Talk:Province of Canada/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Flag of the United Province of Canada

There is a painting that refers to the Flag of the United Province of Canada (1841-1867). The Flag consists of a canton containing a St. Georges Cross atop a reversed St. Andrews Cross, and a blue field (i.e., a British Blue Ensign). It commemorates the opening of the State of Massachusetts to the United Province of Canada Railway in the early 1850s.

ArmchairVexillologistDon 06:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Districts

I am looking for some evidence for the claim made by User:ArmchairVexillologistDon that Canada West and Canada East had long form names "District of Canada West" and "District of Canada East". On his talk page, Don tries to construct an argument that these names existed because other British colonies were subdivided into districts. I am looking for evidence that these longform names actually existed and were used.

The Canadian Encyclopedia articles on the Act of Union (by Jacques Monet) and on the Province of Canada, 1841-67 by (JMS Careless) (both well-known Canadian historians) make no reference to "districts" and refer to Canadas East and West as "sections" of the Province of Canada. The construction of long form names on the basis that Don sets out on his talk page strikes me as being not only original research, but also counterfactual if these names were not used anywhere at the time.

Of course, if another good source or a constitutional or legal document from the era indicates that these long form names existed, then of course I will withdraw my objection. Ground Zero | t 22:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Until sources are provided, I will comment out "District of". There does not seem to be justification for including it. Ground Zero | t 13:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, well, well ... it would seems that Wikipedia itself supports the District names.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District

Northwest Territories
In western and northern Canada, the federal government created districts as subdivisions of the Northwest Territories 1870-1905, partly on the model of the districts created in the Province of Canada. The first district created was the District of Keewatin in 1876 followed by four more districts in 1882. Gradually, these districts became separate territories (such as Yukon Territory, separate provinces (such as Alberta and Saskatchewan) or were absorbed into other provinces.

ArmchairVexillologistDon (talk) 07:53, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

There is no question about the subdivisions of the Northwest Territories, Don. My question is about Canada West and Canada East, which were subdivisions of the Province of Canada, and not of NWT. It seems that it is your theory, unsupported by evidence, that the "district" name was ever applied to CW and CE. Ground Zero | t 13:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


Hello GroundZero. Do you conceed that the United Province of Canada was divided into two Districts?
"In western and northern Canada, the federal government created districts as subdivisions of the Northwest Territories 1870-1905, partly on the model of the districts created in the Province of Canada."
ArmchairVexillologistDon (talk) 00:30, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I will agree with tht contention only if you provide a reliable source for it. Wikipedia's policy on verifiability has this to say on using Wikipedia as a source ofr itself: "Articles and posts on Wikipedia may not be used as sources." Why is that? I presume that it's because Wikipedia recognizes that anyone can edit an article, and therefore anyone with a pet theory to promote can post whatever they want, and it will remain unless is is challenged by another editor. The statement that you cite from District is unreferenced. Should we belive it just because someone posted it a long time ago and no one has challeneged it? That wouldn't make sense, would it? It seems that there just are not reliable sources to support this claim. On the other hand, two eminent Candain historians writing articles for the Canadian Encyclopedia chose not to call CW and CE "districts". Why did they leave that out if it were true? That, to me, is the most convincing evidence we have so far on this issue. Ground Zero | t 12:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Since there seems to be no evidence that is not original research, I will remove these statemenets from the article. Ground Zero | t 05:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

The argument behind designating Canada East and Canada West as districts was spurious. Districts in the Province of Canada were the regions that designated boundaries for municipal governments. There were perhaps a dozen of them at that time (I haven't actually counted), none of which were named Canada East or Canada West. See this source: http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/english/exhibits/maps/districts.htm. According to this source, the Province of Canda replaced District governments with County governments in 1850.PeasantScribbler (talk) 19:31, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

