User talk:Mathieugp
|
|
Salut Mathieu, peut-être qu'ensemble on sera capable de rendre ces articles sur le Québec un peu moins anti-Québecois. (Oops: Tremblay)
Espérons le. T'es qui toi au juste? T'as oublié de signer! La meilleure chose à faire à mon avis est de, tranquillement, calmement, écrire tous les faits historiques importants, même ceux que l'on aimerait mieux oublier, avec leurs dates et lieux, dans History of Quebec. Il faut laisser les gens tirer leurs propres conclusions en lisant les faits. C'est aussi simple que ça. -- Mathieugp
- Vu que nous nous sommes disputé bien des questions à Quebecois, je voudrais te faire savoir que je suis grand admirateur de Timeline of Quebec history. Si j'avais assez d'énergie j'essayerais d'écrire des articles semblables sur l'Ontario. Puis j'ai ajouté un message à Quebecois pour avertir les lecteurs de la vive discussion des implications de ce terme-là. Trontonian 13:14, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Mais Tremblay l'a enlevé. Trontonian
Thanks for the encouragement. I don't think many people know much about Ontario history. I suspect a lot of it has been suppressed because it didn't accord with the official view of the way things work in Canada. I should shortly be incorporating into the Métis article some things about their settlement of the Great Lakes that I'd never heard about before. I got interested in the history of the Métis through watching APTN – now there's a group whose history has obviously been suppressed. For example, the idea that there was a Métis rebellion in 1870 is preposterous. Trontonian 19:55, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Oh, yeah – I will be starting an ontario timeline. Can probably get some other people interested, too. Thanks for the good example. Trontonian
Thanks, Mathieu...I'm not sure my history degree is very useful here, though! I have studied New France, but not modern Quebec, so I only really know about Quebec just from being Canadian. But I want to try to make it an NPOV article, and I hope everyone can work together. Adam Bishop 00:07, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hi Mathieugp, I just came across Political History of Quebec which you created a few days ago. The page is currently nothing but subheadings. I hope you don't mind the suggestion, but it would be best if you added the content before saving it as there is a risk it might be deleted otherwise. Angela. 01:22, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hi again, I just wanted to say I'm not going to do anything to the History of Quebec article after all; it is impossible to sort out what has been done to it, and I don't feel I am neutral in it anymore. Sorry. Adam Bishop 19:27, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)
When I say "idiosyncratic", I'm asking whether the list of categories was chosen specifically for this article by one person. That would be "idiosyncratic" (meaning "peculiar to an individual"), as compared with using categories which are widely used in other places and by experts in the subject. If the article sorts government policies into categories, I suggest that they be categories already meaningful to the world at large rather than categories specific to the article. Onebyone 13:43, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Looking at the page you mentioned, I tried searching google for the phrases used as categories. "Politiques de non-intervention" gets a lot of hits, but as you can imagine almost all of them are nothing to do with language laws. "Politiques de valorisation de la langue officiel" gets almost no hits. "Politiques d'assimilation" + "langue" gets a good number, but again I sampled a few and most aren't specifically about language policy.
So, I'd be a bit cautious about using this categorization, even though it looks quite useful. But it's better to have a non-standard categorization than not to have the information at all, so in the end I think you should do whatever you think is best - you could use these categories, or just give a description of policy in each country in an alphabetical list, or go with whatever other categorization you want to. It can always be changed later.
Another thing to consider is that some of those classifications will be disputed by other contibutors. "Politiques d'assimilation", in particular, could be quite controversial the way it is defined on the site you're referencing. I understand that you've already had difficulties over Québecois history, so you know the kind of thing to expect even if you're doing your best to be fair. In particular, even if you're right, I'd be cautious about labelling North Cyprus, Northern Ireland, etc. as bad guys unless you're sure you want to defend that position. Better to describe their policy, and allow the raeder to conclude that the aim is to marginalise certain languages, than to start out by saying so.
As you've probably realised anyway, including anything like "Enfin, il faut souligner fortement que le territoire actuel de l'Irlande du Nord constitue aujourd'hui un anachronisme destiné à protéger ad nauseam la minorité anglo-protestante de l'île d'Irlande." [1] (http://www.tlfq.ulaval.ca/axl/europe/irlandenord.htm), is out of order (it would also be out of order to say the opposite, that N.Irish Catholics should give up and accept that British and protestant rule is the right thing). Having seen that, I personally wouldn't rely on this site to provide a balanced view on any other debatable case.
Cheers,
Onebyone 01:06, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
En parlant de conspiration, va voir Tremblay où l'on me demande si je suis Suzanne Tremblay - peut-être que tu pourras me dire si c'est supposé être une blague ou si elle est sérieuse. :P Tremblay
I don't have much time to comment the timeline right now, but I'll say that there are a few entries that will need to be reduced/linked to the proper articles for background info. 1608, 1791, 1850, 1960, 1976 are lengthy and not necessarily chronological. I've started work on Quiet Revolution so that History of Quebec can be recreated with summaries. Hoping to develop Charter of the French Language soon too. Tremblay 22:16, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Ive merged the pages you told me about. See Talk:Timeline of Quebec history. Angela. 00:02, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
What country does Societe de fils de liberte refer to? Is it France, Belgium, canada, or part of French Africa? What is it for? jimfbleak 07:18, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Your Sufragettes article needs serious work (especially spelling of Suffragettes). Can I help? Moriori 07:36, Dec 11, 2003 (UTC)
I subdivided the ultra-long Timeline of Quebec history as inspired by Timeline of United States history. As this timeline will obviously only get longer as more events are added, I thought it made sense to do it now. On 3 occasions, User:Angelique has reverted to a previous version of hers to remove it.
- Leave it alone for a few days to see what the VfD result is. There's little point in edit warring over pages that might be deleted anyway. Hopefully the introduction of the issue to some people not currently involved may help the situation, though VfD isn't supposed to be a way of drawing attention to articles under dispute, it does often serve this purpose.
She saw me get angry and insult another user on Quebecois so I think she is trying to push me to do the same to boot me out.
- Keep calm and don't let her push you to do this.
Is it possible for your to try to reason with her?
