Talk:Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day

William Johnson's article

The source citing Johnson's article in the section about the political nature of the celebration, doesnt mention anything about non french canadians minorities, despite Never give up! Never surrender!'s claims. It talks about Johnson's feeling that the national holiday was being held up exclusively by sovereignists (or separatists in his own words), and that it excluded french canadians outside quebec, english-quebecers (which does not represent ALl of Quebec's minorities), and quebec's federalists. I want to hear the opinions of other users on this.Lanççelot (talk) 05:35, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

The whole "Political nature of the celebration" is unsourced and is destined to be biased and dissatisfy many readers. I doubt there even are credible sources discussing the topic with coldheadedness and impartiality anywhere in any language. I move to ditch the whole section.

Impartiality is not defined as "those sources with which sovereignists happen to agree." Besides, if Johnson is so objectionable, why is he archived extensively on www.vigile.net? Vote for retention of Johnson's article.Toddsschneider (talk) 20:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

And let's be reasonable: if we are to seriously discuss (at some point) the misunderstanding between Quebecers and certain francophones outside Quebec who decided to hold on to the French-Canadian name, it will not be here in this article and it will not be using William Johnson's overly partisan and defamatory opinions as reference... There must be some leaders of out-of-Quebec francophone associations who can be quoted on this, if really it is an issue and not just a media fabrication? If it is just a blow from a federalist to a sovereignist (or the other way around), in my opinion it is immediately disqualified as representative of anything other than that one person's political opinion. This article can be improved upon in many ways that would be more informative than petty political accusations of unknown origin. -- Mathieugp (talk) 14:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Anglophone artists at the St-Jean celebration was a huge media controversy, in both the English and French media. Francophone politicians and public figures from all over the political "spectrum" in Quebec, came out in support of the anglo artists. Johnson wrote a follow-up piece which bears citation.[1]

The paragraph clearly states that it is the authors opinion. The wording at the moment is not correct, it has been vandalized to represent a Québécois-centric view and not a summary of what Johnson said in his article. For those who do not have access to the whole article, and are following the link that only shows the intro, it is on Lanççelot's talk page.--Never give up! Never surrender! (talk) 17:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

This may be so, but the section remains a piece of mostly unsourced material, more polemical than encyclopedic in nature. Does it enlighten the reader on the "Political nature of the celebration"? There would need to be multiple POV represented there, which is not the case.

Regarding Johnson's article, which I am reading in full for the first time, it really is his opinion that "La fête de la Saint-Jean until the secessionist Parti Québécois took office in 1976 and changed the name to exclude French Canadians outside Quebec from the festivities." This sentence is factually incorrect on many accounts. It attributes the name change to the PQ and post-1976, when it is to be attributed to the delegates at the Estates-General of French Canada in 1967 who resolved that Quebec was the national territory of the French Canadian nation (nothing surprising there when one knows the history of the renaming from Canada to Quebec and from BNA to Canada). It gives as a motive for the change the "exclusion" of French Canadians outside Quebec, which is not only inaccurate but absurd. On their national day, the Americans, whether in America (USA) or outside of it are free to celebrate. In fact, it generally is the case that embassies celebrate the national day abroad. Being outside the national territory does not exclude non-residing members of a nation from celebrating their national day.

"No one represented English-speaking Quebec, unless one counts St. Patrick." => Actually, St. Patrick represents Ireland, a country whose first official language is Irish, not English. Paul Cargnello, a native English-speaking Québécois was singing that night in the Montreal concert. Not to mention Samian. This is really dishonest journalism because his unique implication in the article is that the event is at the hands of separatists excluding out-of-Quebecers and minorities.

Any serious survey of Ireland would place the country squarely in the Anglosphere.Toddsschneider (talk) 20:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

"Quebec invests millions in celebrating its Fête Nationale and, in nearly every part of the province, its organization is put in the hands of separatists." => The national holiday of Quebec, which still occurs on June 24, St. John the Baptist Day, and is still organized by the St-Jean-Baptiste Society today, is a day of celebration of the Quebec nation. Yes, it is controlled by Quebec nationalists, much like Canada Day's organization is controlled by Canadian nationalists. Yes, it is true, since the majority of Quebec nationalists are separatists, we can logically conclude that the June 24 celebrations are organized by mostly separatists. It has been like that for over 40 years. And I do not believe Quebec is about to run out of separatists singers, songwriters, poets and musicians... - Mathieugp (talk) 20:05, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Not only nationalists but anglophobes, who were horrified that St-Jean might become bilingual with the precedent of L'Autre St-Jean.Toddsschneider (talk) 20:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

This is the only portion of this section that is properly sourced. We must include facts about opinions, without implying that any one opinion is correct. As a radical former president of a minority lobby group we must, in order to maintain Neutrality, include this properly sourced opinion. I am not agreeing or disagreeing with what he is saying in the article, but as a prominent journalist, and political figure, he was the voice of the largest non-French speaking minority in Quebec and a prominent representative of the view that the celebrations are politicized. (whether the view is correct or not, it is still a view)--Never give up! Never surrender! (talk) 20:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

He was not speaking as a representative of any group, only as a journalist as far as I know. I am convinced that any attempt at introducing (however neutral) a description of federalists bashing sovereignists (or the other way around) is certain not to be encyclopedic in nature and is definitely not Wikipedia material. There is so much that could be written on (for example) the history of June 24, in Quebec and in the rest of French-speaking America over the past 175 years. Or the customs that were (or still) are associated with the St-Jean, etc. The junk under "Political nature of the celebration" doesn't even deserve to make it into WikiNews as far as I am concerned.

