Talk:List of proposed provinces and territories of Canada

message: this link should be added, as it talks bout annexing Alaska to Canada
http://groups.myspace.com/AMAcanada  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.240.19.200 (talk) 02:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL - the state taht gave us Frank Murkowski and Sarah Palin wants to join Soviet Canuckistan??Skookum1 (talk) 17:29, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't be ridiculous. Alaska is more Canadian than any other American state and has been claimed as the "lost province", which I completely agree with. Look at other postings elsewhere on the internet about this proposal..... Black Tusk (talk) 19:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: external link

message: For the record the following book is the source for the information below.
* Carmichael, Dr. Trevor A. 2001. Passport to the Heart: Reflections on Canada Caribbean Relations. Ian Randle Publishers, Kingston 6, Jamaica.  The book's Forward passage, synopsis
The various islands are covered in that book as follows.
*Jamaica(Pgs.3-5),
*Barbados(Pgs.5-6),
*Leeward Islands(Pg.6),
*Bahamas(Pgs.6-7),
*Belize(Pg.10),
*Bermuda(Pg.10) and
*W.I. Federation(Pgs.9-15) information within this article is from there.
*Also the 1950's proposal to merge BWIA, Air Jamaica, & Liat (Caribbean airlines) with Air Canada was on (Pgs.30-54)
*Info contained in this wiki article under the current Ref. #4 are also- backed by this same-book by Dr. Trevor A. Carmichael on page 7. 
CaribDigita 03:37, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Caribbean entries

message: at various times, their have been talk bout New Brunswick diving into two new provinces, one being Acadia, another being either retaining the name New Brunswick or being renamed something else. I dont hav any info on it yet, but I remember seeing it from somewhere, so I'll look for a link in addision to my never ending mission of getting Greenland on this page.--130.218.71.195 (talk) 17:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Acadia

message: twice the idea of the part of north Ontario is mentioned to want to join Manitoba, I don't think we need to mention this twice (especially since I cant get Greenland mentioned once, lol, j/k), and it should be mentioned once in other area or the other.--130.218.71.195 (talk) 17:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the mentions are two distinct things. One proposal would create a separate province of Northern Ontario, and the other would see one region of Ontario transferred to another province that already exists. Bearcat (talk) 20:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Manitoba?Skookum1 (talk) 03:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Northern Ontario and Northwestern Ontario