United Province of Canada

Hi I teach this in high school and am trying to find a source for the term United Province of Canada rather than just Canada or Province of Canada. I know the Province was in reality a united province (united from other things) but is United P of C an official title? thanks. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 16:46, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I can't find a source either. I believe the term was invented by historians after the fact. The Act of Union (1840) that creates the Province of Canada specifically gives it the name Province of Canada. It probably got called "United" because it was the result of an Act of Union. Interestingly the act does not mention Canada West or Canada East but Section XLVI of the act states that all laws of Upper and Lower Canada that were in effect before the Act of Union remain in effect after, basically meaning that the new Province had to remain divided into two areas to administer the existing laws. See http://www.solon.org/Constitutions/Canada/English/PreConfederation/ua_1840.html Kpgokeef (talk) 03:17, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Rationale

One thing that is missing here is any discussion of the rationale behind merging the two Canadas into one province. There should be some mention of this here, even if it is covered in another article (which I have not found yet). Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 08:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge from Union of Upper and Lower Canada

The article Union of Upper and Lower Canada contains almost no information that is not already in this article. I suggest that UULC be merged here. Indefatigable (talk) 03:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

"Empire of the St. Lawrence"

"#Empire of the St. Lawrence" doesn't seem particularly relevant to this article, but instead should be in a general history of Canada article. -- 76.65.128.43 (talk) 00:48, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Its specific relevance is the argument that a geographic feature - the St Lawrence - served as an economic and political unifier of the Province of Canada. The existing sections emphasize political, not geographic divisions. As political divisions, they are covered in the sections above.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Schrauwers (talk • contribs) 01:02, 26 January 2013‎ (UTC)
Except that it doesn't pertain directly to "Province of Canada", since it can be equally applied to the preceding Province of Quebec (1763–1791) or Canada, New France or The Canadas. Therefore, it more properly belongs to History of Canada -- 70.24.246.233 (talk) 05:26, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
We need to be careful of anachronism, since what Creighton describes was over before there was a Canada. His book concentrates on the period 1781-1855. It does not apply to all of what is now Canada. Similarly, Pays d'en haut is a term of reference, not a political division, and is superseded after 1763 by the establishment of the Province of Quebec, incorporating all that was later ceded to Upper Canada (not Ontario).

Protected

I have been watching the edit warring go on for a while now, and have decided to protect the article from editing to bring this to an end. Please resolve your differences on the talk page. If you are unable to do so, then use Wikipedia:Dispute resolution processes to resolve it. Thank you. Ground Zero | t 10:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

And once again. I've set the protection for two weeks (expires 1 December 2014), but I'll put a much longer protection if this continues. Mindmatrix 21:45, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Successors

The successors of Upper/Lower Canada are the two post-1867 Canadian provinces Ontario and Quebec, not the entire four-province confederation of ON QC NB NS. This is consensus as multiple users have reverted this already. Nova Scotia has its own, separate pre-Confederation history. K7L (talk) 15:45, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

