text:
Tompion

Tompion (1957–?) was an American Thoroughbred race horse.

Background
Immaculately bred, Tompion was the son of the Hall of Fame horse Tom Fool. His damsire was Count Fleet, the 1943 U.S. Triple Crown champion. During his racing career he was owned by Cornelius Vanderbilt Whitney and trained by Robert L. Wheeler.

Racing career
as a two-year-old, Tompion won the Hopeful Stakes, and placed in the Champagne Stakes, the Hollywood Juvenile Championship Stakes, the Saratoga Special Stakes and the Sanford Stakes. He came third in the Garden State Stakes and the Haggin Stakes.

Ridden by Willie Shoemaker, at age three Tompion won the Santa Anita Derby and the Blue Grass Stakes. The favorite going into the 1960 Kentucky Derby, the colt threw a shoe and finished fourth behind winner Venetian Way and runners-up Bally Ache and Victoria Park. After losing the shoe, Tompion's hoof was injured by one of the nails and as a result he missed the Preakness Stakes but still went into the Belmont Stakes as the betting favorite. After a head-to-head duel with Derby winner Venetian Way, he tired in the longer 1½ mile race and finished fourth to winner Celtic Ash. That year Tompion went on to win the Travers Stakes, Bernard Baruch Handicap and Malibu Stakes. He placed in the Jersey Derby, the Lawrence Realization Stakes, and the Leonard Richards Stakes. In the San Miguel Stakes he came home third.

Racing at age four, Tompion won the Aqueduct Handicap, placed in the United Nations Handicap, and the San Fernando Stakes. He took third place in the Saratoga Handicap and the Fayette Handicap.

Stud record
Tompion was sent to France to stand at stud, and then at the age of 18, went to Japan. He was the sire of eleven stakes winners.

title: Tompion


text:
Waimea River (Southland)

The Waimea River is a tributary of the Mataura River in Southland, New Zealand. The Waimea Plains around this river form part of the Southland Plains.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Waimea River (Southland)


text:
HTC

HTC Corporation, or High Tech Computer Corporation (abbreviated and trading as HTC), is a Taiwanese consumer electronics corporation headquartered in Xindian District, New Taipei City, Taiwan. Founded in 1997, HTC began as an original design manufacturer and original equipment manufacturer that designed and manufactured laptop computers.

After initially making smartphones based mostly on Windows Mobile, HTC became one of 34 cofounding members of the Open Handset Alliance, a group of handset manufacturers and mobile network operators dedicated to the development of the Android operating system. The HTC Dream (marketed by T-Mobile in many countries as the T-Mobile G1) was the first phone on the market to run Android.

Although initially successful as a smartphone vendor as it became the largest smartphone vendor in the U.S. in Q3 2011, competition from Samsung and Apple, among others, diluted its market share, which dropped to just 7.2% by April 2015, and the company has experienced consecutive net losses. In 2016, HTC began to diversify its business beyond smartphones and has partnered with Valve to produce a virtual reality platform known as HTC Vive. After having collaborated with Google on its Google Pixel, HTC sold roughly half of its design and research talent, as well as non-exclusive rights to smartphone-related intellectual property, to Google in 2017 for US$1.1 billion.

History
Cher Wang (王雪紅) and H. T. Cho (卓火土) founded HTC in 1997. Initially a manufacturer of notebook computers, HTC began designing some of the world's first touch and wireless hand-held devices in 1998.

HTC started making Windows Mobile PDAs and smartphones starting from 2004 under the Qtek brand. In 2006 the range was rebranded as HTC with the launch of the HTC TyTN.

In 2007, HTC acquired the mobile device company Dopod International.

In 2008, HTC unveiled the HTC Max 4G, the first GSM mobile phone to support WiMAX networks.

HTC joined Google's Open Handset Alliance and then developed and released the first device powered by Android in 2008, the HTC Dream.

On October 15, 2009, HTC launched the brand tagline "quietly brilliant"', and the "YOU" campaign, HTC's first global advertising campaign.

In November 2009 HTC released the HTC HD2, the first Windows Mobile device with a Touchscreen. The same year, HTC Sense debuted as a user interface which continues to be used as of 2018.

In July 2010, HTC announced it would begin selling HTC-branded smartphones in China in a partnership with China Mobile. In October 2010, the HTC HD7 was released as one of the launch models of Microsoft's revitalised Windows Phone. In 2010, HTC sold over 24.6 million handsets, up 111% over 2009.

At the Mobile World Congress in February 2011, the GSMA named HTC the "Device Manufacturer of the Year" in its Global Mobile Awards. In April 2011, HTC surpassed Nokia as the third-largest smartphone manufacturer by market share, behind Apple and Samsung.

On 6 July 2011, it was announced that HTC would buy VIA Technologies' stake in S3 Graphics. On 6 August 2011, HTC acquired Dashwire for $18.5M. In August 2011, HTC confirmed a plan for a strategic partnership with Beats Electronics involving acquiring 51 percent of the company.

The 2011 Best Global Brands rankings released by Interbrand, listed HTC at #98 and valued it at $3.6 billion. Based on researcher Canalys, in Q3 2011 HTC Corporation became the largest smartphone vendor in the U.S. with 24 percent market share, ahead of Samsung's 21 percent, Apple's 20 percent and BlackBerry's 9 percent. HTC Corporation made different models for each operator.

During early 2012, HTC lost much of this U.S. market share due to increased competition from Apple and Samsung. According to analyst firm ComScore, HTC only accounted for 9.3% of the United States smartphone market as of February 2013. In light of the company's decrease in prominence, Chief Executive Peter Chou had informed executives that he would step down if the company's newest flagship phone, the 2013 HTC One (M7), had failed to generate impressive sales results. HTC's first quarter results for 2013 showed its year-over-year profit drop by 98.1%, making it the smallest-ever profit for the company—the delay of the launch of the HTC One was cited as one of the factors. In June 2012, HTC moved its headquarters from Taoyuan City (now Taoyuan District) to Xindian District, New Taipei City. On 14 January 2013, HTC launched its smartphones in Burma.

The HTC One (M7) was released in mid-2013 and, subsequently won various industry awards in the best smartphone and best design categories, but global sales of the HTC One were lower than those for Samsung's Samsung Galaxy S4 flagship handset and HTC recorded its first ever quarterly loss in early October 2013: a deficit of just under NT$3 billion (about US$100m, £62m). Marketing problems were identified by HTC as the primary reason for its comparative performance, a factor that had been previously cited by the company.

During 2013, Microsoft was in negotiations to purchase HTC. This was revealed in 2018 by Risto Siilasmaa, chairman of Nokia, in an interview with the Helsingin Sanomat. Microsoft would eventually purchase Nokia's mobile phone business that year.

In August 2013, HTC debuted a new "Here's To Change" global marketing campaign featuring actor Robert Downey Jr., who signed a two-year contract to be HTC's new "Instigator of Change.". On 27 September 2013, HTC announced that it would sell back its stake in Beats Electronics

Following the release of the HTC One, two variants were released to form a trio for the 2013 HTC One lineup. A smaller variant named the HTC One Mini was released in August 2013, and a larger variant named the HTC One Max was released in October 2013. Similar in design and features to the HTC One, the upgraded aspects of the One Max include a display measuring 5.9 in, a fingerprint sensor and a removable back cover for expandable memory. The product was released into the European and Asian retail environment in October 2013, followed by a US launch in early November 2013.

In March 2014, HTC released the HTC One (M8), the next version of the HTC One flagship, at press conferences in London and New York City. In a change from previous launches, the HTC One was made available for purchase on the company website and North American mobile carrier websites on the same day a few hours after the launch.

In April 2014, HTC reported sales climbing 12.7 percent to NT$22.1 billion, the company's fastest growth since October 2011. In September 2014, Google selected HTC to make its Nexus 9 tablet. In August 2014 HTC announced a Windows Phone-powered variant of the One (M8), their first using the operating system since 2012. HTC ended its long relationship with Microsoft afterwards due to Nokia's dominance in Windows Phone devices, and started focusing solely on Android.

On 1 March 2015, HTC unveiled Vive, a virtual reality head-mounted display in collaboration with Valve. In June and October 2015, HTC reported net losses; the company has faced increased competition from other smartphone makers, including Apple, Samsung, and others, which had resulted in a decline in its smartphone sales, as well a major loss of market share. Its smartphone market share had risen back to 7.2 percent in April 2015 due to its strong sales of recent devices, but HTC's stock price had fallen by 90 percent since 2011.

In November 2016, HTC reported that it had sold at least 140,000 Vive units, and that each unit was being sold at a profit. In January 2017, HTC unveiled its new U series smartphone line, the U Play and U Ultra; the company described the U series as a "new direction" for its phones, emphasizing an integrated virtual assistant developed by the company. In February 2017, HTC reported that in the fourth quarter of 2016, its operating losses had decreased by 13% year-over-year, citing "robust sales performance" and sequential revenue increases throughout the year.

