Jump to content

User talk:Mathieugp

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Liberlogos (talk | contribs) at 06:46, 25 September 2006 (→Quebec bashing). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

---

Bonjour,

Je suis journaliste pour La Presse, à Montréal. J'aimerais faire une entrevue avec vous en tant que contributeur actif de wikipedia, pour un article sur le sujet. Si vous êtes d'accord, le mieux pour moi serait par téléphone... Pouvez-vous me donner un numéro et un moment où vous appeler ?

Merci !

Nicolas Ritoux niko@hysterie.qc.ca

Je suis intéressé dans la mesure où mon nom ne paraîtra pas dans l'article. Aussi, je préfèrerais que l'entrevue se fasse par écrit, ici-même dans cette page de discussion. --Mathieugp 14:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zut... je viens seulement aujourd'hui de trouver ton message. J'avais pensé que tu m'écrirais par courriel.. dommage parce que j'aurais beaucoup aimé t'inclure à l'article.

Anyway, il est paru mardi dans La Presse (29 aout) Si tu cherches Wikipédiens sur Cyberpresse.ca tu devrais le trouver. en passant les entrevues par courriel ça ne donne pas grand chose en général... alors sur une page de discussion, c'est encore pire ! rien ne vaut la parole...


Salut Mathieu,

J'ai quelques questions pour toi. D'abord, de plus en plus, je trouve que tant en anglais qu'en français les articles sur les dialectes de l'anglais et du français (surtout sur le Joual) sont archi-erronés, incomplets ou mal organisés. Je cherche à former une équipe pour faire une refonte des articles sur le français du Québec. Tu sembles être une des personnes qui connaissent le plus, du moins le plus sur la demolinguistique et la situation actuelle du français et de l'anglais au Canada. Est-ce que tu pourras travailler avec moi sur une refonte? Et peut-on faire de la pub sur the Quebec Notice Board? Moi, je suis bcp moins doué pour les complexités techiniques (You're the techie, remember!). Il faudrait inviter ceux qui s'y connaissent et pas juste les gens qui veulent avoir une voix au chapitre. -- CJ Withers 06:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Salut Mathieu! Merci de tes contributions d'articles, je m'en suis servi plusieurs fois!

Je voulais te proposer qqch que j'ai remarqué concernant un article. Comme je vérifie l'anglais de bcp d'articles traduits du français vers l'anglais, je normalise aussi leurs titres et les termes. Le titre de la version anglaise de l'article littérature québécoise est plutôt guindé; il devrait lire "Quebec Literature" et pas "Literature of Quebec". Cette syntaxe anglaise (adj + "Literature") s'utilise pour tous les autres articles sur les littératures nationales. Je t'en parle ici parce que je ne voulais pas déplacer l'article ou le modifier sans que tu ne le saches. Alors, qu'est-ce qu'on fait?

D'ailleurs, dans tous les articles concernant le Québec, je vérifie que la "québécité" est transparente ou bien comprise en anglais. Par exemple, souvent, dans le domaine juridique, on dit ou écrit en anglais "matrimonial regime" pour "régime matrimonial"; cependant, ce n'est pas clair ce que ça veut dire pour le commun des mortels anglophones, y compris bcp d'Anglo-québécois. Donc, dans ce cas, je mettrais "marriage contract scheme" pour l'amour de la transparence.

À part les corrections, je travaille un peu sur l'article de Denise Bombardier en français (tout en le rendant pour ainsi dire plus neutre) et je vais le traduire vers l'anglais.

A+ CJ Withers 06:28, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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)

Ok, no problem. I've deleted it. Angela. 18:00, 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], 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]. 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 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)

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.

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.

- Liberlogos

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,

  1. you cannot provide an Irish language internet.
  2. 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).
  3. You cannot have sports organised that way; 99.9% of sports players playing gaelic games, let alone rugby, soccer, etc are english speakers.
  4. 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.)
  5. With so few children among the gaeltacht population, it is almost impossible to provide totally Irish-only education;
  6. 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.
  7. 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.