There is no consensus, as the edit was reverted and disputed, and then re added by a user and multiple anonymous IPs that seem to be one in the same - a discussion to re-add was requested and you - after never being involved in this article and only seemingly coming to edit war here after trolling my edits, once again did not follow that request and have tried to divert your disruptive behavior by calling foul on others. The Province of Canada, along with other colonies, became part of the Dominion of Canada in 1867. Ontario and Quebec are not separate entities on their own and are part of Canada. Stop imposing your edits, stop asking others to follow Wikipedia guidelines while at the same time ignore them yourself. Stop looking for edits on pages just to stir up edit wars with users that you have harassed in the past. --NotWillyWonka (talk) 15:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
There is consensus as the only person supporting the version which removes Ontario and Quebec to replace them with the entire fledgling four-province confederation is you. K7L (talk) 16:12, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
One user, does not make consensus - you only reverted the edit because you are doing that to any and all of my edits, regardless of consensus, you have done so on other articles that I edit, that you have not been involved in ever, and revert only after trolling my edit history to disrupt and harass. Stop your disruptive behavior, or are you going to try and once again divert from your tactics by pointing out some other misstep/mistake that I've made in the past, or go create more drama, and headaches for actual contributors, on an administrator reporting site with some other perceived wrong doing on my part, while only showing the "edits" that showcase your plight instead of the whole course of events. I've ignored your harassing and libelous comments so far, and am letting you take as much rope as you need to "hang" yourself, just remember that your actions are the ones that will be evaluated. The "history linking" in this article was stable until only recently, leave it that way until it is discussed and a consensus to change it has been achieved. Follow your own preachings.--NotWillyWonka (talk) 16:42, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
I'd strongly suggest you refrain from false or frivolous libel claims per Wikipedia:No legal threats and stay on-topic. The issue at hand is the Province of Canada article, not your penchant for going from one article to another and starting pointless revert wars which narrowly slip under the WP:3RR bar. The Province of Canada became Ontario and Québec, so we say so. After all, the objective is to produce a factual encyclopaedia... let's not lose sight of that, or all is for naught. K7L (talk) 18:06, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Once again, diversion from your actions accusing others. Never did anyone speak of "legal threats". Your actions however show that you have no respect for the policies that you go around preaching to others to follow. Imposing a controversial edit without discussion is against wp guidelines, YOU have been doing that on multiple articles, I have been trying to keep the articles factual. The province of Ontario became part of Canada, Ontario and Quebec are not made up from only the land mass that was the Province of Ontario - and are subdivisions of the whole country. These are the facts, so we say so. After all, the objective is to produce a factual encyclopedia. Leave your harassing and diversionary tactics in the real world, and stop bullying online.--NotWillyWonka (talk) 21:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Nova Scotia and New Brunswick never were part of Upper/Lower Canada. The only Dominion of Canada provinces which contain any part of the former Province of Canada (pre-Confederation) are Ontario and Québec. K7L (talk) 00:49, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Way to state the obvious and what I just said.--NotWillyWonka (talk) 02:49, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
"Canada is not a federation, it is a country, Provinces are subdivisions of that country. The Province of Canada became the Dominion of Canada (Along with two other colonies), and was then subdivided into provinces. Canada is not the US, different setup." Lol. A country can be a federation. This is the case of Canada, Australia, United States, Switzerland, your sentence is ridiculous. Federalism is just a type of governance, and it correspond to Canada. Also, on the wiki page of the colony of British Columbia, the successor is... the province of BC. Same thing for every colonies which formed a Canadian provinces right now, and same thing for the US states. Your are blocked or you do it on purpose. There is consensus as the only person supporting the version which removes Ontario and Quebec to replace them with the entire fledgling four-province confederation is you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Azertopius (talk • contribs)

One person does not make consensus. Canada is not the US. The US is a Union of 50 states, each one a sovereign entity with it's own constitution, only "giving up" or "delegating" certain sovereignties to the union that they have (The States) deemed to be value to the union. Canada is a different system, you can not compare the two. Canada is the only constitution holder, and the provincial powers are granted through it. The article has been stable with the correct information, until you (and who knows who's IP?) changed it. User K7L's opinion in this is biased as all he was doing at that time was harassing me and disputing/reverting any/all edits/changes I made on every page I was involved in claiming I was wrong, when in fact I was not as shown [here], for example. Ontario, and Québec, it could be argued - and I woud agree - are minimally the successors to Canada East and Canada West, which are subdivisions of the Province of Canada - not seprate entities in their own right, but the Province of Canada did not become Ontario and Québec. The Province of Canada - along with others - became Canada (Or as known then and minimally now the Dominion of Canada). Upper Canada and Lower Canada ceased to exist at the forming of the Province of Canada. --NotWillyWonka (talk) 20:53, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

