Talk:Nova Scotia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Nova Scotia, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Nova Scotia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Motto
Does the translation of Munit hæc et altera vincit as "One leads and the other conquers" have any sort of official sanction or preference?
What it says to me is, "One defends and the other conquers." -- IHCOYC 04:15 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)
- The motto is translated as I'd expect it to be here: http://www.gov.ns.ca/legi/pubs/provhouse/symbols/coat.htm
- I will change it. -- IHCOYC 04:20 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)
---
worth noting that NS is Canada's easternmost province, by virtue of the fact one square yard is on the grounds of Edinburgh Castle. And Lunenburg itself was on the back of the $5 for awhile. Kwantus
Is there any real reason the american colonization template is on the nova scotian page outside of the fact that Nova scotia was colonized by the french and english? I don't see the specific or unique connection to the province over any other colonized place. PullUpYourSocks 19:45, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
without any agenda but to see the truth told from a global perspective, i have considerably altered and will continue to alter piece-meal the history section of the article. i am more than willing to discuss the rationale i have had for these alterations. i found how the article was written to suggest that nova scotia is today some "new scotland", which seems to me a tourism push to have it seen so, not the reality. moreover, i could find no evidence of there being any community of scots (lallans) speakers and any prevalence of scottish gaelic speakers (as opposed to individuals who use gaelic as a heritage language), so please let me know what material is available on this. regards, matthew
- Matthew, I can agree with the sentiment. The tourism type push to "re-engineer" the history of the province into something it is not seems to speak loudly on wikipedia. Please review my changes on Music of Nova Scotia to see what I mean... facts as I have been able to find them 1) scots were here second out of the europeans (unless you count the Henry Sinclair story, which is not considered proven). French were first. BUT the scots settlement was withdrawn after only 3 years in 1624 when the place was handed back to the french. 2) there was no more significant scots settlement than any other part of north america/new england until much later, and I mean MUCH later, like highland clearances times, though to be fair 3) there were concentrations of scots of note, in Pictou, the north shore (gulf of saint laurence area) and by regiments of scots here and there who settled here. 4) The province was pretty much mainly settled by New Englanders, both opportunistic settlers moving in when the Acadians were expelled, and then a huge influx after the British lost the war... the loyalists. 5) it is real, they really did speak Gaelic in Pugwash, New Glasgow, Cape Breton, as late as the 1940s!! and I even read that low land Scotch was spoken in communities all over mainland Nova Scotia. 6) Its Not True to say Nova Scotia is New Scotland. As someone who can trace his ENGLISH PEASANT roots back 225 years in the soil of Nova Scotia and PEI I really have a problem with the idea that "we are all scots here". IF we have the energy some time we should start a myths of nova scotia page, or something. Until then, I will continue to try and make sure the MULTI CULTURAL nature of Nova Scotia appears on the pages of Wikipedia. WayeMason 19:40, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
- I would agree with the fact that Nova Scotia is a not a purely Scottish settlement. The truth of the matter is that people from many places settled and continue to settle in Nova Scotia. I have highland scot, loyalist and ulster scottish roots, which seems to be a direct function of the area that I am from, the North Shore. I have also lived in the Halifax area where I learned about the German settlers on the South Shore, and the planters and Loyalists in the valley. Now having lived away for about 7 years in Saskatchewan, Alberta, and Manitoba, I realise that Nova Scotia is a lot more unique than I had known growing up. I am very proud of my predominantly Scottish heritage, and have taken the time to also visit Scotland. I was surprised to find out how similar the country looks to NS, and how Scotland is actually a mix of different peoples. I met many east indians, slavic people, and a whole lot more Irish than I would have expected there. So in fact I do find the name "New Scotland" quite appropriate. Broad generalisations like "Nova Scotians are all of Scottish decent" are never true, but living away and travelling I have found the more common myth is that Nova Scotia is some how the same as or part of Newfoundland, and I have been called a Newfie more times than I care to mention. In order to give a good picture of the culture of the province one needs to explain how Nova Scotia is not so much a melting pot as it is jigsaw puzzle with certain cultures predominating in certain areas. I doubt there is any sort of movement afoot to re-engineer the history of the province