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, 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]. Par ailleurs, le projet de loi serait-il listé sur le site des Publications du Québec[4] 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:

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| 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) (description). C'est un hotspot. Alors, à très bientôt! --Liberlogos 07:00, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Rencontre wikipédienne du 11 juillet

Est-ce qu'on t'y verra? (RSVP ici) --Liberlogos 8 July 2005 09:21 (UTC)

Esther Delisle again

Thank you very much for the kind words about Esther Delisle. And thanks also for introducing me to vigile.net, which played an important role in helping me improve the article.

Vigile.net was like a breath of fresh air to me. In English Canada in particular, the discussion of constitutional issues and of Quebec's status is usually reduced to mythology and misrepresentation. People are also taught a mythologized Canadian history which glosses over the development of federal-provincial relations in Canada (and over the idea of Canada as a political nationality only). Well, I could go on, but I'm sure you get my point. Thanks again. John FitzGerald

First Nations of Canada

Hi Mathieu, as an editor of articles dealing with Aboriginal peoples in Canada, I'd be very interested in your comments regarding the proposed move of First Nations of Canada to First Nations. Discussion is being held at Talk:First Nations of Canada#Renaming the article. Thanks, Kurieeto 16:20, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Mathieu, I appreciate it. Kurieeto 19:02, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

A. Lafontaine

I guess there's nothing we can do to have him banned permanently, although technically he should be blocked whenever he reappears since DW is "hard-banned". I've noticed him changing Patriotes Rebellion to Lower Canada Rebellion, since I have a lot of that stuff on my watchlist as well...I don't have a problem with that specifically but I can see what you are complaining about too. This is the fouth of fifth time people have complained though, so I think this incarnation can just be blocked entirely. Adam Bishop 20:30, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, his IP must change every time. It would be possible to block of whole range of IPs, if we knew what his IP was, but that is impractical because it often blocks a number of other people as well (at one point I think all of Halifax was blocked because of a certain problem user). Adam Bishop 21:45, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Prochaine rencontre montréalaise de Wikipédia

Tentative de date de rencontre: Lundi le 15 août, à 19h. Ton apport au débat concernant le choix du lieu pour ce rassemblement est bienvenu. Aussi, j'apprécierais beaucoup que tu soulignes si ta suggestion, le Café Touski (que j'ai nommé comme lieu potentiel), est un hotspot. --Liberlogos 03:37, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merci de confirmer (ou infirmer) ta présence ici. --Liberlogos 03:57, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Liberlogos file pas, changement de date du 15 au 22, même bat-heure même bat-chaîne. Ça te va? SVP refaire ton RSVP. Merci! Lawrence Lavigne 18:47, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Date du lundi 22 CONFIRMÉE; lieu de l'Estaminet CONFIRMÉ. J'ai aussi pu aller chercher la confirmation de la présence d'une 4e personne. Bombance. --Liberlogos 22:28, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

La prochaine rencontre devrait avoir lieu dimanche, le 4 SEPTEMBRE. Si tu peux venir, écris-le moi personnellement (sur ma page de discussion ou par courriel; et si tu peux pas, écris-le moi aussi). Signale-moi aussi si tu es intéressé ou pas à aller bouffer au resto avant d'aller ailleurs pour le vif du sujet. La page des rencontres n'est pas mise à jour encore, mais elle le sera bientôt. Merci! --Liberlogos 01:33, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Salut Mathieu,

Par rapport au lien que tu a ajouté, je crois que c'est peut-être une mauvaise idée. Pour moi, çà risque juste de donné l'impression que les québecois sont des français de france vivant au Canada. Çà peut sembler niaiseux mais c'est un problème que je recontre souvent en australie.

