Talk:Thunder Bay, Ontario

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Canada Portal
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.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Canadian communities
This article is part of the Canadian communities WikiProject (Discuss/Join).
Ontario
Ontario Portal
This article is part of the Ontario WikiProject (Discuss/Join).
Thunder Bay, Ontario was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: June 15, 2007
To Do
  • Historic pictures for the history section

vid 07:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Climate data

Source for climate data: Link—Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.211.25.204 (talk • contribs)

The reason I posted the cities link is because right on it it points to environment canada's link. Which meant you didn't have to post such a long link. --Djsasso 19:52, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Population

Where are the 2004 figures from? they do not correspond with the Statistics Canada site which estimates CMA as 127, 100 for 2004.--BrentS 15:07, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

One other population note: the user who repeatedly conflates the population of the city itself (109K) with the population of the Census Metropolitan Area (121K) is kindly asked to stop doing so; they are not the same thing and Wikipedia cannot pretend they are. Thunder Bay does not have a population of 121,000 unless you pretend that Shuniah, Neebing and Oliver/Paipoonge don't exist. The CMA can be, and is, noted in the article, but the article must acknowledge that there is a difference between a city and a CMA. Bearcat 02:33, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sheamus Elvish

Was sheamus elvish really some sort of pimp and guitarist or did someone just mess with this article?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.239.250 (talk • contribs)

The latter. Bearcat 15:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

What was Rowdy Roddy Piper's supposed connection to Thunder Bay? It is not referenced on his page.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.109.243.169 (talk • contribs)

He lived in the city for a time. When he was a teenager I believe. User:Canuckman55

[edit] WWII target

Was Thunder Bay a WWII target? I heard it was, which seems logical, as it was a major trading spot between Canada and the US, as well as the grain capital in the world. Anyone know if this is true?--Richard 01:50, 11 September 2006 (UTC) 8

Thunder Bay was not a major trading spot between Canada and the US. It exported forest products to the U.S., that is all. Ask yourself what possible strategic interest Germany, Italy or Japan might have had in attacking Thunder Bay in the middle of the continent. Its only product of international importance was grain, and that could easily have been diverted to other ports. In any event it was much easier for Germany and Japan to attack shipping convoys closer to home on the North Atlantic and Pacific. However, it did produce airplanes at the Canadian Car and Foundry Company plant, so it is possible the Luftwaffe might have given momentary thought to it as a target, but how easy would it have been to get to the middle of the continent without being detected?. This would take work in German archives to determine if true. Or check some of the official government histories of the Canadian air force to see if there is any mention of German offensive plans against Canada. The Nazi Navy was able to target ships in the Gulf of St Lawrence and the lower St Lawrence with their submarines. Once the British had radar, the Luftwaffe was in trouble. BrentS 02:25, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I heard that during the cold war, there was a threat of Russian nukes? Vidioman 11:00, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures

no pictures of Fort William?

(If you mean the end of town) I don't live in Fort William, and having just a bike it was difficult to go there often. I have some pictures of buildings downtown though. You can add your own if you like.

(If you mean the historical park) I don't have any of those as I haven't been there in years. You can add your own if you like.

Vidioman 02:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Richard Barney

If anyone can provide a source that proves who Richard Barney is, why he is worth of being listed, please do so. Thanks. Vidioman 02:18, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

It's definitely vandalism. --Djsasso 02:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notables

I made a "list of people from Thunder Bay" article, so notables should be trimmed down to people who are really notable. We have 60 right now (tied with Calgary. :)) and 100 on the main article; I'd say bring it down to around 40? Vidioman 02:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

I have placed the review on hold as these need fixing:

  1. "referendum held on June 23rd, 1969" - "1969" should be wikilinked. Dates that have the day, month & year or have the day & month should be linked. There are years in the Geography, Sports and Economy sections which need to be unlinked.
  2. "is immense - about 22.5 kilometres" — the 'minus dash' after "immense" should be replaced by an 'em dash'. Read Dash for the correct use of dashes. There may be other dashes in the article which need fixing.
  3. The use of lists should be minimised in non-list articles. The lists in the Culture, Print Media and Post-Secondary Institutions sections could be replaced by prose.
  4. It might be better to give the Broadcast Media list its own article.
  5. The number of people in the Notables section could be reduced and the list replaced by prose.
  6. Each of he notables need an inline citation. The section should maybe be renamed Notable residents.
  7. The external links should be removed from the Online News section. External links only belong in the External links section.
  8. Surrounding Municipalities should be a subsection of Geography.
  9. Every fact in the article needs to be able to be verified by readers. Most paragraphs in the article will need at least one inline citation.

