Template talk:Infobox Canada electoral district

message: The documentation's good. I made a couple of minor adjustments; you referred to the federal level of government a couple of times in provincial tags. I'd also like to mention that according to the test page, the current version is visibly displaying an extraneous {{ #if: active | under the map and in the federal status field. I realize this is probably a temporary artifact related to my suggestion that certain fields should be hidden if the status is flagged as defunct, but I thought I should mention it anyway just in case. Bearcat 20:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was working on that as you were typing this message. I had added fed-rep-link and prov-rep-link to the template, and was testing for their existence, but forgot to close out the conditional. It's been fixed. Thanks for spotting the doc errors. As you can tell, I employed the ol' "copy and paste" method a few times. Mindmatrix 20:46, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Each of the federal districts in the territories should be fine. The territorial districts can be handled with a clause in the template that would suppress the display of party affiliation and colours if the province field is set to Nunavut or Northwest Territories. It should be fairly easy to implement. Mindmatrix 20:37, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now implemented the change. Mindmatrix 21:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That appears to work now. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 01:45, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Feedback

message: I've clearly mis-read the documentation for parser functions. Things that need to be fixed:
* conditional for (demo-pop > 0) and (demo-electors > 0)
* conditional for (demo-area > 0)
For some reason, #ifexpr: is not behaving as I expected it to, and #if lets everything through so long as it it not an empty string (in particular, expressions that evaluate to 0 are true). I'm missing the obvious. Mindmatrix 05:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Resolved by using a different method. Mindmatrix 05:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes about parser functions

message: There are four extraneous  tags in the rendered page, causing a gap immediately after the image; it seems they were introduced in this edit, which added four error-checking expressions. Removing newlines between if blocks has eliminated two of those (see this), but a clear (and annoying) gap remains. Mindmatrix 15:48, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Resolved by moving the error notices to the bottom of the table, though the cause of the problem was not identified. Since the gap does not display at the bottom, I'm leaving it like this. (Actually, the br tags aren't even rendered in the resultant page, so ParserFunctions is doing something quirky.) Mindmatrix 15:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: There is still one issue with spacing, in which a district is defined with no fed-status (ie - no federal district component). The routines for fed-district add one br tag when parsed and rendered empty, giving a small gap after the image. I'll have to investigate why that happens. Mindmatrix 17:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spacing issues

message: The profile and map links generated from the district number no longer work. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 02:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I noticed that. I can't seem to get any link to the elections.ca Electoral Districts Database website to work properly. It seems to redirect to a "TooBusy" script, but it has been doing that for a months now. I'll try to find suitable replacement links. Mindmatrix 18:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

text: I’ve taken the liberty of prepending to the above request  so that template editors and/or administrators will be flagged to ’s request. Let’s hope it gets done soon. We’re in the middle of an election and the links are not working correctly. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 06:48, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

text: UPDATE:  The requested changes were made here, and failed. The changes were subsequently reverted here. — SpikeToronto 07:23, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

text: Awesome, Jordan! Thank you so much for making that happen. It’s terrific to have this fixed, even if we are coming down to the wire. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 04:05, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead links 

message: Articles about electoral constituencies in Canada get tagged with  templates. A discussion was held recently at the Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board about how to add coordinates; one commenter included a link to a prior discussion at the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geographical coordinates. One suggested method of adding coordinates to such articles resulted: using the  template with appropriate "dim" parameter value, using the coordinates of a constituency office, and adding a comment in the article code indicating the coordinates were from such a constituency office. Including a coordinates field in the Infobox and using the Coord template with parameters "display=inline,title" would be a neater solution: I would like to propose that such a field be added. A subsidiary additional field might be "coordinates_comment" where one could indicate the location the coordinates identified, e.g. "Location of constituency office in Town A." The comment could be coded to place it in the Infobox in smaller font size immediately beneath the coordinates displayed. The comment would make it clearer for readers as to what coordinates they were being shown. Some districts have more than one constituency office; I've simply selected one of them in the cases I've come across. There is no special magic to using constituency offices — one could select a central point within the district as an alternative with an appropriate comment "Central point in the electoral district" — but it is at least an identifiable place that editors could find if they wanted to add coordinates to an article. One should acknowledge that there is small added update burden to adding coordinates, whatever the location for coordinates chosen, as district boundaries and constituency office locations can change. --papageno (talk) 16:17, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Added Coordinates and Coordinates_caption fields to the template and updated the documentation.--papageno (talk) 00:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I ahve also added a Coordinates_date field. This is to indicate when the coordinates location was added, or a known date for the accuracy of the coordinates. The parameter value is passed to an  template. This should allow a better decision to be made whether or not to update the coordinates location, especially after an election resulting in a change of representative for the electoral district. The coordinates do not necessarily have to be changed — a former office is going to be in the district and so representative of the location of the district — but at least a more informed choice can be made. Other events that might precipitate a change in coordinates could be a change in constituency office location, or a change in the boundaries of the electoral district. --papageno (talk) 20:39, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding coordinates field to Infobox to add coordinates to Canadian Electoral District articles 

