Talk:Mississauga

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

Proposed merge with Heartland Town Centre[edit]

Non-notable shopping center located in Mississauga. Would be better off as a merge, if not completely deleted. TKK bark ! 01:23, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how it would merit notability to be included in this article. I would nominate it for deletion altogether really. Krazytea(talk) 05:28, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's fine where it is. 2 million sq ft makes it among the larger centres in the country. I'll see if I can work on the article a bit in the next 36 hours. Taroaldo ✉ 09:12, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article is still a stub, and there's not much more you can say about it. It's just a loosely defined area of the city where a lot of stores are. Fhqwgads (talk) 22:09, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Another problem with these power centre pages is that there is a fine line between providing information and advertising that has to be kept in mind. Krazytea(talk) 02:05, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Define "non-notable". I'm pretty sure those who are serviced by this place (or those who give service in this place) won't be happy if the article is deleted. Spbone (talk) 18:30, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Probably one of the two biggest outdoor shopping centres in mississauga (as in like a plaza) 2001:1970:55DA:7F00:0:0:0:B442 (talk) 23:50, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Politics and government[edit]

There is a section "politics" and a section "law and government". Should we combine? Magnolia677 (talk) 05:08, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge 'em. Krazytea(talk) 05:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Mississauga/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zanimum (talk · contribs) 15:22, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Government

  • I've nixed the ward list; even Toronto doesn't have articles on its wards yet, mostly. I do support each having an article, but this list of redlinks is useless, presently.
  • The way things were worded, it said Mississauga had three mayors; Town of Mississauga had one, so you need to be clear that it was the City. Perhaps also add a note?
  • No mention of Regional government and how the councillors serve on this second level of government's council as well.
@Zanimum: Are you still going to review it? It has been 20 days. Thanks! ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 23:13, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ack, sorry, returning. -- Zanimum (talk) 18:42, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's a few sections I haven't addressed, their headers are mixed in, below.

History

  • Perhaps [[Credit River|Credit River Valley]] area? I read it initially that they lived in the river.
 Done
  • First paragraph has no reference; if nothing else, you need one for the name origin's spelling.
 Done
  • First paragraph, comma needed in the last sentence, for "Iroquois, yet".
 Done
  • The link to Toronto Township is more appropriate up here, rather than down in the shopping section.
 Done
  • "(what is now Toronto)"; because of the name confusion, perhaps "(what is now the City of Toronto)"
 Done
  • Is there a Wikipedia or Wiktionary article for the legal term just compensation? It's a specialized term.
 Done
  • towns --> incorporated towns, to distinguish them from the unincorporated crossroad communities, the villages you're referring to
 Done
  • Gore Township is actually Toronto Gore Township
 Done
  • New York City, eh? I know Derry West settlers were from New York state, but you really need a reference for that sentence.
 Done
  • "Grand River Valley near" --> "Grand River Valley, near"
 Done
  • "In 1873..." this paragraph's first sentence is overly long, and gathers too many thoughts into one.
 Done
                          • NO TOWNSHIP COUNCIL BEFORE 1873?***********
Question? What?  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 20:53, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mail delivery? How is that a township responsibility? It's federal.
 Done
  • "Except for small villages, some" --> "Except for small villages, and some"
 Done
  • Aside from that, there were gristmills and brickworks not served by railway lines.
  • The 1920s are a range, don't say something was 17 years later.
 Partly done I've created a new paragraph. Is it good now?
  • You might also want to mention that the community of Elmbank was nixed by the airport.
 Done
  • "in the world opened" --> "in the world, opened"
 Done
  • "Highway 10, Port Credit in 1935" --> "Highway 10 in Port Credit in 1935,"
 Done
  • "around established towns" --> "around established communities"
 Done
  • "such as in" --> "such as"
 Done
  • I didn't think that Meadowvale started that early. I thought it was more the early 1980s.
 Done
  • While I know the person who wrote the captions for the Mississauga Library's historic images gallery, I think you probably try a better reference for the derailment paragraph.
 Done
  • "Later when the mess had been cleared and the danger neutralized residents were allowed to return to their homes." --> "Residents were allowed to return home, once the site was deemed safe."
 Done
  • References! Things like largest peacetime evacuation and the fact it was studied are both big claims--both correct--but both something that needs to be backed up.

 Done

  • dump "although"; combined with the semi-colon, it doesn't make sense
 Done
  • Ugh. I've personally never heard about the national touchtone introduction being in Malton. It's quite possible, but ugh. Kathleen Hicks was unnecessarily rushed in some of the latter volumes of her book series, so I'd really suggest finding a second reference for this assertion. Canadian Digital Portal has the The Weekly/South Peel Weekly digitized, can you find period reporting on the intro? Or Star/Globe through the library subscription databases?
  • If you're mentioning the Milton land grab, you need to also mention the grab from Trafalgar Township/Oakville. Almost an entire ward (11, maybe? Lisgar, Churchill Meadows) is outside of the County of Peel's original borders. Indeed, both might be better in the Geography section.