Let me know when these are fixed or if you disagree with any. Epbr123 13:42, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I wikilinked 1969, and checked for other dates. I'll double check. ; I changed the - to an — , couldn't find any others but I will double check that also ; converted the lists in culture, print media and Post Secondary Institutions to prose ; I can't decide on a separate article for media, I don't think it is important enough but if you feel the article will be better with one than I'll agree with your decision. I reduced the number of notables listed and changed the list to prose ; I moved the media external links to the proper section and removed a few others, I'll double check for more ; I moved surrounding municipalities to geography but wasn't sure if it should get a header or now (I think it would look awkward with one; most articles have the surround municipalities chart near the bottom of the article) ; I will go through pages I have bookmarked and add sources where possible. Vidioman 17:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Excellent work so far. Its probably best to leave the Broadcast Media list as it is for the moment. Ideally, there should be an article on the broadcast media in Ontario which this article could link to. Epbr123 18:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
The standard practice for Canadian locations has been that each province has a list of all of its television stations and a list of all of its radio stations, while each city has either a separate media list or a media section in its main article grouping media that are specific to that city. What you're suggesting here would be unworkable, as a single Ontario-wide media article would be far too long to be either useful or manageable. The broadcasting system here isn't like the system you know in Great Britain; 21st century media consolidation notwithstanding, the historic structure of North American broadcasting is much more independent and locally-oriented and not so easily merged into province-wide articles. (And, for that matter, Thunder Bay is a bit unusual even in the context of media consolidation — it's the only major Canadian city left where it's still the norm for media to be owned locally rather than by national chains.) Bearcat 02:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I meant that the list of media in Ontario could be subdivided by city, as in List of schools in Kent. Its a way of removing lists from city articles. Epbr123 08:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
While it's not universal, it is becoming increasingly common for cities' media lists to be spun off into a separate article from the main city article. See Category:Lists of media by city. Bearcat 02:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I've had to fail the article, as it has been 11 days since the review and there is still a shortage of inline citations. Feel free to renominate once these are fixed. Epbr123 22:15, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Netnewsledger worthy of mention?

Someone added an internet subsection to the media section, with a brief description and external hyperlink to a single source, netnewsledger.com. "Online media continues to evolve in Thunder Bay. Net Newsledger.com offers seven day a week news updates along with political coverage that includes both Leader's Ledgers and Candidates Ledgers." The site's blog format mixes editorials with unattributed press releases from Canada NewsWire, the Ontario government and other sources (in the sample I checked). There are also answers and submissions from politicans. It doesn't show evidence of having any reporters, writers or editors, except for someone identified as the "News Director." It's a commercial site, and its mention here feels like a publicity grab and possible attempt to boost search engine standings. I don't think its mention is appropriate here, and am removing it, pending discussion. -Agyle 20:14, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

thoughts, if NNL is a commercial site, isn't TBTV, CKPR and all the other media also commercial sites? Net Newsledger, over the past year, has had 130,000 individual visitors, who have read over six and a half million pages on the site. Further, on weekends, NNL is the only online media source in Thunder Bay which updates the news and events going on. If one site is removed because it is "commercial" then should not ALL commercial sites be removed? -- 24.109.254.203 (unsigned)
No they would not be in the same classification. They are reputable news organizations where this particular site does not have any references or track record. That is where the difference is. It's quite obviously a spam link. --Djsasso 16:17, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
NNL has been in operation for a year. Participating writers include Thunder Bay Mayor Peterson, Councillors Frank Pullia, MPs Ken Boshcoff, and Joe Comuzzi, MPPs Bill Mauro and Michael Gravelle. As well, writing on Northern Ontario issues have been Howard Hampton the leader of the NDP, John Tory the leader of the PCS as well as Stephane Dion and Stephen Harper. During last year's civic election campaign, NNL was also the only local site offering online polling. Those polls had an interesting accuracy, as 80% of the polls were accurate. -- NNL is also the only local media which offers Candidate Ledgers, and an ask the candidate feature. This offers a voice to all the voters/readers to have their questions answered by candidates. What defines a track record? Or is that a personal decision? -- 24.109.218.67
Basically blog sites (or ledgers) in general have been considered not link worthy on Wikipedia as a whole because Wikipedia is not a link collection site. As for track record basically being accredited media is probably the requirement which I am pretty sure NNL is not. --Djsasso 14:38, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
The Toronto page doesn't list blogs in it's external links. (The List of Toronto media page has a section for them). The Ottawa page doesn't, nor does List of Ottawa media. I don't see why the Thunder Bay main page should include it. I check NNL almost every day, but I cannot deny that the site has it's biases and flaws. Besides that, what good reason is there for the Chronicle Journal, TBSource or IndyMedia to be on there? Or even Thunder Bay Ontario Information, TBShows, the TBRHSC page (TBRHSC has it's own page, btw), or the library (TBPL also has an article), or the Airport Athority? (YQT has it's own page, as well) I originally put some of them there to 'pad' the article, but it's far from needing padding at this point. Only the official city websites, and maybe the chamber of commerce website (It could go into Economy of Thunder Bay, should that article ever need to be made) actually need to be here, the rest of the links are just 'bonus'. Vidioman 11:21, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
So then by that definition, the Chronicle Journal, which is a journal, or the Thunder Bay Source which claims to be a "source" should not be listed either? A blog is usually defined by most as a single person's opinion. Is Net Newsledger a blog? Nope. If opinions remove a site from consideration then the Thunder Bay Source, and Chronicle Journal sites which offer editorial opinions should be removed? If you can name a single source media which is perfect, and doesn't have bias or flaws, maybe you should create a page specfic to that topic. When looking at what potential visitors to Thunder Bay might want, or need in visiting the Wikipedia site, I would suggest more is better than less.::: —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.109.254.203 (talk)
«So then by that definition, the Chronicle Journal, which is a journal, or the Thunder Bay Source which claims to be a "source" should not be listed either?»