On 21 September 2017, Google announced that it would acquire roughly half of the 4,000 employees who worked in HTC's design and research staff, and non-exclusive licences to smartphone-related intellectual property held by HTC, for US$1.1 billion. The employees included the team involved with Google's Google Pixel, which was manufactured by HTC. Google stated that the purchase was part of its efforts to bolster its first-party hardware business. The transaction was completed on 30 January 2018; while HTC will continue to produce its own smartphones, the company has stated that it planned to increase its focus on Internet of Things and virtual reality going forward.

On 26 March 2018, HTC reported a quarterly net loss of US$337 million in the fourth quarter of 2017, citing "market competition, product mix, pricing, and recognized inventory write-downs". The company's transaction with Google will be reflected in its first quarter 2018 numbers. HTC stated that it would use the revenue to further its investments in "emerging technologies". The company had also cited its increasing VR investments, including its upcoming Vive Pro model, and Vive Focus—a standalone "all-in-one" VR headset unveiled in November 2017.

In July 2018, HTC has revealed that it has entered into a partnership with games and apps developer and publisher Animoca Brands. This includes product development and joint collaboration in areas such as games, blockchain, artificial intelligence, machine learning, augmented reality and virtual reality. Animoca's games will be pre-installed on HTC devices in the future.

On 5 February 2019, HTC released its first "Cryptophone", focused on providing universal finance through Bitcoin and creating a portal towards realizing a truly decentralized web.

On 11 May 2019, HTC announced that its Cryptophone will be the first smartphone to support a bitcoin full node.

On 17 September 2019, HTC appointed Yves Maitre, former executive vice president of consumer equipment and partnerships of Orange, as CEO where Cher Wang will continue her role as chairwoman.

On 3 September 2020, HTC CEO Yves Maitre stepped down from the position citing personal reasons. Co-founder Cher Wang then stepped in and is now the current CEO of HTC.

Litigation

In March 2010, Apple Inc. filed a complaint with the US International Trade Commission claiming infringement of 20 of its patents covering aspects of the iPhone user interface and hardware. HTC disagreed with Apple's actions and reiterated its commitment to creating innovative smartphones. HTC also filed a complaint against Apple for infringing on five of its patents and sought to ban the import of Apple products into the US from manufacturing facilities in Asia. Apple expanded its original complaint by adding two more patents.

On 10 November 2012, Apple and HTC reached a 10-year license-agreement covering current and future patents held by the two companies. The terms of the agreement remain confidential.

Previously, Apple ignored HTC's long held rights over the trade name Touch by calling its new iPod range the same.

In February 2013, HTC settled with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission concerning lax security on more than 18 million smartphones and tablets it had shipped to customers and agreed to security patches.

Corporate information
HTC's chairwoman and acting CEO is Cher Wang who is the daughter of the late Wang Yung-ching, founder of the plastics and petrochemicals conglomerate Formosa Plastics Group. Peter Chou serves as head of the HTC Future Development Lab, and HT Cho as Director of the Board and Chairman of HTC Foundation. HTC's CFO is Hui-Ming Cheng. In addition to being chair of HTC, Cher Wang is also acting chair of VIA Technologies. HTC's main divisions, including the IA (Information Appliance) engineering division and the WM (Wireless Mobile) engineering division, are ISO 9001/ISO 14001-qualified facilities.

HTC's sales revenue totalled $2.2 billion for 2005, a 102% increase from the prior year. In 2005 it was listed as the fastest-growing tech company in BusinessWeeks Info Tech 100.

In 2010 HTC worked with Google to build mobile phones running Google's Android mobile OS such as the Nexus One.

In April 2010, HTC grew exponentially after it was chosen by Microsoft as a hardware platform development partner for the now defunct Windows Mobile operating system (based on Windows CE).

HTC invested strongly in research and development, which accounts for a quarter of its employees. The company's North American headquarters are located in Bellevue, Washington. HTC runs a software design office in Seattle (near its North American headquarters) where it designs its own interface for its phones. In 2011, HTC also opened a research and development office in Durham, North Carolina, a location the company chose over Seattle and Atlanta, to focus on multiple areas of wireless technology.

On 17 February 2010, Fast Company ranked HTC as the 31st most innovative company in the world. On 27 May 2011, in response to customer feedback, HTC announced that they will no longer lock the bootloaders on their Android-based phones.

Cycling
HTC sponsored the HTC-Highroad professional cycling team from 2009 to 2011.

Association football
In 2012, HTC became the official smartphone sponsor of the UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League. HTC also became the shirt sponsors for the Indian Super League franchise NorthEast United for the 2014, 2015 and 2016 season.

Cricket
Ahead of the 2015 season, Indian Premier League franchise Kings XI Punjab signed a sponsorship deal with HTC. According to the agreement, HTC would be the team's official principal sponsor, and the company's logo would occupy the right chest position on the Kings XI Punjab playing jersey.

eSports
HTC sponsors professional eSports teams FaZe Clan, Team SoloMid, Cloud9, Team Liquid, and J Team, (formerly known as Taipei Assassins).

HTC sponsored a Super Smash Bros. Melee tournament, HTC Throwdown, which was held on 19 September 2015, in San Francisco. At the end of 2015, the company also sponsored the creation of that year's SSBMRank, the annual rankings of the best Melee players in the world.

title: HTC


text: User talk:217.12.96.5

title: User talk:217.12.96.5


text:
Mark Hollis (album)

Mark Hollis is the only solo album by the former Talk Talk frontman Mark Hollis. It was released on Polydor Records on 26 January 1998, then reissued on Pond Life on 13 March 2000. In 2003, the album was released in LP format on Universal Records.

Its sound is noted for being extremely sparse and minimal; AllMusic called it "quite possibly the most quiet and intimate record ever made". Hollis found inspiration not in the popular music of the day, but rather in 20th-century classical music and jazz from the late fifties and sixties.

The album did not mark a return for Hollis to the music industry or live performance; he stated at the time of the album's release that "There won't be any gig, not even at home in the living room. This material isn't suited to play live."

Recording
The album was recorded as part of a two-album contract with Polydor, along with Talk Talk's 1991 Laughing Stock. At one point, the record was to be titled Mountains of the Moon and released under the Talk Talk name, but eventually it was decided it should be a self-titled solo project (early promotional CD-Rs and cassettes of the album contain the original details, with the CD-R retaining the attribution to Talk Talk). Recording and mixing the album was a slow and methodical process: the multitracks for each song were recorded on analog tape with a pair of Neumann M49 microphones, then digitally composited and overdubbed with a ProDigi X-850 tape recorder before being mixed back onto analog tape. Engineer Phill Brown, who also recorded Laughing Stock, stated that, compared to the final Talk Talk album, which he considered "one of [his] best projects" but "dark and claustrophobic", he found the solo release "the opposite…- open, restful and at times fantastically beautiful".

On 11 October 2011, Ba Da Bing Records released Mark Hollis on vinyl, marking the first time the album was issued on vinyl in the US. A reissue of the album was released on 18 October 2019 through UMC/Polydor.

Music
"A Life (1895 - [sic] 1915)", which has been referred to as "the album's epic centrepiece" refers to Roland Leighton (1895–1915), a British soldier and poet who was the fiancé of Vera Brittain at the time of his death in World War I. Hollis has stated about the song, "That was someone born before the turn of the century…and dying within one year of the First World War at a young age. It was based on Vera Brittain's boyfriend. It's the expectation that must have been in existence at the turn of the century, the patriotism that must've existed at the start of the war and the disillusionment that must've come immediately afterwards. It's the very severe mood swings that fascinated me." The song correspondingly contains a variety of styles, tempi, and instrumentations.

Cover art
The cover photo, taken by Stephen Lovell-Davis, is of southern Italy Easter bread designed to resemble the lamb of god. Lovell-Davis stated that Hollis selected the photo "much to the consternation of the record company."

Hollis stated about the image, "I like the way something appears to come out of his head; it makes me think of a fountain of ideas. Also the manner how the eyes are positioned fascinates me. When I saw the picture for the first time I had to laugh, but there's something very tragic about it at the same time."