How do you propose to improve this section to make it acceptable according to Wikipedia's criteria? I can think of a few scholarly books that might discuss some aspects of all this with intelligence, but I am not so sure. It seems to me that the subject is inherently polemical.

In the meantime, I cannot agree that the sentence should stay as it is: Nowhere does Johnson state that "many non-French-Canadian minorities view June 24 as an ethnic and politicized event rather than a civic celebration", he asserts or implies that it is such without any sort of reference. In other words, that is is opinion, but he presents it as though it were a fact, and any person who was attending the concert in Montreal last year can testify that his insinuations are lieful for everything other than pointing out the obvious fact that the show is run by people almost universally favourable to the independence of Quebec. But we do not need to quote Johnson to prove this... It can be said without polemic and defamation. And if it is to be said, then in Canada Day, we need an equally big section on the "Political nature of that celebration", with evil separatists being quoted complaining about the percentage of the celebration budget going to Quebec vs. the rest of Canada, the Sponsorship Scandal, the fact people are busing moving to another apartment in Montreal, etc.

I hope I am making it obvious that we do not want to go there. This is precisely what Wikipedia is not for. It seems to me that the national day of Quebec deserves the same kind of quiet and neutral respect the national day of Canada gets in en.wikipedia.org. On the other hand, the fr:Fête du Canada probably needs a little neutral love right now. -- Mathieugp (talk) 22:19, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that no matter what is put up to explain that the one side views it as such, will be disputed by the other side as biased, even when factual. The version as it is right now neutraly summarizes what Johnson wrote in his article. The facts are that the holiday is supposed to be for everyone but, as Johnson points out, because most of the organizers and the festivities are very pro-seperation/soverenty the minorities do not feel welcome. As I have not attended any June 24th celebrations in over 15 years (they don't celebrate it where I live), I can not speak to what happened in any particular celebration, and I do not try to either. In my honest opinion (Not a fact just my thoughts), I think that what the original author(s) was trying to convey, (And I am just talking about this article, not arguing about whether other celebrations or events have simular problems) is that a celebration that is supposed to unite us all as Quebecers has had the opposite effect. I do know from personal experience that not all French Speaking Quebecers are pro-seperation/soverenty, and many of them also stay away from the celebrations for the same reasons, but as I am not a public figure it means nothing. --Never give up! Never surrender! (talk) 01:10, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

---

Let's stop arguing over this as it was not my paragraph to begin with. ----

We need to come up with a better way to write this whole section, the paragraph in question is the only sourced item and seems to be all of a sudden very contreversial. We can not hide or dismiss the fact that the holiday is as the law states a holiday for all Québécois, but the festivities are primarily geared towards a more Nationalist/Seperatist/Sovereigntist and that people who do not adhere to this idealogy feel unwelcome or even unwanted. I am open to suggestions. --Never give up! Never surrender! (talk) 01:59, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

My suggestion was to zap the section. I still believe it is the best thing to do for the moment. It would not be difficult to demonstrate that most Quebecers who are "Nationalist/Seperatist/Sovereigntist" do not feel welcomed celebrating the federal State of Canada on July 1st. There isn't much to say beyond that that will not end up being a cause for endless and useless revert wars.

Quite false. A francophone nationalist would be welcome at any Canada Day celebration sponsored by the Conservative or Liberal parties of Canada. They were the same who voted in favor of the "Quebec is a nation (within Canada)" resolution in the Canadian Parliament. A separatist is another creature. But try wearing a "Canada" T-shirt to St-Jean Toddsschneider (talk) 20:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I am the one who created the section by the way. It would seem I created it on 24 juin 2005 à 14:14 with unsourced material (not written by me) which originally stated just this:

Until the 1970s, Dominion Day, which fell on 1 July, was little more than a day away from work for most Canadians. To respond to the Quebec nationalist appropiation of Saint-Jean-Baptiste, the federal government promoted 1 July as a national holiday for Canada. It did so by furnishing funds for lavish celebrations and by changing the name of the holiday to Canada Day. Within Quebec, separatists have tended to use the Fête nationale du Québec to promote identification with Quebec, while their opponents have used Canada Day celebrations to stress loyalty to Canada as a whole. Canada Day parades in Montreal attract crowds composed mostly of anglophones and recent immigrants. The battle of the holidays has caused the two levels of government to compete with each other in financing public spectacles (e.g., outdoor jazz concerts). Most ordinary people, however, use the two holidays for apolitical recreational activities, appreciating the flood of free entertainment provided in late June and early July.

I don't see that there has been any improvement of this section over the past four years... In fact, I find it was a lot more reasonable then than now, despite the reference notes in the current version. -- Mathieugp (talk) 03:33, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I actually went back a year, then got sidetracked by kids and everything. I did not find where the Johnson article paragraph was even introduced as of yet. My original involvement with this paragraph was when Lanççelot changed it, that got me looking into the source, which the link only shows the intro to the aticle now, So I went on a hunting expedition to get the whole article, sometimes an intro doesn't say it all. Also when you are not a native speaker of a language, comprehension is a factor. I found that the original wording here was more representative of the article by Johnson. We all know too well that words have different uses, and when a text is translated it can lose some of it's meaning. Even my handle on WP eludes to this problem.

It seems to me that the wounds of our fathers have not healed, and the same rhetoric seems to bring back a longing for what once was, holding us back from being able to become what should.

