DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

  1. Trang chủ
  2. Wiki
Former good article nomineeQuebec was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 4, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed

Discovery of Quebec

[edit]

In 1608, following earlier expeditions along the St. Lawrence River, Samuel de Champlain, commissioned by Sieur de Monts, undertook a mission to establish a permanent French settlement. After returning from New France in 1607, Champlain provided detailed maps and reports to Sieur de Monts, who resolved to continue exploration and settlement efforts despite previous hardships. Champlain was appointed as lieutenant for the voyage, tasked with wintering in the new territory while a companion vessel conducted trade with Indigenous peoples. King Henry IV granted Sieur de Monts exclusive rights to trade furs in New France for one year to support the expedition financially, prohibiting other French merchants from trading in the region under penalty of confiscation of vessels and goods. In May 1608, Champlain and his crew reached Tadoussac, a small harbor at the mouth of the Saguenay River, facing challenges including violent weather and conflict with Basque traders who resisted the royal monopoly. Despite these difficulties, Champlain was determined to establish a settlement and maintained peace with rival traders temporarily, intending to resolve disputes through French courts. This marked a crucial step in the foundation of Quebec and the permanent French presence in North America. 2603:8000:101:CC6D:4CBB:D8C2:6BE8:AFF3 (talk) 18:07, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Detail

[edit]

@Safyrr: This article is meant to provide a high-level overview of Quebec - the level of detail here is overall excessive, and in particular discussion of what motivated the Age of Exploration is better discussed at a different article. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:48, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You finally posted on the talk page! I agree that this is not an article meant to focus on the details of European exploration. But, it also doesn't? This is only a single sentence. If you remove it, it would seem that France begins to explore New France and colonize it for no reason. Also the British and Spanish are involved later, also for no reason apparently. This is what I've been working on in recent edits, to improve the flow so the events leading into one another connect a bit more and make more sense instead of just seeming like "this random thing happened in 1834". As for detail, well Newfoundland's history section is more detailed and long than this one. Safyrr 18:05, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you on that last point, but that's not a reason for this one to be the same. We have multiple other articles, not to mention a standalone article on the history of Quebec, to talk about all of the motivating factors for European involvement in North America; that just isn't the purpose of this article. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:10, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to not be addressing what I said and just repeating your opinion...
1) This is a single sentence so you really gain nothing by removing it, like shortening the article. What is actually harmful about this sentence?
2) This sentence improves flow by providing context. Readers should not need to click to multiple different in-depth articles in order to understand why something in the one they are reading now is happening. Especially if only a single sentence is all that is needed to provide that understanding. Maybe you believe that the Age of Exploration details is common knowledge, and that is why you think it should be removed? You seem to be suggesting that the History of Quebec article is why the sentence should not be included. But, then, if we extrapolate this logic, why include a history section in the main article at all? Why not just redirect to that article and be done with it? And its not like 21 words is excessive detail that needs to be moved there.
3) Taking your logic, if Newfoundland's length and detail doesn't matter, because Quebec's has no reason to be the same, then why would other articles' omissions or shortness matter either? Safyrr 18:28, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
1) I don't agree with your contention that this sentence belongs here, and removal of misplaced sentences is a benefit, even if a small one individually.
2) We cannot explain everything in a single article. If readers don't know anything at all about the Age of Exploration, they are unlikely to know why the Byzantine Empire mattered to trade routes, meaning that this sentence introduces confusion rather than clarity. Also see next point.
3) What I'm referring to here is our guideline on summary style, which describes how for a high-level article like this one, details are deferred to more specific child articles. This allows the main article to provide an accessible overview while providing a pathway for readers who want more detail on this subtopic. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:59, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Quebec's" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

The redirect Quebec's 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/2025 July 27 § Quebec's until a consensus is reached. A1Cafel (talk) 14:26, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect statement about housing prices

[edit]

'Since the 1980s, the average price of a single-family home has doubled every 10 years, going from $48,715 in 1980 to $424,844 in 2021.'

The previous statement is factually incorrect. It would take a doubling every 13.2 years to reach the price of 424,844 in 2021 if we start at 48,715 in 1980. 208.96.227.233 (talk) 00:42, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Population

[edit]

Population is over 9 million in 2025, we should edit that intro paragraph, thanks! Louisphilippeq (talk) 21:26, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We use the Canadian census for population totals. Next one is 2026. It'll be updated then. Masterhatch (talk) 21:37, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 17 December 2025

[edit]
  • Change "pop_est_ref" to 
    <ref>{{Cite web |date=December 17, 2025 |title=Population estimates, quarterly |url=https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000901 |access-date=December 17, 2025 |publisher=[[Statistics Canada]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251217211652/https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000901 |archive-date=December 17, 2025 |url-status=live}}</ref>
  • Change "pop_est_as_of" to "Q4 2025"
  • Change "population_est" to 9058089 ~2025-41549-18 (talk) 21:41, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Elijah Wilder (talk) 14:25, 18 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]