Talk:Foreign relations of Canada
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 Untitled
- 2 Removed from multilateralism
- 3 Committed to Disarmament
- 4 Peacekeeping, etc.
- 5 Edited first paragraph on Early diplomatic history
- 6 Fair use rationale for Image:Can-pol w.jpg
- 7 Image copyright problem with File:Coat of arms of Canada.svg
- 8 Proposed WikiProject
- 9 Orphaned references in Foreign relations of Canada
- 10 I wasn't meaning to make a unilateral change.
- 11 Request for page reviews for new Canada Asia Relations Article
- 12 Bilateral Relations Table issues
- 13 Merge
- 14 Links
The U.S. has expressed concern that Canada is an illicit producer of cannabis for the domestic drug market; the use of hydroponics technology permits growers to plant large quantities of high-quality marijuana indoors. Consequently, it has a growing role as a transit point for heroin and cocaine entering the US market
This sounds like the doctrine of the DEA, not exactly a disinterested source. Is there any cite that proves hard drugs are a necessary consequence of marijuana. GreatWhiteNortherner 06:25, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
I was just reading this and I am concerned it is not a NPOV summary. SD6-Agent 13:59, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Removed from multilateralism
"Despite Canada's track record as a liberal democracy that has whole-heartedly embraced the values of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights and its obvious commitment to global security, Canada has been left out of every major plan for UN Security Council Reform while larger developing countries, some of which represent threats to international peace and security, have received support in their bids."
Removed that last bit, as it isn't specific enough IMO. As is, it's impossible to know which countries constitutes a threat to international peace and security, as this depends on whoever reads it. Bjelleklang - talk 05:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Committed to Disarmament
I'm concerned that this article is a reflection of how some Canadians wish to think about themselves as opposed to how the country actually behaves. For instance, I see no evidence that any Canadian government has been, broadly speaking, "committed to disarmament." We are members of a military alliance that has for decades deployed nuclear weapons as the cornerstone of its defense, and while the former Liberal gov't joined with some NATO members in pressuring NATO's nuclear members to agree to a no-first-use policy the government of Canada has been very cooperative in terms of the US nuclear strategy over the years. --Ggbroad 02:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Citations to support your point Ggbroad? I believe that Canada is a signatory to every major disarmament treaty in existence, though of course I could be wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 00:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Some rewriting will be necessary in the section on Peacekeeping and other military operations by Canadian Forces. First of all, the operations in Afghanistan were only briefly UN-sanctioned and were not considered Peacekeeping, if I remember correctly. Canada's current military operations in Afghanistan are explicitly not-UN and are part of the United States Operation Enduring Freedom (also not Peacekeeping). Recent figures indicate that Canada is now ranked 50th among 59 countries involved in UN Peacekeeping missions, so I think the article needs to reflect that fact and related implications (i.e. the level of Canada's current conceptual commitment to Peacekeeping; UN-sponsored missions vs. US-sponsored missions, etc.). I hope to do some of this necessary rewriting, but it may take some time for me to get to it, so if there are any other editors who would like to start on it that would be great! Pinkville 17:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- Indeed --- many of the claims about peacekeeping seem dubious. Is it really true that Canada has, cumulatively, contributed more forces to UN peacekeeping than anyone else? (I doubt it). Is it true that Canada has somehow participate in *every* UN peacekeeping mission? At present, Canada ranks somewhere around 50th in the world in peacekeeping deployments. Check UN websites on this.
