User talk:Friesguy

Stop vandalizing Local Issues on Regina page or I will report you.--216.174.134.2 18:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consider yourself reported.Why do you insist on vandalising local issues ? --206.163.235.114 22:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not the one that got banned from editing the Regina wiki,and I am not the one making unwelcome remarks to other members when edits are made that you dont agree with. Listen to reason and be flexible and everything will work out for everyone. Not everyone can possibly agree with anyone else, but thats why compromise is something of a necessity on wiki.Friesguy 05:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aerial photos of Regina

Fascinating to me as an old Regina guy. Is "Over Winston Knorr Collegiate" a shot of the new residential development to the southeast on Arcola, north of the new graveyard? I haven't been to Regina lately but my Mum has moved to that part of town and it seems to me that her house overlooks an artificial lake that must be that one. What do you propose to photograph from aloft when you return to the air? Masalai 06:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh really. Well, it certainly works. Those ponds in the new residential subdivisions look really terrific. Your idea of providing photos of new building projects in the central business district is an excellent one. Not for the main article, perhaps, but maybe the "Neighbourhoods" sub-article (which, truth to tell, looks a bit lame in its current, under-development state) could have a new downtown section added with your proposed photos. Someone has added an empty "to-do" template in the discussion page of the main article, which doesn't seem very helpful; it would be interesting to know what an experienced editor would have to say. Take a look sometime at the article on Brisbane, Australia, which it seems to me is by contrast rather a mess. Masalai 01:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are magnificent aerial photos of Regina at http://www.globalairphotos.com/gallery/sk/Regina/southeast/2003/11. They are of course for commercial use and are for sale. But they might give you some ideas for shots you could try and duplicate when you make your next venture aloft. I do think it a pity that there are no photos available of Regina in winter, when it really is at its most interesting and lovely in many respects. Masalai 01:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Public, separate and private schools

Brian, I somewhat suspect that you are the editor who inserted the comments I refer to below:

Do I detect a bit of POV in this section that might reasonably be pruned? I was about to adjust slightly for the fact that, whereas in previous years, Catholic children were legally not permitted to enroll in "public" schools and non-Catholic children in "separate" schools, today there is a much more inclusivist franchise. And then I noted the subtle mentions of home schooling being "small but growing" and the new private schools similarly being "small but growing." Am I missing something here? I think we need to avoid anything smacking of politics in such a highly-charged matter. Of course I have not -- as per my previous comments -- presumed to edit out these adverbs, but...comments, please? Masalai 10:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not want to get into a thing here: as I say, editors should consult before unilaterally making big changes. Do you feel strongly about these editorial adverbs? Kind regards. Mac. Masalai 10:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure Masalai go ahead and prune, I was only trying to add more info where I thought we needed more fleshing out,.It is my understanding that until the early 60's there was no catholic system until the catholics formed their own system and broke away. But in my experience Catholic kids were never excluded from the public system it was only their faith that asked them to start up a separate school system, assign their taxes to their separate system and get funding from the government in the 60's. Technically though non catholic students arent to attend catholic schools, it happens all the time because one school might be closer than another, and the faith doesnt matter to some parents just proximity to their home, and as long as their taxes get signed over to the separate system it appears to be ok with the management of the separate board. There does seem to be about 250 -300 kids in homeschooling with the public system offering guidance and assistance to parents and students, and it is growing yearly.Friesguy 03:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, the separate schools date back to the very early days of settlement: the Manitoba Schools Question (I am sure there is an article on that by that name; otherwise under "Separate Schools") was something even the Pope got involved in, back in the 1870s. And yes, there was very definitely a ban on Catholic students attending public schools and non-Catholic students attending separate schools. Masalai 03:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, here it is: Separate school. Quite a good article, though there is a bit of confusing ambiguity in the opening paragraphs. I perhaps show my age in having a reasonably substantial awareness of the Manitoba Schools Question and the history of the Separate School systems in western Canada: grade 12 history in my day (what a fustian, old-fogey expression!) was entirely given over to the development of the Canadian constitution; my son did grade 12 in Regina considerably more recently and he hasn't the foggiest notion of any of these things. Masalai 05:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A recent somewhat hostile contributor

