Jump to content

Talk:Nunavut

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 76.28.72.87 (talk) at 04:03, 6 March 2010 (→‎Voted to be named Ted: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former good article nomineeNunavut was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 27, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
November 26, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
April 25, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Pronunciation

Could someone add a pronunciation for Nunavut? --TreyHarris 05:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's pronounced noo-na-voot. :) 82.45.100.187 (talk) 10:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Article should say right up front how it's pronounced in English. Tempshill 23:12, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard it pronounced like "noon-a-voot" Zeolite 00:09, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Right here: 'nun??vut!! I heard it pronounced "None-of-it" (who can read those pronunciation guide letters anyway?)Billy Nair 21:58, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Plain-English pronunciation guide at the beginning please? Is it "Nunn-a-vutt" or "Nunn-a-voot" or "Noon-a-voot"? Tempshill (talk) 01:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It usually sounds more like "Noon-a-voot" but can also be "nun-a-vut", depends on where you live in the place. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 07:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian wars

There have been lots of battles between Nunavut and the Yukon This is an ok thing but could affect the way Canada thrives. They don't fight much anymore but in the first couple years that they were formed they fought for territory but the fighting has stopped and Canada is thriving! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.9.177.90 (talk) 02:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This would be more plausible if the two territories were even remotely close to each other or formed at remotely the same time. Franamax (talk) 04:19, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nunavut is itself a category within Category:Provinces and territories of Canada. — Robert Greer (talk) 12:11, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Map shift northwards

The latest map shift has put Nunavut way up in the stratosphere. Have we decided to eliminate the Hudson's Bay islands as part of the territory? Or are we trying to claim the Arctic Ocean to the North Pole? Backspace (talk) 02:07, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's not quite correct. Here are the coordinates and scale you put in, 67°30′20″N 91°08′00″W / 67.50556°N 91.13333°W / 67.50556; -91.13333 (Nunavut), and these are the coordinates and scale I put in, 73°N 91°W / 73°N 91°W / 73; -91 (Nunavut). Now a lot of the problem is caused by the mapping service used. The one I used goes from the bottom of James Bay and just cuts the northern tip of Ellesmere Island off. The ones you used goes from somewhere in South America to way north of Ellesmere. However, that is based on us all the same mapping service but I don't think we are. Here's how the various maps look using different services;
67 30 20N 91 08 00W
73N 91W

There are currently 29 different mapping services listed and Google Maps is at the top of the list, making it available twice. I'm going to ask at Template talk:Coord#Mapping services if it's possible to have a new parameter indicating which mapping service the coordinates were tweaked for. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 17:40, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The template concerned is {{GeoTemplate}} so I've moved the discussion to Template talk:GeoTemplate#Mapping services and disabled the link in your post accordingly. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 18:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I didn't realise that. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 21:48, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am having problems with those four map services that you listed. They are not currently working well on my Safari browser (zap out, fail to load, etc.). The service that I used was MSN Maps, which I hope works in your browser so that we can at least see what I will try to explain. For my coordinates and at the scale at which I set the map, just the very top of Ellesmere Island gets lopped off the map, whereas in the south the bottom end of James Bay gets lopped off. I tried to give a scale that would have included everything, but I am not very good at technically tweaking these things to get exactly what I wanted; however it came pretty close to what I wanted. Your coordinates, on the other hand (again, on MSN Maps), at first are zoomed in one click closer than mine are. Zooming out one level makes both our maps the same scale, so that the only difference becomes the map's center (centre). Your map now shows a great deal of Arctic Ocean, almost to the Pole, at the top, whereas at the bottom it pretty much lops off the southern half of Hudson Bay (below the 58th parallel. 71.197.109.181 (talk) 07:54, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, forgot to sign in. That was me up there. Backspace (talk) 08:00, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The whole problem is due to the approach of choosing a coordinate set for such a huge area. What seems centered for one editor may seem random to some other. Why not chose a fixed coordinate, such as the administrative center, even if that is not the center of the map. That is what's done with cities for example (coordinate at city hall). --Qyd (talk) 13:49, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want Russia to be centered on Moscow. I am not looking for Moscow; I am looking for Russia. I am not looking for Iqaluit either; I am looking for Nunavut. Can I get a picture (map) of where it is, without it being skewed toward anyone's favorite part of it? Backspace (talk) 16:33, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, there are only two services that can automatically select an appropriate view to display the given data: see Nunavut on Google Maps and Bing Maps. With all other popular services the links have to be made to a certain zoom level, shorthard for a service dependent number of pixels per ground distance unit. Therefore the view people get depends on the resolution of their screen and size of the browser window. I suppose GeoHack (the tool that creates all the map service links from coordinates on Wikipedia pages) has been configured to link to views appropriate on average, but without some Javascript customising the links for every user, it's not possible to have all links show the entire feature for everyone. And even if the tool had the browser information, the different projections would be a problem. Compare for example the maps given by the two services with the map in this article; pixels/kilometre isn't constant around the world even when you don't touch the zoom. --Para (talk) 18:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to get on another browser (Firefox) to view those maps from Google and Bing. I don't like their extremely distorted Mercator projections at all. They make Ellesmere Island look like it's half of Nunavut. The service that I usually use, MSN Maps (because it works on my Safari browser), provides quite good-looking maps, in color and with very little distortion, so I think I will stick with them. Backspace (talk) 19:08, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Backspace, I tried with MSN maps in Firefox (Windows) and the one that uses your coordinates and more importantly the scale does look good, here but with my scale and coordinates cuts a lot off the bottom. Your MSN looks almost the same as my Google Maps. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 02:52, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As I said before, if you zoom out one level from your map, you get (scalewise) my map, but just a lot farther north. However, I must admit that I did not heavily consider that other people may be basing their data on different mapping services, since I am so accustomed to using MSN Maps. As I've already indicated, I'm not a real big fan of these maps that use the distorted Mercator projection, unless it's for a very small part of the world. Backspace (talk) 18:00, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think we all do the same thing. We get used to one service and forget the others. I wondered how maps looked when viewing a smaller area and coordinates that can't be adjusted so I just tried looking at Cambridge Bay Airport and London Heathrow Airport using MSN, Bing and Google. First at Cambridge Bay using Bing aerial and north of the airport. [http://maps.msn.com/%28bqu3qnzzzzrrkcfdzmwxqk55%29/map.aspx?lats1=69.108056&lons1=-105.138333&alts1=4&regn1=2 MSN is further north than it should be, the airport is on the coast as is the community, and it appears you can't zoom in closer. Goggle satellite and maps are correctly positioned based on the sourced coordinates. For London Bing aerial and map are in the correct place but zoomed in a little too much. Google map and satellite both seem fine. MSN shows where the airprot is but can't zoom in any closer. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 12:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Border location

This article states that Saskatchewan and Nunavut, together with Manitoba and the NWT, form a "four corners" but on the nl: wiki someone pointed out that in fact, due to errors in surveying, SK and NU actually "miss" each other by about 400 meters. I'm unable to get a definitive answers from my own sources so any info someone may have on this would be appreciated.--Kalsermar (talk) 21:15, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Voted to be named Ted

My brother lives in Canada. He says that when they held a national vote to name the province, the winning name was "Ted." The Canadian government stated that "it does not reflect our country as a whole." Any chance we could add this to the article?