Contents

Talk:Winnipeg

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Winnipeg article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

	Winnipeg has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassessit.
Article milestones Date Process Result January 18, 2007 Peer review Reviewed June 4, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed August 5, 2009 Good article nominee Listed January 19, 2010 Good article reassessment Kept Current status: Good article

Canada: Manitoba / Communities GA‑class High‑importance

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 GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Manitoba. This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian communities.

Cities GA‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles GA This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

To-do: E · H · W · R Updated 2008-08-04 There are a few citations that need to be done on weather claims. Anyone want to take a crack at it? jdobbin (talk) 15:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I deleted the brackets where it said "First Nations and Metis" after talking about how the Peg was a trading post for natives before European arrival. Metis didn't exist before Europeans arrived so it didn't make sense, it works better without the brackets.07:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Seems odd to me that there is nothing about the city's First Nations' community, St Boniface, Winnipeg's francophone population, and its reputation for gang violence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.189.135.87 (talk) 20:23, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The current headline picture for the Winnipeg article is too dark in my opinion; it looks too much like a silhouette. Can we please get a GOOD photograph of Winnipeg's skyline without any effects(no special lenses that change the colours, no HDR, no other photoshop/GIMP effects besides the usual basic ones, proper lighting/focus, etc.). We've all seen the pictures I am talking about.

1ajs, you kind of come across with the impression that you want to use Wikipedia as sort of a personal Winnipeg photo gallery. Please remember that the pictures should be good and without abnormal editing/effects. 207.161.10.121 (talk) 13:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree that the picture currently showing is too dark. I think we could use this one, or maybe the one currently on French Wikipedia. The French one is okay to copy to English Wiki. • Supāsaru 14:02, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1ajs here hmm i am just beening hard ball... if yer guna change it call a vote. my pic (current) and the 2 you have chosen(Supasaru). anyone have any other suggestions then? befor we vote?User:1ajs —Preceding comment was added at 03:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you guys happy with the current one? User:1ajs —Preceding comment was added at 02:33, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would personally like to suggest that we use this picture, and be done with it. I think it's neutral, comprehensive, and representative. Pictures that are less representative can always be included in galleries or other parts of the article. Yes, I am aware that I took the picture in question, but that's my "vote". :) Any other opinions? --Kcumming (talk) 17:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a nice picture, but I like what Adrian was trying to show with the winter theme. If we could find something between the two... Maybe if you photoshopped some snow into yours? vıdıoman 19:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

how about this during the winter we have a winter shot during the sping a spring shot during the summer a summer shot during the fall a fall shot hows that sound? o and we take turns with the pic while were at it User:1ajs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.45.177.171 (talk) 02:49, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yet again there is a photo war going on. The Winnipeg article is embarrassing to begin with let alone when all these terrible photos start showing up every so often, usually from 1ajs. I suppose it is fitting that the article is embarrassing, given Winnipeg is a somewhat embarrassing city. I can't even look at the article anymore. JacobTwo (talk) 23:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gonna have to agree. Most editors of this article just keep changing pictures but no one seems to be putting forth as much effort to improve it. I'm not even going to both watching this article anymore because it's obvious it won't solve anything at this point. :( vıdıoman 10:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jdobbin JacobTwo (talk) 14:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am for deleting the introductory picture (which is absolutely hideous) until someone changes it to a better and larger one. No photo is better than that one. The introductory photo must be a summer photo. No other city uses a winter shot for the introductory picture. Does anyone not see how much better in quality the articles on Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, etc. are than this one? And people, they do not use winter photos to showcase the cities. The kcumming photo is good but it is taken from 55 Nassau and puts too much emphasis on the Evergreen Place apartment towers. The photos by 1ajs are better in my view. If people want one winter shot in the article then put it further down the article. --142.161.160.111 (talk) 22:04, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice to find a better headline picture, but I have no problem with an attractive winter shot. Winnipeg is one of the few larger cities which actually has a good-looking snowy winter instead of a cold slushy period, so I don't mind representing it that way. —Michael Z. 2008-09-05 22:38 z