I for one identify with both sides, and see this type of thing all around the world. What we should all realize is that in reality both English and French are descendants of immigrants who at one time left their home lands in search for a better life. And it can even be argued that we both come from the same heritage.--Never give up! Never surrender! (talk) 04:05, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Pardon? Now that is off topic entirely. If you want to more accurately quote from Johnson and work to fix the section, then go ahead, otherwise do you agree that it is only fair to get rid of the section entirely so the article is about as neutral and polemic-free as are Canada Day, St. Patrick's Day or any of the other National day articles in WP? Surely all sides of your family would agree to equal respect for everyone... ;-) -- Mathieugp (talk) 15:04, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if you feel that way, I was just trying to explain briefly my envolvment in the "dispute", and my perspective so you would understand that I have no bias either way, (English mother French-Canadian father, born in the US, raised in a french only speaking area of Québec). It was also very "late" in the morning and I tend to get philosophical. This section does need to be there, but I am unsure as what to do to make it better at this time. --Never give up! Never surrender! (talk) 16:18, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I've been trying to put together something that talks about this section in a neutral fasion, and would like some input. No matter what I come up with it doesn't seem to reflect either side in a good light, and I know that can't be what we want.--That's Life, "Stuff" happens, people die, life goes on. (talk) 18:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Believe me, I know what you mean. Some topics are just too difficult (or to close to us) to be treated with the rational objectivity needed for Wikipedia. That's why nowadays I focus on historical events that happened long ago, yet are still poorly understood by the general public, even in 2009. -- Mathieugp (talk) 20:05, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was consensus not to move the article, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

---

National Holiday (Quebec) → Quebec's National Holiday — See discussions above and archived. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

• Oppose, use Saint Jean Baptiste Day as this is the common name. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 05:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose, considering how long it took to get the current name, which is acceptable, I am not favourable to a move. Arriving to a new consensus is unlikely to occur in my opinion. -- Mathieugp (talk) 16:37, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose, was already discussed and this was the compromise. Also note that other "National Holiday" celebrations use (and could use) the same name (Only luxemburg currently). Note: The legal description in English of the holiday is simply National Holiday. (in Quebec is not part of the name of the holiday, only designates where, as in Thanksgiving in Canada, or Thanksgiving in The USA.) The literal translation of the French name would be "The National Festival of Quebec". --That's Life, "Stuff" happens, people die, life goes on. (talk) 01:30, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Holiday Name

Is National Holiday (Quebec) / National Holiday of Quebec correct? It would appear to me that the holiday for a Province cannot be considered a national holiday.--RedKnight (talk) 21:58, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

The people of Quebec gave themselves their national institutions over the State they could, in this case a Provincial State. The National Assembly of Quebec made June 24 the National Holiday of Quebec in 1977. It is the object of a particular act of parliament which you can read here:

Gouvernement du Québec. "National Holiday Act", in CanLII, Federation of Law Societies of Canada, updated to May 1st, 2008, retrieved June 29, 2008 -- Mathieugp (talk) 00:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

An Act of a provincial legislature, under the federal state of Canada, that is.Toddsschneider (talk) 20:31, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

The correct name is Saint-Jean-Baptiste day. The National Holiday name is only used by a small number of radical Quebec sovereignists. — NRen2k5^(TALK), 06:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

It's the name used by law and by Québec government. It's also used by the Québec Prime-Minister (currently a federalist) and by the Canadian Prime-Minister. It's also used in medias and is the official name of the celebrations. The Saint-Jean-Baptiste day is a religious celebration, the National Holiday is a civic one. Not the same thing. Jimmy Lavoie^talk 03:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

The official name not withstanding (A term you know), the French Québecois people do not call it by this name, and many celebrations are still called Saint-Jean Baptiste Day.--JamesLavoie (talk) 20:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Wrong wrong wrong. Despite the custom is to keep calling it Saint-Jean-Baptiste, it is still OFFICIALLY, by law, the National Holiday of Québec, and it is not an opinion but a fact. Independentism has nothing to do with that. Even federalists may prefer that name because it's void of religious references. Every year there is a comittee and every year the term is indeed Fête nationale. In every government website in Québec, that date is called Fête nationale. --ThoMiCroN (t) 03:24, 31 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThoMiCroN (talk • contribs)

Considering that it's not only celebrated in Quebec, and being the English Wikipedia, we'll use the English spelling for both the location and the celebration. We should use the name that all people who celebrate it would use. Also, we use WP:COMMONNAME, but we should reference the name the province of Quebec uses for its celebrations since they are the largest celebrations. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:39, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

The opening sentence of this article begs the question: "The National Holiday of Quebec (French: La Fête nationale du Québec) is the national holiday[1] of Québec." The equivalent of this sentence is, "This noun is this noun." Don't think it would be appropriate for someone like myself, visiting the article because today is the celebration, to reword this opener. Thanks. RaqiwasSushi (talk) 11:17, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it should be changed. -- Mathieugp (talk) 16:56, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

The current title, Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day, should be changed. Quebec refers to the National Holiday in the goal of promoting secularism, not a sovereignty agenda. 2620:160:E708:6:0:0:0:D (talk) 14:26, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Let's Discuss this information