- I have my doubts as to whether this would be worthwhile. I've e-mailed you as well. Angela. 16:32, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hi Mathie, first off I will redirect Sufragettes to Suffragettes, and when I get time will look at content. Have a few of my own projects to do first. Cheers. Moriori 19:18, Dec 11, 2003 (UTC)
I think you said yoiu had great knowledge of Quebec history. Is that correct? If so, why not an article about the mass marriages by the Roman Catholic Church in the fields of Ahuntsic following the passage of the Conscription referendum during WW II. I would be willing to help, and even give you some names of brides and grooms. Angelique 22:00, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- I am not familiar with this, but go ahead. That sounds interesting. Is this related to the "revenge of the cradle" policy of the Catholic Church? If yes, than it would be logical to include these marriages as part of this to put it in context. We should also write of the marriages between the French colonists and the natives. The "Canadiens" and the Irish immigrants and more rencently, Quebecers and pretty much all ethnic groups that immigrated to live here with us. -- Mathieugp 22:18, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
The "revenge of the cradle" was Jacques Parizeau's that came with the cash bonus for babies because of Quebec's huge decline in the birth rate. The marriages in the fields of Ahuntsic was after 1942 when thousands lined up to get married in what was then open fields so that a married man (and without practising birth control) and soon a father, dropped down on the draft list, below the single men who were drafted first. Angelique 22:36, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- As I said, I am not familiar with this story at all. That's a clever trick not to get drafted. Levesque became a journalist. :-) However, you are wrong on the "revenge of the cradle". La revanche des berceaux is the name given to the policy of the Catholic elites of Quebec which resulted in Quebecers having one of the highest birth rate in world history for a little while. This, combined with a few other important factors like the seigneurial system and a rural way of life prevented the complete assimilation of Francophone Quebecers and the annihilation of their culture from the surface of the earth. The British system of indirect rule succeeded at keeping Quebecers quiet for more than a century after the forced Union, but it ultimately failed at destroying our society. So today we are still around, speaking French only or French and English with a funny accent. -- Mathieugp 22:55, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Turns out Angelique was DW. I've blocked her/him again. [2] (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-December/008966.html). Angela. 03:17, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Please note: normally one should highlight the title word or title phrase at its first appearance, like this. (I took care of this in your Bill 101 article.) Michael Hardy 15:49, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)
If you're going to move source texts to Wikisource that's fine. Certainly the Lower Canada item is suitable in that project. I was sorely tempted to blank it for 3 reasons: 1) It was contributed by an anonymous person who could not be contacted to discuss the problem. (My note is here only because of a good hunch.) 2) It was an orphan, i. e. nothing else in Wikisource linked to it, and 3) There was no context to simply describe what the document was about, its date or historical significance. Not everyone will be familiar with the rebellions of 1837. A person putting material on Wikisource should be prepared to do a little more than just dump his stuff. ☮ Eclecticology 12:13, 2003 Dec 21 (UTC)
- Mathieugp, don't worry too much about it being orphaned or whatever over there. There are plenty of editors who can work on it and get it linked up to the right places etc. Personally, I would rather the material be there for others to work on than people just don't bother moving it there at all, so thanks for doing that. :) Angela. 00:09, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Bonsoir, Mathieu. You may have noticed that there is a French Wikipedia, but in case you haven't been there, it's rather lacking in information on many aspects of Québec and Canada (for example, there's an article on Jean Chrétien, but not on Trudeau). I added an article on Acadia (see fr:Acadie), but there's lots of work to do over there.... -- BCorr ¤ Брайен 02:32, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- Non, Je suis un américain de Detroit -- but I'm just very interested in Quebec. Veuillez visiter ma page à ma page à fr:Wikipedia (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bcorr) pour plus d'informations sur moi. Et je comprends votre situation. Peut-être il y aura plus de personnes comme moi bientôt! Et mon Français n'est pas très bon, mais c'est une méthode pour améliorer mes capacités linguistiques. Je dois continuer à traduire des articles pour le Wikipedia français.
I've made a start on the Timeline of Ontario history. it really is a good way to provide a central reference for related articles. And as you say, it's useful for dealing with biases, and people certainly have biases about Ontarians. My next step will be to provide some information about the political relationships between Canada East and West, so if you can add anything on those topics or suggest some events to include i'd appreciate it. Trontonian 23:11, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'm continuing with the Timeline of Ontario history. What interests me at the moment is the role of Oliver Mowat in the creation of a deep antipathy between French and English. Canada's constitutional history seems to me to be largely the result of actions taken to weaken Quebec but which ended up making it stronger. Lord Durham's reforms, for example, were intended to assimilate the French, but the French were able to use responsible government to protect themselves and their culture. Eventually a legislative deadlock developed which led to a federal state in which Quebec became its own province. Then Mowat opposed a remedial bill in Manitoba because it threatened provincial power, thus alienating Quebec, alienating francophones, but his efforts to expand provincial power obvioulsy helped Quebec. Then there was Regulation 17. It's no wonder Quebec felt threatened. Trontonian 14:18, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Mathieu,
Thanks for the comments on the tidy up I did at logical fallacy. I'm not so sure they deserve quite so much praise... But, bowing graciously to the left and to the right...
As for helping with anything related to the Constitution of Canada, I'd be glad to help as time allows, but it's rather like asking the Rhino Party to behave. I'm from the Big Elephant to the South and know almost nothing about Canadian Constitutional issues. Typical, eh? Lots to say about constitutions generally, as we've got one down here in very leaky shape, but it's not clear that would be all that helpful.
I am a writer, though only in English, as my French is tres phew, and my Mongolian and Georgian are both non existent, and it may be that which was useful at logical fallacy. If you still want any help in re: Maple Leafs, tell me how you think I can contribute.