Musicians

 * Mark Hollis – vocals, guitar
 * Martin Ditcham – drums, percussion
 * Chris Laurence – double bass
 * Lawrence Pendrous – piano, harmonium
 * Iain Dixon – clarinet
 * Tim Holmes – clarinet
 * Mark Feltham – harmonica
 * Henry Lowther – trumpet
 * Andy Panayi – flute
 * Melinda Maxwell – cor anglais
 * Dominic Miller – guitar
 * Robbie McIntosh – guitar
 * Maggie Pollock – bassoon
 * Julie Andrews – bassoon

Technical

 * Phill Brown – engineer
 * Mark Hollis – producer
 * Cally and Crane – design
 * Stephen Lovell-Davis – photograph

title: Mark Hollis (album)


text:
Talk:Central Canada

Central Canada Isn't a Thing
I've lived in Quebec, Ontario, and BC, and I've never heard of anything called "Central Canada". It's not a term that's ever been used on our news. I've only ever heard of "Western Canada" (Manitoba and everything west of it), and "Eastern Canada" composed of Ontario and everything east of it. Usually Nunavut and NWT are referred to as "Northern Canada". I've hear Yukon being lumped in both with North and Western Canada. Indeed, after a quick wiki search, Wikipedia itself seems to confirm this. I'm sure many Canadians would appreciated it if the American editors would stop trying to create a new geographical region in our country.65.94.235.251 (talk) 16:18, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

 * This article is made up, everyone refers to ON / PQ as Eastern Canada. If you use geography MB and NU would be Central Canada. Kav2001c (talk) 19:45, 3 February 2022 (UTC)kav2001c
 * I agree that Ontario and PQ are generally called Eastern Canada, but it's not universal.
 * For instance, Canada.ca describes the five regions as being Atlantic Canada, Central Canada, Prairies, West Coast, North.
 * But the fact that basically nobody actually uses this classification is something that should be mentioned in the article. The East is either Ontario and everything East of it, or just Ontario and Quebec. (At least in Atlantic Canadian usage, Eastern Canada always means only those two provinces and never includes Atlantic Canada.) 24.89.232.58 (talk) 15:42, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Untitled
I live in Ontario, and I don't know anyone who would call themselves a Central Canadian, or say they live in Central Canada. generally, Ontarians refer to themselves by their city (i.e. Torontonian) or as an Ontarian. and sometimes, although much less frequently, and more broadly, an Eastern Canadian.

You're right that "Central Canadian" is probably not be a label for regional self-identification the way "Ontarian" and "Quebecois" are. But look at a newspaper like the Globe and Mail: "Central Canada" is used often to talk about things like the industrial base in those two provinces, or TV programming scheduled to fit into prime-time in the eastern time zone. I've changed it to say that the term's use is "limited and regional." Is that an improvement?

Yes, that makes a lot more sense. thanks

"Thus, when these two provinces act together they can control the federal government, and often impose their will on the rest of Canada."

That doesn't sound very "neutral-point-of-view".

Agreed, this needs to be changed!

This entry should note that the term "Central Canada" is basically a regional usage, limited to Ontario and Atlantic Canada. It is correct that the term is rarely used in Quebec. Neither is it used in Western Canada, where "Eastern Canada" is preferred to describe the region east of Manitoba.

I just checked in the Canadian Oxford school atlas and also on Google maps on the Web. Quebec goes more than 170 km further East and into more and more salt water than Nova Scotia's Cape Breton Island.

Regional Usage
I think we either need a good citation to back up the claim that the term "Central Canada" is a regional usage, or else we should remove this assertion from the article. I'm an Ontarian, and the term is fairly uncommon in everday usage. More often than not, when I hear this term, it is being used by a Canadian from elsewhere in Canada decrying the supposed hegemony of the people of Ontario and Quebec working together to control the federal government. Other than this context, it seems that most of the time when someone needs to speak exclusively of Ontario and Quebec, they just say "Ontario and Quebec". --thirty-seven 07:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I entirely agree and have read so much crap from "Western Canadians" about the alleged conspiracies they believe, out of total ignorance (ever heard of the BLOC?) that "Ontario" (which never votes the same; only the first past the post electoral system sometimes causes total flukes of the Ontarios looking united politically itself, let alone with Quebec -- see Fair Vote Canada for the totally distorted election results we end up with due to FPTP. But western ("Canadian") politicians refer to the mythical "Central Canada" all the time and just read the book David Kilgour wrote about his unbelievable ignorance, spreading total paranoia about "Central Canada's" conspiracies against the poor, poor west (Inside Outer Canada; just Google it and you'll find it and will be able to read a good part of it for nothing).

 * Then there's the talk-radio shows like the Rafe Mair show in B.C. with nothing but endless loops of complaint in gripe-fests (to quote philosophy professor John Dixon of Vancouver) and conspiracies that are laughable, always referring to "Central Canada" as though it's some united political entity out to get the rest of the Canadas (which is why we call it the Canadas; plural, not singular becase THAT is utterly ridiculous) or try any half-decent political discussion forum and see what "Western Canadians" have to say about the conspiracy theories their politicians and news media and parents and grandparents and Uncle Bob and everyone else they know drilled into their heads from birth. If you haven't seen it, you're not looking very hard. Maybe try subscribing to one with some spam email account (typically needed to be able to post messages as opposed to reading them, after one validation email, such as around phpBB2 and vBulletin and such forum software), look for, usually 3 or 4 Albertans who have totally taken the site over with their superior race and hatred of "Central Canada" delusions ... make an open post explaining that you're from southern Ontario, Central Canada and/or Quebec, Central Canada and/or Montreal, Central Canada and/or Quebec City, Central Canada and/or Ottawa, Central Canada or the absolute best (worst), Toronto, Central Canada and make some political point against the "conservatives" (western reform-alliance, which is why it was shut out of every major city in the Canadas other than Calgary and Edmonton of course) and see what happens, "Canadians".

 * I don't and can't even call myself "Canadian" due to the insanity in these country about "Ontario" which Ontario? I am from Toronto and always make sure to let everyone know, to do unscientific market research for kicks, listen to all of the delusions and absolute hatred out there in whatever y'all think "Canada" is and why; inevitably every single problem that everyone has ever had in "Canada" is the fault of...) or "southern Ontario" or "Quebec" or "southeast Quebec" or the Windsor-Quebec City corridor/Main Street (hwy 401 and Autoroute 20 to Quebec City, called "Main Street by flipped out "Canadians", which is totally screwed up on the Quebec City-Windsor Corridor page as though VIA Rail created it, or the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal corridor, which is the real "Central Canada" with all of the political power in the Canadas, totally screwing the rest of the country: so "western" Canadians (Winnipeg, Manitoba is almost dead centre of the Canadas east to west) claim -- and via what amounts to aliens in flying saucers from Mars to do it; they beam their eeeeevil tactics to Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal (it's actually Toronto-south Ontario-U.S., Ottawa-Hull/Gatineau-U.S., Montreal-southwest Quebec-U.S.), to make the lives of the rest of "Canadians" as miserable as possible.  I'd wager that some idiotic "western Canadians" (which western Canada?  Around the propaganda way up and out there, it's all the same in all of my online experiences for many years, but never in reality other than around confederate politicking and the "western" newz media) had a good part in creating this ridulous mainspace propaganda article.

 * And propaganda of all things, does not belong in encyclopedias and propaganda is all it is.

 * Take a look at a political map of "Ontario" (the Ontarios, which should be at least five separate provinces; and will be and at least three provinces in the former Quebecs because we have absolutely nothing in common with one another on any level; and particularly with our norths but it's really rural folk in general and just look at any confederate political map of the Canadas to see it quite clearly and particularly in the Ontarios where the Hick Party only won seats where city regions start to give way to farmland out in the urban fringes) but due to FPTP, it will be assumed that you're gay, a "foreigner" ("Who here isn't other than the Aboriginal peoples?" is what I always respond with when some "western Canadas" and "Ontarios" and "Quebecs" and "Atlantic Canadas" mob is trying anything to discredit clearly cited sources, not what "I" have to say about anything, and I also tell them to take it up with the sources, because y'all don't like to hear about realities out there either) and a Liberal with a capital L at the very least, just by sticking "Ontario" as your location on a phpBB2 (or the like) web discussion forum about "Canadian" politics.

 * Why is almost all of rural Ontario blue (um, that means "conservative hicks" won the federal electoral districts/FEDs that some "Canadians", particularly "western" Canadians still call "ridings" as though this is Britain because they haven't changed in the last 100 or so years other than with technology upgrades from the Windsor-Quebec City corridor and other countries, with one foot in mad cow dung and the other in a "holy puddle" of pig urine for anyone who doesn't know) on the Ontario electoral map from the last confederate election and why isn't rural Quebec "conservative" when polls that I've seen around but didn't keep or note the sources of, claim that "north Quebeckers" despise "the south" (by which they mean the Windsor-Quebec City corridor, though they know nothing abou it, as usual around ignorant rural hicks) and claim that they are much more close to "Western Canada", by which they mean the north Ontarios on west, and of course they are -- they're hicks. Just don't get Metro Vancouver mixed up with it; it's never elected a single western "reform-alliance" hick/nutcase).

 * Then Google +harper +"tom flanagan" +"central canada" to find out about the "school" of Stampede Town and Harper's good buddies from there all have to say about it, and what they all preach about "Western alienation" and "Central Canada", with much venom. They're trying to pretend that they didn't say or write any of it now, to try to sucker "Central Canada" into giving them a majority dictatorship, but until the western reform-alliance is gone from the alleged "Conservative Party of all of Canada", well I can't wait until the Hick Party wins a majority dictatorship because it'll be the end of the pathetic Canadas, as is, and all transfer payments will end along with the federal government, just a union of republics so y'all can endlessly bitch and moan about poor, poor you but y'all won't be able to blame anyone but yerselves fer your self-created problems.  A federal election in the Republic of South Ontario won't affect any of y'all one way or another.