"One person does not make consensus." Wrong. There is me and K7L, 2 vs 1. Canadian federalism is different than the American federalism but it does not change the fact that the country is a federation of federated states. The province of Canada was federated with the colonies of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick to form the Dominion of Canada, and the successors of the province of Canada are the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Azertopius (talk • contribs)
There are no "federated states" in Canada, there is but one country with subdivisions; provinces and territories, there are no "autonomous regions", or " oblasts", or "supra-national" entity. There is no "me and K7L, 2 vs 1". The Province of Canada did not become Québec and Ontario, it became "the Dominion of Canada", period. The fact that other colonies/territories/dominions also joined in and became "the Dominion of Canada" - either at the onset or later - does not change that. Instead of looking at it through a US-centric view, a better comparison would be: The Kingdom of Great Britain's successor is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, not Scotland and England (or even to that effect Wales). The Canadian provinces are "devolved" from the whole, albeit in a somewhat more rigid manner than in the current UK system, as we have a written constitution with specific formulations on changing that relationship - whereas the UK can just legislate away the devolved Scottish/NI legislatures etc.--NotWillyWonka (talk) 16:23, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
"There are no "federated states" in Canada" LOL : please read this article : Federated state. Federated states are subdivisions of a country which has a federal system. " there is but one country with subdivisions; provinces and territories" Same thing for every federations. "Instead of looking at it through a US-centric view, a better comparison would be: The Kingdom of Great Britain's successor is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland" No. The United Kingdom is a unitary state, the comparison is impossible, Canada is a federation. The province of Canada was federated with NB and NS to form the Dominion of Canada, the former province was divided in two new entities : Ontario and Quebec. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azertopius (talk • contribs)
I see that similar edits you made at the Canada article have also been reverted. Perhaps your approach, deceiving edit summaries, and to only discuss your "Bold" and controversial changes after the page is locked is not a good one?--NotWillyWonka (talk) 17:40, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Comment: note that consensus as used on Wikipedia refers to the best set of arguments supporting a central idea, not the number of people who support that idea. There is no vote count on Wikipedia. As it stands, no consensus has been established here. Please see Wikipedia:Consensus for more details. Mindmatrix 14:50, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I see that K7L and his/her/it's anonymous IP are at it again. One user claiming something does not make it fact.--NotWillyWonka (talk) 20:57, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
You are the one user who thinks that they alone constitute a "consensus", this is growing tiresome. K7L (talk) 23:29, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
I will again note that neither side in this argument has provided incontrovertible evidence supporting their claims (or any evidence, for that matter). Consensus does not refer to the number of people supporting an argument. If no citations are provided to support the claims made, I will remove the contested text altogether, or replace it with text that doesn't refer to such political genealogy. Mindmatrix 16:47, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

What do reliable sources say?

To steer this discussion toward resolution, I'm asking the involved parties to supply reliable sources to support their positions. I'll start by adding the following, noting that I do not support either side in this discussion.

Please use this as a starting point to establish consensus. Mindmatrix 17:02, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Constitution clearly states: "the Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick shall form and be One Dominion under the Name of Canada; and on and after that Day those Three Provinces shall form and be One Dominion under that Name accordingly." The country was then subdivided into four provinces.— Preceding unsigned comment added by NotWillyWonka (talk • contribs) 19:53, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
No, the constitution never envisioned anything other than a Confederation. K7L (talk) 00:59, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
So your argument is that the words of the Constitution are wrong? That the divisions set forth by the Constitution are not legal? Please explain to everyone how that is fact? The quote above is from the Constitution, not some analysts, or "memoirs", but the actual text of the constitution. The Parliament's website even says "the term (confederation) emphatically did not mean that. French-speaking and English-speaking alike, they said plainly and repeatedly that they were founding “a new nation”, “a new political nationality”, “a powerful nation, to take its place among the nations of the world”, “a single great power”." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.222.119.221 (talk) 16:40, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

If all this is over the flag useed???. We are currently using the "Colonial Red Ensign" and/or "Meteor" flag. This is simply not possible to many outside of Canada because of the articles time frame ..its the Queen Ann flag that was used only till 1801 officially. The Royal Union flag was used from 1801 onwards. That said we have a problem here ....Although the British Red Ensign was originally a Merchant flag used on "non-military British ship" while at sea, in Canada it was treated as the national flag on land as well as at see by most...... so what to do here? Official flag or de-facto flag used by the population....this is the big question!! I will look for some real book sources and get back in a few days. -- Moxy (talk) 17:25, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