message: Have no idea what befell this proposal, which the lede of the T. D. Patullo article in the NYT about this starts off with as if a done deal.  I found this by accident looking for something else in the NYT's archives; a further web search shows it has something to do with the Manitoba (?) Schools Act, somehow (political bartering perhaps), but everything's in JSTOR or other member/pay-only sites.  This would be something like the fourth (of six or seven) attempts/threats by BC to annex the Yukon...beginning with Governor Douglas' original one (he also wanted what's not Alberta to be part of BC).  The 60th Parallel was a compromise position; the old Stikine Territory went to the 62nd; the kibosh about that border still entails legal paperwork/argument consequences for land claims in the southern Yukon.  Yukoners have always, mostly, resisted BC's attempts to unify transmontane Canada, maybe that's what stopped things in 1937; both WAC Bennett and Dave Barrett had similar intentions and related actions, though WAC was most vocal about it (in re threatening go quit Canada over t he Columbia River negotiations and to take Yukon in doing so....); I'll link this to the Talk:Thomas Dufferin Pattullo talkpage, I guess....also on Talk:Aspirant sovereign states.  The latter because from Douglas on, there have always been those proposing a self-governing - and larger - BC....all this far from Pattullo but it will be interesting to see what turns up about this, what he'd proposed, what deal was inked, why it went down....Skookum1 (talk) 21:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Postscript: I expect the off and on sentiments for the East Kootenay and/or Peace River to join Alberta is already in the article; it should be fairly citable via local press archives, if on-line that is.  And I know it's original research to make a what-if map, showing Bennett's and Douglas' any others' plans, and including the BC position on the Panhandle (see new map on Alaska boundary dispute; similarly the Albertan counter-position/aggrandizement could be shown as an overlap, with shaded areas around a solid-colour BC which add up show its potential maximum extent (if it had ever gotten its way ;-)).  Maps would also be helpful to show re-arranged provinces....proper maps of Nisga'a settlement lands are needed...but then so would be local maps of municipal boundary-shapes, rather than just hte location maps.... what partly gave me this idea is the animated GIF maps of territorial changes in the US and Canada that are kicking around...Somewhere out there, also, in US histories and maybe on some state history pages, old northward boundaries claimed by Montana and Idaho, with the area north of Washington to be a state that was mumbled about as the State of Franklin (though that link refers to somewhere else, and there were one or two other names for such a state; this was long after the 54-40 settlement in 1846, more like during hte mining and railway boom; and a big reason the southern mainline of the CPR was built through there; to secure both economic and military control of the region, a core lement in the regional industrial complex known as the Inland Empire (then including the West Kootenay and Boundary), so it wouldn't become American and was in fact part of the industrial build-up associated with the S-A War; such fears continued in BC right into the start of the 1900s because of the Hawaiian coup and the Phillippines et al, but it was also because the ideas were still being loudly trumpeted by Washington newspapers (I'll see what I can find, there's lots on line)).  So a section and/ormap showing the proposed boundaries (which Il'l see if I can find cites for somewhere) similarly something on the addition of the northwest to - Manitoba? - which was, um, pretty much Riel's concept of Nord-Ouest -  though his was for a province/colony/? stretching from Nipigon/the Lakehead to the Rockies, not just to Brandon/Portage la Prairie (another speculation, but it would seem likely that Gov Douglas, if faced with a suddenly independent Nord-Ouest, or separate province or whatever - would have, perhaps, some influence within the fur trade community and work out a deal to get at least the Foothills, or the line of the Coteau; I'm not sure of his intended eastward boundary, or if it included the Mackenzie (might have been current AB-SK/NT-NU boundary longitude)....all interesting huh?Skookum1 (talk) 03:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Follow-ups: "State of Franklin in Pacific Northwest (proposed)" and "BC if annexed and made a state - I'm uncertain which of the two names it was.Skookum1 (talk) 04:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Interesting item re Yukon "annexation" in 1937

message: This article does not meet the POV standards. Disputed/Unreferenced POV statements should be deleted. Po' buster (talk) 15:44, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you be more specific?--Jsorens (talk) 16:31, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake, the article should have been tagged with the Verifiability tag instead. As much of the article is hearsay, and unreferenced. Po' buster (talk) 19:07, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: Re the SE BC section in the table, it's not just Elkford council that's been heard from, it's a common refrain about the whole East Kootenay/Columbia Valley and it goes back decades, before WAC Bennett even.  Likewise the Peace River Country.  How to find/cite references to that is hard, usually it's mentioned in op-ed columns or bios as opposed to regular news coverage.Skookum1 (talk) 20:59, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There have also been repeated suggestions that the Atlin Country at least, maybe also the Cassiar Country, should be merged with Yukon Territory rather than run remotely from Victoria (that region has no municipal governments of any kind, nor much in the way of population either - total impact on the Yukon population would be less than 5%).Skookum1 (talk) 21:01, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And in addition to the loose sentiment on Vancouver Island for breaking away from the Mainland, there's a parallel sentiment in the Interior about breaking away from the Lower Mainland.  Voices to this effect were in fact heard during the build-up to the Olympics because of all the money/infrastructure improvements going into Greater Vancouver while the rest of the province went without....citations for that might be a bit easier to find, as more recent.  Also, as far as proposed countries within BC, at least ten native nations have talked about being separate provinces/autonomous countries; these include (most loudly) the Haida Nation, and the whole gist of the Delgamuukw case was that the Gitxsan-Wet'su-we'ten Confederacy had never been extinguished and still existed....at one point the Nuxalk made a very clear statement about wanting to be separate/sovereign, and this is still the attitude among the St'at'imc/Lillooet and many of the more radical Secwepemc groups....all this got very sharply into focus during the Oka Crisis, which saw a plethora of blockades and protests in BC while the cameras were focussed on Montreal's bridges or afterwards; there was a blockade of teh road to Apex Alpine Resort from Penticton and the Penticton Band, or its warrior element, were very vocally calling for independence for the Okanagan people.Skookum1 (talk) 21:06, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: SE BC et al.