in favour of the Scots. But it is a unique thing that the scottish culture has survived in Nova Scotia in a way that it hasn't in other places settled by Scots. I live in Winnipeg now. The first white settlers here (Kildonan, Selkirk, and Red River) were from Scotland, but there is no trace of the music and language left to indicate that. Compare to the north shore communities in Nova Scotia where, people like my great great grandmother, who was born and died in the province without ever knowing english (gaelic only, as indicated by her will from the 1800s). Of course I don't know a word of gaelic, but I do know the traditional music because it was played at community dances, etc... I'm sure an Acadian person could tell a similar story. I think the article should definitly reflect all the different base communities in the province, and also the new ones. I know donairs aren't scottish, but it is the first thing I go for when I get home. Tourist oriented material is always full of broad generalisations... isn't all of Canada just Lake Louise and a singing mountie? --Mf135gas 06:13, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Population & area
Where did some of these statistics come from? Statistics Canada reports a population of just under 937,000 as of April 1, 2005 (estimate only). Area is said to be 55,500 sq km (which does not match the table total of 55284 sq km). Density is either 16.88 for 55,500 or 16.94 for 55284.--BrentS 21:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I changed some demographics information using the NS Dept of Finance. That stuff wasn't off by too much. --Jtn5 05:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Settlement
Although the Foreign Protestants came to Nova Scotia starting in 1749 (and mostly from 1750 to 1752), they did not settle at Lunenburg until 1753. (They sojurned in Halifax and Dartmouth until the Spring of 1753.) And they didn't really settle "along" the South Shore so much as settle at Lunenburg initially and then inland. Hebbgd 17:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cabot
"The Italian explorer John Cabot did not visit present-day Cape Breton in 1497 as was previously claimed. The first European settlement in Nova Scotia was not established until 1604. The French, lead by Pierre Dugua, Sieur de Monts established the first capital for the" Anyone know why this change? Can we get a footnote about whether he came or not.... WayeMason 18:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
The evidence is terribly scare, beyond the fact that Cabot made it to some place in North America. The consensus is not that he landed in Nova Scotia (as currently pushed by said article and it's citation link, http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/journals/EH/EH33/croxto33.html). The continuing 'most-likely' location is still the island of Newfoundland, though a good half-dozen locations make some claim of note. Further, the only scholarly content of said link I can see is that it lists some references, and is hosted on a university website; it's nearly all conjecture (much of which is absurd and denotes a strong lack of familuraity with the Eastern Canadian landscape). Perhaps more appropriate would be "Cape Breton is considered by some scholars to be the first landing site.." or simular language that is more neutral? Either way, that link should be dropped.... Anonymous 22:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The many names of Nova Scotia.
I removed the line "and Neuschottland in German." from the article. I think it is only appropriate to use names from the protected cultural groups in the province, Gaelic, French, Mi'kmaq ., and the translation of the name from Latin to English. I understand there is a large number of German descended people settled in south shore areas, but French group has its own province wide school board and protected rights under provincial law, Micmaq has treaties and reserves and protected rights, Gaelic has a college where it is taught, we have the MOU with Scotland, etc etc... I think German is important, but there are many groups (Polish and Arab come to mind) that are as large or almost as large. Logically we could end up with dozens of names on the page for each immigrant group. Thoughts? WayeMason 02:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Absolutely no argument. A particular user, though I'm unsure if the same one as here, was on a recent campaign to add German notations to various Cdn. articles (e.g., the same for BC). I nixed each of them: one of them, however – for New Brunswick – was restored (and perhaps justifiably, which I've left alone) given the root of the name. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 02:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Why New Brunswick? As far as I know, as little as it may be, New Brunswick does not have a huge affiliation with Germany. Well, not one that most of the people in N.B would know of. Or, I may be just too lazy to read up, so please tell me why. User:Nachomania 21:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
- If there were tonnes and tonnes of loyal germans after 1776 who moved there, that would be one thing. But I mean, by the late 1700s hadn't the "german" royalty in England been in England since the late 1600s? Isn't that where Brunswick came from? WayeMason 00:45, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Many Names of Nova Scotia part 2
