Talk:Yorkton

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Yorkton article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Canada: Saskatchewan / Communities / Saskatchewan communities Mid‑importance

	Canada portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Saskatchewan.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian communities.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Saskatchewan communities.

Cities

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

Cemeteries Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cemeteries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cemeteries 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.CemeteriesWikipedia:WikiProject CemeteriesTemplate:WikiProject CemeteriesCemeteries articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Movement

I recall something about the town being moved in the early days when the railway decided on a new route.

I found a reference to this in New town, but I didn't see anything in this article. Is it true? -- timc talk 19:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is true, and there is now a couple of citations for it.SriMesh | talk 01:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strengths

Has map
Has updated to 2006 census information
Has already developed many sections suggested at WikiProject Cities
Has location developed relative to neighboring communties

SriMesh|talk Julia 02:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename page

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move.

Rename: Yorkton, Saskatchewan → Yorkton

This appears to be the primary use for the term Yorkton. Per WP:CANSTYLE, it should take the undisambiguated title, which currently redirects to the city. A hatnote may be necessary to lead readers to Yorkton Securities (if it merits its own article) or Yorkton (N.W.T. electoral district), but otherwise there appear to be no conflicts. (A dab page will be needed, since seveal electoral districts and sports clubs include the name, or use it as the common name.) Mind matrix 19:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nominator. Mind matrix 19:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support per CANSTYLE and primary usage, and next most populous undisambiguation city in Saskatchewan. -Royalguard11(T·R!) 20:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support per CANSTYLE and per primary use. DigitalC (talk) 03:23, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per the naming convention. Since the securities firm, if it ever gets its own article, is not a candidate to ever to be moved to the plain Yorkton title, it does not give rise to a need for disambiguation. Similarly, the riding in the Northwest Territories is not the primary use, and is unlikely to be moved to the plain title. A hatnote will suffice. Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Additions and renovations

Starting to convert listing format to prose format with citations, and add sections using WP cities guidelines and WP settlements how to for a guide where applicable.SriMesh | talk 18:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some sections still need paragraph type expansion in this article along with citations.SriMesh | talk 01:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sports teams

Discussion started regarding Saskatchewan Roughriders. As this is a provincial team, it should be on the provincial article, Saskatchewan. Some folks feel it should also be on every city and town article page as well. Some folks feel only the notable native sports players should be on the individual town and city article pages. Is there any other input on this?SriMesh | talk 01:29, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yorkton is located in the Cypress Hills Forested area?

The article states that Yorkton is located in the Cypress Hills Forested area, but Yorkton is located clear on the other longitudinal end of the province from the Cypress Hills. What's up? I think I'll remove this if I don't receive a response in the next few days. 1brettsnyder (talk) 05:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Yorktonites

WP:FAMRES indicates that everyone in this section doesn't actually belong there. Surely someone from Yorkton is notable but this list of people has to go. I will verify the list prior to deleting names but so far I don't see anyone that qualifies to stay.--Daffydavid (talk) 01:48, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

David Rodney now of Calgary, AB and member Conservative Party of Canada who climbed and submitted Mt Everest twice. 50.101.58.195 (talk) 05:34, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Following the WP:FAMRES guideline I'm not finding anything that qualifies him, but he may belong in the Calgary list. --Daffydavid (talk) 10:25, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

area codes

Please see the Wikipedia article Area code 306

Also this link provides an official map and complete list of affected communities: *http://nanpa.com/pdf/PL_439.pdf%7C

I would like to complete the information in the area code section of the infobox so it matches what's actually written at the 306/639 area code page. After attempting to add the changes several times with official references references it appears to have met with some resistance. user:Daffydavid, what are your objections to my changes? Sincerely, John. 07:09, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adding too much detailed information to a page can cause problems. Lethbridge or Hamilton, Ontario which are FA-Class articles, could be used as examples to edit the Yorkton page. Their infoboxes are clean and not filled up with minute details and references. -- Kayoty (talk) 09:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Kayoty about the overkill in the infobox. A brief summary of a reply I left at the talk page of Techgod aka John is that the page Area code 306 shows only Regina, Sakatoon and Prince Albert as having numbers in service using the 639 area code. --Daffydavid (talk) 06:38, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing the same things that you see on both the Wikipedia page or the NANPA letter. Under the section titled communities affected it lists 250+ communities affected. This is both on the wiki page (which I'm not using as a sole source) and on pages 3 and 4 of the NANPA planning letter. In the letter it states that Creighton Sask. and Uranium City will not be affected at this time. I'm ok with not referencing things in the info box where footnotes are not called for. Since 639 testing ended last year and Sasktel predicted a shortage of numbers by now there must be some cell phones and alarm systems that have been assigned the new area code in the city by now. The Area code 306 page is a redirect page now for area codes 306 and 639. How about no references and we keep the link to the non redirect page as it is now? If I'm not mistaken it's wikipedia best practice to link to the direct page and not a redirect page, I'm not necessarily a "new" user perse, I just try and keep my edits down so I may not entirely be up to date on this.

