Content deleted Content added
→Proposed solution: TL;DR don't care if "establishment" is replaced, but not with "independence" |
|||
Line 180:
:{{ping|Dbrodbeck}} is indifferent.
:The other editors mentioned by [[User:Walter Görlitz|Walter Görlitz]] do not present any valid counterarguments to [[User:Mystery Guyman|Mystery Guyman]]'s arguments in favour of the word independence. This is the key point for there being no consensus for either the current format of the infobox or the word establishment. I'm not saying the wonderful editors here have no credibility ... I'm saying no valid counterarguments for avoiding the word independence have been presented. [[User:NorthernFactoid|NorthernFactoid]] ([[User talk:NorthernFactoid|talk]]) 02:38, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
::Last time this was brought up, it was brought up not as a comparison between the US and Canada (which is an apples to oranges comparison), but rather as a comparison of Australia and Canada. IIRC, the reason why Australia could be said to have become "independent" of Britain at a specific date was because the country was created wholesale on that date. Canada was not. Instead, Canada was established as a reasonably formal concept in the 1700s, and had various regions kinda... mush together until in 1867 they were legally bound. It's impossible to pick a single date for independence for Canada the way you can for the US, or even (to a certain degree) like you can for Australia. Even the latter is more clear cut than Canada. I don't have strong feelings toward "Establishment" (which is a clunky word), but I don't feel independence can be accurately used in this case. — [[User:Gopher65|Gopher65]]<sub><small>[[User_talk:Gopher65|<font color="green">talk</font>]]</small></sub> 15:07, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
=== Non-binding straw poll ===
| |||