message: An anonymous editor is adding a lot of material without appropriate citations, and then even adding a "citation needed" tag to his/her own edits. This is not how Wikipedia works. The contributor provides references for the material he/she contributes, and it is best done so at the time the edits are made. The "citation needed" tag is not a way to ask other people to provide references for what you are adding. Please review WP:V and WP:RS. If citations to reliable sources are not provided soon, I'll remove the uncited material. It can be re-added when references are provided. Ground Zero | t 17:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Stop removing sections and article from this page w/o talking it over with people first. I created this page way back when, and you can not have anything on proposed provinces and territories of Canada without Alaska, Bermuda, Greenland, St. Pierre and Miquelon all together or cherry pick them. This is why Wikipedia is never getting a cent from me. Give me one week, ONE WEEK, and I will have everything cited.--121.219.154.221 (talk) 23:57, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Get your citations, then click the edit button, it doesn't work the other way around. 117Avenue (talk) 01:49, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

text: Please familiarize yourself with proper editing techniques, as well as etiquette in interactions with other editors, before editing again. Thanks. Taroaldo (talk) 04:36, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations

message: I have restored my copyedits that were deleted by the anonymous editor. Here is my rationale for each of them. If anyone disagrees with these edits, please discuss them here first, so we can develop a consensus. If these edits are reverted without getting a consensus here, I will undo the editors edits and protect the article if necessary.
# "The Parti Acadien decided once again to support the creation of a separate province" - this sentence doesn't make any sense. It implies that the PA (1) supported a separate province, (2) dropped that idea, and then (3) decdied again to support provincehood. But this article doesn't say that. 
# "An area which was annexed by and is a part of Nova Scotia, but in the past it has been a separate colony." replaced by "An island that had been a separate colony, but was incorporated into Nova Scotia." This version is shorter (which is always better) and places events in the logical chronological roder: separate colony, then part of NS, rather than the other way around. And Cape Breton is certainly an island, so why generalize it as an "area"?
# " Montreal Gazette, "Montreal as 11th Province", J. Martin, 18 February 1971, pp.7 " replaced by " Montreal Gazette, "Montreal as 11th Province", J. Martin, 18 February 1971, pp.7 " per WP:MOS
# "advocated for the creation" replaced by "advocated the creation" - "for" is superfluous here.
# Northern Ontario Separation Movement -- this group appeared in 2006, but there is no evidence that it is still around, so it is better to describe it in the past tense than in the pluperfect.
# ", and could do so in the future" - deleted - Wikipedia does not speculate.
# ", ranked in the most likely to join to the least." - no evidence is provided for this ranking - this seems to be more speculation.
# ", and while they could do so if they wished, are not likely to join Canada in the future since gaining independence or have dissolved as political entities.' - deleted - this is also speculation and not encyclopedic in tone.
# "Although Canada and the United States share the longest non-militarized border between two countries, there is a long history of secessionist movements and disputes about the border's demarcation." The "although" construction is used where the reader would expect one result from a fact, but there is instead the opposite result. "Although it is raining, she did not take an umbrella." The fact that Canada and the US have a non-militarized border does not mean that they should have no dispute. To say so is just opinion, and is not fact. Please review WP:NPOV.
# "either as part of Quebec or as it's own territory" - I fixed this once before. I don't know why someone would restore a grammatical error. "It's" is a contraction of "it is". Trying putting "it is" in that sentence. It doesn't make sense, does it? "its" is the possessive form of "it". 
Ground Zero | t 22:41, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: All looks and sounds right to me - thank you  for helping this old article.Moxy (talk) 00:34, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: on side-tangent here, the usual phrase is "world's longest undefended border" should be used here; attempting to qualify it as "un-militarized" inflects the meaning and in fact is in error; there are no barbed wire fences and still open stretches of trackless wilderness and open prairie (for now), but the historical and current reality is that the border is lined by bases throughout; not surprisingly since we mostly live close to the border and because the cities evolved around points of military security or geotactical reality; this is hidden on teh Canadian side; on the US side a series of formidable bases are near it, too many to list; a dozen or more in WA/ID/MT, then there's Messina (across from Cornwall), Ft Ticonderoga or if that's the hsitorical fort its successor in the Lake Champlain area, and so on; the US has never had its border undefended; those bases were BUILT to attack Canada, or be on the defense from it; same with Victoria or Halifax, both still naval fortreses, though their immediate competition Port Townsend's strategic position is on Whidbey Island, the Kitsap Peninsula and in Everett and on Boeing Field; and lots more (Steilacoom, Ft Lewis, and more)........so I'm suggesting the return of that phrase to its normal/mostcommon and also most correct form.  The boundary is armed to the teeth; on the Canadian side it WAS (eg. Chilliwack CFB was there to protect a hidden back valley from Whatcom County, and also to guard the mouth of the Canyon and the passes east......Stanley Park and Jericho and Point Grey and more were all defensive positions; at first against the Americans most of all.Skookum1 (talk) 15:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyedits

