little Italy (I use the "official" definition of Bathurst to Ossington, College to Dundas) or is mistaken, as I find it difficult to believe Chow lost ground to Ianno anywhere between '04 and '06.  MF  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattnf (talk • contribs) 05:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Poll-by-poll results

message: Does anyone know where to find the per capita income of this riding, or it's diversity breakdown. Pete Peters 00:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: StatsCan has all the info you need. -- Earl Andrew - talk 18:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I have added the info in, and provided a link.  Pete Peters 21:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Much Needed Information

message: Hello other Canadian Political Wikipedians! I am a bit confused, and would like to get other peoples opinion before I carry on.  I was in the process of filling out candidates expenditures, but for many Conservative candidates I need some clarification.  For the expenditures, many Conservative candidates recieved a lump sum transfer from their federal wing, only to be transfered back as an expense.  In this riding the Conservative riding got around $50 000, only to be transfered back as a campaign expense back to the Conservative Fund as Radio and T.V. advertising.  I noticed that this occurred in many ridings where the Conservative do not stand a chance.  I do not know if this some legal loophole or something.  Officially the Conservatives spent over $70 000 on this riding, but anyone who lives here knows the Conservative did not spend that much money on this riding.  Should we post their official expenses, or should we post their IMO what is the real expenditures on the riding? Pete Peters 02:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Opinions

message: There's an election in October in this riding and candidates are being nominated, but I can't edit the page.  It appears to be restricted and it's not clear why.  It needs to be open for editing so we can keep the candidate information up to date.  Thanks! Morwenne 02:36, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is this page restricted?

message: I have given this article a B rating on the quality scale.  I think it's ready to be submitted for a more in-depth review by more experienced editors to see if it qualifies for an 'A'.  PKT (talk) 16:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initial quality assessment
Talk:Toronto Centre (federal electoral district)

message: I have given an initial assessment of B to this article. It includes information about how it has evolved over the decades, its current composition and representation at other levels of government. An 'A' rating requires a deeper review by more experienced editors.  PKT (talk) 15:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Wouldn't most of the financial district be contained in the east end of Trinity—Spadina? Toronto Centre ends at Yonge and the financial district is at best centred across Bay, and from my observation with a slight west-end slant. --99.236.151.149 (talk) 05:37, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "contains ... most of the city's financial district" 

message: i think the chart for the 2011 election should list the political parties in alphabetical order (Communist, Conservative, Green, etc...) until the election results are in.  The order they are in right now suggests some kind of popularity order, which i feel is prejudicial.  i don't know how to fix it because i don't understand all the programming marks. Torontoemi (talk) 02:09, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  alphabetical order please! 

message: Can federal ridings have city council members? If not, the last sentence of the lead should be adjusted. Perhaps with a mention that it overlaps with certain provincial ridings and city wards... --Truther2012 (talk) 20:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it doesn't belong in this article at all. It should be split off into separate articles on each ward (like with Ottawa). -- Earl Andrew - talk 20:49, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  City Council Members 

message: Someone who knows how might insert a map of the district (riding) as it now exists.  <http://www.elections.ca/res/cir/maps2/mapprov.asp?map=35108&lang=e> Torontonian1 (talk) 13:07, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  2015 Election 

message: The graph (when I make it) will be split into the following, based on major changes that I am aware of.
*2015-(current), includes 2011 redistributed result.
*1968-2013
*1935-1965
*1903-1925
*pre-1903
--Username6892 04:56, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Result graph
Talk:York South—Weston (federal electoral district)

message: I made a major structural change to the page, by rearranging sections, and ordering election tables in a more usual decending order.  As well, I created citations for the federal section, since it was lacking them.  Added a lot more detail about the provincial riding, since it will be undergoing a boundary change this fall.  Added the final list of candidates for the by-election, since Thursday, January 28th, 2007 at 2:00 p.m. EST was the deadline to register with Elections Ontario.  I think it reads better and contains more information than the previous version.Abebenjoe 09:56, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revamped page with descending dates and new sections 

