| Revision as of 16:27, 6 August 2024 editAlaney2k (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers246,622 edits fix cluebot setting← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 00:13, 1 December 2024 edit undoJohnny Au (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers70,065 edits →Missing detail?: clarified |
| (39 intermediate revisions by 12 users not shown) |
| Line 41: |
Line 41: |
|
|format= %%i |
|
|format= %%i |
|
|age=1440 |
|
|age=1440 |
|
|minarchthreads=10 |
|
|minarchthreads=7 |
|
|maxarchsize=150000 |
|
|maxarchsize=150000 |
|
|index=yes |
|
|index=no |
|
|numberstart=9 |
|
|numberstart=9 |
|
|archivebox=no |
|
|archivebox=no |
|
|box-advert=yes |
|
|box-advert=yes |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
{{collapse top|Frequently asked questions}} |
|
|
'''Please change the population figure to the latest available figure. The City website shows this figure. Statistics Canada shows this estimated figure.''' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
We only use population figures from the latest official census per ]. We do not accept any other source, not from the city, and not from ] estimates. |
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 19 November 2023 == |
|
|
|
{{collapse bottom}} |
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Toronto|answered=yes}} |
|
|
For population, add the following below City and above Density: |
|
|
Estimate (2022) 3,025,647 |
|
|
|
|
|
Source is from: https://www.toronto.ca/city-government/data-research-maps/toronto-at-a-glance/ ] (]) 23:17, 19 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{not done}} We only use official census data from Statistics Canada, not population estimates, not even from official municipal websites or non-census population estimates from Statistics Canada, per ]. Thanks. ] <small>(]/])</small> 01:40, 20 November 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Wiki Education assignment: Writing 1 TR Both Classes== |
|
|
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/UC_Merced/Writing_1_TR_Both_Classes_(Fall_2023) | assignments = ] | start_date = 2023-08-24 | end_date = 2023-12-14 }} |
|
|
|
|
|
<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by ] (]) 18:07, 21 November 2023 (UTC)</span> |
|
|
:I have messaged Simranmaan238 regarding the semi-protected statuses of both this article and ]. ] <small>(]/])</small> 00:58, 1 December 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2024 == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Toronto|answered=yes}} |
|
|
Remove Big Smoke Burger from this sentence. It is not a prominent company. |
|
|
|
|
|
Other prominent Canadian corporations in the Greater Toronto Area include Magna International, Pizza Pizza, Big Smoke Burger, Mr. Sub, Celestica, Manulife, Sun Life Financial, Toyota Canada Inc., the Hudson's Bay Company, and major hotel companies and operators, such as Four Seasons Hotels and Fairmont Hotels and Resorts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change this to: |
|
|
Other prominent Canadian corporations in the Greater Toronto Area include Magna International, Pizza Pizza, Mr. Sub, Celestica, Manulife, Sun Life Financial, Toyota Canada Inc., the Hudson's Bay Company, and major hotel companies and operators, such as Four Seasons Hotels and Fairmont Hotels and Resorts. ] (]) 21:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:] '''Not done for now:''' please establish a ] for this alteration ''']''' using the {{Tlx|Edit semi-protected}} template.<!-- Template:ESp --> The only reason I ask is that they do have ''some'' level of prevalence, enough to be enough to warrant an article, and they are headquartered in Toronto. Sincerely, ] (she/they) (]) 00:51, 8 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::To clarify on the above comment, the OP requested the addition of various companies headquartered in the 905 region rather than in Toronto proper. Companies based in the 905 region are outside the scope of this article. ] <small>(]/])</small> 02:47, 11 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Big Smoke sold 60 percent of their company in 2015 for 3 million dollars, valuing it at only $5 million. https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/mty-enters-into-an-agreement-to-acquire-60-of-big-smoke-burger-522257921.html |
|
|
::To mention it in the same sentence as Manulife (worth $60 billion today) is laughable. |
|
|
::It comes across as someone trying to promote their small business on Misplaced Pages, especially when much larger companies are not mentioned: |
|
|
::Restaurant Brands International (48.9 billion) |
|
|
::Barrick Gold (34 billion) |
|
|
::Wealth Simple (8.3 billion) |
|
|
::These companies are all thousands of times larger than some small burger chain. ] (]) 03:39, 18 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2024 == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Toronto|answered=yes}} |
|
|
change "populaton" to "population" ] (]) 17:04, 25 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> <span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size: 90%;">]</span> <span style="font-family:Verdana;font-size: 70%;"> ]</span> 17:10, 25 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Thanks for catching that! ] <small>(]/])</small> 00:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Winter weather == |
|
|
|
|
|
A way to highlight the city has relatively moderate/average winter weather for a Canadian city ? ] (]) 08:44, 2 March 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:See ]. It is much more detailed. ] <small>(]/])</small> 16:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Lead image spam == |