An embarrassment JacobTwo (talk) 01:15, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The photo that greets the visitor to the article is absolutely horrible. Looks like a frozen Siberian city with smoke billowing out of a few very ugly buildings and taken by a 1980's vintage camera. Why not use a summer shot that details one of Winnipeg's assets; its urban forest and utilise a winter shot further down in the article? Is that too complicated for you? I am now convinced that this article has been hijacked by editors who have some sort of grudge against Winnipeg and want to describe it in a negative way. The introduction is terrible. No other city in the introduction details who the current mayor is and obviously the city would be represented in provincial and federal politics. Isn't that trite to say? That info belongs in the politics and government section. The introduction was much better written previously when it described the character of the city, and some of its features, such as its proximity to many lakes. This article is now the worst of all of the articles for Canada's larger cities. It absolutely does not merit good article status. Perhaps consideration should be given to deleting the article outright and not having a Winnipeg article at all. Better no article than this embarrassement. Have a look at the Vancouver article with its beautiful photos and a panorama shot. Everytime someone tries to improve the article someone, and there are a few regular culprits, comes along and downgrades it again. If the winter photo is not replaced by something better within one week I will be deleting it until an appropriate photo is put in its place. --142.161.161.211 (talk) 10:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Higher education

There are four universities and one major college in Winnipeg:

   * University of Manitoba
   * University of Winnipeg
   * Collège universitaire de Saint-Boniface
   * Canadian Mennonite University
   * Red River College"

I see that the CUSB is included in the list of major universities of Winnipeg, as a student from there I know that while it operates seperately, it's officially a part of the University of Manitoba. I'm wondering if maybe the CUSB should be taken off the list, or added underneath the U of M or if we should leave it as it is? (Ghyslyn)

For the Education in Thunder Bay, Ontario article, I listed the main universities in bold and then their sub-colleges or schools or whatever below them. You could try that. Even better, convert it to prose! ;) Make it a paragraph; ie "Winnipeg is home to several post-secondary institutions including..." and then explain everything there. vıdıoman 22:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is better, point form or prose?  :-) The points being links is pretty handy and efficient (even though it may not be Encyclopedia like), and I have no clue what official standards there are for article information in Wikipedia. I've wanted to be lazy in the past, and fill in stubs with minor point forms, since I suck badly at writing. Nonprof. Frinkus (talk) 19:45, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They both have their uses. Point form is great for listing things but if you want to be encyclopedic you would explain it. A short sentence or two about each post-secondary institution in one paragraph would be nice, but the point form isn't necessarily wrong. vıdıoman 20:15, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My goodness can't we get better photos than these? By and large they are absolutely terrible. And why is the main picture a winter shot? No other article on a Canadian city shows the main picture as one with snow on the ground. Check out the Wiki article for Vancouver to get some guidance on how to insert pictures and what types of pictures to utilise. This article was once one of the better ones on Canada's major cities but has now fallen well behind the articles on Vancouver, Calgary, and Edmonton among others. There are many potentially beautiful shots that could be taken in this city. As an example there is a photo in the Geography & Climate section depicting Winnipeg's urban forest, though unfortunately it is taken on a dumpy looking street in Fort Rouge. Aren't there far better examples of the urban forest on the beautiful streets in Wolseley, River Heights, Crescentwood, Fraser's Grove, etc.? Sure wish I had a digital camera.--142.161.162.194 (talk) 23:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't disagree with your opinion about the pictures, except for two small facts, people from Winnipeg, by and large, define themselves through how hardy they are with respect to the harsh winters they have to go through (Winnipeg is nicknamed Winterpeg throughout Canada). One should also note that Vancouver doesn't really have a winter to speak of, so it would actually be pretty hard to find picutres of the city under snow cover. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.22.99 (talk) 14:50, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

^^ wound something from this angle work but no so wide? i can re stich it properly and fix the issues just a crude sample http://pointdouglas.com/plugins/p17_image_gallery/images/1335.jpg

would be something like this but wider possibly with the Esplanade Riel showing in the shot http://pointdouglas.com/plugins/p17_image_gallery/images/1340.jpg

also i got a possible replacement of the mint shot yes no? http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3072/2766548449_6d6914d0aa.jpg?v=0

1ajs (talk) 00:20, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

^^ I would vote YES this mint shot looks very impressive compared to the present mint shot, also i like this skyline shot.. http://pointdouglas.com/plugins/p17_image_gallery/images/1340.jpg Jd.101 (talk) 21:43, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Either panorama looks pretty good. Can they be cropped down to just the downtown skyline, leaving out foreground industrial rooftops? A 2-to-1 crop might look good.

I also found your very pretty sunset shot with cruise boat. It might be improved a little bit by levelling it so that the tallest buildings have plumb vertical lines, if that's possible. —Michael Z. 2008-09-05 23:08 z

This seems silly to argue about but it's being changed back and forth. First, should the esplanade photo go on the right or the left? Any arguments for either side? RightorLeft. I vote right because the photo looks funny under the italicized lines.