message: I've made some changes to tidy this template's code en route to bringing it in line with the  defaults. Test cases can be seen here. An anon reverted saying that the new version was broken in Internet Explorer and Google Chrome, but I can't verify that. Can anyone else have a look? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 17:26, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Chris, give me five test cases (electoral riding pages), and I'll try them in the latest release versions of IE, Firefox and Chrome on Windows 7. Just tried Brant (electoral district) in Chrome and it looked fine. --papageno (talk) 20:40, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  They're available on Template:Infobox Canada electoral district/testcases, which I linked to above. I've tested in IE8 on Windows XP now and the output is fine. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 08:53, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've now redeployed these changes, as nobody else seems to have been able to reproduce Noname2's problems. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:40, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is what it looks like in Chrome 12 on Windows 7 for me: http://oi54.tinypic.com/29mx8ae.jpg --Noname2 (talk) 17:52, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, Chris. Was a little slow-witted!  --papageno (talk) 19:27, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

text:  Noname2: so far as I can see, that's exactly how it's supposed to look. What exactly is it that "doesn't display right"? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 12:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

text:  The coloured bar next to the MP's name is supposed to be wider like it was before. Also the font is smaller now. If that was intentional then you should change it back. --Noname2 (talk) 16:25, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Both of those changes were intentional and were one of the main reasons for the changes. This brings the template closer to the styling used in , a process which I will continue in future. If that's all then I think we're done here. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 09:46, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  We're not done here. I find that the old template was more aesthetically appealing, and you didn't consult anyone before making these changes. Also, there's another issue I found. On some pages, the words in the left column take up two lines and cause the template the stretch out: http://i56.tinypic.com/28rflmr.png Since you didn't consult anyone, I'm starting a section on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada to see what they think. --Noname2 (talk) 17:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sandbox edits 

message: Would any recent editor here be willing to help implement the coordinates parameters (coordinates, coordinates_caption and coordinates_date) correctly? I tried many tweaks and couldn't get them to work correctly. I guess the correct implementation was beyond my skill with template coding. The parameters are commented out for now. --papageno (talk) 19:35, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Easy fix:I've added it to the sandbox. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 11:16, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Many thanks. I've made a few adjustments (missing "}", format change) to the sandbox template, and added in the parameters to the Nickel Belt test case; the parameter values are made up. It seems to work. Tried with various parameters included or not included, and itseems to degrade gracefully. I think it is a "go" to include the code as is for the Coordinates parameters. --papageno (talk) 17:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help in correct implementation of coordinates parameters 

message: I'm currently going through the code's sillier idiosyncracies (such as totally OTT error checking which makes parts of it completely unreadable); I'll deploy the result when I'm done. The only change to the visible output is the way that party colours are represented, which is unavoidable at this point (the colour is currently implemented by reserving an entire table column for the sake of one or two cells, a gross hack which will require changing a great deal of supporting templates to fully remove). Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 11:16, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Code cleanup finished for now. Results are in the sandbox and a side-by-side comparison can be seen on the test cases page. The representation of party colours is a temporary hack until the system used for such things is overhauled. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 11:42, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Tried my hand at making the image map caption follow on from the image map without using a table cell and with the caption text italicized in the sandbox template. Works for all the cases except for Edmonton—Strathcona, which has a template as the image map parameter value. I acknowledge that you may have had the caption in a table cell to accommodate the Edmonton—Strathcona case. You are welcome to revert my change to the sandbox template or adjust further. --papageno (talk) 17:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually, that change was to match the way that  does it. Italics shouldn't be necessary in any case, but I've now pushed a fix which eliminates the divider between image and caption. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 09:58, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for removing the line. However the inclusion of a caption is achieved (and I am not an expert on template coding), there is never a line dividing a caption from its associated image in any infobox I have seen, including the test case at the right on the main  page. --papageno (talk) 15:50, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: More Sandbox edits

message: I've now deployed the updated code. If there are any problems, please let me know. Thanks. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:24, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: On Firefox 4.0.1 using Mac OS X 10.6.7, for Bathurst (electoral district) I'm getting the Census Divisions field in a second column to the right. - Wmcduff (talk) 14:53, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