Peut-être il serait mieux d'avoir un lien vers une liste d'émissions qui existe dans plus d'une version dans divers pays francophones: la petite vie (québec et belgique), un gars, une fille (divers incarnations), star académie, etc... --Marc pasquin 17:10, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merci de ta réponse, crois-tu qu'on devrait ôter le lien quand-même ?--Marc pasquin 01:38, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Tu as écris:
> Non, on ne devrait pas l'ôter. On devrait même en ajouter le plus possible, un vers
> l'allemand, un vers l'espagnol, un vers le mandarin.
J'ai dù mal m'exprimer, je parlais d'ôter le lien vers la page (en anglais) des sites d'émissions françaises (c'est-à-dire, de france):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_French_television_series
par la même logique, on devrait mêttre un lien vers les émissions britaniques sur la page des émission canadienne-anglaise. Je sais que c'est pas toi qui l'a mis là mais j'aimerais avoir ton opinion.--Marc pasquin 17:51, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Canada

Thank you for trying to summarize the debate. I have promised myself that I will not post anymore on that issue on that talk page. I really shouldn't even be here, but I appreciate the honest effort that you have made. My comment is that Theses 2 and 3 are not mutually exclusive. I agree with both of them, generally. "D of C" was used in legislation (as was "Canada" from 1867 onward), but it is no longer used, and it was never defined explicitly as the name of the country. Thanks again for your contribution. Ground Zero | t 22:11, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Contacts sur Fr.Wikipédia

Salut Mathieu. Navré que tu n'aies pu te joindre à nous à la précédente rencontre; ce sera pour la prochaine. Pourrais-tu inviter les gens que tu as connu via le Wikipédia francophone à se faire membre du groupe de rencontre? Si l'approche est faite par quelqu'un avec qui elles et ils ont déjà eu contact, cela pourrait être plus facile de les convaincre. J'apprécie ton aide. Merci. --Liberlogos 08:01, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

29 septembre

Prochaine date de rencontre, à moins d'un changement nécessaire: le jeudi 29 septembre à 18h. Confirme ta présence ou donne-moi des nouvelles. À bientôt. --Liberlogos 01:46, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Papineau (et sa tête)

Puisque tu as une connaissance enviable du sujet, j'apporte à ton attention cette modification: [5]. Te semble-t-elle justifiée? --Liberlogos 09:13, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New diagrams on forced Union of 1840

Good job on the diagrams. Mine were ugly looking because I used an old version old Dia which at the time didn't have antialiazing. However, there is an error in the bottom one: it should be 1848 and not 1948 for the ministerial responsibility. I was wondering also if it would not be better to write "Crown" or "Monarch" instead of "Queen". The Monarch of Britain is a Queen since Victoria, but before that it was a King and it might be a King in the future.

Also, would you mind translating the diagrams to French so that we can upload them to fr:Acte d'Union (1840)?

Here are the bits of text you would need to modify:

  • United Canada = Canada-Uni
  • Queen = Reine (or if we change it to Monarch then Monarque or Crown = Couronne)
  • Metropolis = Métropole
  • Colony = Colonie
  • Governor General = Gouverneur Général
  • Executive Council = Conseil exécutif
  • Legislative Council = Conseil législatif
  • House of Assembly = Assemblée législative
  • 42 MPs from Canada West = 42 députés du Canada-Ouest
  • 42 MPs from Canada East = 42 députés du Canada-Est
  • Population of United Canada = Population du Canada-Uni
  • Hierarchy of power under the Union Act (1840) = Hiérarchie des pouvoirs sous l'Acte d'Union (1840)
  • Ministerial Responsibility = Responsabilité ministérielle
  • Cabinet of Ministers = Conseil des ministres
  • appointed = nommé
  • stems from = est issu de
  • elected = élu

Thanks! -- Mathieugp 22:34, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks. I have to hit myself for not saving the original but only the PNGs.... I changed 1948 to 1848 first of all. I'll do as much as possible. But note that I'm just doing this manually with PS. Thanks, -- WB 22:58, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Finished. added on fr:Acte d'Union (1840) also.