message: Added results that appeared on Elections Ontario's page for the York SouthWeston byelection. I'm just disappointed that Pina Martino & the PCs didn't win. Silander 10:55, 08 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added unofficial election results for York SouthWeston 2007 byelection 

message: I have given this article an initial assessment of "Start" as it needs some cleanup, especially around the 2007 byelection vs. the 2007 general election.  PKT (talk) 13:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initial quality assessment
Talk:Sault Ste. Marie (federal electoral district)

message: The boundaries for the Federal electoral district of Sault Ste. Marie are those that are described in this article, but the Provincial electoral district of Sault Ste. Marie are different - in that it only consists of the City of Sault Ste. Marie, nothing else.  Outside of the city boundaries is within the Provincial electoral district of Algoma-Manitoulin.
Therefore, there should be a separate article for the provincial electoral district.
--chris 22:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Federal/Provincial
Talk:Scarborough—Agincourt (federal electoral district)

message: Opposed. This article is about the Federal riding. There is a separate article for the Provincial riding of the same name. If you want to expand the section on municipal politics, I suggest you create separate articles for the municipal wards. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 18:29, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm confused, it sounds like you support splitting off the municipal politics section into their own articles? I don't know why there's even info on the municipal wards on this page, they should be in their own articles. -- Earl Andrew - talk 00:30, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, this proposed split makes no sense.  Since nothing has happened in over a month, I'll remove the "split" templates.  --RFBailey (talk) 15:15, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  How does it not make sense? Municipal ward information does not belong in an article about a federal electoral district. I'm adding the tags again. If you think the proposed split makes no sense, why don't you tell us why! -- Earl Andrew - talk 16:35, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Read what the tags say: "It has been suggested that this article be split into a new article titled Ward 39 Scarborough—Agincourt, accessible from a disambiguation page."  That's what makes no sense: there should clearly be an article about the federal electoral district, and this should be its name.  What the tags appear to be suggesting is that Scarborough—Agincourt should be a disambiguation page, with the implication that there not be an article about the federal district---that's what makes no sense.  If you don't think the municipal information belongs here---which I agree that it doesn't---then remove it and add it to articles about the wards, like EncyclopediaUpdaticus suggested.  But this is not what the "split" templates suggest, which is why I removed them.  --RFBailey (talk) 00:06, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

text:  This is the template that should be used in this situation.  --RFBailey (talk) 00:13, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  A mis-understanding then. Thanks for fixing. -- Earl Andrew - talk 01:23, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed article split
Talk:Richmond Hill (federal electoral district)

message: someone from there is sending out checks to people saying that they won some money . right now thing are not good for alot of people and i for one didn't like it the company name  
dicom solution. thank you  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.216.138.235 (talk) 16:07, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  north york bonding company
Talk:Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke (federal electoral district)

message: I'm giving this article an initial quality assessment of "B", although it's a close call.  A more experienced editor should be asked to give an opinion.  PKT (talk) 22:15, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I'm more experienced now, and I'm moving it down to "C" due to lack of references  :)  PKT(alk) 21:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Parry Sound—Muskoka (federal electoral district)

message: * Don't Merge - federal riding information constitutes a reasonably large page; the provincial riding page will grow over time. Apart from the very recent harmonisation of Ontario provincial and federal riding boundaries, there is no connection between the different political processes that the article should be consolidated. However, each page should include a prominent link to the other. Dl2000 02:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed merge of provincial and federal riding pages?
Talk:Perth—Wellington (federal electoral district)

