Talk:Vaughan

message: The history info that has been added to this page comes from The City of Vaughan website. I assume that is probably a copyright violation. Adam Bishop 03:06, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I urge anybody who wants to here who wants to look deeper into the City of Vaughan to visit Vaughan Watch.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.184.151 (talk) 22:36, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vaughan Watch 

message: *What do you guys think of moving the list of Councillors off this page and creating a Vaughan City Council page to link to Category Canadian City Councils?     pm_shef 01:34, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Canadian Municipalities

message: *You'll notice I added the cool information bar on the right side. The one piece of info that I'm missing is the area (in square km) of the city. Any help would be appreciated on that... as well as any suggestions to improve the box. Thanks!  pm_shef 03:22, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh yes, C'est ultra cool. Now if only my hometown had the same cool info bar. Phil-hong 11:09, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hrmm... Well I like the Vaughan bar better. It doesn't look like it was made using code from 1997. Phil-hong 06:01, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

text: *Cool, well when I get a chance I'll switch it for Bramptons. pm_shef 00:17, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sidebar 

message: The main page (as presently edited) appears to identify the Mayor of Vaughan as someone other than the sidebar name.  Lacking any verifiable evidence, I merely note this, and that I cannot justifiably edit it. -- Simon Cursitor 12:37, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mayor 

message: *What on earth are you on about ED209? How is it not possible for a building to be environmentally friendly? The entire purpose of the LEED standard is to certify a building as environmentally friendly! Low emissions, low paper usage, green roof, energy efficient light bulbs, etc. Do i need to explain some more?! -- pm_shef 22:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Environmentally Friendly 

message: Since when is the religions of Vaughan more important than the ethnic origins that live there. The big unnecessary chart of religions should  be removed from the page. You can find a credible source of these statistics by going to the community profile page. Once your in Vaughan, on the right hand side, a bar states additional data. Clicking there, reveals a chart. by clicking on "ethnic origin" you find these numbers. there is no specific address. - Galati—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.157.203 (talk) 05:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All data should be cited. In this case, the reference page is here; it just takes a bit of perusal to find it. Many more data tables can be found here. Please note that the information presented as of your most recent edit is wrong - it double counts quite a lot of the population, so the percentages are WAY OFF. They are not statistically valid as presented. Mindmatrix 14:35, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I've altered the "ethnic origin" box to be for "religion", as it was very similar to the "ethinicity" chart in the infobar which covers most of that information already. I've also added references for both. -- pm_shef 15:47, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: **I am sure that most of our Wikipedia users are mixed ethnic origins. Some may be mixtures of for example Italian, English, Irish, combined in one. Obviously, there will double counts in the population it includes multiple responses as well, as the census allows that and no one is one ethnic origin anymore.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.157.203 (talk) 16:51, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Demogrpahics

message: 1.  Gretzky did not play in Vaughan, the team relocated from Vaughan to Toronto in 1974 and was known as the Toronto Nationals (later name changed to Toronto Young Nationals).  2.  Auto. accident is not wiki worthy.  I removed both from the article--CharteredMember 02:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: Do we really need the dab notice on the top?  It would be relevant if Vaughan redirected here, but it doesn't.  I rather doubt a user enetering Vaughan, Ontario would be interested in looking for Vaughan, Mississippi.  Fishhead64 16:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: dab

message: The map on this page isn't very useful. It has no points of reference, visual or textual. Perhaps if one is familiar with Vaughan it makes more sense, but this map is really not much more than a collection of seemingly meaningless shapes. Beaverfever 14:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Map

message: :Image:Yorkregionseal.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 11:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Yorkregionseal.PNG

message: The pronunciation given in the article "/ˈvɔːn/" is just wrong.  In Canadian English [ɔ] only occurs before [ɹ].  I think [ˈvɒːn] would be a better transcription. --Lesouris (talk) 22:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  pronunciation 

