|WikiProject Canada / Ontario / Geography / Communities||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
The Location section seems quite off-topic. Only the first few words talk about where the town actually is, and then only vaguely. The section alludes to the important history of the town, doesn't mention the importance of it being at the western end of Lake Erie and the mouth of the Detroit river when the fort was established, nor talk about the activity of the town during the American prohibition. Perhaps there should be a seperate History section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 03:18, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Governing body, MP and MPP in infobox
My understanding is that creating additional "virtual" rows in a table by embedding BRs in table entries creates accessibility issues (screen readers typically read tables cell by cell, left to right, HTML row by HTML row). The entries in the infobox for this article that list the governing body, MP, and MPP use this technique (all being in the one HTML row created by the leader_title1 and leader_name1 parameters). Would anyone mind terribly if this information is simply deleted from the infobox and moved into the body of the article? -- Rick Block (talk) 03:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:Amherstburgcrest.jpg
Image:Amherstburgcrest.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 Wikipedia articles 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.
If there is other 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 17:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Let's sum things up for the ones who don't get how this works. The Koppen climate classification has been agreed through consensus to be used as the main descriptor on all geographical and city articles. Every single one of those articles, from London to San Francisco, uses Koppen as the predominant climate classification system.
The categorization under Koppen is very strict and clear (to the precision of 0.1 of a degree), and has never been "modified" nor made obsolete. I have looked for reputable sources proving the contrary, and was unable to find any. I did however find tons of sources proving that the original Koppen is still used in organizations worldwide.
The -3C isotherm is absolutely the only legitimate metric used to assign a climate to the Cfa category (alongside the summer temp max. and the percipitation.) Your personal opinions or the opinions of other non-experts have no bearing on whether a climate is "subtropical" nor anything else, just like you may feel that Victoria, BC may not be "Mediterranean", the fact of the classification remains. If you wish to change the term from "Subtropical" to "Temperate" feel free to publish your research in journals supporting this, and then convince the greater scientific community to accept your claims.