-- WB 01:26, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User Categorisation

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Quebec page as living in or being associated with Quebec. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Quebec for instructions.--Rmky87 01:07, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Parti Québécois leadership race and such

Merci pour le compliment au sujet de l'article Parti Québécois leadership race, 2005. De ta part, c'est un honneur. Je fut bien occupé ces derniers temps alors je n'ai pu fixer de nouvelle rencontre wikipédienne. Toi, quand est-ce que ça t'adonnerais ce mois-ci? --Liberlogos 06:41, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Canada

Hi there! I'd like to invite you to explore Wikimedia Canada, and create a list of people interested in forming a local chapter for our nation. A local chapter will help promote and improve the organization, within our great nation. We'd also like to encourage everyone to suggest projects for our national chapter to participate in. Hope to see you there! -- user:zanimum

En effet...

Hey, Mattieu, thanks for getting back so soon.

En effet, it's not obvious, grammatically speaking, why in English we have such a variety of nouns phrases. The difference lies more in the connotations and echo meanings. Take this example for "Douane Canada":

  • Canada Customs
  • Canada's Customs
  • Customs of Canada
  • Canadian Customs

The easiest way to decide on which one to use is if you compare them first to other similar structures and then one variant to another.

If we take "Canada Customs" and "Customs of Canada", the obvious difference lies in its length. The latter sounds more official or bureaucratic, depending on how you look at it. Think: The State of New York vs. New York State. Also, in English, we tend to avoid the "of + NOUN" structure when there's a trail of them. So instead of writing/saying "the policy of negotiating of the contracts in the Department of Health", we'd anglicize it to "the Health Department contract negotiation policy". Also, some forms are considered official or designate certain bodies: The City of New York vs. New York City. Some places even recognize both as official.

Back to "Quebec Literature". "Literature of Quebec", though perfectly correct, sounds more formal, more erudite. For this reason, it's probably chosen in snobby course titles at the university, unless they strive for simplicity and directness. And yes, there are loads of discrepancies as to how people title things on Wikipedia. Take "American Literature", and "Literature of the United States". Honestly, the latter example sounds conflated. And you can probably feel the differences between "Quebec's literature" (sounds like personification) and "Québécois literature" (implies that it is only French and only nationalist). However, in general "Quebec" is the adjectival counterpart to "québécois". In the end, though, something like "Francophone Literature" cannot be altered.

On a different note, when English-speakers look something up, they are more likely to think of the canonical form in terms of the difference. They think more "Quebec" than "literature". It's akin to how we, in English, have trouble finding a heading in the yellow pages. Think: movie theatre; no one looks under "theatre" first.

Puis, je vais donner un coup d'oeil à la traduction que t'as faite. Entre-temps, si ça te tente de me contacter par courriel, voici mes adresses : querellew@hotmail.com ou christopher.withers@videotron.ca Et si jamais t'as du temps pour jaser, laisse-moi savoir, car il me semble qu'on est sur la même ligne d'ondes côté info-gratuite et "décrocheur". ;-)

Aussi, je me demandais si bientôt il y aura un GT quelconque pour discuter en personne et accorder nos violons. Je soutiens la ressource et les principes de Wikipédia d'autant plus que c'est facilement l'endroit le plus accessible pour trouver des infos sur le Québec. Alors, un travail de concertation et de qualité ne fait qu'enrichir notre bien public.

Prochaine rencontre des wikipédiens montréalais

Ô loyal "sujet" de l'Empire meetupique, portant "vraie et sincère" allégeance! Merci du message; je pensais justement à préparer un nouveau rendez-vous après la pause des fêtes. Le 6 mars me semblerait pas mal. ...et toi? --Liberlogos 03:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Je ne sais pas si la date du 6 mars sera possible. Juste pour t'avertir. ...mais je vais tenter d'avoir une date le plus vite et on s'en reparle. Merci. ;) --Liberlogos 00:16, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. J'ai suggéré le jeudi 9 mars à CJ Withers. J'attends sa réponse. T'es libre ce jour? --Liberlogos 16:42, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Quebec parks