message: Most articles on cities of Ontario use either a montage photo (eg. Toronto, Mississauga) or the city hall (eg. Markham, Richmond Hill, King) in the Infobox. The current photo (View from the top of Behemoth (Canada's Wonderland).jpg) has the Wonderland taking up half of the area, and the sky taking up most of the remaining area. If the Wonderland really should be used to represent Vaughan, we may as well use a better Wonderland photo. Raysonho (talk) 03:27, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox Photo 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Vaughan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101028182541/http://www.vaughantoday.ca:80/story.php?id=1705 to http://www.vaughantoday.ca/story.php?id=1705
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:36, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The table at History_of_the_Jews_in_Canada#Canadian_Jews_today says that 12.6% of Vaughan’s residents are jewish, but  according to  Vaughan#Demographics  18.20% of the population adheres to Judaism . This is a large (50%) discrepancy. Any Comments? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: As of 2011 there are 33,745 Jews in Vaughan (11.8%) of the population which is what it shows in one of the Vaughan article tables according to the source listed on that table. What you're looking at the 18.20% is the religion of Judaism, which I assume is higher than the percentage by race because non Jewish people by race can still practice Judaism. The percentage of 12.6 from the Jews in Canada article is probably inaccurate as there is no source. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 16:46, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:   Thanks for the explanation. I am surprised to see so many individuals practicing Judaism who are not Jewish by ehtnicity. Are you sure this is the explanation for this? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:06, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jewish population of Vaughan 

message: So I see that the Order of Vaughan section has been called into question.  While I do agree the people are not quite notable, TOoV does not seem to require a page to itself (yet).  It seems like the Notable People section would be the best location for the honour, but perhaps should be renamed to People of Vaughan or something? 
Also to consider, the Wikipedia's Notability Guidelines do not apply to lists within articles; however, I am all ears to if there is a better spot to include this list in the Vaughan page.
User:Lucky_mac11 16:05, 4 Feb, 2018  —Preceding undated comment added 21:06, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: *If they're not notable, they're not listed in the encyclopedia, at either this article or a separate one. If the city itself doesn't find it necessary to mention the honorees by name.... 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:29, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: *I am curious as to the reason you think they are not notable.  Some recipients include Members of Parliament, prominent business owners, and public service figures. Most, if not all of these recipients are notable in one way or another.  Additionally, WP:N says that notability does not apply to contents within an article.  So while it was perhaps incorrect of me to place the list under the Notable People section, an OoV page on its own would be entitled to the list as it is relevant and important information.  Lucky mac11 (talk) 14:10, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I would not include a list of non-notables, per WP:INDISCRIMINATE.  Magnolia677 (talk) 15:15, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

text: *I should have probably mentioned that the Vaughan website is significantly lacking in many departments.  It may in fact be on the website, but navigation through the website is very poor. The fact that it is "not on the site" should not be considered when accounting for notability, as it also lacks much of the history of Vaughan.  Lucky mac11 (talk) 18:05, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of Vaughan 

message: If feel like the Vaughan Metropolitan Centre does not quite the definition of a community.  I do think that VMC is very important to Vaughan, but maybe needs to be put into a new section, a section for Vaughan similar to what the public spaces section is in Toronto.  Thoughts? Lucky mac11 (talk) 02:38, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The city has defined 5 "developed" communities (those mentioned already), as well as three "community projects" which include Vellore (I will post a source when I find the newsletter/by-law I read with it).  I think that the entire community section could use a bit of a re-work. Lucky mac11 (talk) 13:37, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I found an older source when Concord and Thornhill were defined as one community here.  The city has defined its "neighbourhoods" (or "communities", but I think the name of this section might be a seperate topic), but as far as the boundaries go, I believe that is defined in the telephone books and postal codes. Lucky mac11 (talk) 13:43, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

text: What does "VMC" stand for?  The acronym isn't used in the article. Magnolia677 (talk) 09:25, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  VMC is the Vaughan Metropolitan Centre, the cities new defined downtown core.  It is important to mention from an aspect of human geography, but I feel it does not belong in communities. Lucky mac11 (talk) 13:33, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

text:  I feel the 'Major subdivisions' drop-down list in the infobox should be deleted as it seems unimportant as at the end of the day, all cities contain communities. It only reinforces the city's lack of civic identity.Transportfan70 (talk) 21:02, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

text:  I do agree, since cities like Montreal and Edmonton do not list subdivisions either.  For the sake of arguement, Toronto and New York both list their subdivisions and are cities with less civic identity, but I feel that these cities are a listings can be justified.  We already provide enough context on these neighbourhoods in the Communities section anyway. Lucky mac11 (talk) 12:41, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Communities 