As far as being disruptive editor, these edits are made in good faith. The article is woefully out of date, full of dead links and inaccurate, out of date references. Let's work on improving this article and creating new ones, for example Yorkton Creek. With a new neighbourhood and development springing up could possibly use a page. The Whitesand River article needs some love as well. If we want to encourage growth of our region it is important that the information available is accurate and complete. Nothing makes a village, neighbourhood or city look worse than when people spend more time disagreeing and arguing than making improvements. If I stop mowing my lawn, it makes my neighbourhood look bad. If a wikipedia article is unmaintained and shoddy it can make a whole place look bad. Techgod (talk) 00:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your assumption that "there must be some cell phones and alarm systems that have been assigned the new area code in the city by now" is unsupported and is purely speculation. When you read the area codes 306 and 639 or any other source do you see 639 numbers in any city besides the 3 mentioned? While your edit may have been made in good faith, you clearly assumed mine was not. Wikipedia has procedures in place to deal with this and you need to not take offence if someone disagrees with your edit(s). No one owns an article and as such content disputes will happen from time to time. In other cases material may be removed because it is beyond the scope of the article or veers into not a list of everthing territory. An example of the later is the Rama article. It could use some serious pruning, but I'm not inclined to do so at this time. --Daffydavid (talk) 02:13, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, your reinsertion of the area code back into the article while it is under discussion is clearly disruptive editing. I haven't removed it at this time nor have I reported you at this time but I might not be so tolerant in the future. Please read and follow the Wikipedia procedures I have linked for you on your page Techgod. --Daffydavid (talk) 02:20, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have read it the wp:brd, I'm here discussing this aren't i? Why do you keep jumping down my throat about this then? You reverted my edit 3 times without going to the talk page here. Yet I haven't touched the yorkon page at all since this talk page thing with you erupted and yet here we are discussing it additionally and in an inappropriate place.

If you found the edit less than appropriate why not revert it and say "see talk page" in the edit reasons the very first time?

How about consensus editing as per wp:brd, wouldn't reverting edits that many times without going to the talk page here also be in violation of the policy? Last I checked your a user just like me and subject to the same policy your beating me over the head with now which would also seem to be a policy violation.

Its changed to link to the 306/639 wikipedia page as that seems standard practice on the other city info boxes. It's not excessively referenced on the Yorkton page any more as I took the relevant references to the external links area of that page (306/639) and we are now discussing this here instead of in the history comments and references.

Aside from both yours and my speculation about actually assigned numbers is the actual list of communities and the map showing the area and affected by the overlay, both undeniable and what I am basing my edit on. The three test exchanges in Saskatoon, Regina and PA were disconnected in 2013 as referenced in the letter and were only used for routing and billing tests from other areas. There is no mention of actually assigned numbers in any community or carriers, only a date after which exchanges are required to be fully functional for inbound dialling (except Creighton and Uranium City. A full list of 639 exchanges is in the letter with all of Yorktons exchanges listed individually as actively overlayed with 639 (639-782, 639-783, etc.).

If we need any further reasons in this it's also mentioned as best practice to use the main article link when linking and not the link to a old redirect page.

If we are editing to a class standard as found in the articles referenced by Kayoty; using the wikilinked page in the infobox for the area code would seem to be gold standard here.

It's nice when others help out by editing articles such as the Rama article you mention. Had I not added any information I bet it would look a lot like any one of the hundreds of other small village articles. As a champion of things yorkton area why not help out your local rm's articles? Springside, Orkney, Ebenezer, Gorlitz, perhaps create a proper article for Youngs Siding? The wikilinked youngs siding text in yorkton's article points to the wrong wikipedia article. Those things all need some love.

In my opinion beating people over the head with WP: BRD is a time waster.

I fear how many hundreds of words have been spent here arguing that could have been contributed usefully.

Hamilton lists Area code(s) 226, 289, 519 and 905 each linked to the respective page in the info box.