message: On the Elections Canada profile of this riding, it is referred to as Perth--Wellington (with two hyphens). However, on the riding map, it is labeled Perth—Wellington (with an em dash). As for which one is the official version, I couldn't tell you.
Regardless, the two articles are about the same riding - except that the Perth--Wellington article is confused about the name of the provincial riding which MPP  John Wilkinson represents, which is actually called Perth—Middlesex. However, as of now, that article refers to the riding as a defunct federal riding - which is also incorrect. It's all very confusing.
Ultimately, I think the Perth--Wellington article should simply be removed, and redirect here (and that the Perth—Middlesex article should be brought up to date). --Willmolls 19:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with "Perth--Wellington"
Talk:Parkdale—High Park (federal electoral district)

message: I've just fixed the link to the PC riding association, which someone (Algonquinpark) had changed to point to the current PC candidate (David Hutcheon) instead of the riding association. This isn't the place for that. What is it about this riding that invites ineffectual dirty tricks during campaigns? 206.248.156.230 19:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jiggerypokery
Talk:Oak Ridges—Markham (federal electoral district)

message: Other ridings like trinity-spadina have the boundires in the article? Why were you always removing it. Also, thetowns represented is vague and innacturate. 
69.9.111.112 (talk) 15:27, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boundies and Towns Reperesented
Talk:Jerri Manthey

message: I tried to edit this page, and it got changed back.  I know for a fact that Jerri went to school in Huntsville Alabama, at Butler High School.  This page is wrong about going to high school in Germany.  71.81.1.131 (talk) 20:55, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a WP:RS? If so, please add it to the article, or post it here and someone can help add it to the article. There are strict guidelines about the need for reliable sources in WP:BLP. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 23:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  High school 
Talk:French ironclad Redoutable

message: “[Redoutable] was the first warship in the world to use steel as the principal building material”. This article is misleading. It suggests that the construction material steel played some sort of significant role. The nature of the armour plating was deeply less significant than the development of armour plated warships. France launched in 1859 the first ocean-going ironclad warship, the wooden-hulled “Gloire”. That WAS deeply significant. The nature of the armour plating was not. The “Gloire” started an arms race with the RN. HMS Warrior and her sister ship HMS Black Prince were a response to the “Gloire” and were the first armour-plated, iron-hulled warships, and were built in 1859–1861. Naval technology moved very fast at this time and, in 1873, when “Redoutable” was launched it was, to the best of my limited knowledge of 19th century naval architecture, already redundant. This article about the “first warship in the world to use steel” should at least include some context.  PeterColdridge (talk) 20:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: This Article is Misleading

message: Has this ship ever seen combat? Did this ship sank any other ship ? 81.245.105.236 (talk) 22:27, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 2005

message: Quoting without sourcing is about the worst kind of intellectual dishonesty.  --91.55.220.206 (talk) 00:00, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually altering quotations so they say what you think they ought to have said is even worse.  I have corrected the later problem, and put the source of the quotation in as a citation rather than having it in brackets at the end, which is what the original creator of this page did.--Toddy1 (talk) 07:38, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Quotes

message: This article could do with a lot of work.  Fortunately this ship is well documented in secondary sources.  There are contradictions.  What the 1881 Scientific American article said is interesting, but was evidently not completely accurate.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:13, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Development of this article
Talk:Nickel Belt (federal electoral district)

message: I am proposing merging Nickel Belt (provincial electoral district) into this article, since we treat all other federal and provincial ridings in one article. I don't think this should be too controversial. Mindmatrix 02:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, we are in the process of separating all of the ridings into their own ridings. -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Instead of discussing this on multiple talk pages, I'm just going to start a discussion on the notice board. Mindmatrix 15:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:Mississauga—Streetsville (federal electoral district)

message: What's with the numbers on the Family Coalition?  Looks like vandalism to me.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.255.203.48 (talk) 03:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This map was uploaded 23 October 2005 and is out of date. If anyone is willing to create a new map to reflect the current riding boundaries, it would be greatly appreciated.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brendanhylin (talk • contribs) 15:50, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map of the Mississauga—Streetsville electoral district