Louis Riel is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 13, 2005.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 21, 2005 Featured article candidate Promoted December 11, 2007 Featured article review Kept
	Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 16, 2004, November 16, 2005, May 12, 2006, November 16, 2006, May 12, 2007, November 16, 2007, May 12, 2008, November 16, 2008, May 12, 2009, November 16, 2009, May 12, 2010, November 16, 2010, November 16, 2012, November 16, 2014, November 16, 2015, November 16, 2018, and November 16, 2020.
Current status: Featured article

This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Canada: Manitoba / Saskatchewan / Politics / History FA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Manitoba. This article is supported by WikiProject Saskatchewan. This article is supported by WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada. This article is supported by WikiProject History of Canada. Biography: Politics and Government FA‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as High-importance). Politics FA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Indigenous peoples of North America FA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. United States FA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Montana FA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montana, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Montana on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MontanaWikipedia:WikiProject MontanaTemplate:WikiProject MontanaMontana articles FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:Vital article

How should doi:10.3138/jcs.48.3.79 be cited? As

• English: Barrett, Matthew (2014). ""Hero of the Half-Breed Rebellion": Gabriel Dumont and Late Victorian Military Masculinity". Journal of Canadian Studies. 48 (3): 79–107. doi:10.3138/jcs.48.3.79. S2CID 145605358.

or

• Bilingual: Barrett, Matthew (2014). ""Hero of the Half-Breed Rebellion": Gabriel Dumont and Late Victorian Military Masculinity". Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d'études canadiennes. 48 (3): 79–107. doi:10.3138/jcs.48.3.79. S2CID 145605358.

Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:23, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Since we've hit a brick wall at User_talk:Nikkimaria#Bilingual_journals, let's have an RFC here. Nikkimaria insists on citing Journal of Canadian Studies as the Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d'études canadiennes, as they claims this is "official title" of the journal. This is wrong, but they keep insisting this is so. Journal of Canadian Studies is the English title of the journal, Revue d'études canadiennes is the French title of the journal. The journal itself is clear on this, and lists the English and French titles separately (Journal of Canadian Studies · Revue d'études canadiennes, not a combined Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d'études canadiennes). Further down, there is a copyright notice, in both French and English. This notice is

• Copyright © Journal of Canadian Studies. All rights reserved.
• Copyright © Revue d'études canadiennes. Tous droits réservés.

In particular, it is not

• Copyright © Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d'études canadiennes. All rights reserved.
• Copyright © Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d'études canadiennes. Tous droits réservés.

Because this is the English Wikipedia, we should cite the journal as an English-speaker would, in English. This is unlike Zeitschrift für Physik or Cahiers québécois de démographie (or to take an example from this article, Revue d'histoire de l'Amérique française), which should be cited in German or French, because they have no official English title. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:23, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

!Vote

• Cite in English. Per above. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:23, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Cite in English - I agree that we only need one language usage for the cite, and it should properly be done in English. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:35, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Cite bilingual title. This is a bilingual journal, not a separate French and English edition; the bilingual title as originally cited is correct and an appropriate format for this article. As noted at my talk, this is a common practice among Canadian journals, including by anglophones. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:43, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Cite in English – Canadian here. While the majority of Canadian journals aren't bilingual, there are a significant number of bilingual journals that use naming practices like this in Canada. Nikkimaria is right that these bilingual titles are sometimes found in citations in English-language works. And there are some journals – I'm thinking specifically of Labour/Le Travail – that I don't think I've ever seen referred to unilingually.