ww 20:38, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Mathieu, Following your invitation, I have made a few edits in the first two sections of the article. They are meant to be wording improvements, neutral (or heading toward neutrality) and not to be contentious. Perhaps you'll review them and tell me whether that's what you had in mind? ww 15:08, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Merci for the thumbs up on the Civil Code of Quebec, hopefully it is a little more accurate now. I do plan to add more info one of these days about the different Books of both the CCLC and the CCQ as there is dearth of info on Wikipedia about civil law and since these texts were written both in English and French Quebec civil law has a distinct (yes, I did use that word) role to play in the English speaking world regarding educating non-francophones about the structural beauty of the civilian system of law. Most of the law articles here focus on common law and they do not really do justice to the radically different civil law concepts of the same names (such as contracts a/k/a contractual obligations). — Alex756 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alex756 talk] 23:04, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
| Contents |
Regulation 17
Do you know of a definitive source of information about Regulation 17? Everyone I've looked at says something different. Trontonian 22:37, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Thanks, Mathieu, and thanks also for alerting me to Language policy. Language policy is one area where Ontario is still highly deficient. Trontonian 14:12, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Ontario separate school funding
See Talk:Demolinguistics of Quebec PBrain 22:07, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Ontario separate schools
Hi, Mathieu – I noticed your comment at Demolinguistics of Quebec about the constitutional right of Roman Catholics not being fully recognized by the governments of Ontario. If you could clarify where you see the deficiency, I think that might help resolve our disagreement. Ontario Catholic sources seem to think that their rights have been fully recognized, but perhaps they weren't in comparison to the standards you are applying. PBrain 23:10, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Sovereignism
Salut Mathieugp. Je vais bientôt recontribuer à retravailler Quebec Sovereignism comme toi (merci de t'y être affairé) et j'aimerais te souligner la chose qui me chicotte le plus de ce que j'ai lu à date: la mention que les souverainistes ne sont pas opposés au fédéralisme et sous-entendant que tous les souverainistes laisseraient tomber leur idéal si le Canada lui sortait d'un chapeau un accord du Lac Meech 2e partie! Je crois que ce type de pensée pourrait être mentionnée en tant que fraction du mouvement (des fédéralistes mous et déçus pour la plupart, se rangeant du côté du OUI de façon conditionnelle) mais qu'elle ne peut ab-so-lu-ment pas être considérée comme l'essence du mouvement. Les souverainistes ne s'opposent pas au fédéralisme des régions (comme pour les landers allemands) mais s'opposent au fédéralisme pour une nation, surtout quand une nation possède le pouvoir d'un état régional fédéré et une autre nation possède les pouvoirs cumulés de neuf états fédérés, deux territoires (n'incluons pas le Nunavik), une partie prise en quelque sorte à la première nation (le Labrador) et un état souverain. Le plus qu'on puisse hypothétiquement affirmer est qu'ils sont ouvert au principe de "confédération de nations" largement décentralisée. Je crois que le *coeur* du mouvement souverainiste est "indépendant" des frasques et soubresauts du fédéralisme de la nation voisine, qu'il se base avant toute chose sur le principe qu'une nation doit nécessairement être reconnue et respectée comme telle au niveau international et, conséquement, qu'elle ne peut qu'avoir droit aux mêmes leviers que les autres nations. Est-ce que tu es d'accord à ce que je modifie donc un peu ce passage? - Liberlogos
Irish views of Quebec
Hi there,
Noticed your comments on User:Jtdirl's user page, just thought I'd offer my own responses as an Irishman (who speaks Irish).
1) I imagine right now most Irish people would generally support independance for most regions wanting to break away from a larger state - even if uninformed. Look at the Palestinian situation for example - much support here for them but many would not know the history of how the situation today developed.
2) Many Irish resent having had to learn Irish in school (its mandatory) and this has done a lot more harm than good to the Irish language. The attitude instilled by the British that Irish is a backwards language also persists. Most Irish would have no desire to see Irish take over as a first language and subscribe to the "Oh, everyone in the world uses English. It's used in business. It would be a backward step to start using Irish". I'm terribly upset at this. After all, places like Germany survive fine with much English in business, but generally speaking German.
3) I do not beleive that unless things change, Ireland can become Irish-speaking. If the current situation continues (token gestures and handouts to Irish speakers by the govt. but no policies), there won't even be any native Irish speakers within a few decades. The Government view Irish as an annoying problem - they would love if it went away. Mostly even the government don't fulfill their legal obligations to provide documents and services through Irish. (The first language in the constitution). Eventually, after the decline of Irish, it is like a future government would seek a constitutional amendment to fix the pretence of the constitutional status of Irish.
4) I had a vague notion that there were Irish went to that part of Canada. People wouldn't know specifically - but we would generally assume that we've infiltrated most areas of the world I guess :o)
5) I don't know about Emile Nelligan.
6) Most second-level schools teach French - most students study it. A foreign language is a requirement for many Universities in Ireland - French is the de-facto choice. The quality of teaching is abysmal (almost no Oral work - just reading and writing, grammar, verbs, etc. - Incredibly boring.). I garnered a B2 qualfication in my Leaving Certificate exam (final exam after school) after 6 years studying French at Higher Level. I did a further year and a half at University. I would be hard put to string two words together - I would only have a rough understanding of spoken French, reasonable ability to read, poor written French and very broken spoken French.
Hope you don't mind my offering views on questions posed to another!
Zoney 11:39, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
And now for my answers! :-) (Thanks Zoney. I agree, but typically write it in a longer way! Oh and apologies for the absence of fadas on any Irish words. I'm a mac user using one of these damn pcs right now, so I haven't a clue how to do a fada here!)
I just read the "debate" on whether Quebec is a nation or not on Talk:List of people by nationality. Thank you for trying your best to reason them out. :-) I know it is difficult. It seems that in the English language, the word "nation" is generally understood to mean "nation-state" and that causes a major communication problem. I read on your user page that you studied history and politics. It seems we have a lot in common. I am tempted to take advantage of your knowledge... Do you mind answering a few questions for me?
- No problem.
- If properly informed on the subject, do you think a majority of Irish citizens would give their blessing to Quebec's indepedence?
Because they know so little about it it would be very difficult to adjudicate as to what they might decide. There is no view on the matter and so nothing to go on in judging what their analysis would be.
- Do Irish people wish for the Irish language to becomee the common language of Ireland? (I presume there is a debate on this.)
Very few. Most Irish people veer between an ambiguous liking for the language (ie, love the idea of the language but can't speak it)to detestation. The latter is the result of a disastrous attempt to force the language in the Irish educational system from the 1920s to the 1980s which created a monstrous and tragic backlash. It is a great pity but most of the people I was in school with left school with a profound hatred of the language. How we turn that around is one the questions that those of us interested in Irish ponder, but I'm afraid I don't have an answer. There is fury for example, at a recent decision of the Irish government to oblige Irish utility companies to print bills, reports etc in Irish and english. The Electricity Supply Board spent tens of thousands of euro printing vast numbers of its annual report as gaeilge (in Irish) only to find that not a single person on the island wanted it, while its english language version was read. And whereas the Irish state used to create Irish names for state organisations in the past, it has stopped doing so, planning for example to replace the Irish-named Aer Rianta by a new Dublin Airports Authority. And the Irish government couldn't be bothered registering Irish as a working language of the European Union even when they had the presidency of the Union. So obscure dialects in Europe have official language status in Europe, but Irish doesn't. (Another example: when we became independent, all Bills of the Oireachtas (parliament) were in both bearla agus gaeilge(english and Irish). Today we have so lost interest in translating bills that we are apparently seven years behind in translations, which Acts from 1997 still not translated. And while in the past we did have senior judges like Cearbhall O Dalaigh who used the Irish language version of their name (he later became Uachtaran na hEireann (president of Ireland), no Irish-named judges and few Irish-named national figures exist anymore.