message: Moved from my talk page
 Salutations! I see that you have an issue with my SVG flag of Vaughan, Ontario which I made. Since I first made it I have corrected the leaf, colours and angles on the flag and it is continuously being taken down by you. I am not offended, I would just like you to tell me what it is missing or what is wrong so then we can use it and enjoy the quality of an SVG flag for the wiki! Happy editing! --Cookieman1.1.1 (talk) 13:33, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly, the blue parts are not even widths, and secondly the blue lines do not go to the tip of the red maple as in the official flag. If you're going to make it, you should follow how these are 'professionally' done (including the summary description), see :File:Flag of Toronto, Canada.svg. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 13:55, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

text: I think you have to reupload it, I see the same thing as before. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 14:00, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  This new rendition doesn’t look bad but can you please add a similar summary to the Toronto one I like above? There should be more attribution info. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 03:01, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Elaborate a little--Cookieman1.1.1 (talk) 03:05, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are you indenting page section headings? If you indent the section heading it disappears into a previous comment section which has nothing to do with this section. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 13:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  first off, what? Second why are you literally following my every move and supervising like I'm a child? Its really getting annoying and it is rubbing off like you are doing it to get on my nerves, especially after removing my barnstar for no reason. --Cookieman1.1.1 (talk) 04:00, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  When you take a coat of arms and change it entirely (7 serpents become 14 serpents on your svg of Yauco, Puerto Rico), I had to spend time trying to figure out if this was you- trying to improve Wikipedia, a good faith edit, or vandalism.  I am watching this article as well because another editor was also not happy with your changes to an .svg image on this page. The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 12:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well your late, it's all correct and your presence here isn't needed. He has handled the situation well and informed me what to do and he is capable of handling it himself and doesn't need backup from someone upset because I made a mistake on a separate page for a different country. Let me do my job with SVGs, and you do yours. Happy editing! --Cookieman1.1.1 (talk) 14:46, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Participants in the discussion emphasized that this city is the most important place to be called Vaughan, and thus "Vaughan" was found to be the preferable title per WP:CANSTYLE. Some users argued that the surname "Vaughan" was the true primary topic, but pageview analysis did not support that argument. (non-admin closure)   ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:21, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Vaughan →  – First, to make a place entry consistent with all other "Vaughan" place entries; "Vaughan", Ontario, is not of the same status as Paris, Moscow, or London.  Second, to free up "Vaughan" page for redirect to Vaughan (disambiguation) so that the (overwhelming majority of) users who come to Wikipedia seeking something with the name Vaughan in it other than Vaughan, Ontario, may be spared having to spelunk around the Vaughan, Ontario, page for a redirect to find what they are after. Wikiuser100 (talk) 14:45, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

text: This is a contested technical request (permalink). Crouch, Swale (talk)  12:04, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

text: *Vaughan, Ontario was moved to Vaughan after a 2008 RM, so a discussion would be required to move it back. 162 etc. (talk) 14:53, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  BTW, the hatnote that states, "For other uses, see Vaughan (disambiguation)" should be enough for users to avoid "spelunk"ing for other options.  PKT(alk) 20:13, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

text: Pageviews for the last-name are consistently about a sixth of those for the town —blindlynx 03:12, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 25 December 2021 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: NOT MOVED. No consensus.  Hadal (talk) 17:42, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Also per WP:TITLECON it's best to try to keep title patterns reasonably consistent whenever we can, and the current RM at Markham, Ontario is a good one to consider in this same context. ╠╣uw [talk] 12:32, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

text: This is a well-known type of argument, and it's not without merits, but it applies to all cases where a dab page is at the base title, so it's fundamentally against the primary topic guidelines. – Uanfala (talk) 20:23, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 19 February 2023 

message: I've had a look at https://wikinav.toolforge.org/?language=en&title=Vaughan again and it seems to have been affected by this change in February; the April stats say that now the surname hatnote is in the top 10 (at #10) with 64 clicks, the given name came hatnote in at #12 with 52 clicks, while the generic hatnote came in at #13 with 52 clicks. Their sum is now 168, which is 64% more than the previous data in February (102). There was some incoming view growth from 8.8k to 9k, so I guess we can dock 3% off that. Still, it's hard to see cause and effect just from this - as these were effectively promoted by getting a place very high up there. --Joy (talk) 14:34, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  followup to previous move discussion