From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Politics (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

There is now a Category:Provinces containing subcategories and articles in the form "Provinces of X". Proposal: Individual provinces should be placed in the subcategories. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:03, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Edits by User: excised from text[edit]

I have excised from the text the following:

The Latin word provincia, which apparently was derived from pro ("in front") and vincia ("linked"), originally was a general term in Roman law for a Magistrate or other public official's jurisdiction and competence, as restricted by his constitutional and/or ad hoc mandate in nature (fiscal, military, legislative, etc.) and/or territorially. This even predated the existence of a Roman 'empire' (not as a form of state opposed to a republic, for Rome always remained formally republican in law, but as the result of imposing its authority on territory conquered or otherwise submitted, where the inhabitants are submitted to a different legal regime).
This notion has survived in modern expressions -not in formal Law- where someone claims authority ("... is my province") or shift responsability ("it is not my province").
However, the application to the territorial circonscription of a governor became so predominant, that this actually also became the legal term for such a territory. In this sense it was also adopted in many later states and modern languages, and even by analogy in the Church (see ecclesiastical province), modelling its administration largely on the Roman empire.

Although not terribly written, it drifts drastically off topic to the point of complete irrelevance. Considering that it is written quite authoritively, one would expect references - otherwise, it appears as unsubstantiated dribble.

Also, I am alone in sensing something decidedly WHEELER-esque about this edit?--Cyberjunkie 14:40, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Remove Chile and Peru[edit]

I think Provinces of Chile and Peru should be removed under the Current, since they are called Regions and the are already listed under the Regions Page. -- 21:51, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The listing redirects to the Regions of Chile and of Peru. Their provinces are divisions of the regions, so the redirect is useful as it stands. --Wetman 23:18, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not remotely[edit]

The following statement is not remotely true: " Prior to the French Revolution, the country consisted of the region of Île-de-France—the personal fiefdom of the king—and the royal provinces, which were once governed by their own feudal lords. " Anyone want to allign it with real history? --Wetman 05:04, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup tag[edit]

A "cleanup" tag was applied by User:Dustinasby with the quip "Too dirty". The following note has been left at the User's Talkpage: "Your cleanup tag has been reverted at Province. You have made no contributions to that article, which has been hammered out by many Wikipedians working towards consensus. Please don't use tags for personal comedy." --Wetman 18:08, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

The following was placed on User:Wetman's talk page. "I take wikipedia seriously and find it offensive that you assume I would add to an article for comedic purposes. Take a look at the article. The ideas in the first paragraph are repeated in section 1. The introduction section has no direction and little organization. There are spelling and grammar errors (which I will take the time to fix). The 1st and 6th paragraphs in section 1 is repedative and need to be joined in some agreeable fashion. Do not take offense. I understand that people have projects that they put their time and effort into, and thus become close to. However, regardless of the effort that has been put into this article, it does need improvement. If I had purchased an encyclopedia with entries like this I would want my money back. Remember, the reason for placing a notice is not to insult the contributors, but to aid the processes by bringing in more contributers. Please control your emotions for the advancement of knowlege. I will place this conversation on the discussion page of province where it belongs.--Dustin Asby 19:26, 16 October 2005 (UTC)"
I need to add a follow-up note after having read that my edit was interpreted as comedy due to my summary. Yes, my attempt was to be witty in my summary because there wasn't much summarizing needed. I didn't realise that attempt would offend current contributers. Please accept my appologies, so we can move beyond and work to improve articles.--Dustin Asby 19:47, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
Clean-up tags are not generally appended to articles like this. They are used for devastatingly bad articles that are utterly incoherent, POV, and without semblance of format. While your concerns are legitimate, I feel the tag is un-necessary. By the way, we have a retort for situations such as this: {{sofixit}}. :)--Cyberjunkie | Talk 05:50, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
I was unaware. I don't have time to get involved in another project and I don't want to make drastic changes to the article because I know that there are others that are involved with it who better understand the reasons for the inclusion of the content concerned. I would be more inclined to be bold had I the time to justify my boldness. I will remove the tag, now that I better understand its purpose.--Dustin Asby 18:28, 17 October 2005 (UTC)


Does anyone know where the etymology for 'province' on this page came from? I know that the true etymology is disputed but I've never seen that particular etymology.--Hraefen 20:41, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Northern Ireland[edit]

The Provinces of Ireland article's first paragraph says that “Northern Ireland is […] a province of the United Kingdom”. I guess this is not to be taken as the official name for a type of UK subdivision (that is, NI as one of several Provinces of the UK), is it? Wikipeditor 00:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

The last sentence in Constituent_Countries#United_Kingdom also mentions NI sometimes being described as a province. Wikipeditor 00:05, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Province could it be the traces of your family history. e.g. my father was born in Bicol and I was born in Makati so my province is in Bicol and if i would have a grandson his province would be my hometown which is Makati.