- Do you think it is possible for Ireland to become in the majority Irish-speaking one day? (Is there an actual policy aiming towards that?)
An impossibility. Irish is in fact in steep and some think fatal decline. Some experts predict that 'native' Irish language speakers in the Gaeltachtai (Irish language speaking areas) will no longer exist by 2030. Already most of the people in the gaeltachtai are english speakers. Hardly anyone in parliament can speak Irish (the current Taoiseach's inability to speak Irish is infamous). The Irish language tv station, TG4 - having already been rebranded to try to get viewers, having originally been launched as Telifis na Gaeilge (Irish television)- pulls its main viewers when showing European soccer and old American cowboy films.
There is a form of regrowth happening in Irish, but it is in the form of a small minority of english speakers deciding to be bilingual and have their kids educated in Irish. That is particularly an urban phenomenon but the heartland of traditional Irish, the Gaeltachtai, are in serious, worrying and probably unstoppable decline.
The irony is that every census suggests that maybe one in four people can speak Irish. But in reality all they can say is ta me (I can't type the fadas on this damned machine), the equivalent of saying that someone who can say je suis can speak french. In reality we don't want to admit just how bad our Irish is (if it is there at all, it is barely at primary school level but we don't want to admit it), so we still fill in the forms in the census to claim we can speak Irish (but, curiously for supposed Irish speakers, they always fill in the english version of the form, not the Irish!).
(If you want an example of how bad the level of knowledge is of Irish, by the way, look at the Irish language version of wikipedia. It went for months without attracting a single article, yet many Irish people contribute to wikipedia on a daily basis.)
- Is it generally known in Ireland that a great number of Irish immigrants to Canada were absorbed into the French Canadian nation?
Unfortunately most people don't know much about Irish emigration to Canada, much less which of the Canadian nations they went to.
- Do Irish people know the name Emile Nelligan?
Unfortunately no. I only found out on Wikipedia.
- Do you read French?
A tiny bit that I have almost completely forgotten (it is 20 years + since I studied French!)I always intend to return to it. I am a bit of a francophile and love French culture. Though, and this is typical of Ireland, even though I know very little french - I studied it for three years - I know far more of it than I know of Irish, which I studied for fourteen years, simply because like everyone else in Ireland we were victims of an appalling incompetent force-fed teaching of Irish, which turned people off in droves. A recent writer said that Irish language enthusiasts with their messianic determination to forcefeed people the language whether the people liked it or not did more damage to the language than British rule. When Ireland became independent, there still were large parts of the island were people could speak Irish, albeit in small clusters. But under Irish self government, we have lost leinster Irish (apart from one small gaeltacht in Meath), most of connacht Irish, and most Irish speakers in Ulster and Munster, with gaeltachtai that are at best bilingual, at worst where Irish stopped being spoken a generation or two ago, but to keep up the pretence we still call it a gaeltacht as opposed to a galltacht (english language speaking area). And the only reason for that is to get government grants available to gaeltacht residents. A recent TV programme found that most of those receiving gaeltacht grants to promote the language actually couldn't speak a word of Irish. The minister, Eamon O Cuiv, on of the few Irish speakers and Irish named politicians in Ireland, has announced plans to redraw the maps to only cover genuine Irish speaking areas. The fear is however that that may see has much as 70% of the gaeltachtai wiped off the map. It is a pretty disastrous record.
Thanks! -- Mathieugp 02:22, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Slan. Oiche Mhaith. FearÉIREANN 18:47, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Information on Quebec
Go raibh maith agat! Thanks for your informative comments on my talk page. I must read some more about Quebec!
Slán! Zoney 15:12, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
French
Thanks for correcting my French! :o) I do have German also, but I haven't studied it, let alone used it, for 7 years. My current task is improving my Irish fluency. Zoney 23:31, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Pot-pourri
Salut Mathieu. Comment ça va? Bravo pour le bon travail que tu continues à faire sur ce site. Bon, je t'écris pour plusieures choses.
- D'abord, merci, bien-sûr, d'avoir apporté de solides arguments sur la page talk:Jacques Parizeau. Cela nous permet d'enfin régler la question et d'avoir une référence forte lorsque la question sera soulevée à nouveau.
- Ensuite, au sujet de Quebec Sovereignism:
- Je crois que le titre Quebec sovereigntism est le plus approprié. Il complète bien Quebec nationalism, ainsi que la presque totalité des titres de pages de mouvements politiques (Feminism, Socialism, Conservatism, etc.) et la page European sovereigntism que j'ai l'intention de créer (en France, le récent néologisme souverainiste signifie quelqu'un qui s'oppose à l'Union Européenne; j'aimerais y souligner entre autres la différenc avec le souverainisme québécois qui a tendance à être ouvert aux instances supra-nationales). Je crois m'être rangé à l'opinion que sovereigntism avec un T est le meilleure façon d'écrire le terme, comme il en fut question récemment dans les talk pages, qu'en penses-tu? Finalement, je crois que tu avais raison et qu'il serait préférable d'utiliser la minuscule pour le S, car c'est ce que l'on voit le plus dans l'encyclopédie. C'était juste que: j'aime les majuscules! ;) Ça fait plus digne et impressionnant. Il serait conséquement bien de faire de même avec Quebec nationalism (c'est-à-dire, placer l'article principal sur la page au petit N et la redirection à la page du grand N).
- J'aimerais bien des pages Quebec sovereignty movement et Quebec independence movement de redirection, toutefois. Mais Quebec sovereignty me semble peu approprié... il faudrait y parler de la souveraineté du Québec acquise (un système fédéral comme le système canadien fait en effet référence au pouvoirs des états fédérés sous le vocable de Souveraineté) ou peut-être celle à acquérir, mais pas du mouvement *pour* l'acquérir.
- Je suis simplement "50-50" au sujet de la recréation d'une page comme History of the Quebec sovereignist movement. En passant, je m'excuse encore d'avoir déménagé toute l'affaire de façon impulsive; je commençais avec Wikipedia, après tout. Si une telle chose se produit, donc la déclaration d'indépendance de la page d'histoire (avec offre de partenariat, c'est-à-dire un REDIRECT!), je crois que c'est là que l'on pourrait, devrait parler "d'indépendance" (History of the Quebec independence movement ou History of the Quebec independentist movement par exemple). Là, on pourrait donc, de façon légitime, parler plus longuement des Patriotes, de Mercier, de la Nouvelle-France, etc., etc.