Hi Mathieu, Please explain your phrase: And this language is not neutral. Using "federal" and "provincial" is the only way to remain neutral (from your edit summary of "List of Quebec parks"). I really don't want to get into a war of words, but how is national not neutral??? Especially since english speakers only know these parks as such, I would think that this is the preferred term. --P199 22:15, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merci Mathieu, for your informative explanation. But it still leaves one problem: inconsistency with the other national parks in Canada and with their official names. Your explanation draws heavily from the nuances of Canadian politics of which international reades are not aware. In my opinion, the most neutral approach would be to have an international/global perspective. In that regard, it would stand to reason to use the parks' official name/designation (just as we would for the official names of government institutions - which ironically are not consistent as well, e.g. Federal Court, National Energy Board, etc.). --P199 00:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Let's not rename the page - it follows the same naming format as other lists of parks. I tried to standardize the format based on List of Ontario parks.
BTW, you removed the brief explanation I offered on why all parks in Quebec are called national. I think it is necessary for international readers that there is a (brief) explanation to clear up this confusion and since you didn't agree with my statement, maybe you can do that. Merci. --P199 15:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hi, Mathieu, I was writing an article on Mordecai Richler's Oh Canada! Oh Quebec! Requiem for a Divided Country, and was wondering if you could contribute a soverignist viewpoint to it. Thanks for your time. Habsfan|t 01:08, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Impôt pour le carburant d'avion

Salut, puisque tu identifie comme quelqu'un qui protège l'environnement j'ai pensé que tu pourras être interessé à la nouvelle userbox user pro aviation fuel tax. ROGNNTUDJUU! 15:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nation Building

Hiya, you contributed to the talk page of Nation building. I've just flagged up what I think are a bunch of problems with the article and would welcome your input. Cheers Vizjim 15:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox Public Transit

According to Wikipedia:The German solution, here’s a a tip for you: {{User:Olve/Userboxes/Public transport}} (in lieu of the blanked template:User Public Transit). -- Olve 22:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You make me sick

When the French in Quebec had their hairy French asses handed to them by the English, they should all have been put to death, then we wouldn't have scum like you with your hands in our pockets, at the same time talking about independence for your shitty "culture." You make me want to vomit.

When I was a kid, I learned that people who are mean to others are not really bad persons. They are unhappy and suffering. What is making you unhappy to the point of wishing that the genocide of my people had occured? Wasn't the deportation of the Acadians, your human brothers, enough? I hope you find a way to become happy again. Good luck to you person, using the DSL # 4073158 through Bell Sympatico. -- Mathieugp 15:34, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't enough, no, because they were deported and not executed. My "human brothers"? Ha ha ha. How many wedgies did you get in high school?! Fucking Frenchies. What losers.
I don't know why you do not like nationals of France. All of those I have met were nice. However, weren't you talking about Quebecers and Acadians just now? Surely you must know that Quebecers are to the French as the Americans are to the British. I'd rather you insult us then them. At least I'd know what to answer back. What do you have against Quebecers specifically? Do you even know where it is on a map? -- Mathieugp 16:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The rest of the world doesn't distinguish between French from Quebec or France or anywhere else; you're all equally worthless. I know where it is on the map; you, however, probably know nothing of the world beyond the province of Quebec. Hell, you probably don't know about the world beyond the inside of your own ass, where your head spends all it's time. I suggest you take it out once in a while, and hit the books. Your English is atrocious. In English, we use this symbol - ? - to indicate a question, you lazy, lazy French bastard.
By the way, I'm thinking that a lazy Frenchman biting the hand that feeds him (mainly Ontario) has some serious problems. French people know they're inferior, and having to mix with the English makes them feel that even more. They want to surround themselves with their own kind (they should really form a French version of the KKK, they're so similar) because it's easier to ignore their inferiority that way - of language and culture, mainly. Then they can swallow in their own filth, as the French love to do. 70.49.240.232 16:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be indoctrinated in a system of hateful beliefs. I can only advise you consult a psychologist. He may help you get over the bad memories you have of your father fucking your ass. -- Mathieugp 16:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
We're not French, and so don't enjoy being fucked up the ass - or fucking others up the ass, either. Of course the French take it a step further - they like it dry. It's nice to see you're no longer pretending to be loving and tolerant. Just like a lying Frenchman. (Btw, the word you're looking for is "indoctrinated." Work on your English, you lazy French bastard.)