“Western Alienation” is a bad idea in search of a reality, while Canada is a great reality in search of an idea. And there’s a connection. -- John Dixon, The Last Spike

 * And he tries to get it right in that paper but is a raving lunatic without a clue in the world what he thinks he's talking about; as usual out of the western/Atlantic Canadas and north Ontarios and everywhere in the Quebecs outside the Windsor-Quebec City corridor; and plenty inside it, because there are lots of alienated hicks due to the information "revolution", the digital divide, the ignorant who aren't coming out of the next Dark Ages, don't know much of anything real about rather vastly expanding global trade/economics called globalization for short, the New World Order and such, stuck 100 years back in time compared to people who live in major global cities and the Canadas only has two of those: Toronto (a beta global city) and Montreal (gamma, if any stats bother with gamma global cities given that the criteria are very low and there are hundreds of them; and I'd throw Vancouver in as a gamma global city, just due to the Vancouver ports, but nothing ever does; just Montreal; if they bother to cover gamma global cities}.

 * Then try Statistics Canada, search for quebec windsor corridor or québec windsor corridor (it makes no difference, the StatsCan search engine will turn up anything with e or é in it, and other Quebecois, not French, according to them and the real French who don't have a clue or care in the world about "Québec" to see what you don't find about the most important communications/transportation corridor in the Canadas with nothing I can even prove anymore because the London (Ontario) Chamber of Commerce has removed the "leaked" document, likely by order of Statistics Canada, from its web site.

 * But if you Google the title, "Tracking Trends in London" (in quotes) by Statistics Canada and you might find a transcript of a radio broadcast out of London regarding "the good folks from Statistics Canada rolling into town" to deliver the document because it had a page of information about the Windsor-Quebec City corridor (W-QCC) in it, which is exactly what Statistics Canada calls it, on this end, not the Quebec City-Windsor Corridor and all they documented was the population of the W-QCC from the 2001 Census: 10,706,513 in the Ontario section, 93% of "Ontario's" population, 6,327,354 in the Quebec section of the W-QCC, 87% of "Quebec's" population, 17,033,867 in total, 57% of "Canada's" population, nothing about VIA Rail, even though the revenues VIA makes in the W-QCC pay for VIA Rail all over the Canadas. For now.

 * They didn't bother with any GDP or federal revenues received from the Windsor-Quebec City corridor, but they hand deliver the reports to Chambers of Commerce and Boards of Trade in the Windsor-Quebec City corridor, they hardly ever publish anything about it at Statistics Canada, because it'd make all of the lame excuses out there all too clear as being totally lame propaganda based on nothing but lies, because if politicians lose the "Western alienation" they invented, they'll lose a very useful tool to manipulate everyone way up and out there with, against "Central Canada".

 * And I just read the first paragraph on this ridiculous page. I found a copy of it last night in text format doing some research and it's as hilariously (and disgunstingly) biased and totally full of shite as your politicians and media are.  I'm sure there's lots more to come... I've put up with quite more than enough shite from "western" Canadians in particular about "Central Canada" and "Ontario", the Ontarios, plural, and "Quebec", the Quebecs, plural, the south Ontarios, plural, and certainly the Torontos, plural (the "GTA thing" because it's what Toronto means unless "City of" is specified). --S-Ranger 15:30, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't think that "Central Canada" is very commonly used anywhere in the country. Its use in Ontario/Quebec does not seem to be much more or less common than anywhere else.  But there *is* regional difference in the attitude towards the use of the term.  I don't believe that many residents of Ontario or Quebec object to the term referring to only those two provinces.  But many Canadians, particularly those in the west and in the fat north, do object, primarily because of simple geography.  Southern Ontario and Quebec is not at all central.     And I don't believe very many Canadians at all, even Quebeckers,  would include the Quebec far north as part of "Central Canada." Király-Seth 00:37, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Montrealer here. This is anecdotal, I know, but I too have never heard of Ontario and Quebec being called "Central Canada" or the "Central provinces" in a regional context. I've heard it used once by an Albertan in a political context to refer to, as another Wikipedian said, disparagingly refer to supposed collusion between Ontario and Quebec to control the Federal government. As far as I've ever been aware, there has only ever been Western Canada (everything west of Ontario) and Eastern Canada (everything more or less east of the Manitoba/Ontario border, including the Maritimes/Atlantic Canada). Further, it also doesn't make sense-- if there was such a thing as "Central Canada," it would clearly be Manitoba with MAYBE some of Saskachewan and a bit of western Ontario. The fact that the reference for "Central Canada" appears to come from a 2015 article in which a politician is quoted just adds to the dubiousness of the claim.Stibs84 (talk) 23:50, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Quebeckers

 * Often, Quebeckers (Québécois) do not see themselves as Canadians, primarily because of the distinct Francophone culture which they feel is radically different from the culture of English-speaking Ontario.

The above used to state "do not see themselves as Central Canadians" and when I went to remove Central, it obviously didn't even belong in this Central Canada article, no matter how much y'all want to discriminate against Ontario out there, it's just not proper for an encyclopedia, nor is it true.

This has nothing to do with "Central Canada" and belongs (and is probably already on) the Canada page or a sub/stub article off it. Quebec sovereigntists do not see themselves as Canadians, period, but what percetange with what proof/verifiability? They lost two referendums on their own, despite cheating on/for their side to separate from Canada (not Ontario), which is the reason the Clarity Act 2000 (CANADA) was created by the federal government in the first place.

Since when do Québécois or Quebecker sovereigntists single out Ontario as the reason they don't see themselves as Canadians? When Upper Canada was created in 1791? Upper Canada isn't called Ontario, it's called Upper Canada and if that's what the above is referring to, then it belongs on some Upper Canada/Canada West - Lower Canada/Canada East page as history and properly dated with proper verifiability.

They've got quite a number of English-speaking people in Montreal (over a million, more than the populations of all of the Atlantic provinces and Saskatchewan doesn't have a million people either) and to the south of them in the U.S. as well and Ontario, which only has 106 of 308 federal seats (34%) but it's somehow up to and the fault of Ontario alone that Quebec sovereigntists don't (allegedly) "feel Canadian"? It's up to the whole country (if anyone even knows what "feeling Canadian" or even "being Canadian" means anymore; without using spoon-fed political/media propaganda) and they get far more support from Ontario than they do from Western Canada. Though if that were going to be stated in any article, it would need proper verification.

Hence, the above belongs in the Canada article, not some Central Canada article that singles all of the Ontarios out as the reason Quebec sovereigntists mightn't (take your pick, or ) "do not see themselves as Canadians" (not Central Canadians, which Ontarians don't see themselves as either, as already discussed on this page) or even the above is totally worthless even on the Canada page or whatever political stub; even though it's stated as a cultural issue, by whomever wrote the above, then turned into a political issue (when Central Canada is a geographical reference, not a political jurisdiction) all I've ever heard from Quebeckers, including the Bloc and Parti Québécois, is that they think that the federation/federal government is broken beyond repair and that federal taxes are way too high.

But that doesn't constitute a legal reason to separate from this federation or as a legal reason to use under international law; it constitutes grounds for democratic reforms, but they don't believe that any will ever be done; and I tend to agree; the federation is broken, the federal government is broken beyond repair and there is little doubt or dispute that federal taxes are too high in Canada, not just in "Central Canada".

Prove that 'they' (a majority of Quebeckers/Québécois, not even Quebec sovereigntists or separatists, the latter being rather wishy washy, via an unbiased source, no original research is allowed on Wikipedia) feel that they are not radically different from the culture of Montreal, the U.S. and the rest of Canada, and then you have the Quebecs to deal with because I have seen many polls concluding that whatever "northern Quebeckers" consider themselves to be (how far north of the 401-Autoroute 20 to Quebec City, Windsor-Quebec City corridor, not Central Canada) more like "western" Canadians (which includes the north Ontarios from there) than southern Quebeckers/Québécois.

What proof (or even common sense) states that they don't feel that their culture is radically different from the usual urban to rural and rural to nowheres in the Quebecs, let alone the provinces of Newfoundland & Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick even though it's the only other officially bilingual province mentioned in the (Canadian) Constitution Act 1982, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta (whose premier has been rather mouthy/offensive to Quebeckers and Québécois), British Columbia (the Lower Mainland-south Vancouver Island of B.C.), or any of the territories or any of the states of the U.S., including Lousiana?

Prove it or dump it and no one is ever going to prove "Central Canada" re: Quebeckers/Québécois "not feeling Canadian" is true: Not without violating WP:NPOV at minimum. --S-Ranger 17:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Removed again

 * "Ontario and Quebec are the most powerful and influential provinces, politically and economically, and this is often bitterly resented by the Western and Atlantic regions of the country. Central Canada is often regarded as an outside hegemonizing force, against which the other provinces must stand on guard to protect local interests.