Hi Fries. I have recently got into a bit of a contretemps with User:Pomte with respect to the developing "Regina Neighbourhoods" article. I have attempted to invite him cordially into our little community of contributors to the Regina articles. I hope you will support me in suggesting to this person that we like to confer cordially and enter into a collegial discussion before we haul off and rip Regina articles apart! Kind regards. Masalai 13:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You'll note that I've added a certain amount of guff to the Neighbourhoods article by way of responding to the (in my opinion mischievous) query as to whether there aren't any other neighbourhoods of note than North-Central and the four others which I somewhat arbitrarily noted. Tricky to come up with anything to say about anywhere other than North-Central and Germantown, frankly. Most of Regina, it seems uncontroversial to say, is pleasant to live in but hardly distinctive. Masalai 05:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photos

Newer photos would be terrific. The rather elderly ones that are in the article are there because they are in the public domain; contemporary ones tend to be copyrighted. Masalai 15:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

long time no talk

Hi, Friesguy! Please check my request for comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Saskatchewan. If you have any comments it would be good to add them there. Mumun 無文 20:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise Regina Neighbourhoods

I have posted a compromise to the issues in the Talk:Regina Neighbourhoods. It is my hope that this will lead to a solution over the disputed figures and edits. I also hope that this will eliminate future accusations as to my identity and/or relation to other banned users. I would appreciate that you read over the compromise and comment on it. I just want to find a solution, that will satisfy all parties.--207.81.56.49 07:28, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube clip

I did indeed. Thank you. Who produced it and for whose edification? Masalai 20:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have just reviewed the clips again and I don't know that I entirely indicated what great pleasure I took in them. Thank you again. Masalai 14:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regina photos

This person appears to be planning a book on Historic Walks of Regina and Moose Jaw and has taken a number of photos, some of them quite spectacularly beautiful. They might give you some ideas for one of your photography expeditions. He has posted them and linked to more on http://edwardwillett.blogspot.com/search/label/Regina. Masalai 09:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

St Chad's development

Interesting. Thanks for that. I wonder what use will be made of Bishop's Court or if it will come down. The City of Regina’s 2006 official Regina Development Plan (www.regina.ca/pdfs/meeting_agenda/2006_2006-1A_2006-1_Policy_Plan.pdf Regina Development Plan: Official Policy Guide for the Use and Development of Land pp.86-87) contains the detailed specs. Sounds like a very appealing development; nice that they've taken pains to preserve the old buildings. Masalai 15:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notable Regina neighborhoods [sic]

Hi again. Any thoughts on the suggestion that SriMesh makes on the “Regina Neighbourhoods” talk page that all Regina neighbourhoods have their own articles? There are issues of spelling and grammar in the material she has inserted in the article regarding neighbourhoods but I hesitate to edit till there has been some discussion as to whether the substantial elaboration of the neighbourhoods article(s) is warranted. Masalai 02:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the list that SriMesh has inserted needs a complete working over as to spelling and accuracy -- her introductory paragraph is also poor: spelling and grammmar; statements that need a source. But could you add your two bits worth in the discussion page also? I myself don't even think the list of neighbourhoods needs to be there at all. I should think, though, that since SriMesh put the list there, she could be charged with fixing it up if it is to stay. (The Saskatoon article is starting to look a complete mess with such lists overwhelming the substantive content.)Masalai 18:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent deletions and demands for citations in the Regina article

What do you think about the large number of deletions that a user in Australia is making from the article? I suspect she is a little unclear as to the correct use of footnotes: they are not necessary for trite matters of generally common knowledge (though it is certainly possible for me to add the citations she demands); but I do wonder if it is appropriate for her to have deleted a great deal of material on the basis of its being in other articles. It is common for the main article to summarise such material, which is then elaborated in detail in the relevant sub-article. I reverted a couple of her deletions and she immediately restored them.... Masalai 02:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An Invite to join Saskatchewan WikiProject

Hi, you are graciously extended an invitation to join the Saskatchewan WikiProject! The Saskatchewan WikiProject is a fairly new WikiProject. We are a group of editors who are dedicated to creating, revising, and expanding articles, lists, categories, and Wikiprojects, to do with anything Saskatchewan.

As you have shown an interest in [[Regina neighbourhoods Regina, Saskatchewan Pat Fiacco Culture in Regina and etc]] we thought you might like to take an interest in this growing WikiProject.

Another project dedicated to Saskatchewan is the Saskatchewan Roads and Highways Wikiproject

Also, a descendant project for Saskatchewan is the WikiProject Saskatchewan Communities & Neighbourhoods

We look forward to welcoming you to the project! SriMesh | talk 04:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]