Roger G. Francisco Jr."balky" [Philippines][edit]

Is Xinjiang a province?[edit]

Xinjiang is technically an autonomous region rather than a province under Chinese legistration. If no one objects, I will remove the comment that Xinjiang is currently the largest province in the world. Changeup

Rather than delete text, why not make a note that the province Xinjiang is technically an "autonomous region". All provinces have some degree of self-government and self-identity, or they're not provinces, are they?. Or just remove any reference to "largest province in the world". What best serves the reader? --Wetman 17:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Province versus "The Provinces"[edit]

The article mentions the French usage of "en province", but doesn't mention the equivalent term "the provinces" as used in England to mean "everywhere except London".

Its usage is now somewhat deprecated as it is considered patronising and London-centric, but it should still be included as it gave rise to the derogatory meaning of "provincial" (as in provincial attitudes, provincial mindset, etc.) 16:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Province in Federal state and Unitary state[edit]

There has been too little discussion on provinces in unitary state. Provinces are usually the official subdivision for unitary states. In most federal states, the state(s) that make up the federal state are partially sovereign and are govern by a federal constitution. Only Canada describes it states as provinces.

I just added some discussion to inform readers that provincial subdivision do occur in unitary states like France and China. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Visik (talkcontribs) 01:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

Proper definition of "Province" is an accumilation of states.[edit]

The proper definition of "Province" is an "accumilation of States".

Please refer back to definition of "States".

Apendix: A; 1-5,

Article 1. A state is a large suburb consisting of cities and counties.

Article 2. Due to disambiguousity, a large suburb is commonly refered to as a state.

Article 3. In England a state is an oversized suburb which is not to be confused with a english province which is an accumilation of states.

Article 4. A country is a country, which is not a state, or province, but the combined entity thereof.

Article 5. For example: The United States of America is a Province and/or country of States and/or Provinces.

Hope this helps!!!! (talk) 23:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Russian non-provinces[edit]

Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) still objects to this wording:

Though the only types of federal polities ever called "provinces" in Russia are oblasts and krais, Russia has a variety of federal subject polities that elsewhere would be termed "provinces".

At User talk:Wetman Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky asserts:

Not in a wildest dream can I imagine one calling Russian republics, federal cities, and autonomous entities "provinces"; explaining it to a child maybe, but most certainly not in an encyclopedic context. What these "polities" would be termed as "elsewhere" is really irrelevant in an encyclopedic article dealing solely with subject matter that is referred to as "provinces" in academic context. To top it off, nothing is sourced. Please consider revising once again. Thanks.

However, the wording objected to

Though the only types of federal polities ever called "provinces" in Russia are oblasts and krais, Russia has a variety of federal subject polities that elsewhere would be termed "provinces"

was explicitly chosen to satisfy Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky's vanity, by using the very wording of his own objection. Wikipedia is a reader's guide: if we keep the value to the English-speaking reader firmly in mind, Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky's wildest dreams needn't be ignited by this harmless bit of explication to an English-speaking reader, however small and childish that reader may appear at such a very great distance.--Wetman (talk) 21:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Vanity??? What does "vanity" have to do with anything here? Not to mention that "wording of my objection" is hardly something that can be used as a source; I provided it merely as a description of why a certain passage is inappropriate in a certain context.
If you care as much about our readers as you claim to, please find a supporting source stating that Russian federal subjects (other than oblasts and krais) are ever referred to as "provinces" in academic works. Provinces, after all, is what the article is about, so we should stick to the subject and not to feed our readers with dumbed-down definitions which are neither accurate nor relevant. A list of types of Russian federal subjects is available in articles about said subjects as well as in a higher-level overview.
As a reminder, our guidelines allow removal of information that is unsourced and challenged. It is the responsibility of a person making a statement to source it. Please consider the passage in question challenged and kindly provide sources to back it up. Otherwise, I will be removing it within the course of a week, as "doubtful and harmful", as per WP:NOCITE. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 21:42, October 19, 2009 (UTC)
Well, in order to move the article Province forward, why don't you contribute a section on the very special situation Russia presents. One might give it a neutral title like Russia and "provinces', no? Since you'll likely object to any title, do feel free to change the one I'll edit in for you. Thank you. (Copied from User talk:Wetman).
You know, I simply don't understand your attitude. Take a close look at what the passage you are so fiercely defending actually says: though the only types of federal polities ever called "provinces" in Russia are oblasts and krais, Russia has a variety of federal subject polities that elsewhere would be termed "provinces" (followed by a list of federal subjects).
Now consider this passage: though the polities of the United States are never called "provinces", the United States has political units that elsewhere would be termed "provinces" (followed by a list consisting of "states" and "District of Columbia").
Pretty much the same sentence can be added about any country that does not have provinces, but has subdivisions that theoretically can be called such.
You see how nonsensical it is? Neither states, nor D.C., nor Russian republics/federal cities/autonomous entities are ever ever called "provinces"; it's just that they can be called that in the far-away and presumably non-fictional "elsewhere", which you took no effort to either define or reference. The bottom line is if something is not ever called "a province", it has no place in the province article. What's so hard to understand about that? I can't "contribute" to improve a passage which talks entirely about something else, completely unrelated to the subject of the article. I can only remove it.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:23, October 21, 2009 (UTC)