 * "The economic, political, and cultural power of Ontario is often seen as a dangerous force, requiring them to also protect the French culture and Quebec business interests. Another reason is geographical: only one province (Newfoundland and Labrador, and only a small percentage of that) extends further east than Quebec."

The above was on the mainspace article for Central Canada but it cites no sources, there is no proof of any of it, just political propaganda, which does not belong in encyclopedias.

How do you all explain that a puny 7 MPs (Members of Parliament, federal in Canada) and one mouthy premier from Newfoundland & Labrador is getting more of Ontario's fair per capita share of its own revenues back from the federal government, via the mess of transfer systems, than the Ontario government gets to keep for itself in revenues per capita?

The Toronto Board of Trade (City of Toronto, not GTA or Toronto CMA) Toronto's Fiscal Gap Now a Fiscal Chasm (pdf) or here for both PDFs on the HTML page to do what you wish with the links. I'd still recommend right-click then Save Link/Target As... then opening them in free Adobe Acrobat reader instead of in your web browser.

Or this:

The Toronto Board of Trade

"Strong City, Strong Nation Update: The Growing Gap" (pdf)

January, 2006

Or go through this, backwards, reading the Phase 1 Report first ("recommendations", the Phase 2 Report start the document), Google every citation in the Phase 1 Report, download and read all of the research/documentation and every other reference made in this paper, if you (um, whomever, I'm looking at a video display) to try to dispute it:

Ontario Chamber of Commerce

''[http://occ.on.ca/Policy/Reports/52 Fairness In Confederation Fiscal Imbalance: A Roadmap to Revovery, and; Driving Ontario to ‘Have-Not’ Status]'' (the latter, Phase 1 report, is appended to the Phase 2 report/recommendations)

David MacKinnon, August, 2005

The Canadian Chamber of Commerce endorsed the Phase 1 report from the Ontario Chamber of Commerce above, so good luck trying to dispute any of it. And if "you" (whomever) do, please take it up with the sources, not here.

How does eeeeevil Ontario (south) manage to get itself raped, plundered and murdered by little Newfoundland & Labrador or any other province that ends up with more revenues per capita because the CHT (Canada Health Transfer), CST (Canada Social Transfer), CSIF (Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund), MRIF (Municipal-Rural Infrastructure Fund), SHIP (Strategic Highways Infrastructure Fund), on and on, "tax points" and even EI (Employment Insurance) equalization on equalization on more equalization, and also the real Equalization transfer, which shouldn't exist with the CHT and CST around.

And it's exactly how other, much more influential (with far fewer seats/MPs, far lower populations/markets/voters, in) provinces end up with more of Ontarios revenues per capita than it gets to keep for itself. What kind of massive economic or political "power" does that amount to for Ontario? It amounts to Ontario (even though it's no singularity on any level by any stretch of the imagination) being walked all over by this federation, and Quebec is the least of our problems regarding that.

When looking at federal transfers you have to look at them in per person/per capita terms, not meaningless totals, because they're all worked out/paid out on a per capita basis.

Equalization Entitlements (2006-07)

(per person) _______________________________________                        2006-07   % of Province                 $ each   Total _______________________________________ Prince Edward Island    2,102    23.03 New Brunswick           1,927    21.11 Nova Scotia             1,475    16.16 Manitoba                1,445    15.83 Newfoundland & Labrador 1,334    14.61

Québec                    725     7.94 British Columbia          107     1.17 Saskatchewan               13     0.14

Ontario                     0     0.00 Alberta                     0     0.00 _______________________________________ TOTAL                   9,128   100.00 _______________________________________

_______________________________________                        2006-07   % of SUMMARY                  $ each   Total _______________________________________ Atlantic Total          6,838    74.91 Prairie-B.C. Total      1,565    17.15 Québec Total              725     7.94 _______________________________________ TOTAL                   9,128   100.00 _______________________________________ Note: Totals may not add due to rounding. [Don't ask me; they add just fine. Ask Finance Canada, which doesn't even provide totals, let alone percentages. It's their note, not mine and as per usual I have no clue what they think they're babbling about, given that there is nothing to round. If it stated "Note: This is total bull-sh.t, don't rely upon any of it because we're trying to hide everything possible," then it might make some sense.]

% of Total is the what it states, the total is $9,128 per person in Equalization transfers alone and the percentages are based on that total.

Source: Department of Finance Canada - Equalization Program

Last updated (by source): 2006-07-05

Last checked/updated: 2006-07-09

_____

It could almost be looked at as the Atlantic Canadas, central Canadas and western Canadas. In fact, it can be looked at that way entirely and is in the SUMMARY section. Finance Canada doesn't have any summary section, but feel free to check the oh so complex mathematics (Excel® did it anyway). Same totals, and the percentages add up to 100.00 (of $9,128 per person in total, which is what the percentages are based on so they'd better add up to 100.00000000000000000~%).

Note that Ontario is missing from the above (at the source). And of course it's missing, someone has to pay for all of it and Ontario is the one and only jurisdiction in Canada that has never received the Equalization transfer (even when it was entitled to collect under federal laws and regulations, they laws were changed so Ontario didn't qualify; twice), and Ontario gets ripped off around almost every other federal transfer by these federation, because of its omnipotent hegemonizistic (try finding that in a dictionary; or hegemonizing at Dictionary.com) of political power.

There's no doubt about the economics of the Windsor-Quebec City corridor (which is what Statistics Canada called it in the 2001 Census; on the Ontario end anyway, not the Quebec City-Windsor Corridor), but whether it translates into anything political, particularly in Ontario, is not only debatable, it's an outright lie that everything in Canada that matters has acknowledged: other than the federal government, which just makes itself more and more irrelevant to south Ontario and southeast Quebec (the Windsor-Quebec City corridor, with 60% of the markets of the Canadas, over 60% of its GDP, and on about 7% of the land mass of the Canadas), every day.

Add in the CHT and CST and TFF (Territorial Formula Financing, their federal Equalization system) along with Equalization transfers to the provinces and territories:

Major nowhere near all) Federal Transfers to Provinces and Territories

2004-05 and 2005-06 sorted from the highest, per person, to the lowest for 2005-06.

''CAD dollars ($) per person (per capita, same thing) in confederate/federal transfers to each province and territory for fiscal years 2004-05 and 2005-06, the percentage (%) the amount of the transfers are of total jurisdiction's revenues (pittances of federal tax returns for Ontario, Québec, BC and Alberta; confederate handouts for everything else; on top of getting 100% of all federal receipts collected from them back) -- but for the previous fiscal year. Confused? Welcome to the Canadas.''

______________________________________________________________ JURISDICTION            2004-05    %  2005-06    %   Change ______________________________________________________________ Nunavat Territory       $25,975   88% $28,061   91%  UP  3% Northwest Territories   $16,633   78% $17,951   80%  UP  2% Yukon Territory         $15,727   76% $16,818   78%  UP  2%

Prince Edward Island    $ 2,930   39%  $3,291   42%  UP  3% New Brunswick           $ 2,739   36%  $3,111   39%  UP  3% Newfoundland & Labrador $ 2,449   32%  $2,966   34%  UP  2%* Nova Scotia             $ 2,455   39%  $2,793   42%  UP  3% Manitoba                $ 2,428   38%  $2,717   40%  UP  2%

Quebec                  $ 1,757   25%  $2,052   26%  UP  1% British Columbia        $ 1,383   18%  $1,570   19%  UP  1% Saskatchewan            $ 1,332   20%  $1,487   28%  UP  8%** Ontario                 $ 1,322   21%  $1,487   21%  UP  0% Alberta                 $ 1,321   16%  $1,486   16%  UP  0% ______________________________________________________________ TOTAL                   $78,451   40% $85,790   43%  UP  2% ______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________                                  AVG           AVG   AVG SUMMARY                 2004-05    %  2005-06    %   Change ______________________________________________________________ Territories Total       $58,335   81% $62,830   83%  UP  2% Atlantic Canadas Total  $10,573   37% $12,161   39%  UP  3% Prairies Total          $ 5,081   63% $ 5,690   73%  UP 10%

Ontario and Québec Total $ 3,079  36% $ 3,539   37%  UP  1%

Rest - (ON+QC) Total    $75,372   44% $82,251   46%  UP  3% ______________________________________________________________ * NL moves up one position over NS from 2004-05.

** SK up the highest of every jurisdiction in percentage of provincial revenues in handouts from 2004-05 to 2005-06.

Territories = Nunavat Territory + Northwest Territories + Yukon Territory.

Atlantic Canadas = Prince Edward Island + New Brunswick + Newfoundland & Labrador + Nova Scotia.

Prairies = Manitoba + Saskatchewan + Alberta.