Second, sunflowers: In or out? That's a great photo for Altona, Manitoba, for example, because it's the sunflower capital of Canada, but not Winnipeg. I've never seen sunflowers come up in Winnipeg. I vote out. justinfr (talk/contribs) 11:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The esplanade photo should be on the right. Putting it on the left pushed the beginning text to the centre of the page and that's a no-no for layouts. The sunflowers shouldn't be here, but they can go into the articles for Altona or Geography of Manitoba. vıdıoman 15:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jd.101 is edit warring about the photo again. I've left a terse note on his talk page and will request intervention if this happens again. justinfr (talk/contribs) 01:14, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We now have a duplication of information. I propose we keep the graph and place it on the right, and remove the table, as that is located in the Geography of Winnipeg article already. The smaller climate graph is better for an overview, which this section is providing. If readers want to know exact details, they can go to the Geography of Manitoba article. vıdıoman 15:54, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds great. It was removed yesterday without explanation so I reverted that. If it's in the other article, that's perfect. justinfr (talk/contribs) 15:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone reduce it in size. Most city pages have that chart in a smaller format. jdobbin (talk) 04:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A figure of $26 million is given for the 1950 flood damage. Much too low, I think. Here it says up to 1 billion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_River_of_the_North

It would be nice if in Wikipedia there were an easier way to point out such small things (other than adding a "citation needed")... I mean easier than starting a discussion.

Also: the second part of the article is awful (imho...). Long list of (often hardly relevant...) statistics, various facts etc. 212.171.245.68 (talk) 20:07, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So much is being added but so much of it is not developed further. If someone wants to add city parks or attractions to main page, please make sure they are in Winnipeg or in very close proximity. Likewise, just don't add something if it just adds a redlink or if it needs a citation needed.

I am spending a lot of time trying to end any redlinks on the main page. Don't put Maple Grove Park on the main page if you are prepared to write an article about it. jdobbin (talk) 03:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I'm going to suggest that the 'attractions' section be cleaned up into possibly a 'tourisim' section or just a more proffesional looking attractions section.. maybe similar to Torontosormontreals and in the culture section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.163.53.10 (talk) 18:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I moved sports and attractions to the Culture section. Daniel (talk) 16:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if everyones for the enlarged images but i think the difference is like night and day, i went ahead and enlarged the images, i think it looks good... Jd.101- Feb, 7, 09

Wikipedia:IMAGE#Forced_image_size: “as a rule, images should not be set to a fixed size.” By doing this you are disabling everyone's ability to use their preferences.

Setting a size may be appropriate for an unusual image, like the long narrow panorama, although 800px seems too wide as a default to me. Readers can click it to view it at a larger size. —Michael Z. 2009-02-08 17:06 z

There is reference to the populations of various groups in the Demographics section. Why would those groups be entitled to additional mention when the English, Scottish, German and Ukrainian groups all comprise larger percentages of the total population? Crime statistics are referred to in the law and government section. Your assertion is perhaps a personal belief but I do not believe Winnipeg has a "reputation for gang violence" anymore than does Toronto, Montreal, Calgary or Vancouver.

To whomever keeps re-inserting the false assertion that Winnipeg is the coldest city in the world with over 600,000 population please stop this. Although Environment Canada (EC) published that information it is simply not true. There are Russian cities with greater populations that are colder including Yekaterinburg, which has approx. 1.3 million people. I have also seen stats that show Edmonton Int'l has a colder mean annual temp than Winnipeg Int'l by something like a tenth or a fifth of a degree. Note that the climate stats for the Wikipedia - Edmonton article are for Edmonton City Centre Airport. It would be more accurate to compare these stats to those from the weather station Winnipeg at the Forks. That station commenced operation in 2000 so long term stats are not available but it would be fair to say that the mean annual temp at the Forks is perhaps two degrees higher that that at the airport and in particular night time temps are much higher. EC's published stats are often inaccurate. For example on their website they indicate the average maximum temperature for Winnipeg for 14 Feb is -8C, when in fact, and according to their own statistics found in another print form, the average maximum for that day is -9.6C. I have had communication with EC regarding this and they indicated they use the averages for the entire Southern Manitoba region. Therefore the published norms are not exclusive to Winnipeg and Winnipeg's climate differs in measurable terms from Pinawa, Morden, McCreary, Wasagaming, Melita, etc. Also Environment Canada's website only provides stats commencing in 1938. If one was to rely solely on these stats one would believe that the hottest temperature recorded in Winnipeg was 40.6C on 7 Aug 1949, when in fact it was 42.2C on 11 Jul 1936. Environment Canada has other statistics which commence from the early 1870's but unfortunately they are not available on their website. EC does provide stats for Regina dating from 1884 on their website.