  In the case of the Journal of Canadian Studies, however, it seems that this is not the case. Headbomb rightly points out that the journal itself frequently refers to itself unilingually in both English and French. This appears also to be reflected in common usage. Looking at works indexed by Google Scholar, the English title provides ~16,100 hits whereas the bilingual title provides just ~1,250 hits.^[a]

  Generally, it makes sense that the title used in the citation of periodicals would mirror the title of the article about the journal, omitting disambiguators, of course.^[b] With the possible exceptions of the conciseness and precision criteria (the latter of which mostly just affects disambiguators), our article titling criteria align with what I think most of us would want applied to the titles of periodicals in citations: recognizability, naturalness, and consistency. Mirroring the titles of articles about journals would provide us a uniform way of citing these titles across articles. Between that and the fact that Journal of Canadian Studies appears to be the most common form for citations outside of Wikipedia, it follows that we would use the unilingual title in this case. 207.161.86.162 (talk) 05:17, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Cite Bilingual title - It is common practice to cite (certain, although not all) bilingual Canadian journals with their bilingual titles. It would simply be wrong, for instance, to cite "Labour" rather than "Labour/Le Travail" or "Social History" and not "Histoire Social/Social History". For this particular journal, I note that the bilingual name is on the cover of the journal, and that the publisher refers to it, albeit inconsistently, with the full bilingual name: "The Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d'études canadiennes" See here: https://www.utpjournals.press/loi/jcs Remes (talk) 16:57, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "bilingual title" is not on the cover. Both titles are on the cover. There is not a single bilingual title of "Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d'études canadiennes". This is no different than publishing in something like Physics in Canada (or in French, La physique au Canada). You cite it as Physics in Canada, not Physics in Canada/La physique au Canada. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 06:47, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Cite bilingual title: Following "the principle of least offense". Because it seems like a not insignificant number of French Canadians gets offended by the monolingual title. Since both monolingual and bilingual titles are used by academics, it cannot be wrong to go with the latter. Best would have been if the journal itself had clearly specified which format it recommends. ImTheIP (talk) 08:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm French-Canadian myself, and it's nonsense to require English-speakers to use the French title when there's a perfectly fine English one to use. And if you want the Journal's preference, take a look at [1]'s references (Estok, Simon C. 2010. "An Ecocritical Reading, Slightly Queer, of As for Me and My House." Journal of Canadian Studies 44 (3): 75–95 and Overton, James. 1988. "A Newfoundland Culture?" Journal of Canadian Studies 23 (1–2): 5–22 in particular) which cites Journal of Canadian Studies as Journal of Canadian Studies. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:23, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Cite in English and cite in French: I suggest Journal of Canadian Studies (Revue d'études canadiennes). I do not think it should be listed with a backslash. RFT42 (talk) 20:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @RFT42: What makes the Louis Riel article special? This would just about only place on Wikipedia where JCS would be cited bilingually. See WP:JCW/J30. 'Revue d'études canadiennes' isn't in a single cite journal/citation template out there. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:34, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • What makes it different is that here someone noticed your alteration of the journal name, whereas in other cases - such as this one, or this one, or this one, etc - they did not. It certainly wouldn't be appropriate to claim that no other Wikipedia article ever cited the journal in this way. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:24, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Cite in English: This is a bilingual journal with a French name and an English name. In English Wikipedia, use the English name. In French Wikipedia use the French name. SchreiberBike | ⌨  23:57, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Cite in English as this is apparently also the style used by the journal itself: On page 8 of the submission guidelines is an example of a citation to the Canadian Journal of Political Science, even though that journal on its website is indicated as Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique. --Randykitty (talk) 10:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Cite the same as the title of the Wikipedia article on the journal. We can argue at the talk page of that article, based on Wikipedia's article title standards, what its title should be, but there's no good reason to cite journals differently from what we call them in our articles about them. The current status quo would imply that in this case we should cite only the English title. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:28, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Usually cite in English, but cite bilingually in an article written in Canadian English, since bilingual treatment of proper names, when something has both an English and a French one, is a norm in that dialect, and this specific source clearly intends to be cited that way. This is basically a WP:ENGVAR matter. Whether a bilingual case should use a slash [note: not a backslash, that a different character, the one used for file paths in MS Windows: \] or a parenthetic construction should depend on how the journal presents its own name bilingually, and if this not clear, how it is most often presented bilingually in other sources. From what I see above, the clear answer to that is Journal of Canadian Studies/Revue d'études canadiennes (and, yes, do follow French capitalization conventions for French titles, per MOS:FOREIGNTITLE). Also, the bilingual name being on the cover arguably makes it the most formal/official/proper title for the work, so it's what we should use anyway; it would not be the first journal to have such a name even outside of language-related titling; some have ended up with double-barreled names due to mergers. PS: I kind of want to hand out a mass {{Trout}} for starting an RfC about something so trivial and for a bunch of you ever getting into a fight about it in the first place. PPS: I edit-conflicted with David Eppstein above, who presents an interesting argument, but we have to remember that WP is not a reliable source. And our title for an article can change at any time, so "same as the title of the Wikipedia article" could at least potentially produce unstable results, and so is not a tenable rule. We do not want to have to rename works in thousands of citations every time a WP article on a journal title.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:48, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @SMcCandlish: As a Canadian myself, we have no dialect where we cite things bilingually. The journal has an English name and a French name. You use the one in the language you're speaking (see Copyright © Journal of Canadian Studies. All rights reserved. / Copyright © Revue d'études canadiennes. Tous droits réservés. from the journal itself). The Office of the Prime Minister, for instance, is "Cabinet du Premier Ministre" in French. But no one refers to it as "Office of the Prime Minister/Cabinet du Premier Ministre", even if you'll find both the French and the English names on the logo. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:16, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Maybe things have changed since I lived in Canada for several years, and could not walk more than five feet without seeing something given with both an English and a French name, basically any time the name was presented in a labeling manner rather than in a running-text sentence. The fact that this publication is cited with bilingual titles in many publications (especially Canadian ones, I would wager) supports that I'm arguing for. But I don't think I articulated what I was getting at very clearly. Your PM example: you'll find both the French and English names given in more places than just the logo. Spot-checking, this appears less common now than it once was at Canadian websites, esp. the government ones; many now seem to use landing pages that have you pick French or English before giving you any real content. But it still took only a moment in random Google results to find sites that give both versions of their name as the page title/banner, even if the material is otherwise all-English [without you switching to the French subsite]: [2][3][4][5]. It may actually be changing officially on Canadian government websites, as some policy thing; I just looked at a few and most seem to have dropped this habit on a page-title-by-page-title basis, though are still doing "Government of Canada | Gouvernement du Canada" in the top banner they have in common (even though you're on the English version and there's a Français link to get to the French one) [6]. Some have not made such a change [7]. So, I did probably over-state the case for how normative it is.