I changed language of Afghanistan from Pashto to Persian. Only 35% of Afghanistan speak Pashto, but Persian is the native language of 50% of the population and the second language of the Pastuns. More than 90% of the people of Afghanistan speak Persian!--Kasparov49acer 18:45, 26 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yamaweiss (talkcontribs)

Geology content - see article Geological province[edit]

Removed some geological content, as this topic has its own article at Geologic province. Seems like most information is already present there, but here's the text for safekeeping/checking by experts:

removed: "In geology, the term "province" refers to a specific physiogeographic area that comprises a grouping of like bathymetric or former bathymetric elements (now sedimentary strata above water) whose features are in obvious contrast to the surrounding regions, or other "provinces." The term usually refers to sections or regions of a craton recognized within a given time-stratigraphy, i.e., recognized within a major division of time within a geologic period." GermanJoe (talk) 16:16, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Legal aspects section[edit]

This section deals mostly about 'provinces or states' in federations. However, as Visik also notes above, the areas which form a federation are only called 'provinces' in Canada and usually the word province applies to divisions of a unitary state. So I think this section is very unbalanced or even out of place. Bever (talk) 05:35, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

The section is not very accurate overall. In Roman history (according to my Oxford English Dictionary) a "province" was "A country or territory outside Italy, under Roman dominion and administered by a governor from Rome." In North American history, all of Britain's North American colonies were known as British provinces, e.g. the "Province of Pennsylvania" or the "Province of Maryland" and had British governors. However, as a result of that unpleasant disagreement in 1776, 13 of the colonies declared themselves independent "states", and formed the "United States". The other 3 colonies (they don't talk much about this in American History class) didn't like the idea and continued to be "provinces" of Britain. In 1867 some of the remaining colonies in the Great White North decided to form a federation of their own:
"the Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick shall form and be One Dominion under the Name of Canada"
They were going to call it the "Kingdom of Canada", but the US objected so they called it a "Dominion". The Province of Canada split itself into two provinces, Ontario and Quebec and the Dominion of Canada was formed by uniting 4 provinces, since expanded to 10. However, since then Canada has gradually drifted away from Britain, stopped calling itself a "Dominion" and is now an independent country - except that the Queen of England technically still appoints a Governor General for the country, and the GG technically appoints a Lieutenant Governor for each of the provinces, so they are technically still imperial provinces of England and Canada is still a Dominion of the Queen of England.
France and China were once imperial powers like Britain, hence the term "provinces" for their regions, and they appointed the governors for their provinces. In China, I think that is probably still true. The main difference with Canada is that the appointment of a governor by Britain is just a legal fiction. In reality the elected Prime Minister runs the country and an elected Premier (sometimes called a Prime Minister) runs each of the provinces. The Governor General and Lieutenant Governors are just ceremonial officials appointed by the elected politicians with the power to do whatever the politicians tell them. Also, when the article refers to a centralized federal system (such as Canada), that is also fictional. In reality, Canada is less centralized than the US, and its provinces have more power than American states. That's not what the founders of either country intended, it's just how it turned out.RockyMtnGuy (talk) 05:03, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Ecclesiastical Provinces[edit]

There should be a mention of Ecclesiastical Provinces and a link to . (talk) 10:07, 17 April 2015 (UTC)