As for the picture, much, much improved over that horrible winter shot. It's clearly taken from 55 Nassau St. so does not show a good portion of the skyline to the west of that building but nonetheless is heaps better that any photo that greeted the visitor to the article previously.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.172.55 (talk • contribs)

^^ I agree for winnipeg having a reputation for crime... maybe provicially or locally, but once you leave manitoba winnipeg doesnt really seem to have a "rep" for gang violence anymore then 'swift current, saskatchewan' does...

It's official...let's put it to rest....Winnipeg is NOT the coldest city in the World with over 600,000 population, in fact it's not even the coldest in Canada! Winnipeg's mean annual temperature is 2.6C compared to 2.4C at Edmonton, Alberta. Edmonton is Canada's coldest large city. Saskatoon is even colder with a mean annual temp of 2.2C, but it has a population of just over 200,000.--142.161.179.208 (talk) 19:37, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is "official"? Okay, can you show us the official source for your figures? Cheers —fudoreaper (talk) 00:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The official source is Environment Canada. Edmonton is Canada's coldest large city. Go to Environment Canada's website and check it yourself. Also there are many Russian cities that are colder than Winnipeg, and larger. Why the perverse pride in Winnipeg being so cold anyways? Why assert that this is true when it is not? See the commentary above as well. Everytime I see that assertion in the article I will delete it. --142.161.188.231 (talk) 08:10, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have missed something. You are comparing two airports. However, there is no indication as to what area Environment Canada is basing their statement on, the may be using some other place in Winnipeg and Edmonton. In fact the 2.4 C quoted above is wrong as a quick look here shows. They may be including other factors such as wind chill. Also, the article is not stating that Winnipeg is the coldest, it states that EC says that. As long as it says that EC is making the claim then it's fine. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 14:25, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please learn to read properly. You've provided the chart for Edmonton City Centre. Winnipeg International should be compared to Edmonton International as Edmonton City Centre enjoys the benefit of the urban heat island. Winnipeg-The Forks would be a fairer comparison. You've likely never been to Edmonton so you wouldn't know the difference. If you want to contribute to weather articles for Cambridge Bay or Nunavut in general that would be fine. Windchill is irrelevant. Windchill does not affect temperature. If it is -20 with calm winds or -20 with winds gusting to 50 km/h it is still -20 regardless of how different it may feel when outside. In any event there are many other cities besides Edmonton (and Saskatoon) which are colder including Ulan Bator, Mongolia and a number of large cities in Russia. The statement does not belong and will be deleted. I really don't care whether it's sourced or not. Environment Canada can't even accurately predict the next day's weather so statements made by that agency shouldn't be presumed true. --142.161.184.205 (talk) 18:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but I have been to Edmonton many times and guess what I do for a living even if I don't work for EC. What I was trying to say is that you can't make claims about the climate of a city based on the temperatures of the airport which may be several miles outside. If you read what EC says "...Winnipeg, the coldest city over 600,000 people in the world..." and not that Winnipeg has the coldest average temperatures in the world. There is a difference. Thus, it's impossible to say exactly what EC is saying and they may also be including factors other than temperatures such as wind chills. Something I do understand quite well as part of my job. Based on what you have written above and on my talk page it appears to me that your efforts are based more on a dislike of EC than anything else. The fact of EC being or not being a good forecasting agency has nothing to do with them being a valid source, which for Wikipedia purposes they are. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 19:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a source that contradicts Environment Canada's claim, or is this discussion based on personal opinion and the reputation of EC?--Ducio1234 (talk) 20:09, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that the statment is not true, so regardless of the fact that it was claimed by EC to be true, it is not true and does not belong in this article. Coldest city would indicate unless otherwise specified coldest mean annual temperature. What else would coldest city in the world indicate? Do you think that would mean coldest July minima! The mean average for Edmonton International is colder than that for Winnipeg International. Like it or not, the mean averages for Canadian cities, whether it be for Toronto, Winnipeg, Vancouver, etc. are tabulated from statistics at their respective airports. Yes, that's it, airports, and yes, they may be several miles outside of the city. What else would coldest city in the world indicate? If in fact you believe that at the very least Ulan Bator, the Mongolian capital, is colder, then why do you insist on retaining a false statement in the article. I can only suggest that the reason why you insist this false statement be in the article is because you do not like Winnipeg for some reason so you wish to disparage the city. I'm not at all interested in what you do for a living. You don't seem to understand that temperature and windchill are two very different concepts and if in fact you've been to Edmonton then why did you use the graph for Edmonton City Centre knowing that City Centre would have urban heat island effects? Look if you want the article to read that "Winnipeg has the coldest Winter temperatures (Dec-Feb) of any Canadian city over 500,000 according to EC" I wouldn't have a problem with that, but coldest city in the world is patently untrue, EC sourced or not. I have no reason to dislike EC. I do think that as "National Weather Offices" are concerned, they do a poorer job than the comparable agencies in the US and UK, but this could be as a result of chronic underfunding more than anything else. As for the comments by Duncio, EC provides a source that contradicts their own claim. Note that many Russian cities are colder as well. The Russian weather office is a verifiable source; if you can read the Russian language. --142.161.150.89 (talk) 03:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What sources do you have that say the statement is not true? Yes CYEG has a colder average temperature than CYWG. So what, the article is not about airport temperatures but about Winnipeg being the coldest city. I do know full well the difference between temperature and wind chill. The thing is that EC says Winnipeg is the coldest but does not say that Winnipeg has the coldest avererage temperature, which is something you don't seem to understand. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 15:29, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The thing is that EC says Winnipeg is the coldest but does not say that Winnipeg has the coldest avererage temperature"....well what does the statement mean then? You agree that Edmonton is colder than Winnipeg but yet you still think that Winnipeg is the coldest city in the world with over 600,000 population. In otherwords, you agree that Toronto is larger than Montreal in population but you still suggest that Montreal is Canada's largest city. Your argument no longer has any logic or reason. I don't want to waste any more time arguing this point. Just so you are aware, Canadian temperature averages are generally taken at the airports of the respective cities. So the airport temperatures are what we refer to when we discuss annual average temperatures. I'll simply delete the statement when I see it as it is untrue, sourced or not, and it doesn't belong in this article. This silly notion of many editors that as long as a statement is sourced it meets Wikipedia standards is absurd. Obviously the veracity of the statement has to be assessed. For example: "100 year old man gives birth to 100 pound baby"....Oh it's sourced by the National Enquirer, therefore it MUST be true. Too stupid.

