User talk:81.110.220.68

Rideau Hall

I see there's a dispute over whether the Canadian monarch is a resident of Rideau Hall. PS- didn't we settle this at Rideau Hall, months ago? GoodDay (talk) 17:13, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I like the current version, with the monarch noted in brackets. --Padraic 11:51, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

This indeed was settled at Rideau Hall some time ago, despite Loner's maximum contribution being the odd personal opinion and hitting the revert button. Nothing new from him, so I wouldn't expect anything more. --G2bambino (talk) 00:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

And apparently his personal opinion is that the those at the Department of Canadian Heritage are "eccentic" and hold "fringe opinions." The Lonewolf has spoken! --G2bambino (talk) 23:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

The monarch resides in the United Kingdom, not in Canada. --Dlatimer (talk) 16:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's nice of you to let us all know what your opinion is. Unfortunately, it has zero to do with the discussion here. --G2bambino (talk) 23:00, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

That's not actually an opinion, it is fact. The statements "The monarch has a residence in Canada" and "The monarch resides in Canada" are not equal; the former is true while the latter is false. Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 00:29, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Too long

Giving each house it's own line in this template makes it needlessly long. It will break it into section soon unless I hear a good reason why not. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 21:50, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. --Padraic 01:20, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree, too. --G2bambino (talk) 01:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I've gone and made some changes to make the overall box smaller. In about five minutes there will be another, even smaller, alternate version. I have also removed the repetition of Lieutenant Governor in favour of piped links and a note; I have also placed 'also of the monarch' in a ref, as that seems tidier to me. Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 00:12, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

How does a footnote work in a template? --G2bambino (talk) 00:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Not, apparently. Removed. Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 00:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Thoughts on new versions

Anyone? I like the second better; it's more compact. I think perhaps the bolding should be edited, as it seems overwhelming. Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 22:27, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Bueller? Bueller? Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 18:00, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

There is a discussion about Canadian templates in general at Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board#Consistency of appearence to Canada-related navboxes. --G2bambino (talk) 02:52, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, but we're talking about this template. And since, as you said, there is currently no consistency, that discussion is irrelevant unless/until a consensus develops there to push for consistency, at which point cosmetic changes may be made to be in line with that consistency. So, your thoughts on this template? Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 03:06, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, nobody seems to object to consistency, just to the over-use of red. Some suggestions have been raised there that would apply here. --G2bambino (talk) 03:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I am not objecting, nor have I ever objected, to consistency. I was pointing out that since there is no consistency, discussions on consistency have no bearing unless and until a consistency consensus is conveyed. So what are your thoughts on this template and how it should look? Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 03:34, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, it was you who began a project of implementing consistency across Canadian navboxes, and there's been no objection to that at Wikipedia talk:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board. As for the layout of this box, what I said at the aforementioned talk page applies here. --G2bambino (talk) 03:37, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Other than 'red title bar only', I see no suggestions from you. Again: what would you suggest for how this template should look? Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 03:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, since nobody has offered any input on the issue, I have been bold and selected a new version. Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 23:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Queen's official residences

Hello Lonewolf. I don't like it either, but we've already agreed to keep it this way. If you still disagree? take it here (please). GoodDay (talk) 13:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The discussion was already started above; Lonewolf chose not to participate. --G2bambino (talk) 20:39, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

So it was; I'm getting senile lately. Feel free to 'merge' this discussion to the above discussion. GoodDay (talk) 20:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Objections

I've opened the sub-section to direct Lonewolf BC here. I know he's eager to discuss his objections to Rioux & G2bambino's edits. GoodDay (talk) 18:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Roux, dammit! No 'i'! :P I thought this whole thing had been settled? [ roux ] [x] was prince of canada 18:17, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

It had, that's just the point. I'd be very careful making edits against consensus...Best, --Cameron* 18:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Er.. I didn't. [ roux ] [x] was prince of canada 18:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)