message: I think the Turks and Caicos should definitely be mentioned here. Was there a reason for removal other then it being unsourced? I think the original editor was right that it was too much detail for the main T&C article. CMD (talk) 18:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I am looking for better refs so we can add some info on  the topic-  However the old text was just a copy and paste from here. Wait wait .... are you saying this is old info that was just moved  from a wiki article? I though it was new. .......... info restored (but trimmed) and referenced. Moxy (talk) 20:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's from this edit, more or less. Nontheless, still unsourced there. Happily, you seem to have done a good job solving issue. CMD (talk) 06:37, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turks and Caicos 

message: Sounds more like they wanted the whole of southwestern Quebec, not just Montreal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Option_Canada_(political_party)
I would do the edits, but every time I edit something on this page it gets deleted or edited, so someone else should have a go cuz atm I am done. --124.180.155.198 (talk) 04:38, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: sounds like whomever out there has a WP:OWN/WP:COI problem.  I just removed the unref tag and formatted the plain refs that were already there (no titles just dates and rags) and added some relevant see also and a stub and cat to flesh it out.  And yes, the area west towards Cornwall and Ottawa and some of the Townships and parts of the Gatineau and Laurentians too I think; not clear what this division would have done for the the English Shore on the Baie de Chaleur but that's more of a New Brunswickian/Acadian issue...what I mean is that yes the anglo areas were not limited to just Montreal, and the notion that the major cities (the Big Three/Four) should be provinces in their own rights is current in all those three/four provinces, which is why the possible support base from Quebecois as well as anglophones and allophones (who were also an intended "market" for this party); there was also talk, maybe it's already in the table/article, that indigenous Quebec wanted no part of separation and were declaring they wanted to remain part of Canada (they are mostly anglophone when not monolingual Cree or Montagnais or Inuit); this is also why I added the Clarity Act, which as I recall proposes the indivisibility of Quebec (also a key PQ/BQ point) and it was "everything or nothing", it was politically intended to reduce discussions of dismantling Quebec which began discussions about border rearrangements across the country; if them why not everywhere etc.....the notion of "Greater Labrador" is out there, too, which would mean that eastern "tongue" of Quebec would become Labrador.....yeah we could definitely have fun playing games with the map....especially in real life.  Anyways this Option Canada article needs those refs looked up, if online things are even possible; probably titles re unrecoverable; if the Gazette or another cite was or became Canwest, all back files and digital items on them were ordered destroyed by Izzy Asper in 1993.  Thus is history not written; it is erased.....about so much I won't go on; anyways this has been fixed up some, I'll keep an eye out for POV/OWN SPAs.Skookum1 (talk) 15:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal by Option Canada 

message: The animation of Candian territories is broken and displays a static picture.Yehoshua2 (talk) 07:43, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It works if you click through (last time I looked). —Tamfang (talk) 23:02, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animation Broken 