I suppose I can be content with the way the section now reads. Although it contains a false statement, it is at least qualified, and the reader will realise that despite the statment, Winnipeg is not the world's coldest large city, or indeed even the coldest in Canada, measured by annual average temperture. Edmontonians will likely argue that Edmonton City Centre Airport be used for comparison (and that is the source of the climate stats in the Edmonton article) but a more meaningful location for comparison with that location would be Winnipeg-The Forks. --142.161.191.18 (talk) 05:46, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edmonton's city centre airport data should be compared with Downtown Winnipeg's the forks weather station data. BTW, the temperature at the forks weather station for yesterday was a whole 0.5°C warmer than the Airport data...Despite this, Ulan Bator still has a lower anuall average temperature (-0.67°C) therefor Ulan Bator is actually the COLDEST CITY IN THE WORLD WITH A POPULATION OVER 600,000 -- User:Jd.101 14:29, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to add this to the article, you need to source it and word it in such a way as to make it clear why the two sources conflict (location, wind chill, whatever the case may be). Nikkimaria (talk) 20:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did source the fact that Edmonton is colder than Winnipeg but Cambridge Bay Weather removed it. Edmonton's average annual temperature is 0.2 degrees Celsius colder than that of Winnipeg. Thus Edmonton is Canada's coldest city with a population of over 600,000, BUT THERE ARE STILL COLDER CITIES IN THE WORLD!! JD101...0.5 degrees is huge when speaking of weather averages. My guess is that the annual average at the Forks is 2 to 3 degrees warmer than the Airport especially due to warmer overnight temperatures.--142.161.157.40 (talk) 18:40, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The thing is that EC says Winnipeg is the coldest but does not say that Winnipeg has the coldest avererage temperature" just means that there is no way to tell exactly what EC means. Do they mean coldest average temperature or do they make the statement based on some other critera, I have mentioned this before but you seem to have missed that point, which from looking at the source may be the "The coldest winters (average night-time temperature during December, January and February, inclusive).... If that is the case then they are only talking about a small part of the day during three months of the year rather than the entire year. So I have contacted them to see if I can get some clarifiaction on it. The other problem is that there are three sources for the coldest average temperature, two for Edmonton and one for Winnipeg. WINNIPEG RICHARDSON INT'L A, (2.6 C), EDMONTON INT'L A (2.4 C) and EDMONTON CITY CENTRE A (3.9 C) and there is again no way to tell which of the Edmonton airports EC is using. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 20:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coldest city would imply coldest mean annual temperature, plain and simple. If what EC meant was coldest May minima or coldest January maxima then that's what would have been asserted. If what is meant is coldest winters, that that is what should be stated. And EVEN IF that is the assertion, it is still not true. I know that your point is that the statement is sourced and was printed by EC so therefore it's as good as gospel, but regardless of the fact that you can provide a source, it is still a false assertion. Winnipeg does not have the coldest winters of any city over 600,000 population in the world. Ulan Bator, Mongolia is colder during the Dec-Feb period as are several cities in Russia, and all are either around the same size as Winnipeg or LARGER!!! So despite facts which overwhelmingly suggest that the statement is false you continue to argue that it belongs in the article. The only explanation I can offer is that you made the assertion in the first place and you just can't admit that you're wrong. And again, if you want to use Edmonton City Centre airport (which no scheduled passenger service even uses) stats, then compare them with Winnipeg - The Forks. Just so you know the stats for Toronto are for Pearson Int'l, Vancouver for the Airport (even though Greater Vancouver has many micro climates), Calgary for Calgary Int'l, Montreal for Dorval, etc, etc., etc. I'm for outright deletion, but again I've qualified the statement to ensure that the reader knows that it is untrue.--142.161.178.139 (talk) 01:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To you that's what it means but I can't and will not say what exactly EC means as to do so would violate Wikipedia:No original research. By the way I didn't make the original claim, it was already in the article. To correct some of your other comments. The Edmonton#Climate (here) article uses Edmonton City Centre (Blatchford Field) Airport for the climate, and the airport does have scheduled passenger service from Air Mikisew, though why that would have anything to do with the climate I'm not sure. The Toronto#Climate is taken from here and not Toronto Pearson International Airport, which is used for Mississauga#Climate. As for Montral, Vancouver and Calgary you are correct. I have no problems with the qualifier, which you put in earlier, and never had. By the way I just added a reference for CYEG, here. However, that seems to have been changed here and was later removed. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 08:29, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's no evidence in there that the statement is wrong. Edmonton does not appear to take their climate from the International but from the City Centre, which of course has a somewhat higher average temperature, 3.9 °C (39.0 °F). Though that last sentence is not sourced so it's only opinion. THe thing is that for the claim EC are making they are using night time temperatures for three months. I restored the section, removed the last sentence and added a bit about where the data is coming from. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 09:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Environment Canada should of stated this: "Winnipeg is the coldest city in North America with a population of over 600,000 based on the average night-time temperature during December, January and February, inclusive". Also, did someone forget about Ulan Bator?

