Talk:British North America Acts
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| List | This article has been rated as list-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
|
 |
The following text is from Constitution Act, an article which now redirects here. Please merge any relevant information into this article as appropriate. Rossami 22:40, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- This act has essentially functioned as a Canadian constitution ever since being passed by the British Parliament in 1867, technically becoming a law when Queen Victoria gave her Royal Assent. The Act gave the new Canadian confederation a good deal of internal autonomy; however, final authority in many matters, especially judicial ones, remained vested in the Crown. The Statute of Westminster 1931 gave more authority, and essentially made Canada fully sovereign, with a notable and anomalous exception -- the document serving as its constitution was in fact the parliamentary act of another country.
- Any change to this was delayed by interprovincial disputes and the ongoing language issue that was at the heart of some of those, so the true patriation of the Canadian Constitution was to wait for the Constitution Act, 1982.
- Actually, the idea that Constitution Act, 1867, currently the most important law in the nation, should be merged into an historical overview of some statutes, was ridiculous from the outset; now that that wrong has been righted, there's no need to merge the above material. CanadianCaesar 23:08, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Are the two 1949 acts cited with commas in Canada? Kurando | ^_^ 08:29, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Can-pol w.jpg
Image:Can-pol w.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:39, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
