Talk:Seven Wonders of Canada

Television Low‑importance

I don't think I've ever seen anything as lame and brain-dead as the Seven Wonders exercise by Canada's socialist national radio organization, Radio Canada. The original Seven Wonders focused on the most amazing creations of man such as the pyramids or the Colossus of Rhodes. But the best efforts of these Ontario dimwits could come up with were silly little contraptions like the canoe or the home-made snow cave, the "igloo". In a monumental intellectual leap, one judge selected "the prairie sky"! Sometimes you have to wonder what Canadians are smoking (or maybe drinking)! It's as if Canada still consists of rocks, dirt, and bush, and these radio geniuses spotted a canoe and were astonished. Have Canadians truly accomplished absolutely NOTHING except building a canoe? How embarrassing for Canada that these public ignoramuses were tasked with finding the most wonderful wonders created in Canada, and this is all they could find! Hoserjoe 05:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Just a reminder that this isn't the place to rant about the list itself... discussions should be about the article only. See
  WP:TALK. Rawr 06:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Well, wonder if this page is really fit for an encyclopdia - I mean, this was an "event" created by marketing people in an attempt to create press, and this article just seems to follow up on this. So, I wonder.

  Greswik 19:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  • You lost any credibility in your argument as soon as you said the word "socialist" -- Earl Andrew - talk 20:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter if "it is the better list" or "the one more Canadians agree about", the list of top voted wonders should not be listed first. This article is first and foremost about the CBC competition and thus the CBC sanctioned list should be listed first, regardless of whether or not it is accurate. As well, the CBC never once refered to it as a list of wonders - it is just a top 7 list. Thus, we should avoid calling it a "seven wonders" list. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I say we just call it CBC's Seven Wonders of Canada.

In contest to Scorpion0422's above argument. As referenced in a previous page edit (http://www.cbc.ca/sevenwonders/map.html), the CBC lists the two choices side by side under the title "Seven Wonders of Canada Map". This proves the online voted results to be a CBC sanctioned list worthy of equal precedence on the Seven Wonders of Canada page.

In addition, to my knowledge, the contest was sanctioned by the CBC, not the Department of Canadian Heritage, not any of the provincial Ministries of Tourism, nor any other division of the Canadian government (municipal, provincial, or federal), which would lend an official designation to the "seven wonders" list, therefore, the article title must bare reference to the CBC's involvement in the creation of such a list.

Yes, it does reference the CBC several times. I was curious as to why the two lists had to be combined and couldn't be listed seperately? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter if it's an "officially sanctioned" list or not, the CBC calls it the "Seven Wonder's of Canada", not "CBC's Seven Wonders of Canada" so please stop moving the page. Here at Wikipedia, we go by whatever the official name is, not be what it should be. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:14, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there would have been any other seven wonders of Canada list, the title should have included CBC. As it is now, it doesn't really matter, so would

Qyd 13:12, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm not the one moving the page, I'm the one reverting the moves. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Sleeping Giant.

The reference to sleeping giant should be changed to 'The Sleeping Giant"

--Caesar J. B. Squitti  : Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti 03:48, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the dispute seems to be resolved, is it possible to unlock the page please? These days we talk a lot about the new7wonders... it's a good moment to have contributions around wonders! And I also want to make an article in french, but this version is pretty empty. There's a

And these two freely licensed photos on flicker: [1] and [2]. Thoughts on any of these. None of them are really that great. Bawolff (talk) 19:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]