Geography 

   * 2.1 Climate
  1. 3 Demographics

Languages

  • Why is there a break in the table? Is the remainder collapsed? (I'm working offline from a saved copy.)
It might be some offline glitch because I see no break. ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 21:11, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Economy

  • "of the Fortune 500 base" --> "of the Fortune 500 companies base"
 Done
  • None of the companies listed in this section have their world headquarters in Mississauga. Who exactly from the Fortune 500 has their global headquarters in town?
I don't get it. They all have their headquarters there. ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 19:38, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ew. A collection agency is cited as a source? What about the City's economic development department? What about the Mississauga Board of Trade?
  • What is Kam Air?
It's already wikilinked.  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 19:38, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second paragraph is inconsistent in what is referenced and what isn't, but no qualms against it from a prose perspective.
  1. 5 Arts and culture
  2. 6 Attractions
   * 6.1 Mississauga Celebration Square

Art Gallery of Mississauga

  • This is dreadfully brief. What about Museums and art galleries as a section? Museums of Mississauga is a significant program.
 Done
  • "Square One Mall" is improper, "Square One mall" or "Square One Shopping Centre".
 Done
   * 6.3 Shopping
  1. 7 Sports and recreation

Government

  • "the upcoming 2014 municipal election to be held" --> "the upcoming 2014 municipal election, to be held"
 Done
  • Perhaps mention the Region of Peel, the split of municipal roles, the fact that Mississauga councillors sit on both councils, perhaps even the political unease between Mississauga and the rest of Peel?
  • No mention of the fact that an acting premier was from proto-Mississauga, and that another premier represented Mississauga for part of his time in office? (TL Kennedy, Davis)
Ughh. Apparently, I am very terrible at politics and have no idea what the top two notes are asking me to include. Do you know of anyone that could help me? The other topics I'm fine with, it's just the politics. Sorry,  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 21:17, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Passing "Provincial electoral districts", "Federal electoral districts".

Infrastructure 

   * 9.1 Law enforcement and fire
   * 9.2 Library
   * 9.3 Healthcare
   * 9.4 Transportation
         o 9.4.1 Highways

Rail

  • Perhaps bump GO Transit up in the paragraph, so that instead of three lines, no VIA, GO, it's three lines, GO, no VIA.
  • The whole tone is fairly woe is me, when those three lines are more than any other municipality other than Toronto; how many actual GO stations are there in Mississauga?
  • You might want to reword the LRT section, as it's dated. You might say something along the lines of "Port Credit to southern Brampton, and possibly to Brampton's downtown", the current council has said they won't allow LRT past Nanwood.
  • Yes, LRT could be created on other routes, but unless you can say "Metrolinx has suggested" or "City council has expressed interest"...

Bus

  • MiWay doesn't connect directly with the Toronto RT. It connects directly with their subway, and with their buses.

Mississauga Transitway

  • "Renforth Avenue via" --> "Renforth Avenue, via"
  • Is Renforth still in Mississauga, as opposed to Toronto?
  • "with planned connections from Renforth to Kipling Subway Station." --> "When finished, the service is expected to connect to Kipling Subway Station in Toronto, via mixed lanes." or something similar.

Air

  • I find it odd that the article goes all out about the staff size of UTM, yet not the staff size of Pearson, one of the employment hubs of the city.
  • Can you expand this section a teeny bit, it's rather short in comparison to the other modes.

Bicycle

  • Any info about the here and now, biking in Mississauga? This is also so forward looking, a two decade plan.
  • The stakeholder consultation sentence doesn't add anything at a high level article like this.

Education

  • Is "enrolment" the Canadian spelling? (Honest question.) Spell check is suggesting two Ls.
  • Why "Institutes for"? It seems more universal to call them faculties. You don't need to follow their branding.
  • Is the Mississauga Academy of Medicine separate from the U of T? A tenant?
  • Wikilink alumni names, as they're mostly not household names. Zaib might be updated to actor/bureaucrat or similar?
  • Innovation Complex, north building: did they open? More over, do readers care at a high level?
  • "The school will have" Are both concentrations not up and running yet?
  • "business education and programs" --> "business education, and programs" Otherwise it can read as if both are for new Canadians
  • location also written as foreward looking, as is the expected phase two... phase two? there's only one building, isn't there?
  • "Together there are more than 150 schools in this city to fulfill the needs of its large youth population." There is a large youth population, but really that's a judgement call, using a broad, inspecific term like "large". Perhaps "Within the city, the four boards run a total of more than 150 schools."
  • It's nice that Applewood has a reference for the Regional Sports Program, but do PDSB and DPCDSB have pages summarizing their programs across the board, that you can cite at the top level?