- Je suis à 120% d'accord pour que l'on redonne vie à une page pour la Souveraineté-Association.
- J'ai une petite discorde à propos d'une page que j'ai créée et j'aurais peut-être besoin de l'appui de quelqu'un. Il s'agit de List of flags of nations not fully sovereign/List of not fully sovereign nations. D'abord, on l'a "scrappée" (pardonne le terme) impunément et maintenant on lui a donné un nom qui m'horripile: List of Flags of Subnational Entities. Les peuples non-souverains sont-ils des sous-peuples? ...les femmes sont-elles des sous-hommes, les noirs des sous-blancs? Aussi, bien évdemment, Subnational Entities ne tient pas debout puisque cela comprendrais toutes les régions de pays du monde. Je suis tout à fait conscient du caractère politiquement chargé et controversé du mot nation (t'en sais un bout à ce sujet, je crois, selon les combats que tu as mené toi-même dans les discussions) et je crois fermement à la nécessité de la neutralité sur Wikipedia alors j'ai trouvé un compromis pour des titres: List of flags of non-sovereign peoples/List of non-sovereign peoples. J'aimerais le suggérer mais, puisqu'une personne a annulé la page et une autre a changé le titre (donc, 2 contre 1), j'aurais peut-être besoin d'un soutien additionnel. Dis-moi si tu serais prêt à écrire un petit mot à cet effet sur la page de discussion de l'article.
- Quand est-ce que tu vas te donner la page personnelle que tu mérites, bon sang? ;)
Voilà, c'est tout. J'attendrai tes réponse, alors. :) Passe une bonne journée.
MNQFLQMLNQCSNFTQ
Est-ce vraiment sage de placer le MLNQ dans la section Civil (c'était moi qui l'avait ajouté)?? J'avais également ajouté IPSO et, à ce sujet, aucun autre mouvement sur la page, je crois, n'utilise les abréviations... Cette page est pour informer, informer les gens qui ne connaissent pas encore ces mouvements, dans l'espoir qu'ils les comprendront mieux. Je trouve plutôt stérile de remplir la section d'abréviations pour des gens à qui MNQCSNFTQ ne veut pas dire grand chose, *surtout* puisqu'il n'y a pas encore de pages pour ces organisations, où ils pourraient trouver davantage d'information. Pourquoi ne pas wikifier la section, c'est-à-dire la présenter avec la même clarté que les autres? Finalement, crois-tu, puisque l'on inclut la CSN et semblables, que l'on pourrait inclure aussi l'Union des Artistes dans Cultural, un autre organisme dont la principale raison d'être n'est pas l'indépendantisme, mais qui en est malgré tout très proche? Merci et salut. ;) --Liberlogos 17:36, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Hi! I didn't leave any links for you (I've been under pressure at work so I hadn't any chance to chase up links). So the links you received didn't come from me! Sorry. FearÉIREANN 20:00, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Invitation
Salut Mathieugp. D'abord, j'aimerais te souligner que je n'ai pas encore eu de tes nouvelles au sujet de mon dernier message! Ensuite, je t'invite fraternellement à ajouter ton nom, à te joindre à la nouvelle communauté Wikipedians/Quebec (ainsi qu'à inviter les Québécois de Wiki que tu connais). Merci et bienvenue! --Liberlogos 04:47, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Merci de ta réponse. Tu ne m'as pas répondu au sujet du MLNQ. Aussi, est-ce que ça te dérangerais que l'on mette les noms complets pour les organisations qui ne sont pas des syndicats? Je crois que c'est pertinent.
- Aussi, merci beaucoup de t'être joint à la communauté. Si tu le peux, parle de la nouvelle communauté aux autres Wikipédiens Québécois (ou reliés au Québec, même des Franco-Américains) que tu connais pour que l'on puisse mieux se connaître, mieux partager et mieux s'aider. À bientôt! --Liberlogos 14:53, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
More on Irish
Hi. I meant to leave a note earlier but I've got some more bad news on the Irish language. A newspaper report in the Irish Times about a week ago said that the new examination of the size of the Gaeltachtai (damn - on a mac I'd know how to put in the fada over the i. But I've not idea how to do it on a PC!) will see the them reduced to a depressing 11,000. In other words, there are only 11,000 Irish speakers living in Irish-speaking parts of the country and many of them are elderly, with english-speaking children. As a passionate supporter of Irish, it is hard to know what to say. I hate the idea of an Ireland where no-one is a native speaker, with a cultural link to areas of continuous Irish speaking, and where the only Irish speakers are english speakers who learnt Irish as a second language. Unfortuntately those who predicted that there will be no Irish speakers by 2020 may well have been over-optimistic, with its actual death potentially sooner, as little as a decade away.
The complete and utter failure of independent Ireland to save its native language is mind-boggling. Unfortunately instead of a coherent, workable stragegy, all independent Ireland offered was a small band of fanatics who highjacked the language and so alienated the majority that people who might have been favourably disposed to the language, came to hate it with a vengence (an experience hundreds of thousands of school-children faced).
I found it sad once to hear a recording of President Douglas Hyde recite his Declaration of Office in the Roscommon Dialect of Irish at his inauguration as president of Ireland in 1938, knowing that when he died in 1949 he was almost certainly the last speaker in that dialect, and the recording of him in 1938 effectively the only recording of a dialect that could be traced back millennia. Now it looks like all the remaining dialects are similarly destined to die. The ultimate irony, as someone from Conradh na nGaeilge (The Gaelic League), said bitterly on television recently, is that under British rule Irish would probably be flourishing, because it would have a symbolic importance it lacked in independent Ireland, and because the fanatics would not have been able to highjack the education and do such catastrophic damage.
I am reminded of Ernest Blythe, the Irish language fanatic who controlled the Abbey Theatre and was so fanatical that he forced the Abbey to perform sixth rate garbage in Irish rather than first rate plays in English. By the time he died in the 1970s the Abbey actors had developed such a detestation of the language that one puked on the stage when he heard the new management were going to have an Irish language play (ironically, not the Blythe crap but a first class one). Some actors walked out rather than "do that bloody language". Yet many of them started their careers as Gaelgoiri themselves but were sickened by the bullying.