It should also determine the fate of the following text:
The Province of Canada ceased to exist at Canadian Confederation on July 1, 1867, when it was redivided into the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec.
That is, was the Province of Canada divided into Ontario and Quebec, or was it merged into the new union named Canada, which was then split into four provinces. Mindmatrix 18:41, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
That is easy...they were RENAMED to Ontario and Quebec keeping the same Governments in place at the PROVINCIAL level under the new federal Dominion of Canada. How to say this is best left to someone else...but we need to mention federal system (federal system was important) the term Dominion has less meaning today then it did then...but federal is a big one - Got to remember since the Quebec Act French civil law has always divided the provinces despite a joint name for some a short time. They have basically been divided into 2 administrations both legal and political since the act....for various reasons.
  • Trevor Lloyd (Emeritus Professor of History at the University of Toronto) (2006). Empire: A History of the British Empire. A&C Black. p. 98. ISBN 978-1-85285-551-2.
  • Jörg Fedtke; Basil S Markesinis (2006). Patterns of Regionalism and Federalism: Lessons for the UK. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 22. ISBN 978-1-84731-200-6.
Its what we teach the kids.. Frances Stanford; Lisa Solski; On the Mark Press (2013). Confederation: The Dominion of Canada : Grades 7-8. On The Mark Press. p. 30. ISBN 978-1-77078-867-1.
-- Moxy (talk) :-)
Not sure what you teach the kids, but there were no "separate" "Provincial" governments (For Canada East/West) in the Province of Canada, Just one elected legislature. The Province of Canada, as the Constitution states, (as you say - I agree) was merged into the new union, then subdivided into the four provinces. The two other provinces (not Ontario and Quebec) "kept" their legislatures - but became "under" the federal (in a sovereign sense as they were no longer separate entities, but parts of the whole), while new provincial legislatures for Ontario had to be created. (Read the Constitution, it's pretty well laid out.) The successor to The Province of Canada IS The Dominion of Canada. The successors to Canada East & Canada West are minimally Quebec and Ontario, I say minimally as Canada East and West were portions of the Province of Canada, not separate or sub-national political entities. --NotWillyWonka (talk) 02:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
I would also add, that the Governor General of The Province of Canada became the Governor General of the Dominion of Canada. The Lieutenant Governor of Nova Scotia became the Lieutenant Governor of Nova Scotia, The Lieutenant Governor of New Brunswick became the Lieutenant Governor of New Brunswick, Lieutenant Governors for Ontario and Quebec had to be "created". --NotWillyWonka (talk) 02:58, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
At a practical level there was a double-headed government.. and this was a problem. They each had an attorney general for a time..joint leadership you could say. We should make this more clear in the article as NotWillyWonka has done above . The "double majority" principle, whereby critical votes in parliament would have to carry majority support from both halves of the province, east and west.Garth Stevenson (1997). Ex Uno Plures: Federal-Provincial Relations in Canada, 1867-1896. McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP. p. 8. ISBN 978-0-7735-1633-5. This fact of basically two political sides east and west was such a problem that it led to confederation Frances Standford. Canada's Confederation Gr. 7-8. On The Mark Press. p. 32. ISBN 978-1-77072-746-5.Trevor Lloyd (2006). Empire: A History of the British Empire. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 97. ISBN 978-0-8264-2171-5. They tried a union but it simply did not work until the federal system was implemented. The union never got of the grown at a practical level...but it led to the 2 political party system that dominated Canadian politics till now. -- Moxy (talk) 02:41, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Ottawa flag

I just have a random question I have been wondering about for a while. I live in Ottawa and I was thinking. Does Ottawa have a flag? If so, please let me know and add the image, thanks. Danger Barrel (talk) 23:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Flag of Ottawa. -- Longhair\talk 06:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

History section

As presently written August 2007, this section is not a history of the Province of Canada, but a rehash of Upper Canada, with lots of geography. Stick to 1841-1866 not what happened before these dates. The article on Upper Canada has or should have the history for the period 1791-1840. Also, the history must now cover both Canada East and Canada West, and cease being "Ontario-centric". — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrentS (talk • contribs) 04:13, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Province_of_Canada/Archive_1&oldid=1166846517"