|
|
|
|
|
11 images for three paragraphs is excessive.... and an accessibility nightmare. I suggest removing 50% of the images. <span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue">]</span>🍁 00:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:That is a problem in many articles. Just go ahead, ], especially remove images that are marginally relevant, see ]. Thanks. -- ''']''' <big>]</big> 14:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== The image I took of skiing at Earl Bales == |
|
|
{{Resolved}}{{-}} |
|
|
|
|
|
] |
|
|
|
|
|
I like my photo and think it suits the article. The background is blurred because of the depth of field when I took the picture. It improves the experience for readers of the article since it shows what winter life is like in Toronto. ], why do you dislike the photo? ] (]) 03:06, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Completely disagree..... can barely see the hill in question. I suggest you get a third opinion. I would suggest that it be removed from ] as well. Not the place for self promotion. If you have an actual image of the park that would be great. We're not here for you show your friends you got a picture here. <span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue">]</span>🍁 03:12, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::It is not for self-promotion. Unfortunately, I'm not in Toronto right now, and I won't return until 2026 at the earliest. I'll dig through my archives for a better photo that shows more of the hill, but I'll keep this one until then, as I think it's better than nothing. ] (]) 03:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I've gone ahead and remove this from all over the place. Do not re add it without other editors input. I'm sure you're aware there's other better images available as you removed one from the main page and added a .<span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue">]</span>🍁 03:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Mine is in the winter... ] (]) 03:40, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Regardless, it is very bad practice to put a photo of yourself in a Misplaced Pages article not about yourself. Good photos of natural places such as Earl Bales Park should avoid having people in them, especially if it is yourself. Misplaced Pages is not Instagram after all. Even UrbanToronto strongly discourages photos like this. I strongly recommend that you find a photo of the park not with a specific person in focus, especially yourself, someone you know, or even a photobombed person. The photo that you uploaded only belongs on your user page and nowhere else on Misplaced Pages. ] <small>(]/])</small> 14:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:Completely fails ]. Does nothing to highlight anything to do with Toronto and has no encyclopaedic value. It's a portrait of a person, not anything to do with the city. ] ] 14:27, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Agreed. This picture has no place in this article. ] (]) 21:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::No doubt about it. People who read everything pertaining to Earl Bales Park aren't interested in such blatant self-promotion. ] <small>(]/])</small> 00:03, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::OK, I'm sorry that you didn't like my photo. I will not add it again. ] (]) 00:44, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
As I said I would after closing the ] ill-advisedly opened on this, I am adding my thoughts on this over here. |
|
|
|
|
|
TL;DR: The image isn't a good fit for ''this'' article, at least. And it has an issue that, while easily corrected, could require its deletion. But there are flawed arguments on ''both'' sides here. |
|
|
|
|
|
While Felix is right that it's better to show this in winter than summer, this is not the winter picture we need. Yes, the slope is visible (and the blur is not so serious that we can't see what it is), but Felix himself is the subject. You would be hard-pressed to see this as anything but a picture of Felix. A picture of the ski slope should be a picture of a ski slope, not someone standing in front of it. |
|
|
|
|
|
Nevertheless, though, there is ''nothing wrong'' with having people in this picture. I would ''expect'' a picture of a ski slope in the wintertime to show people ''skiing'' on the slope. What, otherwise, would be the purpose of having cleared the area and built a lift? To say that it shouldn't have people in it because it's in a "natural area" is again to miss the point. Alpine skiing is intensive-use outdoor recreation that very often ''requires'' substantial alterations to the land (like, ] it); it would be very hard to call the resulting ski slope "natural". |
|
|
|
|
|
So I really don't have any objections (and neither should we) to a picture of a ski slope including people. Ski slopes are built for people to use. They should be in pictures of ski slopes. I don't even have a problem with Felix being in this image. But if he were to be, he (and probably others) should be shown ''skiiing'', not standing at the top of the slope looking cool. |
|
|
|
|
|
This leads me to a larger issue that Moxy (did I meet you last fall at WCNA 2023? I vaguely remember your username on a lanyard) brought up. I think it's rather extreme to tell people they can't put pictures of themselves ''anywhere'' on Misplaced Pages save their userpages. Yes, we don't want to be the Instagram of encyclopedias, but to say that any picture of oneself cannot possibly have any encyclopedic value is to take a rather blinkered view IMO. |