Ulan Bator, Mongolia's Jan/Feb/Dec's monthly average low = -23.7 C Harbin, China's Jan/Feb/Dec's monthly average low = -22.7 C Winnipeg Int's Jan/Feb/Dec's monthly average low = -20.2 C Astana, Kazakhstan's Jan/Feb/Dec's monthly average low = -20 C Edmonton Int's Jan/Feb/Dec's monthly average low = -17.4 C User:Jd.101

No I didn't forget about Ulan Bator. However that's unsourced. In the case of Winnipeg EC are using a very narrow definition of coldest. The 2 Canadian ones and I assume the UB numbers are all based on 24 hourly recordings while the EC statement about it being the coldest is based on a number smaller than 24. Might as well take it out as it's impossible to compare numbers without being able to see the raw data and even then you are heading into OR. Also it's silly to compare CYEG with Winnipeg as Edmonton's climate is based on CYXD which is downtown. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 20:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief, we're back to this again. Regardless of the fact that Environment Canada made the assertion that Winnipeg is the coldest city in the world with a population of over 600,000, it is NOT TRUE and does not belong in this article. Simply because a statement can be sourced does make it eligible for inclusion into an encyclopedia. The veracity of the statement must also be assessed. As for the qualification that this refers only to daily minima for December, January and February, I do not see this on Environment Canada's web page. The statement is untrue and far too vague to have any value. It does not belong here, and I will continue to remove it. The winter overnight lows assertion is original research and POV by one particular editor residing at Cambridge Bay, in the Nunavut Territory. I would agree that Winnipeg has the lowest overnight minima for Dec-Feb inclusive of any city with a population greater than 600,000 in the Americas (or even 100,000 for that matter...I think only Fairbanks, Alaska is colder even for cities over 25,000 population, and Winnipeg beats out Saskatoon with average winter minima of -20.2°C vs. -19.9°C at Saskatoon ), but this is not sourced, and indeed is not the assertion EC made. Worldwide, significantly colder winter minima are experienced in Ulan Bator, Mongolia (pop. 1,000,000) with a Dec-Feb average of -29.7°C, Tomsk, Russia (pop. 500,000) average -22.7°C, Irkutsk, Russia (pop. 600,000)average -25.0°C, and even Harbin, China (pop. 5,000,000+) with an average of -22.7°C. Furthermore, climate statistics at Winnipeg International SHOULD BE COMPARED to Edmonton International, not Edmonton City Centre (which in any event, only has records dating to 2005), as stats for Edmonton City Centre are affected by an urban heat island. Edmonton City Centre should be compared to the weather station Winnipeg-The Forks, Edmonton International to Winnipeg International. As an opinion only, I think Winnipeg-The Forks should be used as the primary weather station for Winnipeg as it is more representative of the climate. The airport is outside of the built-up portion of the city. So let's put this issue to rest once and for all. We can agree that the following statement was made by EC: "Winnipeg is the coldest city in the world with a population of over 600,000". It has been proved time and time again that this is false. One Nunavut editor insists that the statement really doesn't mean what it says, it means something else, so it still belongs in the article because it can be sourced, and because EC is the source, it should be accepted as fact. An analogy to this is that the Bible says that earth was created in seven days. Now, shall I suggest that this be accepted as fact because it can be sourced, probably doesn't mean seven 24 hour days but perhaps seven periods of one billion years each, but that's just a guess, and AFTER ALL THE SOURCE IS THE BIBLE! So therefore people, it belongs in an encyclopedia, and should be accepted as fact. I think the Nunavut editor needs to utilise his logic skills just a little bit more. The statement does not belong. I for one am prepared to suggest that re-insertion at this point should be considered vandalism. --142.161.174.62 (talk) 16:24, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"a conflict between the local provisional government of Métis, led by Louis Riel, and newcomers from eastern Canada"