In addition, regarding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, may I point out that Canada was one of only 8 members of the UN to abstain from approving the UDHR in the plenary session? (Humiliated, the delegation rushed to reverse its vote before the General Assembly). --Ggbroad 02:34, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, looking around I can't find any evidence that Canada has contributed more to UN Peacekeeping than any other country, let alone all other countries combined. I'm removing it until it is properly cited from a good source. Sorry. --Ggbroad 02:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
- Okay. Looked at some hard data from the UN at http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/contributors/2006/june06_2.pdf Canada currently ranks 53rd in terms of deployments, with a total of 133 soldiers serving in 8 missions, not the 40 that the article claimed. In addition, Canada's total peacekeeping deployment since the beginning of the UN has been about 125,000 soldiers. Given that there are currently over 70,000 soldiers serving on peacekeeping duties worldwide it seems unlikely that Canada has contributed more troops than all other nations combined! Come on, people. This Wikipedia experiment will fail if the articles aren't more credible and carefully cited. --Ggbroad 02:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Edited first paragraph on Early diplomatic history
in order to make the account more nuanced. Canada was hardly under the jackboot of British imperialism during the last half of the 19th century. Responsible government meant that Canada controlled directly its foreign economic policy. And, if Canada chose to accept the lead of the British government in military/defence/diplomatic spheres, it was because it saw its interests as being for the most part congruent (or even identical) with those of the then global hegemon. This did not mean that there were not specific points of tension that emerged from time to time, or some rejectionists like Quebec nationalists who differed on principle, but that for the most part Canadian development within the Empire was seen by Canada's dominant political classes to be more attractive than development outside of it or, alternatively, annexation to the US. --Pinkythecorgi 19:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Can-pol w.jpg
Image:Can-pol w.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with File:Coat of arms of Canada.svg
The image File:Coat of arms of Canada.svg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
There is now a upstart WikiProject to establish a concensus about WP's International bilateral relations articles, including "X-Y (country) relations" articles, at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations. Interested parties should add their names at Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations/Bilateral relations task force if they wish to play a part in the discussions or have an Interest in this going forward. Thank you for your attention. CaribDigita (talk) 23:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned references in Foreign relations of Canada
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Foreign relations of Canada's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "About":
- From Canada – New Zealand relations: New Zealand :: About New Zealand
- From Philippines: "General information". Government of the Philippines. Archived from the original on 2007-10-22. Retrieved 2007-10-01.
"Official Website". Government of the Philippines. Retrieved 2007-10-01.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:04, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
I wasn't meaning to make a unilateral change.
I wanted to however find out if my edit was helpful? If it should be reverted? If it made things worse etc? I tried to move the "administration" of Canada's relations to the top (below history), followed by the provincial influence in these foreign relations, next it has bilateral relations and relations with organisations including treaties and then territorial disputes. I was additionally thinking (as mentioned previously on this talk page), it may be nice to also put a section on peacekeeping or some background on what the Canadian military forces are doing abroad? Perhaps either before, or after territorial disputes (since Canadian forces do try to play a role in the world whenever they can.) CaribDigita (talk) 16:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Request for page reviews for new Canada Asia Relations Article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Asia_Relations —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jillianoliver (talk • contribs) 00:38, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Bilateral Relations Table issues
I was noticing the table of Bilateral Relations in this article and found some formatting errors with the table starting at Belgium and going down to Chile. For some reason, other countries like Brundi are not showing up there even though they are in the table; Belgium seems to have Bosnia's notes, Brazil has Bulgaria's information etc. It seems this problem is sporatic throughout this article.
I would like to recommend someone who has experience with these kinds of tables to take and make the necessary edits done to ensure the table is formatted correctly? I'd try and do this myself, but I would probably fudge something. Best to leave it to an expert. AnthonyWalters (talk) 20:13, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- You beat me to this, hehe. I noticed it too when I saw that the entry about the relations with Mexico links to "Canada-Mongolia relations". It seems the problems began when 126.96.36.199 arrived and changed a bunch of stuff on the table. Not only did he destroy the formatting but he also changed some dates, which makes me think it could be either an honest mistake or some sort of sneaky vandalism... So maybe someone should look into those dates too, just to make sure they are correct, but I think the table should be fixed first. I hope someone with table skills sees this. Here  is the revision that seems to have caused the table problems: Cancerbero 8 (talk) 08:46, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
A merge from Embassy of Chile, Ottawa needs to be performed, per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Embassy of the Democratic Republic of Congo in Ottawa. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:31, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
- Odd theses would be merged like this - I am opposing - simply dont have room to have all 150 + articles merged ... lots more like this at List of diplomatic missions in Ottawa. -- Moxy (talk) 22:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
- @Northamerica1000,@Moxy thanks for the heads up and starting a fairly lively discussion at: Wikipedia_talk:Canadian_Wikipedians'_notice_board#Embassies. Keep up the good work. XOttawahitech (talk) 23:41, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
- UMM, this belongs to the country of the embassy not the host country. Should be obvious(Lihaas (talk) 03:37, 26 December 2013 (UTC)).