|
|
|
|
|
Firstly and generally, I think we should ] here that Felix was seriously trying to improve the article and ''not'' accuse him of promoting himself. |
|
|
|
|
|
What if an editor has, say, a visible medical condition that would effectively illustrate the article about that condition? Should they not take a picture of it? (I have a rather large scar from a ] 15 years ago on my abdomen. I haven't added a pic of it to the article only because it's rather difficult to take that kind of picture of oneself with a digital SLR). The editor who wrote ] used two photos of his hands holding guns to show the difference). Should he not have? |
|
|
|
|
|
And that latter image brings me to the most significant issue here IMO. As is, this image should be deleted from Commons. Felix uploaded it as "own work" but it should be obvious from the first glance that it cannot be his own work, since he's some distance from the camera and both of his hands are visible. Therefore he was not holding the camera used, much less pulling the shutter. Copyright on that image thus (I should think ] as much as the U.S.) belongs to whoever actually took the picture ... ''they'' are the author of the image, ''they'' have the rights to freely license it, not Felix. |
|
|
|
|
|
If the photographer was someone you know, Felix, you can cure this by getting an email from them saying that they agree to license that image under CC-BY-SA-4.0 and forwarding it to ] on Commons. Otherwise we would have to delete it. (And in the future, you can solve this problem by paying whoever shoots the picture a token sum like a dollar—that will make it a ] and ''you'' will own the copyright). |
|
|
|
|
|
I am glad that this discussion remained civil and has come to a peaceful resolution. But these issues remain. ] (]) 02:58, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:I believe we did...]. ....they are free to ask me for any help they need. <span style="font-weight:bold;color:darkblue">]</span>🍁 03:34, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:Hi ], it was my dad (Harry An) who took the photo. But my dad let me use it however I wanted to, since I requested him to take the photo and send it to me with his phone that day when I was skiing. I can assure you that there are no copyright issues. ] (]) 14:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Hang on, I'm paying my dad CNY￥5 now so that there are no "ridiculous copyright issues" (it really is just a family photo where nobody cares about copyright LOL). I will show the screenshot of the payment and consent after I am finished. ] (]) 14:21, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Done! See the screenshot. (Copyright is pretty ridiculous. It sucks that I have to prove this even between family members...) Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience. ] ] (]) 14:33, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::OK! Just go to Commons VRT per the link I provided and forward that to them (you have to do that yourself as the uploader). ] (]) 18:07, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:On a related note, the photos at the ] look very handsome, and the uploader was also the model in the photo. Therefore, I reasoned it was okay to include photos that contain yourself in an encyclopedia article if they enhance the reading experience for the reader. ] (]) 14:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::And as has been pointed out, your picture does not "enhance the reading experience for the reader". A picture of someone wearing full biking clothes is an appropriate image for ]. The pictures of parks (] and ]) and the picture of a well-known skating rink covered in skaters are appropriate images for ]. Your picture is a picture of '''you''' with a blurry background of a hill, and is not an appropriate image for use in ]. Please drop this. ] (]) 17:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I understand, I wasn't trying to argue bringing it back. I was just saying. ] (]) 00:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Good. ] <small>(]/])</small> 00:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::], despite it being of ] wearing a Toronto Blue Jays cap and a Toronto Blue Jays t-shirt.]] |
|
|
:::Agreed. Park photos should focus on parks. Let me provide you with another example of what not to do. The photo of myself wearing Toronto Blue Jays clothes would not be appropriate for ]. ] <small>(]/])</small> 00:13, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Missing detail? == |
|
== Missing detail? == |
|
|
|
|
|
The lede is woefully inadequate without a mention of Toronto's ascendancy at the expense of Montreal. If not for the Québec nationalism, Toronto would still be the Second City. Glaring omission, and if I trawled the history, I bet it used to be there... ] (]) 00:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
The lede is woefully inadequate without a mention of Toronto's ascendancy at the expense of Montreal. If not for the Québec nationalism, Toronto would still be the Second City. Glaring omission, and if I trawled the history, I bet it used to be there... ] (]) 00:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
:It's mentioned in ]. ] <small>(]/])</small> 13:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
:It's already mentioned in greater detail in ]. ] <small>(]/])</small> 13:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Official name in French == |