text: Addendum: See  for a cap of what I meant. - Wmcduff (talk) 14:55, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

text: Addendum to the addendum: My theory it's something to do with the empty Area field? (Elections NB doesn't release the area of the polling districts, though I've put in a request.) - Wmcduff (talk) 14:49, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Missing a new row declaration. Now fixed. Sorry about that! If you spot anything else please let me know. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:36, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synced with sandbox 

message: When the last election was a by-election, the infobox points you to a non-existent election. For instance, Vancouver-Point Grey points to the about to be deleted redirect British Columbia general election, 2011. For federal elections, a by-election year seems to make the infobox display unlinked text (See Calgary Centre). Is there a way to make the provincial districts behave like the federal ones? -Rrius (talk) 03:18, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, the problem only exists because of the errant redirect. -Rrius (talk) 14:45, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  By-elections 

message: I'd like to allow this to use Template:Canadian party colour as an option for provincial party colours. What do you think would be the best way to do that? Should I just add  and allow people to enter the full template there, with colour defaulting to the system in place now when that parameter doesn't exist or does anyone have an idea about how to make that work with the parameters that are already there? —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 20:17, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allowing other colour template 

message: I'm looking at Kitchener—Conestoga (provincial electoral district), where Michael Harris is the MPP - not the former premier nor any other person by that name.  When I found it, there was an effort to disambiguate the name in the infobox by means of a prov-rep-link parameter, but it's not working.  I tried a couple of ways of disambiguating, but haven't found a solution.  Can somebody please advise?  Thanks, PKT(alk) 13:46, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like the field prov-rep-link (and other link fields) was removed from the template by Arctic.gnome in 2013. A whole bunch of transclusions will likely need to be updated to reflect this, if they haven't been already. Just link to the article directly using normal wikilinks. I've fixed this one. Mindmatrix 14:11, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguating [[Michael Harris]] 

message: I noticed on Cariboo District the obtrusiveness of the BC flag, and the way the caption is staggered with "electoral district" on a different half-line than comes before.  Per the Flag Icon usage standards, when has including the provincial flag on this infobox become de rigeur and why?  Seems cumbersome and the flag, if anything, should be the federal one...if present at all.  I was going to remove the flag but it seems built into the coding of the infobox's "Province" field as automatic.  Note Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Icons#Avoid_flag_icons_in_infoboxes which says 'flags in infoboxes should be avoided.Skookum1 (talk) 07:55, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure you've seen Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal regarding flag icons in infoboxes by now. At any rate, MOS:INFOBOXFLAG states "Human geographic articles – for example settlements and administrative subdivisions – may have flags of the country and first-level administrative subdivision in infoboxes; however, physical geographic articles – for example, islands, mountains, valleys, rivers, lakes, and swamps – should not." So, they're not currently prohibited by current policy, but irrespective of this, I would support their removal. (I think I originally added the code for the flags because I modelled this template on another template that used flags.) Mindmatrix 14:39, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  flag icon built-in? 

message: Hello - I tried clicking on the map link in the infobox for Brampton—Springdale this morning, but was sent to the map for Beaches—East York - that is, the URL http://www.elections.ca/res/cir/maps2/mapprov.asp?map=35007 .  The Brampton—Springdale riding is defunct, and its Federal District number (35007) is the same as Beaches—East York.  There is a map of Brampton—Springdale that's being kept for historical purposes by Elections Canada, which is available at http://www.elections.ca/res/cir/maps/mapprov.asp?map=35007&lang=e .  I don't see how the map link in the infobox could be adjusted to point to the correct link.  Would somebody please have a look at this?  Thanks!...PKT(alk) 13:40, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Just found another example: the infobox link to the map for Kitchener—Waterloo (electoral district) (a defunct federal riding) yields the map for Hastings-Lennox and Addington at URL http://www.elections.ca/res/cir/maps2/mapprov.asp?map=35039.  The two ridings apparently share the same Federal District number 35039.  The historical map for Kitchener-Waterloo can be found at http://www.elections.ca/res/cir/maps/mapprov.asp?map=35039&lang=e .  PKT(alk) 14:35, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect map link: [[Brampton—Springdale]] 

message: I'm afraid I find this infobox confusing because it does not say right at the top if the riding is a federal or a provincial riding.  Since it starts with the flag and province, I thought at first it was always referring to provincial ridings, but then I realized it could also be referring to a federal riding in that province.  Could the first entry in the box be changed to give a choice between "Federal electoral district" or "Provincial electoral district", and if federal, put the maple leaf flag in? (if it's a federal riding, still important to say what province it is in, but the key thing is to make it clear that it's referring to a federal riding.) Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 17:11, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, technically the box does already contain a way to clarify whether it's a federal or provincial riding — but it only seems to display correctly on active electoral districts, while disappearing if the district is coded as defunct. That should definitely be fixed, but that's more the problem than the flag-province field per se. I've posted to WP:VPT to see if we can get a template coding expert to look into this. Bearcat (talk) 17:53, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Clarification whether it's a federal or provincial riding 