Er, what "newcomers"? Wasn't the whole point of the rebellion the "underdogs" (the French and Metis of western Canada) fighting for rights against "the big guys" (aka, eastern Canada and the Canadian gov't)? Who is "new" here in this situation? -- 205.200.0.105 (talk) 17:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Calgary includes a chart listing amateur and junior clubs, why cant weDaniel (talk) 15:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Winnipeg/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a(prose): b(MoS):

   The article needs a good copyedit. Some of the language is rough in places. Punctuation is a bit off (there seems to be too many places where commas & semicolons are used when a new sentence should be started. The photo caption on the main street image is very long -- try to reduce it -- captions should be short & concise. The lead section doesn't really summarize the article and is overall too short. Should be expanded.

   I think I've now dealt with most of these concerns, although feel free to take another look and let me know if further changes are needed. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:02, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a(references): b(citations to reliable sources): c(OR):

   The article seems to be well-referenced and cited overall, and all citations seem to meet WP:RS guidelines. References should be formatted using citation templates (see WP:CITE); full citation information is needed -- author, title, date of publication, publisher, date of retrieval -- even when it's a website (fill in as much as possible). I see a lot of plain URLs in the notes section -- these should be linked to the title of the page. There's also a 'citation needed' tag in the climate subsection (geography). The plain external link "[2]" in the demographics section should be converted to an inline citation.

    Done

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a(major aspects): b(focused):

   Overall, the article follows WP:USCITY guidelines (even though it's a Canadian city). So the organization is overall good. I would recommend moving the 'education' section down to right after the 'law and government' section, thereby promoting the 'economy' section, which is of higher importance. The 'arts and culture' section still needs a lot of work -- the museums, theatre companies, festivals, and music organizations are just bulleted lists. These information should be presented in prose format, as a discussion on how this integrates into the overall culture of the city (remember: Wikipedia is not a directory. I would move local media into its own main section, immediately after 'arts and culture'. It needs to be expanded, as, at present, it doesn't adequately cover the topic -- I would think the the linked article, Media in Winnipeg could be converted more to a list (it almost is anyway), and more specific information about major newspapers and TV stations could be moved into this section. Similarly, the sports section seems to be dominated by the multiple tables of sports teams. Perhaps amateur and junior clubs & college teams would be better covered as prose; although the Manitoba Bisons teams would probably be more appropriately listed in the article about the college, not here. In prose, you could simply mention the local universities/schools that have sports teams, and maybe some notable ones -- though ***every*** sport doesn't have to be included here. The military section seems a bit awkwardly organized. It may be ok, but perhaps something could be improved as it seems that the bulleted lists break up the flow of the prose in the section. The subsections under 'demographics' and 'law and government' could be done away with. Since these sections aren't really very long to begin with, and the subsections have little content, it's better to eliminate the subsections and combine everything into one, well-written, easily-flowing section discussing the topic.