ON = Ontario

QC = Québec

AVG % (of "provincial"/territorial revenues) and AVG Change in SUMMARY is not the sum of the percent changes from fiscal 2004-05 to 2005-06 but are the average changes (totals divided by the number of jurisdictions; e.g. AVG Change is (3 + 2 + 2 = 7) / 3 = 2.3 percent change for the territories).

Source: Department of Finance Canada - Federal Transfers to Provinces and Territories (scroll down for all jurisdictions)

Date modified (by source): 2006-03-29

Last checked/modified: 2006-05-20

_____

Reality is reality and the paragraphs move from the main article above are nothing but propaganda, the usual from "western" and Atlantic Canadians, nothing but lies and discrimination against Ontario and Quebec. It's too bad that there is no such thing as any unified political entities or all of the Ontarios or all of the Quebecs, let alone both combined (as I said previously, has no on ever heard of the Bloc Quebecois? We don't have any equivalent for that in Ontario, but the western Canadas do, with the Reform-Alliance "conservatives", we've got the Bloc on one side the Hick Party from Stampede Town on the other side), or we'd keep billions of dollars more of our own revenues here in the Windsor-Quebec City corridor (not "Ontario" and "Quebec"; the "Ontario" government is on very shaky ground as well as some singularity in these federation, Ontario needs to be at least 5 provinces) where our fair per capita share of our own revenues belong. And why bother being fair when nothing else in the Canadas is fair to the Ontarios?

And the "Ontario" government is worthless, which is why all the businesses in Toronto and the south Ontario, via the suddenly South Ontario Chamber of Commerce (though it did get some input from the Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce, nothing else in the norths)are bypassing all politicians, to use the economic might we have to get our fair share of our own revenues out of these federation for once.

What is more important around political institutions (politics) than the amounts of money they force your employer (or you if self-employed) extort from you out of the (sort of) money you make in exchange for the work you do and what you get back (or don't) from that extortion?

The above proves quite clearly that the territories get the most of their (and our) money sent back to them by Finance Canada, then the Atlantic Canadas, then the prairies, with "Central Canada" at the bottom getting back the least in exchange for our work and with Ontario at the bottom of the heap. That is what politics amounts to and most important politicking around.

So why doesn't Ontario use its almighty omnipotent political power to force the federal government to give us our fair share of our own revenues back? And why not in combination with Quebec, totally ignoring the rest of the Canadas and threatening every political party that if they don't put that issue front and centre, we won't vote for them? It's what the above implies, along with potential "invasions" of who knows what that causes those in the "Outer Canadas" (outside the Windsor-Quebec City corridor, but we also include the Lower Mainland-south Vancouver Island; ask David Kilgour, Edmonton Alberta why HE calls it Outer Canada, not us) that you have to "stand on guard" against.

It makes no sense at all. People from all over the "Outer Canadas" are moving to the Ontario section of the Windsor-Quebec City corridor along with an average of 60% of all immigrants to the Canadas. Who has to stand on guard for what again? Moosejaw? Medicine Hat? Certainly the Aboriginal peoples do (and we in the civilized world with them) with the western Reform-Alliance Hick Party, even with a minority federal government.

And particularly out west in the deserted prairies. Is Alberta standing on guard to get qualified human resources for just about everything, because it waited, did nothing to attract the human capital it needed for far too long? They can't even get enough skilled tradespersons out there and are running ads in Toronto and who knows where else to get people with skills to move to Alberta, which amounts to "standing on guard" against what? Their own stupidity?

If ANY of the above, removed again after giving everyone a chance to address verification, which is not done by simply removing the tags, it's done by finding reliable sources, according to the standards of Wikipedia, no mine or anyone else's, with credibility, without bias, is added again, it'll simply be removed again because it's a load of mad cow dung, has no basis in fact (just politicking, propaganda, outright lies), which does not belong in an encyclopedia.

And if anyone is going to add any of the above back, please at least provide the courtesy of addressing the comments (and proof) on this page first. Thanks. --S-Ranger 19:48, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

A credible source or not?
On the Quebec page, this is stated in the opening paragraph:

 * "Quebec, or Québec in French, (pronounced or  in English and  in French) is a Canadian province, in Eastern Canada..."

And in the first sentence of the Ontario article:

 * "Ontario is the most populous and second-largest in area of Canada's ten provinces. It is found in east-central Canada..."

If either are claimed to be in "Central Canada" then the first sentences of both pages must be corrected to state Central Canada. --S-Ranger 03:21, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

How common is "Central Canada" usage in Ontario?
From the intro:
 * The term "Central Canada" is used in Ontario and Atlantic Canada but rarely in Quebec or Western Canada.

I think that "Central Canada" is also only rarely used in Ontario; I cannot comment on how common it is in Atlantic Canada. In my experience, the majority of the time I encounter the phrase, it is being used by western Canadians, either ironically or to complain that Ontarians are conceited because they call themselves and Quebec "Central Canada".

Obviously some people use this phrase, but it seems to me that this must be mainly a limited political or economic usage (and even then a minority usage) and certainly not used in normal discourse. In my opinion, this article comes across as a bit POV by implying (without citation and in my experience counter-factually) that this term is used non-rarely in Ontario and Atlantic Canada and then spending half the article ridiculing how inaccurate this term is geographically --thirty-seven 06:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, that problem seems to have been solved nicely. Now it reads like an encyclopedia instead of the National Enquirer or the like.  But this is not only out of place, it's also unnecessary and potentially misleading:

 * "Central Canada, particularly southern Ontario, also houses the headquarters of many Canadian national institutions and large corporations."

 * So does the Quebec section of the Windsor-Quebec City corridor, the Montreal area in particular (corporate headquarters and Quebec City has a national assembly not a provincial legislature and to Quebeckers who believe so, Quebec is a nation and its national assembly is its federal government, not confederate mound), which, for the most part, is already stated in the paragraph above it. And southern Ontario is called southern Ontario (or south Ontario), not central Canada.  It's also called the Ontario section of the Windsor-Quebec City corridor, not central Canada.

 * And that Ottawa, the national capitol, I mean capital is in the Windsor-Quebec City corridor; it's in the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal corridor for that matter, not "central Canada" so of course national institutions are there; it's what national capitals are for.

 * It looks more like some attempted jab at southern Ontario ("Canadian" style; success is eeeevil; particularly in south Ontario where all eeeeevil, the source of everyone's problems in the Canadas allegedly come from, with hilarious propaganda that who knows how many western and Atlantic Canadians ... and north Ontarians and Quebeckers believe) than anything else, so I removed that too.

 * I think that the page just states what is relevant and as it is now; encyclopedic, with all the information (and links and a map) necessary. --S-Ranger 19:27, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

 * From my Atlantic vantage point, "Central Canada" is used sometimes, but not often, to refer to Ontario and Quebec (usually in some sort of diatribe about economic power or somesuch, which would thus limit it to the W-QC corridor). Though if we really wanted to goad the Ontarians, we'd say "Upper Canada". Kirjtc2 15:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

History
The article used to state:

 * "Historically, Ontario was once called Canada West, and Quebec Canada East."

With the map of central Canada (as of today) on the article it's misleading, because the northern borders of what are usually referred to as Upper Canada and Lower Canada, because Canada West and Canada East didn't last for long, didn't include any of the north Ontarios or Quebecs when they were Upper/Lower Canada, and there were no links to Upper Canada or Lower Canada.

But I created this:

 * "Historically, southern Ontario was once called Upper Canada and later Canada West, and southern Quebec Lower Canada and later Canada East, as the original Union of Canada as referred to in the British North America Act 1867 (now Constitution Act, 1867), the Confederation of the Union of Canada, to become the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, adding the then British colonies of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick."

...and do think that some historical references should be given to the original Canada. I just don't like any of the wording and there are probably lots of internal links I'm missing and I couldn't find a page that addresses Upper and Lower Canada as the original Union of Canada untl 1867. Upper Canada just pops up out of nowhere on the Canada page in its History section, with no mention of Étienne Brulé (explored what is now southern Ontario in 1610–12), Henry Hudson (who sailed into Hudson's Bay in 1611 and claimed all of the lands that flowed into it for Britain), Samuel de Champlain reached the east shores of Lake Huron in 1615, French explorers and missionaries started to colonize what was then just New France, Rupert's Land (the first governor of the Hudson's Bay Company, British Crown corporation, was named Prince Rupert; hence Rupert's Land) and "Unexplored wilderness" out west, looking for the northwest passage.

Then the American Revolution moved lots of United Empire Loyalists (expatriated but Brits loyal to the motherland, King & Country, who knows) into what's now south Ontario, not just the Atlantic provinces and the trappers and whatnot from Rupert's Land into what's now south Ontario and the French-Anglo struggle for what was to become Upper Canada (south Ontario) decades later, began.

But that history doesn't belong on a page with a map of Ontario or Quebec (or anything else but Uppe Canada/Canada East and Lower Canada/Canada West ... and orientation of some sort to show where it was/is, even in North America) on it, as they exist today. I'm not quite sure where the history of the real Canada, the original Canada, goes. It's certainly not on the Canada page and the above isn't exhaustive nor is it meant to be. It just gets the labels and links Upper Canada and Lower Canada in, and tries to explain that they certainly weren't "central Canada" as Ontario and Quebec as they exist today.