The central problem of this holiday for many Quebecois is that this festivity symbolizes the celebration of "pure laine"(literally translated as "pure wool"), a term used to describe someone born in Quebec and directly descended from European blood. [28] [29] The Saint Jean Baptiste holiday focuses on both linguistic and racial purity thereby alienating the growing numbers of non-white, non-French and many French speaking Quebecois (of all origins). [30] However, recent journalism on this subject has shown that the younger generations of franco Quebecois find this issue of language a "non-issue", while others hold this idea of "French only" as essential to Quebecois identity. [31] This is a highly contentious subject which few discuss openly; yet the day before the 2008 celebration, Stéphane Gendron, an established francophone radio presenter, questioned if this holiday was not more of a polemic than a celebration. On the television show, "L'avocat du diable", Gendron said "we are a people of liars", indicating the 35%-40% rate of unemployment for "our Arab colleagues" adding: "We are a nation of racists!" accusing the Quebecois leadership of demagogery by exaggerating the language issues in the province in order to avoid discussing the real and more immediate issues. [32]

This paragraph has been continually deleted by Mathieugp and I would like other input as to the validity of this information. I have cited, academic texts and newspapers which have looked into the polemic behind this festival. I would prefer input from those outside the country since it would seem people here are unable to maintain their calm nor respect for other wiki users. Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Disfasia (talk • contribs) 16:33, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

For a more accurate account of how and why the above paragraph was removed by two different administrators, and User:Disfasia received not one but two final warnings by the same two administrators, see User talk:Disfasia and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring . Sorry to all. I know you have better things to do, especially in July. ;-) -- Mathieugp (talk) 23:02, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

It was removed because you are warring mathieugp. And you clearly have nothing better to do than harass wiki users and censure content here. You incredible lack of honesty is only underscorred by your inabilty to respect the "do not remove until dispute is resolved" and your constant lying on this site about the references not being valid. You clearly have difficulty understanding English or you simply have not read the sources. You need to stay off this wiki entry and let third parties who are both honest and competent deal with the editing. Failure to do so and I will request your being indefinitely banned from Wikipedia. Stop harassing me, stop censuring this site, and stop condescending to what is an open access forum. Got it? Disfasia —Preceding undated comment added 10:10, 19 July 2009 (UTC).

I have been following this discussion and I have to admit that I am a bit disillusioned with what Wikipedia is supposed to "be about". Disfasia has given a fair rendering with detailed bibliographies of this holiday. I would even go further and say that disfasia is more than fair as what appears on the national holiday site is pretty slanted towards a neo-nationalist rendering of a holiday that most people of color, most immigrants and most English speakers are made to feel unwelcome. Even more sadly is that the representation here on this wiki reflects that same type of harassment that many living in the province feel. I have checked the resources that disfasia states and it would seem that other people are simply defaming him. He gives solid resources--from newspapers and books. I see accusations of blogs being cited. I honestly see none. Who is reviewing this information? Perhaps this is not the proper space to ask these questions. If not, I apologize in advance. (Chang70 (talk) 16:19, 20 July 2009 (UTC)chang70).

Well, something weird is that your account has been created today (July, 20). Of course, you may have followed the discussion with an IP account, but I don't understand why you would create an account only to talk here and on Disfasia's talkpage (contributions). I'm wondering... you may be Disfasia's clone. Anyway, Mathieugp explained everything above. We cannot add content not adhering to the neutral point of view to Wikipedia. And saying things like "English speakers are not welcome here" and "the representation here on this wiki reflects that same type of harassment that many living in the province feel" means that you are trying to fight for a group's point of view (here the English Canadians) and are trying to put turn this to political. This should not be turned to political (English VS French). We're not in Québec, neither in Canada, we're on Wikipedia- where the origin of people doesn't matter anymore. Please don't bring "life issues" on Wikipedia. Sincerely, Jimmy^talk 17:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

You are a piece of work, you go and defend your point of view on other articles stating that what is being talked about is about Québec so it should be written as such, but here when a fact, not heresay or speculation, shows that the festivities are made for only one heritage group exclusively, you hide behind a false "wikipedia" neutral point of view argument. This is a "life issue" that is being catalogued in an encyclopedia, so the facts, whether they paint you and your group as treating another group in a way that is not in line with the values that you say you hold or not, need to be included. To not include this information would violate said neutrality of the article as it is unfairly politicized to one side. Do we need to talk about the recent well publicised celebration that created a major PR problem for the organizers? When a group of major French sponsers threaten to pull out unless the celebration gets rid of that "non french" performer, it shows that even in the new millenium there are still people who treat non "French-Canadians" as second class people. It is time that the minority, like you Jimmy, need to stop acting in a counter productive way. The French language in Québec will only be in jeopardy if parents stop teaching it to their children. How does prohibiting the use of, education in, and fair treatment of English by native English speaking people in Québec, regardless of their origins, help protect the French language? It doesn't, but it gives people who do not properly educate themselves and their children, who let the standards lower, and listen "blindly" to the propaganda someone to blame to make them selves feel better. In a place where 80 to 90% of the people use one language as their everyday language, people who "immigrate" to that area often have to learn that language to communicate. They might chose to continue to use their native language at "home", and should be able to do so without prejudice. So instead of taking all this time to try and hide the fact that there are still problems with "language-ism"/nationalism in Québec's national Holiday celebrations, why not accept that it has happend, and do something to stop it from happening again.