message: There's nothing about various secession movements within BC, and that's not even counting First Nations who have that agenda (and which are many....).  Even now there's still a strong movement for Vancouver Island to be its own province, and the same sentiment is often heard in BC......also talk of Atlin joining the Yukon, for very practical reasons, and notably and especially the East Kootenay and the Peace River District joining Alberta....Vancouver/Lower Mainland very much functions as its own place; the "outer regions" and editorials and letter to the editor often voice suggestions that BC should be broken up and let the regions have their own governments.....Skookum1 (talk) 11:16, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: BC

message: Surprised this isn't here already, given the number of cites available; either for a breakaway from Canada or for Washington and Oregon joining Canada....Skookum1 (talk) 11:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's not here because the Cascadia movement would be to form its own country, seceding from both Canada and the US.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.85.113.197 (talk) 04:41, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Cascadia?

message: It does not belong on this page.  I haven't followed the growth of this page of late, but would have opposed its addition, whenever that was.  A disputed territory is not a proposed territory; it's not the same as suggesting that Greenland, say, had any movement to join Canada, in the way that there were those on St Pierre & Miquelon proposing joining Confederation, or the same as Sverdrup's claims. Re Hans Island never has such a fuss been made over a small bit of frozen rock, but this is a case of Canada claiming territory recognized by the ICJ as Danish, not Denmark claiming a part of Canada, not the other way around, or any movement by any Hans Islanders to join Canada.Skookum1 (talk) 15:33, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Sverdrup's claims doesn't really belong here either; or Russia's claims down to 43-50 and 50 from 181x-1824/25 and 1799, respectively, or the Oregon Dispute-era US proposals that what is now BC be the State of Jefferson (or was it Franklin?); or New Spain/California for that matter, which is of the same kind.  Those are not "proposed territories of Canada" and belong on a different page completely.Skookum1 (talk) 15:37, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

text: What is SOAP, and what is the validity of a separation movement? A Maritime Union would be the fifth-largest province in Canada by population, Cape Breton Island had been a separate colony, Nunatsiavut has a different culture, Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean has a different culture, the government of Ontario does not pay sufficient attention to Northwestern Ontario, Toronto is the largest city in Canada. 117Avenue (talk) 03:09, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Did I remove those?  No.  SOAP is WP:SOAP, soapboxing to advance an agenda in this case; no other entry has that kind of sales pitch at its start.  It doesn't belong there as it does come off like sales pitch; mentioning economics figures for the Island in the primary position and in a rationalization-context is part of that party's pitch; similar figures could be trotted out for the Interior or, noting what I already said about the Northeast and the East Kootenay, for smaller areas yet.  I don't think "background" justifies it when it sounds like that.  I haven't looked yet?  Did you restore Hans Island too?  WHY??Skookum1 (talk) 12:49, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hans Island is not a proposed territory 

message: I removed Hans Island and the Sverdrup claims sections, and also the bit about the Alaska boundary dispute; none of those have to do with proposed territories; irredentism is a completely different subject.  Of the European ones, there is Iceland to consider, though I don't have cites handy, but between talk of using the loonie as currency there was also some chatter, if not citable chatter, about joining Canada; there may be articles in Icelandic media mumbling about it somewhere.  I also took out a bit of blatant pitch - SOAP - for the Vancouver Island movement, and note that the long-standing talk of the East Kootenay and the Peace River, which both share a timezone with Alberta and relate closely to it, have wanted to leave BC; never coalesced but cites are out there somewhere.Skookum1 (talk) 15:51, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: What is SOAP, and what is the validity of a separation movement? A Maritime Union would be the fifth-largest province in Canada by population, Cape Breton Island had been a separate colony, Nunatsiavut has a different culture, Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean has a different culture, the government of Ontario does not pay sufficient attention to Northwestern Ontario, Toronto is the largest city in Canada. 117Avenue (talk) 03:09, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Did I remove those?  No.  SOAP is WP:SOAP, soapboxing to advance an agenda in this case; no other entry has that kind of sales pitch at its start.  It doesn't belong there as it does come off like sales pitch; mentioning economics figures for the Island in the primary position and in a rationalization-context is part of that party's pitch; similar figures could be trotted out for the Interior or, noting what I already said about the Northeast and the East Kootenay, for smaller areas yet.  I don't think "background" justifies it when it sounds like that.  I haven't looked yet?  Did you restore Hans Island too?  WHY??Skookum1 (talk) 12:49, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Removals