Frankly it's a mess (what I wrote), but it's a start of a tiny bit of history of the region, which should only point to internal links in brief summary; if at all.

I'd appreciate it if it would be left for a week or so, to see if I can improve upon it and others almost certainly can, but without going into anything major; just getting the proper internal links together in a short summary, or just chopping it to:

 * Historically, southern Ontario was once called Upper Canada and later Canada West, and southern Quebec Lower Canada and later Canada East.

I'll be happy to do so myself in a week or so if I can't improve it or no one else tries, and no complaints if the blabber after the above is chopped right now, because improvements should probably be worked out here before going onto the article. --S-Ranger 20:48, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Central Canada. 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/20071211074227/http://www40.statcan.ca:80/cgi-bin/getcans/sorth.cgi?lan=eng&dtype=fina&filename=demo05a.htm&sortact=2&sortf=6 to http://www40.statcan.ca/cgi-bin/getcans/sorth.cgi?lan=eng&dtype=fina&filename=demo05a.htm&sortact=2&sortf=6

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:54, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Central Canada


text:
Christian Democratic Centre

The Christian Democratic Centre (Centro Cristiano Democratico, CCD) was a Christian-democratic political party in Italy from 1994 to 2002. Formed from a right-wing split from Christian Democracy, the party joined the centre-right coalition, and was a member of the European People's Party (EPP).

History
The CCD was founded in January 1994 by members of Christian Democracy (DC) who opposed the party's transformation into the Italian People's Party (PPI), and advocated an alliance with Silvio Berlusconi's Forza Italia (FI), which was launched on the same day, while the PPI advocated a centrist alliance with the Segni Pact called Pact for Italy. Its leaders were Pier Ferdinando Casini and Clemente Mastella. The CCD represented the right-wing of the defunct DC, while the PPI was largely the heir of the party's left-wing, especially after the split of the United Christian Democrats (CDU) from the PPI in 1995.

In accordance with an agreement between the party presidents of CCD and PPI, the CCD "inherited" 15 percent of the DC's assets, while the PPI was awarded the remainder. In the 1994 general election the CCD joined FI as a member of the Pole of Freedoms in Northern Italy and the Pole of Good Government in Southern Italy, forming a joint list with FI, and gaining 27 deputies and 12 senators. After the election the CCD joined the Berlusconi I Cabinet, with Mastella minister of Labour and Francesco D'Onofrio minister of Education.

After the sudden fall of the government in December 1994, caused by Lega Nord's exit, a new general election took place in 1996. The CCD formed a joint list with the CDU. The alliance proved successful, gaining 5.8% of the vote, 30 deputies and 15 senators. However, as the centre-right lost the election to The Olive Tree centre-left coalition, the party was in opposition.

In 1998 Mastella and several MPs left the party to form, along with the CDU, the Christian Democrats for the Republic (CDR), which was later folded into the Democratic Union for the Republic (UDR) and supported the centre-left government led by Massimo D'Alema. In 1999 the UDR was transformed into the Union of Democrats for Europe (UDEUR), while the CDU was re-organised as an independent party and returned to the alliance with the CCD.

Once again, the CCD and the CDU formed a joint list (the so-called White Flower) for the 2001 general election, this time gaining only 3.2% of the vote, as part of the winning House of Freedoms coalition composed mainly of FI, National Alliance and Lega Nord. Casini was elected President of the Chamber of Deputies, while Carlo Giovanardi was appointed minister of Relations with Parliament in Berlusconi II Cabinet. In 2002 the CCD, the CDU and European Democracy (DE), which had won 2.3% in 2001, gave birth to the Union of Christian and Centre Democrats (UDC).

Leadership

 * Secretary: Pier Ferdinando Casini (1994–2001), Marco Follini (2001–2002)
 * President: Clemente Mastella (1994–1998), Sandro Fontana (1998–2002)
 * Party Leader in the Chamber of Deputies: Carlo Giovanardi (1994–1998), Marco Follini (1998–2001)
 * Party Leader in the Senate: Massimo Palombi (1994–1996), Francesco D'Onofrio (1996–2001)
 * Party Leader in the European Parliament: Sandro Fontana (1994–1999), Raffaele Lombardo (1999–2002)

title: Christian Democratic Centre


text:
Second Battle of Corinth

The Second Battle of Corinth (which, in the context of the American Civil War, is usually referred to as the Battle of Corinth, to differentiate it from the siege of Corinth earlier the same year) was fought October 3–4, 1862, in Corinth, Mississippi. For the second time in the Iuka–Corinth Campaign, Union Maj. Gen. William Rosecrans defeated a Confederate army, this time one under Maj. Gen. Earl Van Dorn.

After the Battle of Iuka, Maj. Gen. Sterling Price marched his army to meet with Van Dorn's. The combined force, known as the Army of West Tennessee, was put under the command of the more senior Van Dorn. The army moved in the direction of Corinth, a critical rail junction in northern Mississippi, hoping to disrupt Union lines of communications and then sweep into Middle Tennessee. The fighting began on October 3 as the Confederates pushed the U.S. Army from the rifle pits originally constructed by the Confederates for the siege of Corinth. The Confederates exploited a gap in the Union line and continued to press the Union troops until they fell back to an inner line of fortifications.

On the second day of battle, the Confederates moved forward to meet heavy Union artillery fire, storming Battery Powell and Battery Robinett, where desperate hand-to-hand fighting occurred. A brief incursion into the town of Corinth was repulsed. After a U.S. counterattack recaptured Battery Powell, Van Dorn ordered a general retreat. Rosecrans did not pursue immediately and the Confederates escaped destruction.

Military situation
As Confederate General Braxton Bragg moved north from Tennessee into Kentucky in September 1862, Union Maj. Gen. Don Carlos Buell pursued him from Nashville with his Army of the Ohio. Confederate forces under Van Dorn and Price in northern Mississippi were expected to advance into Middle Tennessee to support Bragg's effort, but the Confederates also needed to prevent Buell from being reinforced by Maj. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant's Army of the Tennessee. Since the conclusion of the siege of Corinth that summer, Grant's army had been engaged in protecting supply lines in western Tennessee and northern Mississippi. At the Battle of Iuka on September 19, Maj. Gen. Sterling Price's Confederate Army of the West was defeated by forces under Grant's overall command, but tactically under Rosecrans, the commander of the Army of the Mississippi. (Grant's second column approaching Iuka, commanded by Maj. Gen. Edward Ord, did not participate in the battle as planned. An acoustic shadow apparently prevented Grant and Ord from hearing the sounds of the battle starting.) Price had hoped to combine his small army with Maj. Gen. Earl Van Dorn's Army of West Tennessee and disrupt Grant's communications, but Rosecrans struck first, causing Price to retreat from Iuka. Rosecrans's pursuit of Price was ineffectual.

After Iuka, Grant established his headquarters at Jackson, Tennessee, a central location to communicate with his commands at Corinth and Memphis. Rosecrans returned to Corinth. Ord's three divisions of Grant's Army of the Tennessee moved to Bolivar, Tennessee, northwest of Corinth, to join with Maj. Gen. Stephen A. Hurlbut. Thus, Grant's forces in the immediate vicinity consisted of 12,000 men at Bolivar, Rosecrans's 23,000 at Corinth, Maj. Gen. William T. Sherman's 7,000 at Memphis, and another 6,000 as a general reserve at Jackson.

Price's army marched to Ripley where it joined Van Dorn on September 28. Van Dorn was the senior officer and took command of the combined force, numbering about 22,000 men. They marched on the Memphis and Charleston Railroad to Pocahontas, Tennessee, on October 1. From this point they had a number of opportunities for further moves and Grant was uncertain about their intentions. When they bivouacked on October 2 at Chewalla, Grant became certain that Corinth was the target. The Confederates hoped to seize Corinth from an unexpected direction, isolating Rosecrans from reinforcements, and then sweep into Middle Tennessee. Grant sent word to Rosecrans to be prepared for an attack, at the same time directing Hurlbut to keep an eye on the enemy and strike him on the flank if a favorable opportunity offered. Despite the warning from Grant, Rosecrans was not convinced that Corinth was necessarily the target of Van Dorn's advance. He believed that the Confederate commander would not be foolhardy enough to attack the fortified town and might well instead choose to strike the Mobile and Ohio railroad and maneuver the U.S. soldiers out of their position.