Another example: in 1990 the new Irish president, Mary Robinson, met her new (Irish speaking) secretary who said "you will of course sign your name as gaeilge (in Irish)?" When she said she already had a signature, Mary Robinson he looked through her and muttered "we'll get back to that" (ie. that's what you think). The idea that a president of Ireland could be forced to sign her signature in Irish by Irish language brigade was symbolic of the attitude. She might have agreed if asked; she was after all someone who made a point of learning Irish for the job. But the fanatics didn't ask, they presumed and when they didn't get their way they bullied. Which is why so few people speak the language today and why today there are more Chinese speakers, Russian speakers, Japanese speakers, French speakers, Spanish speakers etc etc than Irish speakers in Ireland. And why the Department of the Gaeltacht (the government department for the Gaeltachtai) found to their embarrassment that the location of their planned new headquarters, supposedly in the heart of the gaeltacht, is actually in an entirely english-speaking area, and that three-quarters of the supposed gaeltacht there is actually no more Irish speaking than Italy is Latin-speaking. It is all too depressing, but it is hard to see an ancient language like Irish in freefall and not feel anything else but depressing. (BTW the nearest native Irish speakers to me physically right now are about 150 people living thirty miles away from me. And I am living in a city of one million people. And all too few people in Ireland would be able to understand what my Irish language name on wikipedia actually means!)
PS - sorry for the length of the note. It is something I feel strongly and emotionally about. FearÉIREANN 17:42, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply on the talk page. However I don't think your ideas are workable.
- The size of the modern real gaeltacht makes it impossible to follow a one language only. There is a mimumum level of population needed to facilitate the provision of all services in one language. At 11,000 speakers the actual gaeltacht is simply too small.
For example,
- you cannot provide an Irish language internet.
- An all-Irish television station is financially impossible (that was tried, but you can't do it when some programmes had such small audiences there were more people in the studio making the programme than were actually at home watching it , as was the case before it went bilingual).
- You cannot have sports organised that way; 99.9% of sports players playing gaelic games, let alone rugby, soccer, etc are english speakers.
- There are not enough clergymen of the various denominations capable of ministering to their flocks, and with such a small population base the chances of that community providing its own clergymen are non-existent. (Dublin with 1.1 million last year produced 2 Roman Catholic priests, 20 Church of Ireland priests and 40 buddhist priests. If you can only get that number from 1.1 million, the chances of producing Irish-only speaking priests from the gaeltacht are non-existent.)
- With so few children among the gaeltacht population, it is almost impossible to provide totally Irish-only education;
- With such a small population, there is not the economic strength to provide jobs in Irish for the community. Therefore most of the jobs available will have to come from the galltacht (english-language Ireland) and are indeed located outside the gaeltacht.
- one of the major industries in the gaeltacht area is tourism. That means visitors who don't speak Irish. A single language policy in the gaeltacht would kill off the local tourism industry and in one stroke kill Irish stone dead, as 8,000 of the 11,000 people in the gaeltacht are employed in the tourism sector. Without tourism they'd have to move out of the gaeltacht and work as english language speakers elsewhere. You'd kill Irish completely in three years with a policy like that.
In other words, an enclusively Irish-language area, without bilingualism, is impossible. An Irish-speaking Ireland is impossible. The only hope is that the language can regenerate itself in a small compact gaeltacht, but that is tragically unlikely as Irish has now dropped below the minimum level of gaeltacht usage to be capable of regenerating itself. Put simply the language is on life-support and all attempts to bring it round using the sort of policies you advocate, have only made it worse. At this stage it would take a miracle for the language to survive longterm as a gaeltacht language. Its only likely way of survival, unfortunately, is as a secondary language for english speakers, not a principal language for people in the dying gaeltachtai.FearÉIREANN 20:05, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Quebec French splitted
Suivant ta suggestion de juin, j'ai créé un nouvel article Quebec French lexicon. Un work in progress, mais j'ai cru bon de t'en faire part déjà. --Valmi 23:25, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Contre argumentaire
Merci de m'avoir communiqué tes interrogations. Je soutiens fermement qu'il n'y a pas de raison pourquoi État québécois ne devrait pas être un article. Tu ne m'as pas présenté tes arguments; je suis prêt à les écouter. Je présente les miens. État Québécois est utile pour que les gens comprennent tout de suite ce que veut dire Quebec State (ils comprendront que ce n'est pas une référence à un état fédéré américain, pourquoi le terme est préféré, etc.) Je te rappelle que c'est toi qui voulait séparer les articles (pour History of the Quebec sovereignist movement)! ;) Non, un article sur une expression importante, et son historique, sont pertinents. Il y en a des tonnes, mais laisse-moi te présenter des articles qui existent déjà, et qui sont comparable à ceux dont je suis le fier papa que tu as énumérés.
- État québécois ->> And you are lynching Negroes (deux expressions politiques en partie utilisée par des gouvernement, l'article État québécois étant peut-être en fait plus légitime encore)
- The Three Periods ->> Third Way
- French America ->> Latin America
Pour le cas de Sovereigntist events and strategies, il ressemble à plusieurs articles, dont des listes, mais je pourrais certainement songer à l'inclure dans Quebec sovereigntism (j'y avais pensé).
À part de ça, j'ai quelques autres chose de quoi te parler. D'abord, j'ai créé une page nommée Opposition to the Charest government. La liste est à compléter, et je t'invite comme ça, si tu veux, à contribuer si tu trouves quelque chose à écrire pour les sections encore vides (parfois, il faut faire de la recherche pour ces choses, ce qui est peut être long et ardu, alors de l'aide est évidemment appréciée). De plus, j'attire ton attention sur la page Quebec general election, 2003 que j'ai totalement revampée (et dont je suis plutôt fier). :P Finalement, puisque tu es un Wikipédien avec encore plus d'ancienneté que moi, est-que tu sais s'il y a un moyen de... disons, avoir une communauté à propos de certains sujets... Par exemple, une communauté de québécois, ou de gens qui s'intéressent aux sujets conscernant le Québec, où l'on pourrait communiquer en groupe, attirer l'attention sur les contributions intéressantes récentes touchant le Québec, lancer des appels aux ajouts à faire pour des stubs, demander de l'aide à propos de recherces de références ou d'un sujet d'article que l'on ne connaît pas suffisemment mais qui mérite d'être traité plus longuement, etc.? Est-ce que ce type de chose existe déjà? Je crois que l'un des projets wikipédiens connexes le permettrait. Ah, finalement, crois-tu qu'on remplira un jour History of Quebec? Ça presse! ;) Tu as des suggestions, stratégies à ce sujet? Enfin, lis-moi tout ça et réponds-moi quand tu le pourras. À la prochaine! --Liberlogos 08:23, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Act on rights and prerogatives, etc.