They aren't listed.

«A blog is usually defined by most as a single person's opinion. Is Net Newsledger a blog? Nope. If opinions remove a site from consideration then the Thunder Bay Source, and Chronicle Journal sites which offer editorial opinions should be removed? If you can name a single source media which is perfect, and doesn't have bias or flaws, maybe you should create a page specfic to that topic. When looking at what potential visitors to Thunder Bay might want, or need in visiting the Wikipedia site, I would suggest more is better than less.»

Wikipedia is not a link farm. In fact, there is actually an article that states just that. TBSource has been removed. TBShows has been removed. The Chronicle-Journal has been removed. The only websites that are included—the only websites that need to be included—are the city's official website, the city's official tourism website, the website of the chamber of commerce and the website of the airport (which technically is also unnecessary).

From Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Guideline -

A link to some of the official websites should be provided here, such as the official city government, the chamber of commerce, and the convention & visitors bureau. Providing links to every commercial, educational, or other entity within the city is not appropriate for this section. Information about such entities should actually be written into the article, with links to wikipedia articles on notable entities. Remember, Wikipedia is not a linkfarm, and excessive lists of links on articles will generally be removed.
Additional guidelines on external links can be found at WP:EL.

vid 19:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Vid, Interesting change. Thunder Bay is a community struggling with lost jobs, lost opportunities and working to shift toward a knowledge-based economy as a way forward. The Internet as a part of the kbe accessible to those in our community without access to massive government grants and lab coats ;).

Wikipedia has been gaining notoriety increasingly over the policies and abilities of its editors, the Vancouver Mayor's office recently updated the site on him to remove unflattering but true comments. Users at the BBC based computers have been linked to making unflattering comments on US President Bush.

When I look to Wikipedia, and Thunder Bay, one of the things I think should be considered is looking for ways and means of boosting the local economy. That is not to say the site should become a linkfarm. If you go to the Wikipedia page on New York city, you would see that there are links there to media outlets. I guess that needs editing too. ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.109.254.203 (talk) 16:17, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

«When I look to Wikipedia, and Thunder Bay, one of the things I think should be considered is looking for ways and means of boosting the local economy.»

There are two ways a person can lie. They can just make something up—"Joe Smith is a Gold medal winning Olympic athlete "—or they can tell a half truth—"Jack the Ripper was a man in London". An encyclopedia is often seen as a source of fact, not fa or ct. Fact. The whole thing. 'Thunder Bay is a community struggling with lost jobs, a dying resource economy, high crime and urban malaise, with a strong community proud of it's heritage and diversity. The city is a major part of the economy and culture of Northwestern Ontario.' To tell a prospective employer that Thunder Bay is a "bustling market place of 110,000 people" and leave out the rest is dishonest. Wikipedia isn't a tool for repairing our economy, it's a tool for telling people about our city. How it came to be, how it's government works, what it's economy is like, what crime is like, what kind of people live here, and how we relate ourselves to the rest of the world.

