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.
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
I see that others have found issue with the wordiness of the article like I do. Encyclopedic is encyclopedic. I wish to do away with excess fat and certain redundancies as well. It is a fact that we share our history with NS and so we do not need to revisit the early colonial periods, nor it's precolonial inhabitants (they remain it's current residents, so are "they" not still responsible for Augustine mound?), necessarily.
Portrayal of first nations aside, and as was discussed here before (see archive), the succinct-ness of the article could really improve, with pleasant 'snapshots' that have their subjects develped in specific articles. An unfortunate part of tour New Brunswick Story is that we have not had to work together much n account of the unique directions the province took. And though that is a matter for another article, perhaps it can not be exemplefied so well here. --Placeographer77 (talk) 19:09, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Incorporation means that the city government is actually a "public" corporation with a "board" (i.e. city council) to run it — it may not always have been the way a place became a city in the past, but the way politics is structured now, "incorporation" is the very essence of how a place becomes a city in the first place, and it's impossible for a place to be a city without incorporation as a city. Montreal and Quebec City weren't incorporated as cities until 1832 — but the bigger problem with the sentence is that Saint John wasn't even in Canada in 1785, so by definition it can't have been the first incorporated city in a country it wasn't even part of yet. I've rephrased the sentence. Bearcat (talk) 18:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article on Saint John, New Brunswick has a reference to [1] which contains the statement (in the Settlement section) that "In 1785 Carleton and Parr Town were incorporated, taking the name Saint John - the first incorporated city in what is now Canada." The replacement of "in Canada" by "in what is now Canada" makes the statement true. Dirac66 (talk) 20:31, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's Nouveau-Brunswick, not Nouvelle-Brunswick. Not to be confused with Nouvelle-Écosse. While the subject should be given due treatment in the lead, I say leave it out of the first sentence per WP:NOTDIC. --Cornellier (talk) 13:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's not currently mentioned in the article, and I'm not sure how it would be worked in outside of the standard second-language Wikipedia notation. How would you write that? Marnevell (talk) 18:50, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would question the first of several edits by Cornellier on Nov.24, which deleted the entire history section prior to the establishment of the Province of New Brunswick in 1784. Most historians and most articles in Wikipedia consider that the history of an area goes back as far our knowledge goes, even if the name and status of the area have changed. The History sections of the USA article and the Canada article do not start in 1776 and 1867 respectively.
The edit summary of this deletion reads "start history when NB came into existence rather than repeating what is written in so many other places in WP". Yes, there are more detailed articles on some aspects of the history of NB. But I still think that this article should contain a summary of the complete history of the area which is now NB, starting from the arrival of the first known indigenous inhabitants, with more detail in other more specialized articles. I propose that we restore the pre-1784 history. What do others think? Dirac66 (talk) 23:02, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An issue has come up: should the infobox to this article contain the field "government_type", filled in with "Parliamentary constitutional monarchy". Since this issue affects all ten provinces and the three territories, a Request for Comment has been started on the Canadian Wikipedians Notice Board. If you interested in this issue, please come to the Notice Board and contribute to the discussion. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:29, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
