Talk:Made in Canada

A fact from Made in Canada appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 February 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that a journalist lived for a year using only goods made in Canada?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/February. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Made in Canada.

Wikipedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 12:53, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the certification mark Product of Canada may be used for a good if at least 98% of all direct costs to create it are incurred in Canada? Source: "The Competition Bureau requires that at least 98 per cent of a good’s total direct costs of production or manufacturing are incurred in Canada before that good can be legally advertised as a "Product of Canada."" (Made in Canada or Product of Canada? There's a difference)
- ALT1:... that a company that makes fraudulent Made in Canada or Product of Canada claims can incur fines of up to CAD $10 million? Source: "Corporations that break the law can face fines up to $10 million dollars. Individuals found guilty can be fined up to $750,000." (Made in Canada or Product of Canada? There's a difference)

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Lydia Purdy Hess; see my DYK tracker

Moved to mainspace by Mindmatrix (talk). Self-nominated at 22:55, 19 December 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Comment: please note that there was a previous DYK about Made in Canada, but it was about the television series (Made in Canada (TV series), not the product labelling certification mark. See also Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Previous DYK article to be moved Mind matrix 22:58, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: there is a request to move this article to a different name. Results of the DYK review should be suspended until that discussion resolves. Mindmatrix 22:45, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I did some expansion of the article, so it might be a good idea to hold a full review for a bit. I think the only major missing content is how "Made in Canada" is received internationally. Everything else seems sourced and just needs a bit of layout and tidying. – Reidgreg (talk) 19:18, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2 ... that journalist Frédéric Choinière lived for a year on Made in Canada goods? Source: The Globe and Mail: "French-Canadian journalist and TV host Frédéric Choinière ... decided to embark on a challenge of living for one year exclusively on Canadian goods ... As his made-in-Canada experiment winds down, Choinière says what he's learned over the year is that incorporating Canadian-made goods into his lifestyle was easier than he thought it would be"
ALT3 ... that journalist Frédéric Choinière lived for a year using only goods Made in Canada? Source: The Globe and Mail: "French-Canadian journalist and TV host Frédéric Choinière ... decided to embark on a challenge of living for one year exclusively on Canadian goods ... As his made-in-Canada experiment winds down, Choinière says what he's learned over the year is that incorporating Canadian-made goods into his lifestyle was easier than he thought it would be" - same as ALT2 but grammatical. Johnbod (talk) 18:09, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: the requested move discussion has been closed. Mind matrix 19:23, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is only a comment but I'm not sure if ALT2 or ALT3 can be passed; from what I remember there's an (unofficial) guideline on DYK that mentioning people who don't have articles in hooks is to be avoided unless necessary. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 02:33, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Mindmatrix:, I am willing to do the full review, but the introduction needs work. It is far too short to summarize the main points of the article. Could you please expand? Flibirigit (talk) 03:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Additional ping to @Reidgreg: for the above statement. Flibirigit (talk) 03:42, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Flibirigit and Mindmatrix: I fleshed it out a bit and tried to include the essential facts. Two paragraphs is about right per WP:LEADLENGTH. – Reidgreg (talk) 13:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing... Flibirigit (talk) 15:07, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article was moved to the mainspace on December 19 and nominated the same day. Length and sourcing are adequate. Article is neutral in tone. No plagiarism issues were found. The concerns highlighted by the Earwig tool were directed quotes and proper names, neither of which are plagiarism. All four of the proposed hooks are interesting, and all are properly mentioned in the article and verified by the source. Also, I feel that mentioning the journalist by name is not a violation of WP:BLPNAME since the attribution of the documentary is required and helps the understanding of the subject. No images are currently used in this article. QPQ requirement has been completed. Flibirigit (talk) 16:07, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thorough review! I'm okay with any of the hooks. BTW, I took a look for sources on Frédéric Choinière and found a few pieces on his works (Ma vie Made in Canada is the most prominent in English media) but did not find any RSS focusing on the man himself, so I don't think a biography article would pass WP:GNG. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:35, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 December 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Rough consensus the article is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and follows a similar name as other country labels. (non-admin closure) Vpab15 (talk) 16:57, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Made in Canada → Made in Canada label – This article is not broadly about "things made in Canada" (which I would say is the primary topic of "Made in Canada") but about voluntary country-of-origin product labels/claims and the regulations concerning them. The labels themselves do not have a proper name, they appear in different forms and language, and are not themselves simply called "Made in Canada". I feel that the article should be moved to Made in Canada label or alternatively to Made in Canada (label) with a disambiguation page placed at primary per WP:TWODABS. (There presently being a GA at Made in Canada (TV series).) – Reidgreg (talk) 17:23, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Further notes: On December 19, this article was moved to primary in place of a good article which was moved to Made in Canada (TV series). Brief discussion at Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board § Usurping a plain title (with no notice on the GA's talk page) held that the label was primary topic. While I feel that the label is more well-known, it isn't quite the natural name of the subject, and I suspect traffic would be in favour of the TV series. A pageview comparison with the parent articles Country of origin and Consumer Packaging and Labeling Act (and with Made in USA) gives an idea of what they might be for the Canadian label article (keep in mind that Country of origin is a global subject and that Canada has about 12% the population as the US). (Incidentally, Made in USA was formerly located at Made in USA label, though I was unable to find a move discussion.) The next-most popular wordings that appear on such labels are Product of Canada (a redirect), Fabriqué au Canada, and Produit du Canada. I feel that there's a case to move the TV series back to primary, since that is its actual proper name (unlike the generic labels), though I'd be okay with a disambiguation page placed at primary. That would give the new article a chance to establish its scope and provide fair traffic statistics for possible future discussions. – Reidgreg (talk) 17:23, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Made in USA was only briefly located at Made in USA label to fix the editing history of Made in USA (Sonic Youth album) or Made in USA. A history merge was performed to fix it by User:Graham87 in May 2018. See Public logs for Made in USA. You can see in the original version of {{COO}} from 2015 that the link is to "Made in USA" (see this version), not "Made in USA label". Mind matrix 22:43, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The label is only one aspect of what this topic represents. This article is about the certification marks "Made in Canada" and "Product of Canada" (often but not always grouped as "Made in Canada"). These marks represent voluntary claims made by a company about the origin of its products; a company may additionally add a label to its products stating "Made in Canada" or any number of other claims (as mentioned in the article). Although not yet in the article, such claims are covered by a number of laws, including the Food and Drugs Act and Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act (see, for example, Guidelines defining "Product of Canada" and "Made in Canada" on food labels and advertising at Canadian Food Inspection Agency) and the Competition Act and Textile Labelling Act (see Do I have to put "Made in Canada" or "Product of Canada" labelling on my product? at Competition Bureau Canada), and are covered by guidelines established by the Competition Bureau.
With that said, I oppose the suggested move to Made in Canada label or Made in Canada (label), as neither title is wholly representative of the concept discussed (though they'd make good redirects to this target). Perhaps Made in Canada (certification mark) or a less wordy version of "Country of origin certification marks in Canada" would be a more appropriate target. I believe that the certification mark is a better candidate as WP:PRIMARYTOPIC than the television show (and moreso as time passes, as the mark will likely continue to be used for decades), and that the current title redirect to whatever title is chosen (if any) and the hatnote updated accordingly. If the page is moved, all current redirects should be updated. Mindmatrix 00:56, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I like Country of origin certification marks in Canada for covering the subject of the article. Assuming that the scope of the article won't cover the use of other countries' certification marks within Canada, it may be redundant to have both country and Canada. How about Canada-origin certification marks? That will also leave room for how the marks are received outside of Canada (i.e.: whether they encourage or discourage foreign consumers) and for counterfeit goods on the international market. – Reidgreg (talk) 13:43, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is standard nomenclature. See Made in China, Made in France, Made in Germany, Made in Croatia, Made in Russia, etc. BD2412 T 19:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't believe that this is a universal article title practice; there are counter examples like Swiss Made, Australian Made logo, Make in India, 100% Cinta Indonesia and Guaranteed Irish, though these articles often cover government or business-association campaigns as much as country-of-origin. (These can all be found on the navigation template {{COO}}.) – Reidgreg (talk) 04:16, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.