En fait, d'après les informations sur assnat.qc.ca (http://www.assnat.qc.ca/archives-36leg1se/fra/Publications/projets-loi/etat-051.htm#et99f099), la loi a été adoptée le 7 décembre 2000 et sanctionnée six jours plus tard, devenant la loi E-20.2, qu'on retrouve sur le site des Publications du Québec avec les autres lois. Vérifie tes sources et les miennes, mais il me semble qu'il s'agisse bel et bien d'une loi. --[[User:Valmi|Valmi ✒]] 04:28, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Il y a pourtant bien une date de sanction spécifiée sur le site de l'AN[3] (http://www.assnat.qc.ca/archives-36leg1se/fra/Publications/projets-loi/etat-051.htm#et99f099). Par ailleurs, le projet de loi serait-il listé sur le site des Publications du Québec[4] (http://www2.publicationsduquebec.gouv.qc.ca/dynamicSearch/telecharge.php?type=2&file=/E_20_2/E20_2.html) s'il n'avait pas force de loi ? --[[User:Valmi|Valmi ✒]] 18:13, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Ouh là là, moi qui n'étais pas fou de l'idée d'écrire cet article dans un premier temps, me voilà pris avec un beau mal de tête. En tout cas, il y a dans le dossier Vigile pas mal d'infos qui gagneraient à être intégrées à l'article Wikipédia... si tu t'en sens l'énergie ! Pour ce qui est de déterminer avec certitude si la loi E-22.2 est vraiment une loi, ma foi, je n'ai aucune idée comment on va procéder. --[[User:Valmi|Valmi ✒]] 00:29, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
List of Quebec television series
Salut Mathieu...just to let you know, I've reverted WhisperToMe's redirect to List of Canadian television series. It's a really pointless discussion -- separating all TV series in Canada out by province would be just silly, since most Canadian provinces don't have a distinct media culture that warrants its own separate encyclopedia topic. (For what it's worth, take some solace in the fact that none of the Canadians have, as far as I know, tried to pull this stunt. Whisper is from Texas, and really oughtta keep his nose out of things he doesn't know anything about.) Bearcat 08:44, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Anglo-Quebec
Salut Mathieu...I don't know as much about Anglo-Quebecers as I do about Franco-Ontarians, but I'd be happy to help out as much as I can. (I'm one of those nasty franco-ontarians who got raised anglo, though unlike some of us, I had access to enough French that I'm at least awkwardly bilingual :-) Bearcat 23:48, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Re: Roosevelt's 1942 Letter To King
Hello Mathieu,
Thank you very, very much for your help with sourcing Roosevelt's 1942 Letter To Mackenzie King. The book source and website were a great help! Thanks again and take care, Dave
Charter of the French Language
I can read French.
Until one of writes a full article on the opposition to Bill 101, it fits well under the category of 'Opposition.' Contrary to your opinion, my sources are accurate. They reflect a prominent minority opinion, which though you may disagree with, cannot be said to be invalid. You should note that B'nai B'rith is respected internationally as a group in support of the rights of Jews. The Gazette is one of Montreal's most read daily newspapers. The Mirror is a widely circulated alternative newspaper.
If you'd like my political opinion, here it is: I agree with the need to support the French language in Quebec, but I don't believe the gestapo tactics of the language police can be justified in a democracy.
But my political opinion, and yours, are irrelevant in ultimately considering how the article should be constituted. In deleting a reference to a valid, minority point-of-view, you are showing a clear bias which harms the objectivity of the article. Wikipedia is not a medium for reproducing the official justifications of government policy; is it intended as a space to report objectively, and any reporting will show both positive and negative reactions to a given subject.
Until an article specifically on opposition is created, I will revert the page to its edited state. If you dispute the neutrality of the article, you are free to add a NPOV notice, but I think the article as a whole reflects both sides of the issue well. You might consider adding a section which shows the wide support the Charter has among Francophones and the perceived good in forcing immigrants to school their children in French. You should note the Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:Conflict Resolution", particularly sections that call for better edits to be made instead of deletions.
It is unlikely that one of us will convince the other that his point of view is correct, we should be able to have an article that does not dogmatically mirror the views of the Québec government.
In quoting popular sources, I was trying to represent opposition to the Charter of the French language, not analyse whether that opposition is valid from a sociolinguistic perspective. Though the Montreal English press and B'nai B'rith aren't authoritative sources on sociology or linguistics, they do reflect the point of view of a prominent minority. Surely you cannot deny that.
Charter of the French Language
Your comments on fallacies are irrelevant. I am not arguing in favour or against of the Charter of the French langauge, I am merely reporting on opposition to it. If you'll read the style guides for Wikipedia, you'll note that Wikipedia doesn't aim to present essays. It aims to present reports, and I am reporting on widespread opposition to the French charter in non-Francophone communities.
To be more specific, so that you'll understand: I am not representing arguments against the French Charter. I am representing opinions held by groups. I have no need to prove that those opinions are rational, simply that they exist, which they obviously do. I could find ten thousand newspaper articles that show Anglo and immigrant discontent with 101. You, I note, have not found one reference to support your dogmatic rendering of party line bullshit.
You have clearly never left Quebec for any appreciable amount of time. I can see by this statement:
Also, the law actually forces all Quebec children to go to the French education system until the age of 16. An exception is made for the children of the English-speaking minority of Quebec. In Ontario, children are also forced to go to school until the age of 16, but since going to French school is not a viable option (there is not even one university), there never really was a need to explicitly direct immigrant children to English schools. Funny how your statement made this reality look sooo bad... -- Mathieugp 07:05, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
that you do not know that, even in unilingual Edmonton, of all cities, children have the option of being educated exclusively in French. In fact, many Anglophone parents send their children to these schools. You should also note that Edmonton, of all cities, has a University faculty that grants French degrees (Faculte St. Jean).
Oh, and this was great: "No, I cannot deny that disinformation is a problem in most Western societies"
And you wonder why people think the PQ has totalitarian leanings. Where did you pick that sentiment up? 1984?
Well, much as I support your attempt to monopolize the truth, I'm going to have ask that the article be protected.
To Mathieugp
I posted my response on the article's talk page. I'd like to stress I don't have anything against you personally. We just disagree. Sometimes I say rude things when I respond too quickly.
Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
- Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
- Multi-Licensing Guide
- Free the Rambot Articles Project
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:
- Option 1
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
OR
- Option 2
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)| talk)
Quebec television series redux
WhisperToMe has come back for another kick at the "should be merged with List of Canadian television series" can. I've posted an RFC at Wikipedia:Requests for comment. Bearcat 03:23, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Just thougth i should mention it: "the quiet revolution" is also a book - but the writer here talks about globalization and builddown of the national state...