message: I understand that Wall made the invitation in a tweet, and admitted the tweet was sarcastic.  Based on those facts, I think it's misleading to say that Wall invited T&C to join Saskatchewan, without any reference to the fact that he was joking.  In 1984, Reagan leaned into a microphone and announced that he'd outlawed Russia and bombing was set to begin in 5 minutes.  I don't think an encyclopedia that wants to be taken seriously would refer to Reagan wanting to bomb the Soviet Union in 1984, without a reference to the circumstances (i.e. it was a joke).  We have a whole article on that particular joke.I do think it would be fair to say that Wall jokingly invited T&C to join Saskatchewan.  I think that's legitimate.  The question then becomes whether Wall's joke tweet is sufficiently significant to merit inclusion in the article, or merely trivia.  I don't have a strong opinion on that second issue. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:01, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd frankly consider it trivia. Had he made a substantive offer through more conventional channels, it would absolutely merit mention — but if it was meant as a sarcastic joke, I don't see it as being worth wasting wikibytes on. For added bonus, Twitter is never a sufficiently reliable source for anything in its own right anyway — between the possibility of hacking, the inability to properly analyze a tweet for tone and the 140-character limit imposing serious restraints on the ability to add much actual context or nuance to a statement, things people say on Twitter almost never really merit Wikipedia's attention at all. Bearcat (talk) 21:21, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It's clearly the most trivial of trivia, and twisting it into an "invitation" is beyond comprehension—a total misrepresentation of the sources.  I'd oppose its inclusion in the article entirely as WP:UNDUE. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:07, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't most of this article trivia though? The Global video didn't say if it was sincere, or a joke, and neither did what I had written. Unless he retracted it, an invitation, whether formal or not, is an invitation. Right? 117Avenue (talk) 03:06, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: As I noted on your talk page, this was clearly and obviously a suggestion made in humour.  If we are going to present it as anything other than that, then I flatly oppose its inclusion as a clear misrepresentation. Resolute 13:47, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't imagine that Wall made the invitation in anything but jest.  There would presumably be pretty significant financial, political and economic implications of T&C joining any province - not to mention a lot of practical considerations - and not sure it's even within provincial jurisdiction to make such an offer.  Given the circumstances, even if he didn't say it was a joke (although he did, didn't he?), you need to assume he had tongue in cheek.  Even Rob Ford would think twice before making such an "invitation".  So, let's not take it at face value. Skeezix1000 (talk) 14:43, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: But the Nova Scotia one is sincere, and there's never any joking in the Assembly. 117Avenue (talk) 03:44, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The Nova Scotia invitation was the result of a vote, not a tweet, and nobody's suggesting removing it. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 04:44, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Even a sincere invitation is dubious, for the reasons set out above.  But I'm not going to wade into that issue.  Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:43, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brad Wall invited Turks and Caicos to be part of Saskatchewan 

message: Why is that twaddle about the Rhinoceros Party and Jesusland in there? It's really and eyesore in an article as serious as this one. AngusCA (talk) 03:49, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Didn't I see you in a Hotels.com commercial, rocking a beard? AngusCA (talk) 19:39, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are silly examples [[WP:N]]? 

message: Separation in Northern Ontario is back. But I don't have much time to update this in the list. Volcanoguy 13:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Northern Ontario 

message: What about proposed provinces and territories for first nations like Nunavut for Innuit?--Kaiyr (talk) 16:44, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: With wp:reliable sources they could be included. CMD (talk) 18:32, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