Treason

You might someday regret being so openly treasonous. There's a new Prime Minister, and out West they are not so tolerant of lazy Frenchmen.

I'd like to see Harper try to invade France. That would be funny. -- Mathieugp 16:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Who said anything about France you dumb fuck? Of course, it'd be easy to do anyway. They just laid down for the krauts and took it up the ass. Frenchmen like that sort of thing. Next time, you might want to ask yourself, "Will my reply reinforce the idea of French inferiority, or not?"
I doubt I'll ever be your equal in arrogance and stupidity. You got me there playing your childish game of who can be the dumbest and I lost. You beat me there all the way. I am no match. -- Mathieugp 17:36, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you crazy? No one can beat you at that game!
Oh, I know I said it already, but it is nice to see your true self. That other guy you were pretending to be...let's just say no one will ever be fooled into thinking that's the real you.

Delisle-Richler-Scott

Thabks for letting me know about your plans for the article about the Delisle-Richler controversy. I'll check out your sources and let you know if I think of anything that might be useful. I also have a couple of ideas that might turn up something useful. if they do, I'll let you know.

As you probably remember, one of the things that interests me is the, for want of a better word, semiotic aspects of this dispute. The semiotic aspects of the reaction to Richler in English Canada are also interesting. The press seems largely to have taken the line that he was saying Bad Things rather than incorrect ones (I'm not implying that everything he said was correct, of course).

And what did you do to them last two guys? You must have said something bad about their mamas. Shame on you (or shame on their mamas if it was true). The one who mentions the new prime minister doesn't seem to understand Steve's desire to please Quebec, or his general position on federal-provincial relations. John FitzGerald 14:42, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose I shouldn't treat hate speech, especially the anonymous variety, as if it's amusing. Sorry. I think got a little too used to being branded an American imperialist on another talk page here (in a dispute over word choice, yet). Those guys were merely rude, however. John FitzGerald 20:13, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia naming conventions

I see you created the article "Centre d'études et de recherches internationales de l'Université de Montréal." For your future guidance in creating new articles, this needs an English language title in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions and also because as an English encyclopedia, virtually all users/potential users are and will be English speakers who will have no idea what the French language title would mean. Thank you. Lionel GM 20:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can more-or-less ignore this previous comment from Lionel GM. See further discussions of this issue at Wikipedia:Canadian wikipedians' notice board/discussion#Names of Canadian unilingual Francophone universities in English Wikipedia article titles and at User talk:Lionel GM#Moved pages. --Stéphane Charette 09:04, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, no. A few Canadians, mostly French-Canadians, on an obscure discussion page they created is not Wikipedia policy or proper procedure. However, I will present this in the prescribed manner so that one way or the other they is a factual policy reference in existence. And, just for the record, Université de Montréal 18.2 million Google hits but the University of Montreal gets 56.7 million hits. - Lionel GM 20:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only when you incorrectly do your Google search! If you correctly remember to use quotes in your search, so that the word "university" does not match every page on the internet with the word university, then the search results are:
  • "université de montréal"[6] gives 7,460,000 hits on Google
  • "university of montreal"[7] gives 1,280,000 hits on Google
Note that I've even linked the search page to make it easy to find. --Stéphane Charette 21:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quebec bashing

