User talk:Friesguy

Welcome!

That's exactly what I meant. I wonder if the extensive discussion of potash and other natural resources belongs on the Regina page. Certainly it is relevant and useful information but I note that the page is attracting the comment that it is getting too long (despite the recent relocation of the extensive history section to a separate sub-article). Perhaps it's appropriate, if it is indeed the case that the article is starting to exceed the recommended length, that there be a link to a separate sub-article on natural resources and industry. Masalai 05:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree that we are at our limit as far as length of content, but I feel that the Industry and resources section was necessary to put an up to date picture on the city. Anyone that hasnt been keeping up with Regina's recent history would still think that we are totally at the beck and call of the farm economy. Reality is that Regina's economy is currently listed by the big banks as having a growth rate in the top 5 in the country, in spite of the worst farm economics in history. Friesguy 15:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi there, Friesguy. I've done some modest editing and added the following comments to the discussion page for the Regina article.

I quite agree about the lists. But also with the proposal to hive off further discussion into separate, linked sub-articles. The history section being separated was a good move (although it needed a prodigious amount of editing), though others have continued adding tidbits to the main article. The issue with the quality of the prose is one that comes and goes; the article gets a thorough edit and then more material gets added here and there, not necessarily in the best place for it, not necessarily very well written (I don't mean you, Fries!). Sure, let's go for it. Masalai 01:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, I've done a lot of editing down of the article, reducing unnecessary repetition, toning down the civic boosterism a tad. I reject the criticism that listing eminent Reginans is inappropriate. How else is a city known? The suggestion that there is a lack of documentary citation is entirely valid, though: too much of this article comes straight out of my own head (not that it's incorrect for that; only that it needs documentary citation) or from captions in the many pictorial histories that have been published over the years. Perhaps someone who doesn't have to travel intercontinentally to do so could pay a visit to the Regina Public Library, the University of Regina library or the legislative library to beef up the citation section. Fries, I really don't think you should be so modest -- you have added immeasurably to the article and congratulations, not criticism are due.Masalai 06:32, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

The article is starting to look very good thanks to masalai, kmsiever and everyone that has contributed. I have to apologize for not having the time to lend a hand too much lately as I have pressing family health issues. Ps I have contacted Balfour collegiate about the unwanted additions in the Famous Reginians and students will have protocol discussed. Friesguy 14:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry to hear that you have “family health issues,” friesguy. May I say that it is entirely in keeping with your classy style that you have discreetly said that and no more. I hope that you will soon be able to back to the project; in the meantime, rest assured that I urgently defend the Regina article from its critics. Masalai 10:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Regina's Big Dig

Hi, could you expand upon this to explain why it is notable? Thanks :) Dlohcierekim 20:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Further re: length of Regina article

We're still getting the thing of: "This page is 32 kilobytes long. This may be longer than is preferable; see article size."

May I suggest that the following sections be hived off into separate sub-articles with, of course, overviews retained in the main article:

• Industry and resources
• Wascana Centre (actually this perhaps merits a substantive article of its own in any event)

Masalai 14:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I think youre right, the Wascana Centre article is pretty large and maybe that would be a better place for me to put "the Big Dig" stuff. Sorry for not being much help lately, just had eye surgery and still have family health issues, and, family always comes first. Friesguy 14:48, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Our friend Kmsiever has somewhat aggressively cut back the substantive content of the Regina article. I don't know if you will entirely agree with me on this, but I have put this message on his user-page: "Perhaps you might find it interesting to consult the Wikipedia articles on cities such as Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne, all cities of some millions rather than hundreds of thousands. Previous drafts of the Regina article notably erred on the side of naïve civic boosterism ("impressive skyline" indeed!) but we should not go overboard in minimising the merits of this interesting city with its decidedly interesting past and continuingly lively present. The article (and the subsidiary articles) is now deficient in illustrative photos. I expect to be in Regina in July, or at least sometime this year, for a family corroborree and I can amply remedy this default without copyright issues. Let's not cut too aggressively, shall we?" What say ye? Masalai 11:19, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Ski runs

Friesguy: This website — http://www.virtualsk.com/guides/winter/downhill_skiing.html — would indicate that White Track (at Buffalo Pound) and Mission Ridge (at Ft Qu'Appelle) are still going. Do you have more current information that they have closed, as with Last Oak (pity that; it was a very enjoyable ski run)? I won't restore the references to them since obviously you have personal knowledge of the current situation that I lack, but do please confirm. Masalai 15:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

