Talk:Port Colborne

Canada: Ontario / Communities Mid‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian communities.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Port Colborne , Ontario Canada has a population of 18,500 now , since 2005. I was going to change it , but when i backspaced it all backed up and I lost text. Can someone else please do that?

- Done, I used the exact number from the 2006 census (i.e. 18,599) Supasheep (talk) 19:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The photograph that is there is a photo of Colborne Ontario, and NOT Port Colborne, Ontario. I was born and raised there, and I can tell you that this photo is not of Port Colborne. So, I'm taking it down.

Beaudoin (talk) 01:45, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Echo Beach?[edit]

Can someone please change "Echo Beach" to "Elco Beach" in the Communities section? Thank you. I've lived here for my whole life & never heard of Echo Beach. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.238.6.239 (talk) 01:51, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MoneySense ranking[edit]

I reverted an edit to this article where an editor added: "In 2018, MoneySense rated Oakville, Ontario as the best place to live in Canada with Port Colborne coming in at 387th on the list and at 150th on the list of best places to live in Ontario. The criteria for its rating system includes wealth and economy, affordability, population growth, taxes, commute, crime, weather, access to health care, amenities and culture." I'm not sure how being 387th is notable, as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. The editor appears to be adding these rankings to a number of articles. The input of others is appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:02, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Magnolia677 reverted my edit about this area being one of the worst places to live in Canada. (And it ranked as the worst in Ontario).

How is being 387th notable? Please discuss.

How is it NOT notable??? Is information notable only when it is favourable to the place covered in the article??? Peter K Burian (talk) 12:10, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter K Burian: I have started a discussion above. Please consider adding your comment there. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:11, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved my comments to this section. Peter K Burian (talk) 12:15, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If Wikipedia articles cover the crime rate in a city, whether it is high or low or medium, why would they not also cover whether the place is good, bad or just ok to live in? Peter K Burian (talk) 12:15, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be relevant in your view if it was slanted in this manner: Worst Place to Live in Ontario? Peter K Burian (talk) 12:21, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For reference, here is a link to a previous discussion on the issue here. Air.light (talk) 23:50, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Air.light: The consensus seemed to be that entries such as these should not be included. Is this correct? Magnolia677 (talk) 23:56, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The original consensus seemed to be to not include these rankings on city articles at all. A couple of users added their comments later on essentially agreeing but adding that there could perhaps be some careful exceptions. What is happening here now seems to fall outside of what was decided there. I am not in favour of changing the outcome of that discussion. Air.light (talk) 01:13, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is every article on wikipedia bound by that discussion?

The Feedback service would get us a consensus as to the Moneysense ratings.Peter K Burian (talk) 00:42, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Every relevant Canada-related article would be bound by that. If you want to bring it up again to try and get a different result it would perhaps be best to bring it up in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Canadian_communities again as it is the most relevant and addresses the people with the most interest in it. Air.light (talk) 03:11, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree but I don't own this article and I *am* a member of Project Canada - If the majority don't want content of this type, ok. But let's not claim that being the Worst Place to Live in Canada is "not relevant". It is highly relevant but we are not to use content from Rating sources such as MoneySense. Peter K Burian (talk) 12:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing notice of this months later at CANTALK, be advised of this discussion from 2015, of which Bearcat, Mkevlar, and Mattximus will recall. This was the past discussion Air.light was pointing to on August 2. Whether a community is first or 387th, it is effectively nonsense. MoneySense is simply trying to sell magazines. Hwy43 (talk) 20:59, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with Hwy43, MoneySense is not an encyclopedic reference. Mattximus (talk) 00:28, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Hwy43, MoneySense is not an encyclopedic reference. mkevlar (talk) 14:10, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]