Salut Mathieu, comment ça va? J'espère organiser une rencontre bientôt; suggère-moi une date si tu veux. Je t'écris parce que je travaillais sur l'article que j'ai créé, Quebec bashing, et là y'a cet article qui sort, "Get under the desk" par Jan Wong, du Globe and Mail. Je compte faire des liens vers cette page depuis d'autres et, si l'on a conséquemment des lecteurs, je voudrais que ça soit bien documenté. Je sais que tu as une "sandbox" Quebec bashing et que tu t'y connais. Pourrais-tu m'aider à détailler les autres exemples (Francis, Richler, etc.) et trouver les références pour les thèmes? J'en serais reconnaissant. --Liberlogos 02:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merci pour la réponse. Je te conseille de jeter un coup d'oeil à Talk:Jan Wong et Talk:Quebec bashing et peut-être éclairer du monde d'un commentaire ou deux. Aussi, j'ai écrit un paragraphe sur l'affaire Lafferty à Quebec bashing#Richard Lafferty. Là, pour Quebec bashing, j'ai écrit et cherché beauuuucoup de trucs. Si tu le pouvais, ça serait bien et utile que tu partes des sections pour Diane Francis, Galganov, Richler, Delisle et/ou les autres en <!--commentaire--> dans la section Quebec bashing#Examples. Y'a aussi la section Quebec bashing#Response qui est à travailler, et si l'on pouvait trouver la défense des gens accusés de Quebec bashing, ça pourrait être utile aussi. --Liberlogos 04:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mathieu, on a besoin de ton aide à Talk:Quebec bashing. Merci. --Liberlogos 07:50, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Serais-tu d'accord pour que toi et moi se rencontrent bientôt pour travailler sur l'article? --Liberlogos 02:54, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
J'aurais en tête une rencontre plus rapprochée, centrée sur cet article, avant la rencontre du QWMG. Es-tu libre dans les cinq prochains jours? L'article est d'actualité et il faut y travailler promptement. --Liberlogos 03:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
J'y songerai. Mais, tout de même, je crois que les nombreuses heures que j'ai dédiées sur un article quand même pas mal, exhaustif, avec plus de 60 références, méritent quelques commentaires positifs. --Liberlogos 04:26, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questions que je soulève:

  • Je sais que certains journalistes ont écrit qu'il y avait des exemples faisant du "Quebec bashing" mais que c'était marginal, non généralisé. Je crois me souvenir d'André Pratte et Chantal Hébert, cette dernière citant Graham Fraser comme contre-exemple (avec raison) je crois, et citant d'autres. J'aimerais qu'on parle du débat sur l'ampleur du phénomène. En as-tu des exemples?
  • Chantal Hébert: trouvé; toutefois, dans cet article de 2001, elle cite ironiquement comme autre exemple nul autre qu'Edward Greenspon
  • As-tu entendu parlé de Canadiens anglais (hors-Québec; des anglo-Québécois sont cités), même de gens hors-Canada, dénonçant Wong (à part les politiciens) ou Kay? Richler (autre que Conlogue)? Dénonçant d'autres? Que dit Graham Fraser de tout ça?
  • Peut-on faire une section clairement d'analyse, ou toute tentative serait-elle frappé d'accusation "d'original research"? Des exemples d'articles réfutant des mytes existent pourtant sur Wikipedia. J'ai fait une section "Response" qui se limite aux exemples de réponses faites. Peut-on réfuter autrement? Exemple: en 2005, le B'nai Brith a recensé 544 incidents antisémites en Ontario et 133 au Québec. [8] Doit-on absolument avoir quelqu'un qui a cité ces chiffres pour mentionner ces chiffres?
  • Doit-on inclure des exemples hors-média, comme les exemples de députés?
  • On a excisé des sections comme celle de Lafferty parce que "personne n'a entendu parlé d'eux", ils sont "obscure". Quoi répliquer?
  • On me met la notoriété de Ray Conlogue en doute. Quoi répliquer?
  • Comment prouver la prévalence de l'expression "Quebec bashing", puisque Google nous a été de peu d'aide?
  • On met la neutralité du titre en doute, à répétition. Pourtant, c'est une expression et l'article le mentionne. Il ne qualifie pas de "bashing", il rapporte l'expression "bashing". Quoi répliquer (à part ce que je viens juste d'écrire, ce qui ne semble pas fonctionner)? --Liberlogos 06:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mathieugp&oldid=77678327"