This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
cities,
towns and various other
settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all
list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Mattximus et al: see
here. We are just awaiting proclamation in 2017 and we will have much more clear legislation describing the difference of municipal statuses, incorporation requirements, etc. If there are no objections, I may start adapting the article accordingly in advance of the inevitable proclamation.
Hwy43 (
talk)
04:26, 29 December 2016 (UTC)reply
And here are the
key changes. Glad to see they are doing away with the generic "community" status in favour of the more intuitive "rural municipality" status, which is a status or aggregation of statuses in Nova Scotia and the three Prairie provinces. Interesting to learn that
Resort Municipality didn't previously hold the generic "community" status as previously thought. It held "resort municipality" status, of which there was no immediate evidence found during the major expansion efforts of July 2013 through May 2015 that such a status even existed. Based on the key changes linked above, I hope the official legal name of the lone resort municipality is not "Resort Municipality of Resort Municipality". We should investigate if the new legislation includes an official name change so along the lines of the "Resort Municipality of Foo". Here is the link to the progress of
Bill No. 58, Municipal Government Act (MGA). Here is the
direct link to the first reading version of the new MGA itself.
Hwy43 (
talk)
04:53, 29 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Section 30 of the new MGA confirms the official legal name of
Resort Municipality has been "Resort Municipality of Stanley Bridge, Hope River, Bayview, Cavendish and North Rustico" since 1990 and will be continued as such. This official legal name is reflected in the resort municipality's
official website as well.
Hwy43 (
talk)
05:01, 29 December 2016 (UTC)reply
I agree with all your suggestions, thanks for working on this. Are you still aiming on bringing this list up to featured status like the others? Please let me know if I can help in any way. When the new census is released, I'll convert this list into the templated version seen in
List of municipalities in Manitoba. I wonder if there is a way to force a break in the "Resort Municipality of Stanley Bridge, Hope River, Bayview, Cavendish and North Rustico" because the length of the name is causing weird formatting to the list on my screen.
Mattximus (
talk)
16:57, 29 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Yes. I'll let you know when NS and PE are ready. NS will be ready sooner, but note my activity will drop off once back to work next week.
Just in time for some free time I will have over the holiday season, the new MGA will
come into force on Saturday, December 2018. With this, we can start the next steps to a FLC nomination.
Hwy43 (
talk)
08:41, 22 December 2017 (UTC)reply
And also just before the above announcement a couple days ago, we have an amalgamation of Brackley with Winsloe South to create the new Brackley effective December 15 (a week ago). See page 5 of
this.
Hwy43 (
talk)
08:55, 22 December 2017 (UTC)reply
They are towns. While StatCan is the primary and definitive source for population counts on Wikipedia, it is not for the actual statuses of incorporated municipalities. The provinces are the primary and definitive sources of municipal statuses. StatCan periodically gets statuses wrong or misses status changes here and there. StatCan has the municipal status of
Northern Rockies Regional Municipality wrong (it is incorporated as a "district municipality" that has branded itself as a "regional municipality" in its official legal name). StatCan erred on the
Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo for years, but fixed it about a decade ago after I squawked the correction at them. Been meaning to do the same on Northern Rockies.
Hwy43 (
talk)
20:35, 12 February 2017 (UTC)reply
Updated for 2016 census
I've updated the page as best I can to reflect the new census data. As you can see the table is missing a lot of data points, however I do not know how to replace them. I'm just reaching out to see if anyone has any info on how to finish the incomplete table, or help with formatting/text. Otherwise, I think this is the best I can do with this page. Thanks!
Mattximus (
talk)
00:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)reply
This is a shortcoming of StatCan failing to establish census subdivision boundaries for all incorporated municipalities in the province. For the 2011 counts published by the province, it must have had to work with a StatCan to generate custom counts based on municipal boundaries it had to provide to StatCan after the fact (I know this is likely from experience helping two Alberta municipalities order custom counts from 2011). It could be a month or more, or even a year or more until PEI and StatCan work through this process so that PEI can publish counts for all of its municipalities like it did last time. We should routinely check the PEI Municipal Affairs webpage over the coming months to see if and when this updated data is unveiled. Based on that, it looks like Newfoundland and Labrador should be next on our list after Nova Scotia's list achieves featured list status. Cheers,
Hwy43 (
talk)
02:30, 17 February 2017 (UTC)reply
GoodDay, you changed Tignish's population from 719 to 1,341 in this
series of edits. Care to provide a reliable source per
WP:CANPOP? Also, this table should only feature 2016 population counts where available rather than differing years. Is 1,341 an adjusted 2016 population count as a result of incorporating as a town with a boundary greater than that of when it was a community? Cheers,
Hwy43 (
talk)
08:40, 24 December 2017 (UTC)reply
No disputing it is now a town. The town's article is silent on amalgamation concurrent with the status change, as is the
source verifying its town status. Article also presents population of 1,341 in two locations yet no source. The 2016 population of Tignish will be returned here and at that article until we can find a reliable source complying with
WP:CANPOP to support it.
Hwy43 (
talk)
07:51, 25 December 2017 (UTC)reply
Under the "New Municipalities" heading,
Three Rivers is a new municipality with town status that amalgamated seven municipalities – the towns of Georgetown and Montague and the RMs of Lorne Valley, Cardigan, Brudenell, Lower Montague, and Valleyfield – as well as adjacent unincorporated areas. This was approved on
September 25, 2018 with an effective date of September 28, 2018.
Hwy43 (
talk)
19:11, 21 October 2018 (UTC)reply