Media

  • Is Mississauga News still three days a week? I thought I heard that it was only twice a week now, but perhaps the Booster is published on a third day?
 Done
  • There are dozens of South Asian weeklies in Peel, and a fair percentage are published in Mississauga. How is it that Sunday Times was chosen?
I dunno. Perhaps it is more popular?  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 20:47, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • MississaugaLife is Spirit in the City now.
 Done
  • RawalTV's first claim... is this first with a signal originating out of Canada, the first South Asian-Canadian as in the domestic immigrant culture, something else?
 Done

Sister cities

  • That's one city, not plural. Perhaps merge into see also?
 Done

Passing See also.

Notes

References

  • 7: sp MoneySenese
 Done
  • 9: "Mississauga Article"
 Done
  • 11: no to homesbuyregina.ca as a source
 Done
  • 13: missing a publisher
 Done
  • 14: missing a publisher
 Done
  • 15: missing reference to The Canadian Encyclopedia, and why doesn't this content exist in the current TCE article?
 Done
  • 16: "Malton:Farms to Flying" needs a space
 Done
  • 17: unlikely that that's the title
That is the title actually. ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 20:04, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • 19: real estate agents aren't reliable sources
 Done
  • 20: real estate again
 Done
  • 22: real estate again
 Done
  • 25: bare link
 Done
  • 27: this is to Mississauga Data, but the title doesn't reflect that
 Done
  • 32: don't cite collection agencies
 Done
  • 40: what outlet is this news article from?
 Done
  • 41: City of Mississauga isn't the author of the Carassauga page, it's an independent non-profit, albeit with City funding.
  • 42: cre8iv80studio.com isn't the best source to cite
  • 45: find another source than an outdated calendar
  • 46: date of the article?
  • 47: wrong initials
  • 55: Where does the info in Waymarking come from?
  • 63: next to uselessly vague
  • 68: source?
  • 75-78, 80: all should be Mississauga News
  • 79: schools.peelschools.org --> Peel District School Board

External links

  • Why link directly to the 2011 census? Shouldn't that already be covered in the references?

-- Zanimum (talk) 15:16, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Zanimum:  Done all. Hope this is enough for GA.  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 00:08, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to look over this again. -- Zanimum (talk) 21:38, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Zanimum: I think you should fail this. Mississauga is running a mayor election so that makes it unstable. Thanks for the review!  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 12:41, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would be a mistake to fail this: the election was over two weeks ago and the article has been stable since it ended. Zanimum, this needs your attention when you resume editing; it's now been over a month since TheQ Editor finished your requested edits. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:35, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I could be wrong, BlueMoonset, but it seems as if this review has been abandoned. If so, it might be best to close this as unsuccessful and renominate. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:45, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@BlueMoonset and SNUGGUMS: Yep, I think the article should be closed as unsuccessful. I still have to find someone interested in the government and politics section too.  ΤheQ Editor  Talk? 01:24, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Zanimum unfortunately tends to take a very long time and a great many reminders to ultimately finish a review: a couple of months and more is not unusual. Sometimes they get gone, and sometimes they don't. At this point, if Zanimum doesn't show up the next time some edits are made, closure is probably the way to go. I'll leave a pointed message on Zanimum's talk page as a reply to the message left there by Snuggums. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:03, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Closing this, it's fruitless to wait for Zanimum. Seems like it was close but since the writer's requesting it...Wizardman 04:13, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Section ordering[edit]

An unregistered editor has been removing the transportation content out of the Infrastructure section and elevating it to its own section. This editor is probably not aware of WP:CCSG. The only problem I could see within the stable version of the article before the edits, which is something I may have in common with the editor, is that three pieces of soft infrastructure were ordered before the transportation content within the section. As WP:CCSG mentions transportation first, I've elevated it to be the first section. Most other city articles tend to give transportation the most weight and present it first under the Infrastructure section. Hopefully this resolves the current controversy (on ordering anyway). Hwy43 (talk) 05:38, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The IP edits also introduced some bad formatting with unnecessary break tags and extra spaces. Dr. K. 05:48, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mississauga. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:23, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

does anyone know how to update this to the 2016 census[edit]

does anyone know how to update this to the 2016 census — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.122.44 (talk) 13:35, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mississauga. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:47, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Montage[edit]

Hi,

The montage for Mississauga has been updated, which is great, but unfortunately the perspectives of Mississauga only include four images of the city centre and one of the civic centre. In cases like this montage where repetitive image locations are shown, it should only include one. The purpose of a montage is to show the variety of the cityscapes located in the community. See WP:COLLAGETIPS for more ideas on this. If someone does not update the montage, I am happy to take another crack at it. Words in the Wind(talk) 23:50, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:2024 Mississauga mayoral by-election[edit]

Not sure when it's appropriate to make this public. -- Zanimum (talk) 14:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mississauga&oldid=1217630189"