Yes I am an IP user, Wikipedia does not require anyone to create an account to contribute, if your only argument against my response is that I am a sock puppet of a registered user, like the previous response, than you have demonstrated that you are more scared that the truth will get out than actually making this article accurate and neutral. --24.11.34.119 (talk) 06:31, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Constant removal of cited information

Twice now correctly cited information has been removed, that the st-jean is celebrated in the us, once by an ip user, then by a registered user stating that it is not supported by reference? This is the reference: "The celebration became annual, and gradually more elaborate, and spread to other localities in Quebec, in Acadia (1880), and in the francophone regions of Ontario, the Canadian west, and even the USA." Please explain to this novice user, how that does not support the inclusion of "in the us"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notwillywanka (talk • contribs) 00:00, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi. If you want to add this information to the article, you need to provide a source for it. The source doesn't need to be online (it can be from a book for instance), but you need to state where we can find it. The Help:Citing sources page explains how. Thank you for your contributons and sorry for the misunderstanding. Bouchecl (talk) 00:55, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

The correctly referenced material indicated that the celebrations had ended. The two new ones are weak references, but meet WP:V. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:03, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Do you speak English natively? They were suspended 1838-42, is the same as saying they were suspended between 1828 and 1842, not that they have been suspended since 1838-42. Secondly, that has nothing to do with the celebrations spreading to other areas in Canada and the USA, they were talking about the celebrations in Montreal, not the celebrations that spread elsewhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notwillywanka (talk • contribs) 18:51, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

As per Wikipedia:No personal attacks, please comment on content, not on the contributor.

The sentence is entirely ambiguous. It's not clear if they started to be suspended in 1838 and they were finally completely suspended by 1842. Further reading does indicate that "Quebec City had its first official celebration in 1842". After that sentence, no further mention is made of celebrations in the United States. Your claim about spreading, etc., isn't supported by the article. The remaining references, while weak, do support acknowledgement in parts of the United States, but don't really deal with the extent of celebrations or their importance. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:28, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

English is as English does

I've noted your edits on National Holiday (Quebec). I don't know if you're Canadian, but I can tell you that in my experience, English-speaking Canadians refer to it as "Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day" almost exclusively. Nor is it just common usage - English language media use the same term: [2] and [3]. It's as much English as Deja vu or Samizdat. As it happens, I am Catholic, so I do use and hear the term "Nativity of Saint John the Baptist", but I do so purely in relation to relgious celebrations, not the socio-cultural celebrations the article is primarily about. Gabrielthursday (talk) 19:18, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

If you notice, both of the articles you mention are talking about celebrations of French culture, the celebration it'self (Nativity of St John The Baptiste) is of a religious nature that has been adapted in French Canadian culture as patriotic, just like the Wikipedia article says. The section in question states that the celebration, which was and still is called the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist, in English, has been since used in Québec/French Canada. Not the "Saint-Jean Baptiste" day. The current celebrations around French Canadian culture are yes absolutely called "La Saint-Jean", and it's variations, but the feast day is still the "Nativity of Saint John the Baptiste"--Notwillywanka (talk) 01:01, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

The nature of the event in Canada is that it is called St. Jean Baptiste Day in Canada. This is not an exonym and endonym issue. To expand on the list at CBC alone: http://www.cbc.ca/gsa/?q=St.+Jean+Baptiste+Day compared to http://www.cbc.ca/gsa/?q=Nativity+of+Saint+John+the+Baptist which doesn't return any valid links but lists two close matches. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:49, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Only when referring to French Canadian Heritage celebrations, and/or patriotic (aka Nationalist) celebrations. When referring to the feast day that is the origin of the patriotic celebration, it's "Nativity of Saint John the Baptiste", that is the English name, that is what French Canadians started celebrating as our Patriotic Day, and only when used in the context of French Canadian "patronage" should it be called "Saint-Jean Baptiste" day.--Notwillywanka (talk) 01:01, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your expanded explanation, I think we aren't as far apart as I had thought. I wouldn't make such a strong distinction between the feast day and the cultural/heritage/patriotic celebrations that grew up around it. Saint-Jean-Baptist Day to me includes both the religious aspect and the more civic-cultural aspects. However, I would like to propose a compromise: the section should still be headed "Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day", but the first term in the paragraph should be as you had it, the Nativity of St. John the Baptist. I think that initial reference is mainly to the religious celebration prior to its growth in patriotic and civic significance. I hope that sounds reasonable to you, I'm going to make the edit. Gabrielthursday (talk) 07:31, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 2014

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 14:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

---

National Holiday (Quebec) → Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day – WP:COMMONNAME;WP:PRECISE

• Most importantly, the scope of the article is not limited to the provincial holiday in Quebec, denoted by the current title. SJBD is celebrated by French Canadians throughout Canada, and even, to a limited extent, in some areas of the United States, as noted in the lede of the article. The current title is flat-out inaccurate outside of Quebec.
• Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day is the common name for the celebration in English, both in Quebec and outside it. "National Holiday" simply is rarely used by English-speakers. Even for French-speakers, "La Saint-Jean" and "Saint-Jean-Baptiste" are much more common than "Fete Nationale"
• The article discusses at length the origins and history of the celebration. It was never called "National Holiday" until 1977, and so the term is not very common in
• Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day is the preferred use by the media. Since a simple google search is subject to confusion, given the common terms "National Holiday" & "Saint Jean Baptiste" outside the subject-matter of this article, I looked at some national media outlets in Canada: CBC, The Globe and Mail, and The National Post. The CBC, Canada's public broadcaster, used the term "SJBD" in all three stories it carried: Quebec rings in 180th St-Jean-Baptiste Day with parade, shows, PM to mark St. Jean Baptiste Day in Saint-Lazare-de-Bellechase and What's open and closed on St-Jean-Baptiste. In The Globe and Mail, SJBD does not appear to be mentioned this year. In past years, one columnist for the Globe and Mail used "National Holiday": [4]; however, the only news report I found employed "SJBD": [5] The National Post, Canada's other national newspaper, carried a story that referred to "Quebec's annual holiday known as Fete nationale", but the photo was subtitled with a reference to "the St. Jean-Baptiste Day holiday": [6]
• Lastly, official messages from the Prime Minister and the Governor-General both used the term "Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day"; neither employed "National Holiday", though the Prime Minister also referred to the "Fête nationale du Québec".

