This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Commonwealth, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Commonwealth of Nations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CommonwealthWikipedia:WikiProject CommonwealthTemplate:WikiProject CommonwealthCommonwealth articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
The opening paragraphs state the Act was never "signed or ratified by the government of Quebec." The government of Quebec has no role in approving or signing federal documents; indeed, the Lieutenant Governor of Quebec could not add his/her signature to a document already given Royal Assent by the Governor General or the Queen herself. The phrasing of the sentence is misleading. --G2bambino 17:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What does this actually mean in terms of the effect of the Act? Is Quebec not bound by it? QuinnHK 15:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
@Helmfr00: Just spent several minutes restoring Canadian citation style to statutes of the Canadian Constitution and Canadian cases after series of changes were made. Please familiarize yourself with Canadian citation practices before making major changes. Good starting point is the Schedule to the Constitution Act, 1982, with the formal names of all the constitutional statutes; could also check out the McGill Guide to Canadian Legal Citation. Our Constitution is Canadian, not British, so British statute citation practices don't apply. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 06:37, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why the move to a new title..... is there another 1982 Constitution Act anywhere?--Moxy- 23:12, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have also wondered about that. My understanding of disambiguation phrases is that they’re only to be added if there is confusion between different articles with similar names. Why was the disambiguation phrase added here, resulting in a page move, without any explanation or prior discussion? Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:03, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Moved back to "Constitution Act, 1982" by LastOthello on May 17, 2021. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 14:10, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
23:12, 9 April 2021 (UTC)