Last night I was cross checking the mikmaq name for Nova Scotia against the article.http://www.mikmaqonline.org says that Gespogwitg means southern, western Nova Scotia, and that Gespugwitg is the Annapolis Valley. It makes sense that mikmaq political divisions did not match present day provincial boundaries. There are also names for the Canso area and Cape Breton. Technically, Nova Scotia is part of Mi'gma'gi, the name of the Mikmaq nation. But this includes PEI and bits of NB... what to do?WayeMason 11:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
I suppose it would be okay to go with Mi'gma'gi, because...well, in most text-books, or at least ones I have read, all provinces/terretories [sic] are mentioned with their BNA names, like how the NWT would be still Rupert's Land, but it would tell about present day....I'm not exactly sure if that helps, but I've tried. User:Nachomania 21:53, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] introduction
To be strictly accurate, "Nova Scotia was one of the founding four provinces to join Confederation with Canada in 1867." should be changed to either "Nova Scotia was one of the original four provinces in Confederation in 1867." or "Nova Scotia was one of the founding three provinces to join Confederation in 1867." Three founding provinces of Canada, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia joined in 1867, forming the four original provinces of Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. Original sentence suggests five provinces -- "four provinces to join with Canada"!
- Were they not Upper and Lower Canada at the time of Confederation? BNA Act 1867 refers to Upper and Lower Canada, and how they will be renamed Quebec and Ontario. People in Nova Scotia certainly knew the difference between "the French" and "Damn Upper Canadians." WayeMason 01:31, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
No, not quite. French colony of Canada became British province of Quebec. With the influx of the Loyalists it was split into Upper Canada and Lower Canada. Because of Lord Durham's report recommending assimilation of the French, Upper and Lower Canada were re-united as the Province of Canada in 1840. That single province had two administrative parts, namely, Canada West and Canada East. With Confederation, Canada was again separated under names Ontario and Quebec. Section 3 of BNA Act refers to three "Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick" forming "One Dominion under the Name Canada". Section 5 divides Canada into "Four Provinces, named Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick". Section 6 provides that the part of the Province of Canada that formerly constituted the Province of Upper Canada becomes the Province of Ontario and the part that formerly constituted the Province of Lower Canada becomes the Province of Quebec. Section 138 says that the use of Upper Canada instead of Ontario or Lower Canada instead of Quebec does not invalidate deeds, etc. Hebbgd 20:09, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- That is fine by me... it flows well with teh "annexed to Canada" segment! WayeMason 01:22, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Proposal: New Article on Colonial Era
Since Nova Scotia existed as a British colony before it was a Canadian province, I propose creating a new page about the British colony as a seperate entity (perhpas Nova Scotia (colony)). This compares with Ontario and Upper Canada, BC and Colonial BC, or Newfoundland and Labrador and Dominion of Newfoundland. It doesn't mean that this article can't mention the history before 1867, but that the new article could go into much more depth. Kevlar67 19:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- I dunno, the history of the province is continuous, going back to 1740s and the establishment of British rule over Acadia. The legislature sat for over 110 years before Canada was created. There is no legal or constitutional break or change in Nova Scotia's law or governance at Confederation, unlike the changes in Upper/Lower Canada to Ontario/Quebec, and Newfoundland having limited self government at Confederation. I don't think this is needed. WayeMason 02:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bibliography
I think that the bibliography has to go. Unless its actually a footnote from the article, I think it needs to be cut down. Its a great list but its not needed and it really bogs the article down. Thoughts? WayeMason 02:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Info Box - Dog
The info box does not show the provincal dog but is in the incoding . Can someone with knowledge of the coding fix this --D053 19:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Vandalism
Can't someone find a way to slap those immature students/governmental employees wrists a little harder than just blocking them for a quite short period after a zillion of warnings? I mean, atta boy for those of you who revert and revert and revert . . . but doesn't it get annoying over time? Thanks anyway for the effort! Lost Boy 05:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