In short, "Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day" is the common English name for this holiday; the current title is almost never used in English; and most importantly of all, the current title cannot and does not apply to the holiday outside of Quebec. Since the article is not limited to Quebec, it is currently inaccurate as well as not the common name. Gabrielthursday (talk) 08:44, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Survey

• Oppose Support National Holiday (Quebec) is not the common name, Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day is. While primarily celebrated in Quebec, it is also celebrated outside of it and so using the current name drastically limits the scope. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:21, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose The article is about the Provincial holiday in the province of Québec legally named "National Holiday". It is a patriotic day celebrated on the French Canadian Patron Saint's nativity. If someone wants to create another article about Saint John the Baptist day, aka the Nativity, around the celebrations that take place in Canada, outside of Québec, that is another story. This article is not about that, but about the official provincial holiday.

−Just because most people still call it the Sears Tower, because it used to be named that, it does not make it so. It's now the Willis Tower, also/formerly know as the Sears Tower. More people in Chicago still call it the Sears Tower, just like More people in Detroit call the GM Tower the Ren Cen. Just because some politician calls Canada Day, Dominion Day, it does not make it right, It's not like there was any quantification tests to become an elected official. News papers/TV-Radio stations simply report what the politicians say.

−In short this article IS about the Official Holiday in Québec, not the religious, or cultural celebration elsewhere in Canada.--Notwillywanka (talk) 16:32, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

No, the article discusses the provincial holiday at length, but it's about the day. WP:COMMONNAME is policy. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:48, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Agreed, the infobox and the lead section both point to the fact that SJBD is celebrated outside of Quebec. There is mention of an attempt to recognise SJBD as a federal holiday. I agree that the article could be fleshed out in terms of the celebration of SJBD outside Quebec, but the article is clearly not limited to Quebec. Also, I think you meant to support the move. Gabrielthursday (talk) 19:34, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

A question to Walter Görlitz? Did you actually mean to say support since oppose in this context would mean that you are against moving the article to Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day, however the rest of your post seems to argue the exact opposite?--67.68.160.163 (talk) 22:02, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Changed my vote. The article shouldn't be here but rather at the feast day. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:31, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

The article has been National Holiday (of one form or another), since 2004, you would think that if it was an issue it would have come up in the 10 years? Also, to compare this article with Independence Day (United States) or National Independence Day (Poland), for example, it clearly states in one; commonly known as, and talks about celebrations in other countries, or regions; and in the other "The date corresponds to the date of other countries'", and goes on to explain the significance, just like this one does, even though all clearly are talking about the patriotic "National" holiday. Do we need to rename those two articles because they mention celebrations outside of the "Nation" where the statutory holiday takes place? This article is about the Québec provincial "National" holiday, that has been celebrated since 1977, as an official statutory holiday, of course it makes sense that there is some historical context as it evolved from a religious celebration, but it makes no sense to rename it.--Notwillywanka (talk) 04:52, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Did you check the archives? There are many discussions and it has been moved multiple times.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Holiday_(Quebec)&diff=284742772&oldid=284663082 moved National Holiday of Québec to National Holiday (Quebec)
• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Holiday_(Quebec)&diff=284662444&oldid=282323940 moved Fête nationale du Québec (Saint Jean Baptiste Day) to National Holiday of Québec: Official English name. French name is stated in the introduction.
• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Holiday_(Quebec)&diff=222593353&oldid=222591682 moved Quebec's National Holiday to Fête nationale du Québec (Saint Jean Baptiste Day)
• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Holiday_(Quebec)&diff=222591682&oldid=222591195 moved Saint Jean de Baptiste Day to Quebec's National Holiday over redirect
• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Holiday_(Quebec)&diff=222591195&oldid=222588230 moved Quebec's National Holiday to Saint Jean de Baptiste Day: See multiple references on discussion page
• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Holiday_(Quebec)&diff=222570568&oldid=222569896 moved Fête nationale du Québec to Quebec's National Holiday: As per the National Holiday Act (http://www.canlii.org/qc/laws/sta/f-1.1/20080515/whole.html

Six moves is more than none. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:15, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

• Support the common name in French and in English is Saint-Jean-Baptiste or Saint-Jean. WP:OFFICIALNAME we don't use the official name if a common name can be established. Google News: [7] [8] [9] -- Notice that "National Holiday" is almost entirely absent from Google News. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 06:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

• Support (as nominator). I've said much of what I wanted to say above. In my view, there are two separate and equally decisive rationales for changing the title: (1) the fact that the English common name (even in Quebec) is Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day; and (2) the fact that the article's scope extends beyond the confines of Quebec, where SJBD is celebrated without much (if any) evidence of the more secular/separatist tinge that has developed recently in Quebec. I'd also point out that "Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day" is the only name that was used for most of the history of this holiday, ever since it became distinguishable from the religious feast day (and though distinguishable, it is not entirely separate, even today). Gabrielthursday (talk) 18:36, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

