Jump to content

Talk:Downtown St. Catharines

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I started this article to inform people of the downtown, a unique area of St. Catharines. I emailed the general manager of the Downtown Association about relaying information to and from their official website. She responded that doing so is allowed, provided it's done in a positive way (i.e. doesn't give the association negative publicity). That wouldn't be the intent of wikipedia, so that's not a problem. I am wondering, however, if we can obtain some of the nicer pictures off their website. Is this difficult to do? If so, does someone have pictures to improve this article. Also, someone with experience should possibly reformat this article, make it more dynamic. (Trappy 22:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC) = Username)[reply]

Images

[edit]

I am currently restructuring some pictures I personally uploaded, so they may disappear and reappear over the next while. (Trappy 20:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Problem

[edit]

I have a problem that theres a St. Catharines downtown article, while theres no Toronto downtown article.

Toronto has been reshaped over the years, and old buildings have been razed in favour of modern structures. St. Catharines still has a lot of it's old buildings from the 1800s intact and occupied. There is a lot of area in the city that is unique and protected under laws that forbid destroying ancient culture. --Matt0401 17:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have a solution, which is for you to write a Toronto downtown article. 69.49.44.11 16:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further Development

[edit]

I sincerely believe that Jerry's Alley deserves an entry under the 'lost heritage' caption. I myself don't have the details available. 69.49.44.11 16:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Downtownstcathlogo.jpg

[edit]

Image:Downtownstcathlogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 08:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Downtown St. Catharines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:00, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SmartGrowth Correction

[edit]

I haven't been able to find a citation for the claim that the Gerrard, Beecher, and James Street area scored 'Pretty good' in the "Walkability ranking of your community". Perhaps this information is outdated and would merit deletion. If anyone is able to find a source for this information, please improve the post so we can ensure reliability on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trappy (talkcontribs) 20:10, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]