message: I'd be interested in seeing the following changes.
1. Remove the flag. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Icons#Avoid flag icons in infoboxes says "Generally, flag icons should not be used in infoboxes, even when there is a "country", "nationality" or equivalent field: they are unnecessarily distracting and give undue prominence to one field among many." It does go on to say "Human geographic articles – for example settlements and administrative subdivisions – may have flags of the country and first-level administrative subdivision in infoboxes." but in the original may is in italics and is not required. It does not add to the readers information in any way.
2. Get rid on the line wrap caused by the "Legislature" line. See Edmonton Strathcona and Tununiq for examples.
3. If the riding is held by an independent member then there is a link to Independent politician#Canada and to the left of the name is a grey bar. See Nunavut (electoral district). However, if the riding is in Nunavut or the Northwest Territories there are no political parties and form consensus governments. The box appears to have no coloured bar (it may be white), which makes the incumbents name look as if it is pushed to the right, and there is no link to Consensus government in Canada. See Tununiq again. There are multiple shades of grey available to be used that there would be a difference between consensus and independent.
I would have done some of this but the template is above my skill level. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 17:36, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to say the flags might help quickly identify whether the district is federal or provincial, but that doesn't appear to be the case. -- Earl Andrew - talk 21:47, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's quite the opposite. The way the flags are used, coupled with the phrase "[province] electoral district]" as the header for the infobox, federal electoral districts look like they are provincial electoral districts.  For instance, here's the links to two ridings that cover the same area of Regina:  Regina—Lewvan and Regina Pasqua.  Just look at the info boxes, can you tell right away which is a federal district and which is a provincial district?  I've always thought the purpose of infoboxes is to help give accurate "at a glance" info to the reader. This template fails that test. The reader can be positively misled by the infobox, in my opinion.  Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 18:45, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would say keep the flag, but use provincial / territorial flags for provincial / territorial ridings, and the maple leaf for federal ridings. That would be a quick visual clue to help the reader, since the names of federal and provincial ridings can be quite similar. We can't assume that the average reader will know that an em-dash indicates a federal riding. ;) Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 19:02, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes 

message: I'm working on creating separate articles for each of the electoral districts of the Province of Canada, and I think we need to make two changes to the template to accommodate the particular features of those districts.
:First, although the template accommodates Province of Canada districts, it doesn't make any distinction between districts for Canada East and Canada West.  This is a significant omission, in my opinion.  The Union Act distinguished between Canada East and Canada West in the allocation of seats, providing that each region was required to have the same number of seats.  This constitutional requirement became a contributing factor in the Great Coalition which led to Confederation, as George Brown insisted on "rep by pop" between Canada East (Quebec) and Canada West (Ontario) in the new federation.  Because of the political significance, I think there should be a variable in the template to indicate whether the district is Canada East or Canada West.
:Second, when the province field is filled in with "Province of Canada", the inbox generates "Legislature:  Legislative Assembly of the Province of Canada".  However, from the mid-1850s to 1867, the Legislative Council was elected, in separate electoral districts than for the Legislative Assembly.  There should be some way to distinguish between districts for the Assembly and districts for the Council.
Thoughts?  Comments? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 03:19, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two suggestions for changes to the template 

message: Since I posted this inquiry, I got in touch with one of the template gurus, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions, who very kindly took a crack at the issue of an option for electoral divisions for the Legislative Council. The draft Dreamy Jazz produced in the template sandbox has a new parameter, for "division".  If you leave that field blank, you get the "electoral district for the Legislative Assembly" infobox.  But if you answer that parameter with "yes", you get this result:
The reason for using "division" as the new parameter is that was the term used at the time to distinguish between the Legislative Assembly ridings and the Legislative Council divisions. We still see it today in the reference to the Quebec Senate seats, which are allocated according to the pre-Confederation "electoral divisions" for the old Legislative Council:  Constitution Act, 1867, s. 22.
Are people okay with making this change to the template? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 16:25, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Two weeks have gone by without any comment, so I've asked Dreamy Jazz to make the change to the Template. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 18:49, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done!  Thanks, Dreamy Jazz! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 19:43, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed change to template for Legislative Council divisions 

message: Hi, the links don't work JordanKlooster (talk) 04:10, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 06:59, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 15 July 2021