   Most of these issues have now been addressed. Arts and culture is now all prose, although the section is now rather long for my taste - I'll try to reduce it a little. I'm not quite sure what you're envisioning for Media - isn't the specific information supposed to go in the subarticle, with an overview here? I've expanded the section a little, so let me know what you think. I took out one of the lists in military, but I left one subsection (crime) in law and government, as it's a subsection of law, but doesn't really fit in cohesively with the politics information. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   There doesn't appear to be any major WP:NPOV issues.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

   The article is stable, other than some minor reversions of anonymous editors, but nothing major.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a(images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b(appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images are appropriately tagged. Though you might want to check the city flag image. While it's tagged, the "licensing" tag states, "I, the copyright holder of the work" -- in fact, I believe the flag image is copyrighted to the city, not the wikipedian who uploaded it, so the tag should probably be replaced.

   The way I understand it, it is the copyright of the wikipedian who uploaded it, as it was created using an image program, and the creator only based it on the flag itself. The image tagging is consistent with that used on other Canadian city articles. (I realize that we may be going against the spirit of the rules on this one, but technically my understanding is that this is acceptable. If you insist, I can take it to Media Copyright Questions for a second opinion.) Nikkimaria (talk) 01:12, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   The article doesn't pass as-is, but I'll leave it on holdatWP:GAN for about a week or so, so that editors can address the issues. Overall, it is good, but the issues raised above need to be addressed before GA status can be awarded. Cheers! Dr. Cash (talk) 21:57, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. I'll have a look over the next couple of days and hopefully address your concerns. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 01:12, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay; I had to make a few unexpected out-of-town trips and that put my Wiki schedule a bit behind. Anyway, the article is in very good shape! I made a couple of minor touch-ups, mostly just cleaning up. I did remove the statements regarding cable/satellite services from the media section -- consensus at WP:CITIES is that these are optional, paid services, and articles should only cover the broadcast stations, not third-party providers. Plus, cable/satellite services are not unique to the city, either, unlike the local broadcast stations, which do provide local content & news to the city. You might improve this section further by mentioning, in prose, some of the major network affiliates directly in the article, and possibly add something about the Nielsen media market rankings compared to other markets in north america or canada.

I also moved 'crime' from the government section to the demographics section. It seems like crime is often misplaced there -- I guess lots of people think that they're elected officials are criminals? Anyway, I think it fits better in the demographics section.

I also removed a few of the links under the 'see also' section -- per WP:MOS, you generally don't include links here that are already mentioned or used previously in the article text. The 'see also' section is for related articles that haven't really been discussed in the main article.

Other than those minor changes, the article is in good shape, and can be promoted to WP:GA. Nice work! Moving forward towards WP:FA, I'd focus on continuing to develop the 'arts and culture' section. Some of the subsections are still kind of generic, and it would be nice if these sections weaved together better to tell a better story about the overall living experience in the city. Dr. Cash (talk) 21:12, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about the tidbit about Manitoba Public Insurance's "financial incentives" to get an immobilizer installed? MPI forces customers to have them installed otherwise they won't insure the vehicle. Cause that's what everyone wants... electrical devices installed in their vehicles that are notorious for causing other electrical problems. Since there aren't any other insurance providers allowed in Manitoba "By Law" 24.77.166.248 (talk) 02:58, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone persists in adding arbitrary, rounded, inflated population numbers for Winnipeg, and uses incorrect citations to back them up. Winnipeg's metropolitan area or capital region does not have a population of 739,000. Every time I have corrected obviously incorrect figures in the past (and, they are obvious, because no official population statistic ends in ",000") it gets edited back. Yes, it is unfortunate that Calgary, Edmonton, Hamilton, Quebec City et al are catching up to or have surpassed Winnipeg in population, but putting an artificially inflated figure is not going to change that. I am not going to edit it myself with correct citations, because I know the same person is just going to come along and put something like "842,000." I ask that people with more moderating power take steps to fix and prevent this, as it makes both Wikipedia and Winnipeg look like a laughing stock. 71.238.201.7 (talk) 21:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there is a 1 in 1000 chance a population figure ends in 000. just sayin :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.161.186.221 (talk) 06:38, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• If that is the case, and there is a correct citation to back that up, then by all means it should be added. Just sayin'. 71.238.200.214 (talk) 22:51, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

actualy 739,00 is wrong its 742,400 http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/demo05a-eng.htm [[[User:1ajs|1ajs]] (talk) 08:00, 2 March 2010 (UTC)][reply]

The climate section has some errors. It claims that the temperature "generally remains below 0", but the chart right below states that the average daily mean is 2.6. Also, Chicago is not "known as a windy city" in that there are high winds, but in that its leaders tend to boast a lot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.23.147.10 (talk) 05:01, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]