text: If you can reliably source the hard details of one or more specific and concrete proposals, then they could certainly be added to the article (Kanienkehaka and Nunavik and Nunatsiavut, for example, are already included; Nunavik being the Cree/Inuit region in northern Quebec, just for the record, not a misspelling of Nunavut.) But if you want somebody to float their own personal theories about First Nations entities that could theoretically shoot for provincehood, then this article isn't the right place for that kind of original research speculation. Bearcat (talk) 04:34, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Nunavik is not a Cree region, although there is one Cree village in SW Nunavik. No, in northern Québec, Eeyou Istchee would be your best bet. Indeed, there is a case to be made to add: Eeyou Istchee, Nitaskinan, Nishnawbe Aski, Nitassinan/St'aschinuw and Nionwentsïo to this list. I do not know of any Anishinaabe (outside Nishnawbe Aski, which is quite large) or Mi'kmaq movement for provincehood or province-like-hood or pure secession. I am curious about movements within the Blackfeet Nation and other prairie nations... Danachos (talk) 05:52, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cree and Ojibwa etc 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of proposed provinces and territories of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070310231613/http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4000/is_200207/ai_n9131167 to http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4000/is_200207/ai_n9131167
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:14, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Okay there seems to be a person (or persons using multiple ISPs) who want to add Hong Kong to the list. This has been reverted for a number of times now. The reason, as I have stated in the reversion notes is that the assertion is not supported by the sources given. I have examined the sources, and only one has any mention of an association between Canada and Hong Kong; however it is a blog. Wikipedia policy WP:UGC is clear that Blogs are not Reliable Sources. The other "sources" are irrelevant to the subject. Until a RS can be provided this material cannot be included. Mediatech492 (talk) 15:36, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  TDL (talk) 16:08, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

text: @Mediatech492: That wasn't "user-generated content". The author is a critic/commentator who contributes extensively in the press and appears frequently in radio and television programmes. 219.77.116.103 14:39, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Perhaps he is known in Hong Kong, but not elsewhere. Regardless, the blog is insufficient by itself. If there is a widespread interest in this, then it should not be difficult for you to provide several actual RS to support this claim. Mediatech492 (talk) 15:44, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Hong Kong?

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of proposed provinces and territories of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121105113833/http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=b887d3f8-2eb5-4886-b42a-b056ed05b509 to http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=b887d3f8-2eb5-4886-b42a-b056ed05b509
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:05, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm removing the inclusion of Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean from the list, for three reasons:
*The page cited (broken link, though this is the page in question) makes no mention of such a movement, André Harvey's involvement, nor even of the region's distinct culture and flag. So right away the claim is dubious.
*Using Google, I can find no reference to any Saguenay secession movement nor proposals, from Harvey or anyone else. My searches were non-exhaustive, but if this were a real proposal, and André Harvey were credited for bringing attention to it, then surely it would be easy to find.
*André Harvey was a Progressive Conservative and then a Liberal— ie: a federalist. For that reason, I'm inclined to think that *if* he really did make such a suggestion, it was intended as a satirical criticism of the Quebec sovereignty movement (particularly by highlighting a "distinct culture") and not a serious proposal.
Ultimately, there does not seem to be any evidence, or even any suggestion, of an actual movement for a separate Saguenay province. Therefore, I'm removing it. — Kawnhr (talk) 20:54, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean 

message: Some members of the Alaskan Independence Party want Alaska to leave the USA and join Canada as a province. There is information that says that somewhere (it should also be mentioned on AIP Wikipedia page). How can this page not have Alaska (or Greenland) on here and yet have the countries of Iceland and Scotland.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.123.224.212 (talk) 23:15, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Reading the article on the Alaskan Independence Party, their platform apparently seeks establishing Alaska as an independent country, there is nothing there about joining Canada. Mediatech492 (talk) 17:48, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

text: As for Greenland, there was a discussion on this page on the topic, last updated in 2009 (see above). I know of nothing to indicate the situation has changed since then. Mediatech492 (talk) 16:57, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is Alaska 

message: There is a persistent rumour among Toronto's air force veterans that representatives of Trinidad and Tobago secretly conducted talks with Diefenbaker to become part of Canada, and that it was pretty much a done deal when Pearson became prime minister and killed the treaty. Many RCAF veterans of that era claim to have arranged or guarded the flights between Downsview and Port of Spain for the T&T delegates. If there are any contributors in Ottawa who can confirm or deny if documentation exists because there is nothing in Toronto and most of the Downsview records aren't present in the Toronto archives. 192.0.182.43 (talk) 06:36, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trinidad?