The article New York City does not include links to it's media outlets. Media of New York City does not offer links to media outlets, either.

vid 16:52, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


So then the Wikipedia page is like your blog, with your opinions surplanting others? If you want to include facts, you should have cited the sources for all of them. That isn't the case.

Though it may not require a link, I would say Net Newsledger definitely deserves a mention in the media category. After all, a search of Wikipedia for the word News gave this definition:

News is any new information or information on current events which is presented by print, broadcast, Internet, or word of mouth to a third party or mass audience. While Net Newsledger does contain some editorials, it also has many traditional stories and video that falls into the news category. It also does meet Wikipedia's description of New Media. Newspapers, radio, and television media also frequently contain editorials, so the argument of Net Newsledger not being a news site doesn't really mesh. Perhaps Net Newsledger could have its own page as the Chronicle Journal and Dougall Media do... then you could technically justify NNL as being linkworthy. Canuckman55 (talk) 06:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)Canuckman55

We can mention it, sure. Moncton had some free rags inserted into its section so I'll shove NNL in and use its URL as a reference. It doesn't meet noteworthyness so far so an article might not be necessary, but if it had a print edition or was part of something big it might be warranted. If we use the definition you posted, we might as well be adding Evergreen, Real Estate News and whatever that Seniors tabloid is called, too. I can't promise you that if I insert this thing it'll stay though. If another edit removes it I will not put it back. vıdıoman (talk • contribs) 06:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

There are a number of conflicts which are on the page. For example, why is the Hoito listed as a tourist attraction? Why is Victoriaville listed as a tourist attraction?

West Edmonton Mall in Alberta, or Mall of the Americas in Minnesota is a tourist attraction, does Victoriaville fit that model?

When you make decisions, you are using your opinions to decide what you will, or will not allow. Why isn't the McKellar Confectionary listed as a tourist attraction? It is at least as popular as the Hoito.

What about the Persian? Shouldn't the Persian Man be listed to? There is a Thunder Bay only item in the Persian, with a certain but not well known history behind it?

Have fun. Cheerios and Rice Krispies. ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.109.214.138 (talk) 00:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


So then the Wikipedia page is like your blog, with your opinions surplanting others?

Not at all. If you don't like something, change it. That's what the edit button is for!

If you want to include facts, you should have cited the sources for all of them. That isn't the case.

Some things don't have sources to cite, or were put there without sources.

There are a number of conflicts which are on the page. For example, why is the Hoito listed as a tourist attraction? Why is Victoriaville listed as a tourist attraction?

Is the Hoito not a tourist attraction? Is a shopping facility not a tourist attaction?

West Edmonton Mall in Alberta, or Mall of the Americas in Minnesota is a tourist attraction, does Victoriaville fit that model?

It doesn't. Victoriaville is an urban shopping centre. WEM and MotA are both classified as Entertainment Facilities. Victoriaville does not compare to them. Nothing in Thunder Bay does.

When you make decisions, you are using your opinions to decide what you will, or will not allow.

I am, but I'm not the ultimate authority. Add whatever you want. As long as it exists, and it something a visitor might find interesting, it's ok. :)

Why isn't the McKellar Confectionary listed as a tourist attraction? It is at least as popular as the Hoito.

Yes, their burgers are to die for. Add it if you want. Make an article, too! I won't delete it. Other members might. They deleted County Fair Mall, so I expect the factnazis would delete McKeller Confectionary too.

What about the Persian? Shouldn't the Persian Man be listed to? There is a Thunder Bay only item in the Persian, with a certain but not well known history behind it?

Persians are listed! They're under the culture heading. :)

vid 19:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nickname

Is it necessary to list Lakehead twice (technically) then include "Head of the Lakes"? I've never even heard "Head of the Lakes". Vidioman 21:47, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

The first mention is to indicate that Lakehead and Head of the Lakes were historically used names or nicknames (article says 19th and 20th century). The second is to explain the origin of the nickname "Lakehead". I'm not sure a reliable source was cited for either nickname, or their span of usage. But consider this 1943 obituary, which uses both:
"Aho, Urho, Mrs.: Mon 11 July 1938 Fort William Daily Times Journal. Lakehead citizens today learned with regret of the death at noon yesterday in hospital here of mrs. Urho Aho, wife of Urho Aho, well-known timber contractor. She succumbed following an illness of about two years duration and which had prevented her from taking part in any community activites during that time. She was fifty years of age. Born in Finland, Mrs. Aho came to Canada in 1911 coming directly to the head of the lakes."
It seems to me that "the head of the lakes" was generally uncapitalized (this history seems to reflect typical usage]), but there are counterexamples: [1] "...some 75 conscientious objectors were employed at the Head of the Lakes [Thunder Bay, Ontario] in loading and unloading...." -Agyle 22:28, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