Quebec sovereignty movement
As a past contributor to this page, can you take a look? There is an editing dispute with User:JillandJack. In my opinion he has made a lot of POV changes. Perhaps you can offer useful suggestions. -- Curps 21:08, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
User:JillandJack
User:JillandJack has been blocked; it appears they were merely the latest reincarnation of a previously-banned user, User:DW (a/k/a User:Joe Canuck, User:Angelique, etc.) Bearcat 00:21, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
JillandJack
Hi Mathieu, I just wanted to let you know that JillandJack has been blocked, as the latest incarnation of the banned User:DW (who was also our old friend Angelique!). Adam Bishop 00:23, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Quebec wikipedians notice board
You are hereby cordially invited to join the Quebec Wikipedians notice board.
Vous êtes cordialement invité à collaborer au Quebec Wikipedians notice board. Circeus 19:14, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)
Esther Delisle
Could you have a look at Esther Delisle? I should warn you that you may pop a vessel. I near did and I like Dr. Delisle. Anyway, it seems to me like a highly propagandistic depiction of the controversy over her first book. I don't think she would endorse it, for a start. I removed some POV, but my knowledge of the dispute is limited. In particular, I've never been able to find any follow-up about the serious methodological criticisms that were made of her work, apart from her own. John FitzGerald 20:02, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC) [formerly your bud Trontonian]
- Thanks for the information, Mathieu. I'll check it out. This controversy, by the way, has received almost no coverage in English Canada, and what it has received has come chiefly from people with one point of view -- that Esther Delisle is a victim of Quebec nationalism. I suppose one aspect that needs to be considered is the transformation of a deadly dull academic treatise into a cause célèbre. John FitzGerald
- I mean, Edward VIII was a Nazi sympathizer.
I have made further changes to the article to remove POV and make it clear that the objections to Dr. Delisle's work are not simply hysterical. I have also linked to Gary Caldwell's article and a couple of pages at vigile.net. Dr. Delisle and her detractors (and the francophone and anglophone media) really have little to be proud of. When Dr. Delisle responds to academic criticisms through a lawyer one suspects that things are being carried too far. And Gérard Bouchard's refusal to accept any of Delisle's evidence because some of it is inaccurate seems a tad irresponsible. As for the media, the francophone media seem to have been playing the familiar tune "The English Hate Us," when in fact probably about 10 English Canadians in total could tell you who Esther Delisle is, and while English Canadians are well aware of the antisemitism of their own leaders in the 30s and 40s. The anglophone media's rare examinations of the issue seem to have been examples of their usual lazy resorting to cliche and myth – Quebec nationalists were mad at Esther Delisle, so they must be oppressing her. The reason, however, the truth has never come out in the anglophone press is that English Canadians don't appear to give a rat's ass about the issue.
Well, I'm pretty busy myself so will probably be leaving the article alone until I can do a more comprehensive edit. Thanks for the help. John FitzGerald 13:15, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I've done some more work on the article. It's been a valuable experience for me, if for no one else (for one thing, vigile.net introduced me to David Rome's work). As my next steps I'm going to check what Richler said about her in his book and incorporate that in the article, and also investigate the question of how Delisle ever got a doctorate for a piece of armchair theorizing. The issue was addressed in the documentary about her, but not thoroughly enough.
- Reading about Delisle's work also shattered one of my favourite illusions – that Canadians are less excitable than other people. Delisle's thesis and first book are pretty well ho-hum, but anglophones and francophones alike have been popping their corks over it for years. John FitzGerald 15:53, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Aboriginal language maps
Hi Mathieu! Your suggestion regarding the Atlas of Canada is a great idea. The Canada-scale maps will be especially useful to newcomers to the subject. I've never uploaded an image before but I'll look into how that's done. Do you know how images on government sites fit under Wikipedia's image usage policies? Great idea, Kurieeto 14:12, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
Metro in Montreal
Hi Mathieu! A tiny correction to one of your pages: the multilingual support in the Montréal Métro is in fact lacking. The signs on the trains are fine. However I live near Snowdon metro stop and am appalled that the only emergency exit signs from the trains are the big red Sortie signs. I never noticed until my father, visiting from abroad, said "'Sortie.' What does that mean?"
But that's not why I'm cluttering up your perfectly nice talk page. I'm writing to ask for references on Quebec history. What should I read to better understand this place? I find Quebec so strange, even after two years. I speak French, I speak Italian. I speak English. I believe Montreal can be one of the 10 most vibrant cities on the planet. And maybe it already is. But when I try to navigate Quebec bureaucracy, when I deal with the Montreal public school boards (both of them!), when I read the editorial page of any major Montreal newspaper, I feel like I walked into someone else's hangover. Help me Mathieu! MySamoanAttorney 17:31, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)
Quebec Collaboration of the week created
The QCOTW has been created over at WP:QCOTWCirceus 17:54, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
COTW Project
You voted for History of Quebec, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.
Thanks
Hi Mathieu. Thanks for the long response on my talk page RE language politics. It's much appreciated. I didn't read it until tonight, and I don't have time to respond now but I wanted to thank you for your time. MySamoanAttorney
Meetup / Meeting / Rencontre
Bonjour, Mathieu. J'ai fait renaître les "Meetups" ici. Pourras-tu assister à la prochaine rencontre? --Liberlogos 05:53, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Rebonjour. Puisque l'avis du rendez-vous fut tardif et que l'on a pu avoir le temps de ramasser suffisamment de confirmations, que dirais-tu de reporter la rencontre? Ça te serait peut-être plus pratique. Peut-être mercredi le 15, ou le 22? --Liberlogos 07:10, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Je ne peux moi-même être présent lundi le 13 au soir, en fin de compte. Je suggère à nouveau de reporter le rendez-vous le 15 ou le 22. --Liberlogos 07:42, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- J'espère que tu liras ceci à temps. Nous nous rencontrons finalement mercredi le 15 juin à 19 heures, au Laïka, 4040 Saint-Laurent (adresse (http://www.google.ca/local?q=la%C3%AFka&hl=fr&lr=&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2005-14,GGLD:fr&sa=X&near=Montr%C3%A9al,+QC&radius=0&latlng=45512363,-73675627,2844804206205661038)) (description (http://www.montrealplus.ca/portalf/profile.do?profileID=77342)). C'est un hotspot. Alors, à très bientôt! --Liberlogos 07:00, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Je ne peux moi-même être présent lundi le 13 au soir, en fin de compte. Je suggère à nouveau de reporter le rendez-vous le 15 ou le 22. --Liberlogos 07:42, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)