|
== Less precipitation than rainfall? == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was looking at the weatherbox for the climate of Toronto here when I saw that it said that Toronto had less precipitation than rainfall in August and September (August had 71.9 mm of precip but 81.1 mm of rainfall, for example). This seems illogical because rainfall contributes to precipitation totals, and thus is a part of it. Can someone check this/check the resource? ] (]) 15:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
The city in French is Cité de Toronto. Add that to the infobox.<!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:49, 6 June 2024 (UTC)</small> |
|
|
:Why? It's not an official language of Ontario or Toronto. ] ] 23:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::Agreed. Just because French is an official language of Canada does not mean that French is the official language of ''all'' of Canada. ] <small>(]/])</small> 00:07, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::It has a geographical area type abbreviation of C, which means City / Cité.<ref>{{cite web |title=Population and dwelling counts: Canada, provinces and territories, census divisions and census subdivisions (municipalities) |url=https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=9810000203&geocode=A000235}}</ref>] (]) 00:11, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::What does that have to do with the French language? <span style="color:DarkGray">...</span> ] <sub>]</sub> 01:02, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Exactly! Though Statistics Canada officially publishes data in both languages, most provinces of Canada are officially monolingual in either English or French. New Brunswick is the only officially bilingual province. ] <small>(]/])</small> 00:02, 15 June 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 25 July 2024 == |
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2024 == |
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Toronto|answered=yes}} |
|
{{Edit semi-protected|Toronto|answered=yes}} |
|
Change city population from 2,794,356 to 3,025,647 (July 2022) ] (]) 17:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
toronto indigenous name add citation https://guides.library.utoronto.ca/toronto ] (]) 03:06, 5 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{partly done|Partly done:}}<!-- Template:ESp --> cited with https://digitalarchive.tpl.ca/internal/media/dispatcher/2128934/full. ] (]) 08:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
:{{not done}} There hasn't been another census since 2021 so we don't know what the population is. We don't use guesstimates, only census figures. ] ] 18:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:See ], which explains much better. ] <small>(]/])</small> 15:14, 29 July 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Simple spelling error == |
|
== Less precipitation than rainfall? == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Edit semi-protected|Toronto|answered=yes}} |
|
I was looking at the weatherbox for the climate of Toronto here when I saw that it said that Toronto had less precipitation than rainfall in August and September (august had 71.9 mm of precip but 81.1 mm of rainfall, for example). This seems illogical because rainfall contributes to precipitation totals, and thus is a part of it. Can someone check this/check the resource? ] (]) 15:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
Can anybody turn "Lakes Simcoe" into "Lake Simcoe" under the Quick Facts section? ] (]) 13:33, 5 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{notdone}} "Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching" is grammatically correct as it refers to both Lake Simcoe and Lake Couchiching. By the way, the proper term for the "Quick Facts" section is the Infobox. By the way, you can now edit semi-protected pages yourself. ] <small>(]/])</small> 16:16, 5 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::However, I did correct a different spelling error in the infobox, or as you call it the Quick Facts section, albeit regarding the spelling of "statutory." ] <small>(]/])</small> 00:17, 6 October 2024 (UTC) |
The lede is woefully inadequate without a mention of Toronto's ascendancy at the expense of Montreal. If not for the Québec nationalism, Toronto would still be the Second City. Glaring omission, and if I trawled the history, I bet it used to be there... 142.126.140.83 (talk) 00:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
I was looking at the weatherbox for the climate of Toronto here when I saw that it said that Toronto had less precipitation than rainfall in August and September (August had 71.9 mm of precip but 81.1 mm of rainfall, for example). This seems illogical because rainfall contributes to precipitation totals, and thus is a part of it. Can someone check this/check the resource? Antarctican2606 (talk) 15:26, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Partly done: cited with https://digitalarchive.tpl.ca/internal/media/dispatcher/2128934/full. NotAGenious (talk) 08:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Not done "Lakes Simcoe and Couchiching" is grammatically correct as it refers to both Lake Simcoe and Lake Couchiching. By the way, the proper term for the "Quick Facts" section is the Infobox. By the way, you can now edit semi-protected pages yourself. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 16:16, 5 October 2024 (UTC)