Lethbridge shows Area code(s) 403 & 587 both using links to the respective area code page. Techgod

When you go to the pages you mention and follow the linked area codes what do you find? You find actual phone numbers in use not speculation. If you have a reliable source that phone numbers in Yorkton are using the 639 area code I will not object to it's inclusion. Until then the material should be removed. As far as "beating you over the head with WP:BRD", I have actually been very polite about not reporting you. BRD stands for Boldly edit, if Reverted, Discuss at talk page. It does not mean reinsert your edit numerous times and then eventually discuss it at the talk page. I left edit summaries each time and my argument remains the same. Which to reiterate is - 639 numbers are not currently in use in Yorkton. --Daffydavid (talk) 07:26, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there some evidence somewhere that there are none assigned? Is that just an assumption or do you have a verifiable source that your getting this info from Daffydavid? All the info I can find (Would Sasktel be authoritative?) shows 639 as province wide and includes Yorkton in the active exchanges list. Techgod (talk) 03:43, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See my comment above which I have bolded the part you are attempting to dodge.--Daffydavid (talk) 22:31, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all trying to dodge it. I added my map showing the Saskatchewan area codes and the list of communities to the wikipedia area code page for Saskatchewan. My reliable source are the NANPA (North American Numbering Plan Administrator) documents and the sasktel reference located on the 306/639 wikipedia article itself. I am now curious as to what your reliable source Daffydavid? How exactly do you know this area code isn't assigned to all of Saskatchewan? Since we aren't able to find consensus should this go to dispute resolution?

Please see area codes 306 and 639 for my references and further evidence sourced from authoritative places. Under the section "communities included" on the Wikipedia page Yorkton is clearly listed. I did not include it there.

Techgod (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I thought this discussion was over. Either 306 or 306/639 is okay with me. It really does not matter. 639 will be in place soon if its' not already. I suggest leaving it at 306 simply to end this edit war.-- Kayoty (talk) 22:00, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can agree to that. The problem will be self resolving.

Techgod (talk) 22:16, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rail (section on Transportation)

The rail section appears to describe old rail lines that once served the city. Is this noteworthy? What are the current rail lines serving Yorkton? -- Kayoty (talk) 17:49, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Currently CPR mainline and CNR branch line go through Yorkton. I glanced at the rail section and it is indeed a mess but I'll look at fixing it later. --Daffydavid (talk) 06:32, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe someone can make use of these when updating the rail section: *https://www.cn.ca/en/our-business/our-network/maps *http://www.cpr.ca/en/about-cp/cp-network/Documents/cp-map-2012.pdf Techgod (talk) 01:08, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reference Techgod. I was able to use the CN network map (in your first reference) on the rail section. The interactive map [1] shows both CN and CP stations in Yorkton and could be used on many other related pages.-- Kayoty (talk) 08:28, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice Kayoty, I had hoped to have a written reference but this will do fine. --Daffydavid (talk) 19:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Glad it was helpful Kayoty. Techgod (talk) 03:41, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Historical population of Yorkton

The table "Historical population of Yorkton" needs references for each population entry. -- Kayoty (talk) 18:24, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yorkton quality rating assessment

I have entered Yorkton at Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/Assessment asking for a new quality rating assessment. The page is now start class. A new rating may bring it up to C or possibly even B class which would be quite an achievement for this collaborative effort. -- Kayoty (talk) 06:16, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All the recent work seems to be paying off. Looks the reassessment saw the article upgraded to a C!

Techgod (talk) 02:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Transportation section.

I am curious about the portion of the article referring to the highway network, is "The Trans Canada highway" in reference to the Yellowhead highway? If so why is the Yellowhead listed twice? Hwy 1 does not appear to travel through the city.Techgod (talk) 05:21, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the sentence to indicate the Yellowhead is part of the Trans Canada Highway, most of the Trans Canada Highway is two roads.--Daffydavid (talk) 10:25, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The end result looks much clearer and should be easy to understand for anyone. Good job Daffydavid. Techgod (talk) 15:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sports teams

I added a link to the sport in Yorkton category but it's sure not very pretty. If someone has a nicer way of adding that link or if there is none and the rest of you aren't overly thrilled with it then feel free to remove it. I thought it would be a nice addition but looking at how it turned out I'm less sure of that now. Any other thoughts on that? Techgod (talk) 16:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen a category linked like this either. -- Kayoty (talk) 17:44, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe some sort of list to include the teams from the sport in yorkton category? It seems like it would be prudent to include some sort of link over to that information without making the article here a huge list of sports teams. Techgod (talk) 21:50, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The sub-categories are all under the category Yorkton at the bottom of the page. The pages in these sub-categories are now also linked (blued) in the article. There are not enough teams for a new article (list) to be created. See the Lethbridge article. They created a small template for their teams. -- Kayoty (talk) 22:37, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Great example, thanks for clarifying. It would be nice to have a more elegant way of linking to a category. Techgod (talk) 04:47, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Yorkton Mural.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:25, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]