      Anyway, the "we just use the English one" argument you're presenting is (and was, when I lived in Toronto) entirely applicable to use in running-text sentences. It doesn't seem to broadly apply to all other cases, especially ones with a labeling purpose. Citations are not running-text, and exist for one purpose only: helping readers identify sources. The titles in the citation are basically serving that labeling function. As this journal is sometimes cited by its English name, sometimes the French, and sometimes both, the most reader-helpful thing is to provide both, which is what the publication is [mostly] indicating is its preference and the actual formal title of the work. It's certainly an approach Canadians are used to, even if they don't "demand" it and their government is less interested in now than before. If the argument is that various publications in Canada do not bother giving both versions in a citation, I'm sure that's true, but WP doesn't have a rigid "do it this way or else" citation format like so many off-site organizations (some of which have citation styles aimed at compression over clarity, given their specialized audiences, e.g. abbreviating journal names, compressing all author names to "AB Ceedie" format, etc.). It's more helpful to WP readers, and more in alignment with Canadian writing in general in a labeling context, to present both names. Or so I'm arguing. I've not lived in Canada since 2006, so I could just be flat-out wrong, though.
       — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:39, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

      • " more in alignment with Canadian writing in general in a labeling context, to present both names." It isn't. When you write or cite things in Canadian English, you use the Canadian English name of things. Look at Canada, in passages like During this time, Canada introduced the Indian Act extending its control over the First Nations to education, government and legal rights. you don't have french translations at every turn i.e. During this time, Canada introduced the Indian Act/Lois sur les Indiens extending its control over the First Nations/Premières Nations to education, government and legal rights. Canadian law journals likewise cite it as the "Indian Act", not "Indian Act/Lois sur les Indiens". The journal itself cites itself as Journal of Canadian Studies, not Journal of Canadian Studies/Revues d'études canadiennes. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:59, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Cite in English per Randykitty; that appears to be the journal's own style of citing papers published therein, e.g., six of the references here, two here, one here, one here, etc. XOR'easter (talk) 22:32, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• A quick note to point out that the articles XOR'easter links to are from the Canadian Review of Political Science not the Journal of Canadian Studies so don't say anything one way or the other about how the latter journal cites itself. Remes (talk) 15:29, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Oops! But it's true of the Journal of Canadian Studies, too (e.g., the last page of [8]). XOR'easter (talk) 16:47, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Cite in English per WP:UE and evidence by Randykitty and Headbomb. No such user (talk) 10:47, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• UE applies to article titles not work titles in citations, and explains why the title of the journal's article is in English. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Cite in English per SchreiberBike , and it might be more related that: "...in English Wikipedia, use the English name. In French Wikipedia use the French name." Ali Ahwazi (talk) 08:41, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Cite in English for the reasons given by Headbomb, Randykitty and SchreiberBike. To the example of the statutes which Headbomb mentions, I would add that it's not just the name of the Act which varies from French to English; the citation itself does. So if it is required to cite bilingually, the citation would be: Indian Act, RSC 1985, c. I-5 / Loi sur les Indiens, LRC 1985, ch. I-5. But no-one in the legal community uses that citation style, including the courts. For instance, the Supreme Court uses the English name and cite for the English version of the judgment, and the French version for the French version of the judgment. See the English and French versions of the Daniels case for an example citing the Indian Act:

https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/fr/item/15858/index.do

https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/15858/index.do

Parliament is required to enact the statutes in both languages, but that does not mean people who cite the statutes are required to use both languages. See p. 10 of the Submission Guidelines for this Journal, where it recommends using only the English version of bilingual/multilingual treaties and statutes. See also p. 7 of the Submission Guidelines, where it gives a couple of cites to debates in the Commons and in standing committees, in English only, although there are French versions for each of those cites. Seems to me that for this journal at least, its own practice is to cite in English for English articles. If there is a journal which itself consistently cites itself bilingually, then that would be the cite here.Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 18:39, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article does not currently meet the featured article criteria. There is significant uncited text and the historiography section excessively relies on long quotes. Hog Farm _Talk 05:16, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also MOS:SANDWICH, and listy popular culture prose. FAC nominator has not edited since 2007. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:29, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm and SandyGeorgia: Ready for reassessment. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:40, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Nikkimaria; on my list. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:05, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"FAC nominator has not edited since 2007." Why is that at all relevant to whether the article meets FA status? Suggests ownership as an FA criterion? I'm puzzled by the comment.Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:25, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's relevant to the question of whether the article has been maintained, particularly kept up to date with recent scholarship, in the absence of a steward. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:38, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I hope to be able to take another look at this soon. Hog Farm _Talk 18:17, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My concerns appear to have been addressed. Removing from WP:FARGIVEN and marking as satisfactory at WP:URFA/2020. Hog Farm _Talk 13:41, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Please double check ref order; I adjusted some, but there are more.
• Please have a look at WP:OVERLINKing with User:Evad37/duplinks-alt.
• This statement should have date context: Historians have debated the Riel case so often and so passionately that he is the most written-about person in all of Canadian history.[71] ... is cited to 1994; is this still true? Maybe it should say "was described in 1994 as the most written-about" or something to that effect. Review throughout for similar ?

Marking Satisfactory at URFA/2020. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:04, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]