And this one — http://www.saskbiz.ca/communityprofiles/CommunityProfile.Asp?CommunityID=230 (a Broadview community profile) — says "Ochapowace Mountain provides downhill skiers with the best facilities in Saskatchewan. Their snowmaking equipment ensures that skiing is possible from early December until late March or mid April." Are you sure that there is no more skiing at Broadview? Masalai 15:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

http://www.corrine.ca/AboutRegina.html

You're right: those photos are beautiful. But I can't see where on the website the photos are released into the public domain. Can you clarify? They certainly would spruce up the Regina article and several of its sub-articles. Masalai 03:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

As you can see, I have presumed that the photos are indeed in the public domain and I have added them to the article. I hope that you can confirm that they are indeed available. Please get back to me on this: it would be a pity if the photos were now removed from the article.

I do wish that we had more winter photos though. Regina is most beautiful during winter; in summer it looks like any old place -- extremely nice, of course but in June everywhere is nice. Incidentally, does "Friesguy" indicate that you are related to Mr Justice Friesen, a long ago judge of the Saskatchewan Queen's Bench? Masalai 05:00, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I went to boivin's website and the ok to use statement is no longer on the bottom of her page so I have sent her an email to confirm that it is ok for us to use. I dont have many winter pics, but I will see what I can find , and no I am not related to Justice Friesen. Friesguy 12:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Exhibition Park

Here is what I have said on the discussion page for the Regina article regarding the material you had contributed on visitor attractions, especially the Exhibition. I didn't see how and when all this got deleted; I'm sure it was by inadvertence so it is a good thing you raised the matter. Please add any comments you may have.

Ive just noticed that the section on Exhibition Park and all the shows and amenities held in the park is gone. My personal feeling is that Exhibibition Park and its attractions has more to offer on a page about Regina than some of our current info, (like our article on the organs in the churches). Would it be ok with everyone if I re-did all the info on the EX Park (now know as IPSCO Place)? Friesguy 15:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

That's very odd, Friesguy. I remember that section; I had thought someone had moved it to a sub-article. Don't try to re-created it, which would be a needless duplication of your previous effort; go back to the last draft where it appeared as part of the main article and copy and paste it from there. ("Our article on the organs in the churches"? What is that?) It was a substantial volume of material though; perhaps it could be a sub-article, properly linked from the appropriate place in the main article -- maybe "visitor attractions"? Masalai 16:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and restored your material on Regina visitor attractions, Friesguy, to a linked sub-article with a summary in the main article. Possibly the summary could be expanded somewhat insofar as this can be accomplished without simply replicating material already contained elsewhere in the article. Masalai 13:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Masalai 13:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

You want to have a go at fixing up the "visitor attractions" sub-article? I think you own it! I presume that the objection of the editors who suggest it needs a "clean-up" is that it's not a narrative but only a list. As I say, my awareness of the Regina Exhibition Gounds stems largely from being dragged around to the agricultural displays as a young kid by a farmer grandfather, plus winter concerts in Exhibition Auditorium before the Centre of the Arts got up and running.

I have tracked down an assortment of reference texts in my own library, incidentally -- the 50th anniversary of city status volume "Regina Before Yesterday: A Visual History 1882-1945" is replete with interesting and useful quotations and photos (a pity they are not available online -- surely they must be, somewhere) which I think I might incorporate with suitable footnotes. The documentary early history of Regina is largely one of incredulity in the national press at the improbable location and aghast reactions of travellers through. I really think it is not inappropriate to focus on the contrast between what Regina seemed likely to be in the early days and what its pioneers made of it. I realise that you somewhat take umbrage, but really, Regina is a marvel from that standpoint. Masalai 05:43, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I will look up the book in the library at work and have a read, I like your historical bent on Regina, but thought if youre taking that tack I would pursue more current things for the article so we get a more balanced feel. You know Regina's starting to be noticed when it sounds like the Stones will be playing here in the fall. Friesguy 14:30, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

That sounds to me a very useful division of labour: my knowledge of Regina in recent years is limited, though I'm really enjoying being brought up to date through this exercise. Masalai 08:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)