If it is there to explain Lakehead, it would belong in a section explaining the name, either in the history section (Which needs some improvement) or in the politics section where the name Thunder Bay is explained. Also, is it necessary to have both "Lakehead" and "The Lakehead" together? (Remember what happened last time ;)) It is somewhat redundant. Perhaps put the in brackets? Vidioman 22:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Seems like a judgement call. To me, it seems well positioned in the opening overview paragraph; the explanation doesn't just explain the name, but adds an interesting tidbit on the region's geography. Explaining that it's called both Lakehead and the Lakehead (and really, with "the" before all the nicknames) isn't easy to convey gracefully, but [the] Lakehead, [the] Canadian Lakehead, and [the] Head of the Lakes, as you suggest, is a succinct approach. It would best if we could go back in time and tell everyone who said "the" before the names to stop doing that. It makes sense if they're descriptions, but is awkward for nicknames. -Agyle 02:12, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Well it wasn't a nickname. We were called The Lakehead just as Ottawa is called The Capital. We were, literally, The Lakehead, so it wasn't really a nickname at all, but rather a regional reference. I usually use Lakehead to refer to the entire area, while Thunder Bay refers to the city. Tundra Bay and T Bay are nicknames. (The) Lakehead is more of a geographic reference. Vidioman 02:57, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citations

I want to know your opinions on changing the reference system from the <ref></ref> format to the {{citation}} format. The {{citation}} format can be bulky but it will provide a more organized, uniform look to the references and make filling out citations easier. If we're going to change them, it would be better to do it now while there are only a few dozen references to change, as opposed to a later date when there may be a hundred. Vidioman 22:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Here's my subjective opinion: I prefer <ref></ref> for their added flexibility in cases where a citation just doesn't fit into the normal templates. I also find the citation templates more technically arduous. Making the references look more uniform would be good, but that can be done with mixed ref-tag and citation-template usage. If someone adds a good citation, I don't really care which format they use. Good ref-tag citations should look pretty much the same as a citation-template anyway (in the article, not in the edit screen of course). This article's citations are pretty deficient, but that's because they don't follow citation guidelines, not a result of their using ref tags. -Agyle 22:56, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lakehead

I removed "Through the 19th and 20th century the area was commonly referred to as the "Head of the Lakes" or the Lakehead." At the end of the introductory paragraph, there was already a sentence covering this. These terms were NOT used in the 19th century - Thunder Bay was used. Find me one example from a 19th century publication where "lakehead" or "Lakehead" was used. Lakehead came into use as an abbreviation for head of the lakes after WWI during the 1920s. Head of the lakes as a term is also claimed by Duluth, Minnesota --BrentS 14:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Further reading

There are a couple books I recently checked out of the library, I don't know if two would be enough for a further reading section though? Perhaps we could start a History of Thunder Bay page and add these and the other book citation there, as it isn't exactly citing anything? I'm going to try and get some more books in the coming days. I'd suggest other editors do the same, I tried looking for Rivalry to Unity but couldn't find it at Brodie at the time.

  • Campbell, George (1981). The Town That Arrested A Train. Guide Printing and Publishing.

vid 14:41, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History of Fort William, part of Thunder Bay.

From the information on wikipedia concerning Fort William, we have this bit of information...

In 1803 the Nor'Westers abandoned Grand Portage and established a new fur trading post, near Fort Kaministiquia on the Kaministiquia River on land acquired from the Ojibwe by written agreement 30 July 1798. In addition Canadian fur traders had been forced to abandon Grand Portage as their centre of operations when that area was ceded to the United States after the American Revolution, and to avoid American taxes the trading post was moved to what became Fort William on the Canadian side of the border.[1].

This should be merged with the current information on Thunder Bay ?

--Caesar J. B. Squitti  : Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti 21:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Nope, its in the Fort William article which is linked to in the History section of Thunder Bay. This page really should only have the history concerning the creation of the city of Thunder Bay itself and on. With obvious reference to the Fort William and Port Arthur articles for older information. --Djsasso 21:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to see a History of Thunder Bay (Or 'History of The Lakehead') to cover history of the entire thing, and let the Port Arthur and Fort William articles take more of an emphasis on the modern communities, but it is fine as it is now. vıdıoman (talk • contribs) 12:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)