This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries 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.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North America 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.North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject North AmericaNorth America articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken 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.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia articles
This article has been viewed enough times to make it onto the all-time Top 100 list. It has had 106 million views since December 2007.
This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2008, 2009, and 2010.
Please read before contributing The Canada article is already too long (oversized) and should serve only as an introduction for topics on Canada in general. To keep this overview article concise, please consider adding information instead to one of the many "main" articles about individual topics that link from this article, e.g. History of Canada, Culture of Canada, Canadian football etc. See Index of Canada-related articles for a complete listing of topics. Why? see Wikipedia:Article size.
The question does not appear to have anything to do with improving the article. It is better suited to something like Wikipedia:Reference desk or Reddit.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
It's not an official symbol of Canada on its own, but it's legally and officially adopted as part of the flag as your source clearly states. It's just not a legal symbol if it's just a maple leaf. Canterbury Tailtalk20:08, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
In the Government and politics section of this article, the opening text states that "an implied bill of rights" is a "founding principle of the Canadian government", with a link to this page for further reading. However, that page states the exact opposite: this theory was never taken seriously by the courts, and was in fact explicitly rejected by the Supreme Court of Canada.
Not sure how to reword this to be more clear....lets first look at how some sources word this....or we can swap out sources to the one below that are more extensive?
McLachlin, Beverly (Jun 30, 2014). "Human Rights Protection in Canada". Chief justice of Canada. Canada's experience with human rights. Canada's experience can be divided into three phases: 1) Judicially implied rights; 2) Legislatively protected rights; and 3) Constitutionally protected human rights. Before human rights legislation and the Charter, courts in Canada relied on the theory of an "implied bill of rights" to protect traditional civil liberties such as freedom of speech and association. The theoretical foundation for these rights was the importance of free political speech and discussion in a democracy.
Jonathon W Penney, Ivan Rand's Ancient Constitutionalism, 2010 34-1&2 Manitoba Law Journal 43, 2010 CanLIIDocs 229, Even today, the judicial work of (Ivan Rand) “one of the greatest— if not the greatest— jurists in Canadian history” 2 remains required reading in law schools; and many of his most important decisions retain a central place in the minds of judges and legal commentators. For example, his judgments in the so-called “Implied Bill of Rights” cases were called the Supreme Court of Canada’s “most distinguished achievements,” 3 “the ‘golden’ moments of the civil liberties decade” 4 and the theory of implied rights described as “valuable”, 5 “one of the most original and provocative contributions ever made to Canadian constitutional law
Eric H Cline et al, Case Comments: Whither the Implied Bill of Rights? - A.G. Canada and Dupond v. The City of Montreal, Saskatchewan Law Review 137, 1980 CanLIIDocs 227,Much of the concern has focused on the court's changing approach to the Bill of Rights, but the Bill or Rights is not the only protection for civil liberties which has been recognized by the Supreme Court. Switzmann v. Elbing,1 and Saumur v. Attorney General for Quebec2, the leading civil liberties decisions of the 1950's, rested in part on a doctrine created by the court itself: the implied Bill of Rights.
Since few people know what an "implied bill of rights" is, it should be explained if it is included at all. The way the paragraph combines different claims about the country is implicit synthesis and should be re-written. It might make more sense to describe the situation as it stood at confederation, then describe the current one.
Maybe say something like although Canadian confederation did not provide a bill of rights, Canadians were assumed to have the rights traditionally recognized by courts in England. On the other hand, some have argued that peace, order and good government was a defining principle of the new confederation.
It should be noted that Canada does have (and had at the time) a literal “Bill of Rights”. I point this out as the language should reflect this fact (or not lose sight of it via good faith wording) 142.127.4.14 (talk) 12:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The founding fathers also believed in the supremacy of the British constitution, which they believed guaranteed certain rights such such as the right to own weapons. TFD (talk) 16:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done. See talk page archives for extensive discussion on this topic and the consensus is it not any longer considered by anyone other than old documentation to be the official name of the country. Canterbury Tailtalk18:50, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Update Canadian population from 41,012,563 (2024 Q2) to 41,288,599 (2024 Q3). It's from the same source, whic has been updated (Population estimates, quarterly). ZeusMinerva25 (talk) 13:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-3 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
The redirect Canadialand has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 31 § Canadialand until a consensus is reached. Cremastra (talk) 21:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