French be in the lede

It currently reads "Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day (French: Fête de la Saint-Jean-Baptiste), officially known in Quebec as National Holiday (French: La fête nationale)" however it until recently read "Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day (French: Fête de la Saint-Jean-Baptiste), officially known in Quebec as La fête nationale (English: National Holiday)". The fact that

1. It is officially known in Quebec as La fête nationale, and
2. It is even called that by Anglophones

leads me to believe that even though this is the English version of Wikipedia, there's a serious problem with the change. We're presently passing off a lie since it's not officially known as National Holiday in Quebec. It's not the name of the article, that was dealt with earlier on the talk page. It needs to reflect the legal name or we have to change the lede. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:02, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Actually you have that backwards. It has read this way until only recently when someone switched the English and French. In English it is officially named ad "National Holiday" that is the name that the government gave it in the English legislation, which in Québec has equal value. That is why it even states "official known as", instead of "also known as". It was not until July third, after renaming the article about the legal holiday in Québec to the religious celebration nationwide (Canada) that the French name was placed prominently. The French name (maybe common, however to Québec English speakers only) is still in the lede, so there is no problem as it reads right now.--Notwillywanka (talk) 18:21, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Quebec has English legislation? I'd like to see that. This in particular.

Regardless, it's even known as fête nationale in English publications:

• http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/f%C3%AAte-nationale-celebrations-1.1275374
• http://www.cbc.ca/news/arts/anglophone-bands-back-on-roster-for-f%C3%AAte-nationale-1.778658
• http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=ce2b6068-f8b9-4bd9-8148-490d012a7ecf
• http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/06/25/fete-nationale-celebration-north-of-montreal-ends-in-clashes-with-police-22-arrests/

In other words, it's a loan word. Granted, The Globe and Mail doesn't use the term and I didn't check other publications. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:23, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

I tend to agree that "Fete Nationale" should be given the first mention. Livorno is not "Leghorn" despite the fact that "Leghorn" is the English word for it; but English-speakers now typically use the Italian. In this case, English-speakers typically use the French term, rather than the English translation. Gabrielthursday (talk) 07:08, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

All Quebec Laws have to be enacted in English and French, it is mandated in the Canadian constitution section 133, here is the [National Holiday Act] in English. Using news agencies who's writers are based inside of an area with a "regional dialect" does not demonstrate widespread English usage, many of the corespondents are native French speakers or Native English dialect speakers who also employ terms like "close the lights", that does not make it correct or "universal". Wikipedia is a worldwide encyclopedia, and should be intelligible to all English speakers, not just to the people who speak the local dialect that the article is written about. It is not an "English translation" but the actual legal name of the holiday, there is nothing wrong with also mentioning that many "locals" call it by the french name, just like they call a convenience store a "dépaneur", Native English speakers usage of French loan words in Québec varies depending on region/education/assimilation/length of residence/etc.--Notwillywanka (talk) 18:52, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, English-speakers outside Quebec typically call it "Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day". It doesn't really matter much - I suspect that the question is really whether for a secondary name in an article we should prioritise an official name or the more common usage. Obviously, for an article title, the common name is preferred; but for a secondary name, I don't have any clear idea of what the preference is. I think part of the distaste for "National Holiday" is a combination of the banality of the term combined with the lack of its currency in the vernacular. At any rate, it's not a significant question. Gabrielthursday (talk) 02:54, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

WTF? Quebec never signed the constitution.

Second, all Canadian Federal laws must be in both English and French. Every province has its own provincial official languages. New Brunswick is the only officially bilingual province. Quebec's official language is French. The remaining provinces are English. So in BC, there is no French legislation and in Quebec there's no modern-day English legislation.

Third, the English is not legislation it's a translation, but it's not official.

As Gabrielthursday stated, it's "Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day" in English Canada and then fête nationale as I showed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:03, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Walter, I'm afraid you've got a couple facts wrong. Firstly, regardless of Quebec's consent to the Constitution, they remain bound by it and their legislature passes laws in both English and French. Secondly, while Quebec's official language is French, the French and English versions of its statutes have equal force (iirc, Quebec tried to give its French versions of its statutes primacy, the SCC declared it unconstitutional, and they amended Bill 101 (Charter of the French Language) to give them equal footing.

So, to be fair, both "National Holiday" and "Fete Nationale" are official names. "National Holiday" is definitely the "official" English name. But in terms of usage, I believe Fete Nationale is used much more commonly even by English-speakers, so you have that going for you.

I'll bow out of the argument- I don't really think it makes much of a difference, but I do still have a slight preference for mentioning "Fete Nationale" first, fwiw. Gabrielthursday (talk) 05:43, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

In regards to the statement: "WTF? Quebec never signed the constitution." A> thanks for using vulgarities and keeping it civil. B> Québec may have never "consented" to the 1982 Constitutional amendments - which was not required as Britain was in charge of passing that law, the 1982 "repatriation" of the constitution has nothing to do with section 133 of the constitution, which was already part of the constitution before 1982.

The point is, that the official name of the statutory holiday in English, the language we are using here, and the language of this quasi-encyclopedia, is correct as National Holiday. The "common name" is not in question in this discussion, as it was already decided that it apparently is "Saint Jean Baptiste Day", the official French language name is already included and follows the same patter as other pages with multiple names in different languages, in parenthesis after the English name for example: National Patriots' Day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notwillywanka (talk • contribs) 23:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you interpret a TLA as vulgar. If I had wanted to be vulgar, I would have been, however my point was not to offend. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:49, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified August 2015

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100712132331/http://www.montrealgazette.com:80/Life/Anglo+band+ousted+from+Jean+f%C3%AAte/1695386/story.html to http://www.montrealgazette.com/Life/Anglo+band+ousted+from+Jean+f%C3%AAte/1695386/story.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified February 2016

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121017051723/http://www.theprovince.com/Life/English+bands+back+Montreal+Jean+Baptiste+festivities/1698990/story.html to http://www.theprovince.com/Life/English+bands+back+Montreal+Jean+Baptiste+festivities/1698990/story.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:13, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

This one is a 404 in the archive. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:31, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151016123154/http://claudegravelle.ndp.ca/post/gravelle-tables-bill-making-saint-jean-baptiste-a-national-holiday to http://claudegravelle.ndp.ca/post/gravelle-tables-bill-making-saint-jean-baptiste-a-national-holiday

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) 20:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090404140646/http://cgi2.cvm.qc.ca/glaporte/1837.pl?out=article&pno=0046 to http://cgi2.cvm.qc.ca/glaporte/1837.pl?out=article&pno=0046
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.montrealgazette.com/Life/Anglo%2Bband%2Bousted%2Bfrom%2BJean%2Bf%C3%AAte/1695386/story.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070120083246/http://french.epochtimes.com/ to http://french.epochtimes.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 06:42, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080624040208/http://www.fetenationale.qc.ca/la-fete-nationale-du-quebec-et-le-mouvement-national-des-quebecoises-et-quebecois-mnq.html to http://www.fetenationale.qc.ca/la-fete-nationale-du-quebec-et-le-mouvement-national-des-quebecoises-et-quebecois-mnq.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080627154427/http://www.ssjbmauricie.qc.ca/action/fetenationale/historique.php to http://www.ssjbmauricie.qc.ca/action/fetenationale/historique.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140808042233/http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/413993/langue-des-celebrations-de-la-fete-nationale-lake-of-stew-et-bloodshot-bill-chanteront-aussi-en-francais to http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/413993/langue-des-celebrations-de-la-fete-nationale-lake-of-stew-et-bloodshot-bill-chanteront-aussi-en-francais
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081121060014/http://www.ameriquefrancaise.org/index.php/Les_processions_de_la_Saint-Jean-Baptiste_%C3%A0_Montr%C3%A9al to http://www.ameriquefrancaise.org/index.php/Les_processions_de_la_Saint-Jean-Baptiste_%C3%A0_Montr%C3%A9al
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080702035722/http://www.rdaq.qc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/framesets/bottomFrameset.cfm?dir=chroniques to http://www.rdaq.qc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/framesets/bottomFrameset.cfm?dir=chroniques

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 20:58, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130605021543/http://www.lautrestjean.org/ to http://www.lautrestjean.org/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090404075847/http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=3329 to http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=3329
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090404075821/http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=2390 to http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=2390
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090404075831/http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=2405 to http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=2405
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090404080216/http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=2397 to http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=2397
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090404075826/http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=2396 to http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=2396
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090404075838/http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=2459 to http://www.ourroots.ca/e/toc.aspx?id=2459

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 02:58, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day. 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:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://montreal.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1%2FXJ&zTi=1&sdn=montreal&cdn=citiestowns&tm=44&gps=384_29_1004_579&f=00&su=p284.9.336.ip_p554.12.336.ip_&tt=3&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A%2F%2Farchives.radio-canada.ca%2Fsouvenirs%2Fdate.asp%3Fmois%3D06%26jour%3D24%26IDLan%3D0%26IDClip%3D8152
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140628040850/http://www.montrealgazette.com/opinion/Macpherson+Competing+national+holidays/9970184/story.html to http://www.montrealgazette.com/opinion/Macpherson+Competing+national+holidays/9970184/story.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 16:30, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Name of the Holiday must be changed accordingly to it's real name

The name of the page is wrong. It should be named "Québec National Day" instead of "Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day" because the Québec government officially changed the name of this holiday in 1977. The holiday isn't religious anymore. Also, considering this page is a direct traduction of the "Fête nationale du Québec" page, it should respect the official name of the holiday.

Some could argue that French-speaking people outside of Québec still celebrate the original "Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day", but this is not an issue since another article already exists separetely about the original St-Jean eve (in both french and english).

--Goldagent (talk) 01:04, 11 June 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldagent (talk • contribs) 00:19, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

The name in English is correct as the celebration in Quebec is only one part of the events on the day. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:15, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Did you read my comment ? What are your arguments regarding my own arguments ? Why keeping the "St-Jean-Baptiste" name for this page while there is already another page for the non-Québec celebration ?

--Goldagent (talk) 00:13, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

I did. I do not have to respond to your points as they are not the WP:COMMONNAME in English. Take a look an English calendar for instance. If it is listed, it will be listed using this name, like this one. I know what its name is in French, and the French project can use whatever term they want. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:24, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Specific article for the Quebec National feast

The rationale behind the denial of a specific article called ‘Fete nationale du Quebec’ makes no sense and is just wrong. You can twist it any way you want, there is a reality out there beyond the English speaking world. For instance, Unicode may have refused to create an emoticon for the Quebec flag, it doesn’t mean it is inexistent. You may not want to acknowledge it, but do the right thing and name it the way it is. 173.176.8.175 (talk) 20:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

When two topics are closely related, it often makes sense to cover them in a single article, and such is the case here. Could you be more specific about what you would change to improve the article? And please remember to assume good faith. Indefatigable (talk) 15:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)