Along the north and east sides of Corinth, about two miles from the town, was a line of entrenchments, extending from the Chewalla Road on the northwest to the Mobile and Ohio Railroad on the south, that had been constructed by Confederate General P.G.T. Beauregard's army before it evacuated the town in May. These lines were too extensive for Rosecrans's 23,000 men to defend, so with the approval of Grant, Rosecrans modified the lines to emphasize the defense of the town and the ammunition magazines near the junction of the two railroads. The inner line of redoubts, closer to the town, called the Halleck Line, was much more substantial. A number of formidable named batteries, guns positioned in strong earthwork defenses, were part of the inner line: Batteries Robinett, Williams, Phillips, Tannrath, and Lothrop, in the area known as College Hill. They were connected by breastworks, and during the last four days of September these works had been strengthened, and the trees in the vicinity of the centrally placed Battery Robinett had been felled to form an abatis. Rosecrans's plan was to absorb the expected Confederate advance with a skirmish line at the old Confederate entrenchments and to then meet the bulk of the Confederate attack with his main force along the Halleck Line, about a mile from the center of town. His final stand would be made around the batteries on College Hill. His men were provided with three days' rations and 100 rounds of ammunition. Van Dorn was not aware of the strength of his opponent, who had prudently called in two reinforcing divisions from the Army of the Tennessee to deal with the difficulty of assaulting these prepared positions.

Union
Rosecrans's Army of the Mississippi was organized as follows:
 * Division of Brig. Gen. David S. Stanley included the brigades of Cols. John W. Fuller and Joseph A. Mower.
 * Division of Brig. Gen. Charles S. Hamilton included the brigades of Brig. Gens. Napoleon B. Buford and Jeremiah C. Sullivan.
 * Cavalry division of Col. John K. Mizner included the brigades of Cols. Edward Hatch and Albert L. Lee.
 * A division on loan from the Army of the Tennessee, commanded by Brig. Gen. Thomas A. Davies, included the brigades of Brig. Gens. Pleasant A. Hackleman and Richard J. Oglesby, and Col. Silas D. Baldwin.
 * A second division on loan, commanded by Brig. Gen. Thomas J. McKean, included the brigades of Brig. Gen. John McArthur and Cols. John M. Oliver and Marcellus M. Crocker.

Confederate
Van Dorn's combined Confederate Army of West Tennessee was organized as follows:
 * Price's Corps, also known as the Army of the West, with two divisions commanded by Brig. Gen. Louis Hébert (brigades of Brig. Gen. Martin E. Green and Colonels Elijah Gates, W. Bruce Colbert, and John D. Martin) and Brig. Gen. Dabney H. Maury (brigades of Brig. Gens. John C. Moore and William L. Cabell, and Brig. Gen. (acting) Charles W. Phifer).
 * The 1st Division of the District of the Mississippi, commanded by Maj. Gen. Mansfield Lovell, with the brigades of Brig. Gens. Albert Rust, John B. Villepigue, John S. Bowen, and a cavalry brigade commanded by Col. William H. Jackson, and Major St. L. Dupiere's Louisiana Zouave battalion.

October 3
On the morning of October 3, three of Rosecrans's divisions advanced into the old Confederate rifle pits north and northwest of town: McKean on the left, Davies in the center, and Hamilton on the right. Stanley's division was held in reserve south of town. Van Dorn began his assault at 10 a.m. with Lovell's division attacking McArthur's brigade (McKean's division, on the Union left) from three sides. Van Dorn's plan was a double envelopment, in which Lovell would open the fight, in the hope that Rosecrans would weaken his right to reinforce McKean, at which time Price would make the main assault against the U.S. right and enter the works. Lovell made a determined attack on Oliver and as soon as he became engaged Maury opened the fight with Davies's left. McArthur quickly moved four regiments to Oliver's support and at the same time Davies advanced his line to the entrenchments. These movements left a gap between Davies and McKean, through which the Confederates forced their way about 1:30 p.m., and the whole Union line fell back to within half a mile of the redoubts, leaving two pieces of artillery in the hands of the Confederates.

During this part of the action Gen. Hackleman was killed and Gen. Oglesby (the future governor of Illinois) seriously wounded, shot through the lungs. About 3 p.m. Hamilton was ordered to change front and attack the Confederates on the left flank, but through a misunderstanding of the order and the unmasking of a force on Buford's front, so much time was lost that it was sunset before the division was in position for the movement, and it had to be abandoned. Van Dorn in his report says: "One hour more of daylight and victory would have soothed our grief for the loss of the gallant dead who sleep on that lost but not dishonored field." But one hour more of daylight would have hurled Hamilton's as-yet unengaged brigades on the Confederate's left and rear, which would in all probability have driven Van Dorn from the field and made the second day's battle unnecessary.

So far the advantage had been with the Confederates. Rosecrans had been driven back at all points, and night found his entire army except pickets inside the redoubts. Both sides had been exhausted from the fighting. The weather had been hot (high of 94 °F) and water was scarce, causing many men to nearly faint from their exertions. During the night the Confederates slept within 600 yards of the Union works, and Van Dorn readjusted his lines for the attack the next day. He abandoned his sophisticated plans for double envelopments. Shelby Foote wrote, "His blood was up; it was Rosecrans he was after, and he was after him in the harshest, most straightforward way imaginable. Today he would depend not on deception to complete the destruction begun the day before, but on the rapid point-blank fire of his guns and the naked valor of his infantry."

Rosecrans's biographer, William M. Lamers, reported that Rosecrans was confident at the end of the first day of battle, saying "We've got them where we want them" and that some of the general's associates claimed that he was in "magnificent humor." Peter Cozzens, however, suggested that Rosecrans was "tired and bewildered, certain only he was badly outnumbered—at least three to one by his reckoning." Steven E. Woodworth, a historian specializing in the Western Theater of the American Civil War, portrayed Rosecrans's conduct in a negative light: "Rosecrans ... had not done well. He had failed to anticipate the enemy's action, put little more than half his troops into the battle, and called on his men to fight on ground they could not possibly hold. He had sent a series of confusing and unrealistic orders to his division commanders and had done nothing to coordinate their activities, while he personally remained safely back in Corinth. The movements of the army that day had had nothing to do with any plan of his to develop the enemy or make a fighting withdrawal. The troops and their officers had simply held on as best as they could."

October 4
At 4:30 a.m. on October 4, the Confederates opened up on the Union inner line of entrenchments with a six-gun battery, which kept up its bombardment until after sunrise. When the guns fell silent, the U.S. troops prepared themselves to resist an attack. But the attack was slow in coming. Van Dorn had directed Hébert to begin the engagement at daylight, and the artillery fire was merely preliminary to enable Hébert to get into position for the assault.

At 7 a.m., Hébert sent word to Van Dorn that he was too ill to lead his division, and Brig. Gen. Martin E. Green was ordered to assume command and advance at once. Nearly two hours more elapsed before Green moved to the attack, with four brigades in echelon, until he occupied a position in the woods north of town. There he formed in line, facing south, and made a charge on Battery Powell with the brigades of Gates and McLain (replacing Martin), while the brigades of Moore (replacing Green) and Colbert attacked Hamilton's line. The assault on the battery was successful, capturing the guns and scattering the troops from Illinois and Iowa. Hamilton repulsed the attack on his position and then sent a portion of his command to the assistance of Davies, who rallied his men, drove the Confederates out of the battery, and recaptured the guns.

Maury had been engaged sometime before this. As soon as he heard the firing on his left, he knew that Davies and Hamilton would be kept too busy to interfere with his movements, and gave the order for his division to move straight toward the town. His right encountered a stubborn resistance at about 11 a.m. from Battery Robinett, a redan protected by a five-foot ditch, sporting three 20-pounder Parrott rifles commanded by Lt. Henry Robinett. Fierce hand-to-hand combat ensued, and Maury was forced to retire with heavy losses from arguably the hottest action of the two-day battle. Col. William P. Rogers of the 2nd Texas and Col. John Daly of the 18th Arkansas were both killed in the failed attack. Col. Lawrence Sullivan Ross of the 6th Texas was thrown from his horse and mistakenly reported killed with Rogers.

Phifer's brigade on the left met with better success, driving back Davies's left flank and entering the town. But their triumph was short-lived, as part of Sullivan's brigade, held as a reserve on Hamilton's left, charged on the Confederates, who were thrown into confusion in the narrow streets, and as they fell back came within range of batteries on both flanks of the Union army, the cross-fire utterly routing them. Cabell's brigade of Maury's division was sent to reinforce the troops that had captured Battery Powell, but before it arrived, Davies and Hamilton had recaptured it, and as Cabell advanced against it, he was met by a murderous fire that caused his men to retreat.

Meanwhile, Lovell had been skirmishing with the Union left in the vicinity of Battery Phillips, in preparation for a general advance. Before his arrangements were complete he was ordered to send a brigade to Maury's assistance, and soon afterward received orders to place his command so as to cover the retreat of the army. At 4 p.m., reinforcements from Grant under the command of Brig. Gen. James B. McPherson arrived from Jackson. But the battle of Corinth had effectively been over since 1 p.m. and the Confederates were in full retreat.

Aftermath
Rosecrans's army lost 2,520 (355 killed, 1,841 wounded, and 324 missing) at Corinth; Van Dorn's losses were 4,233 (473 killed, 1,997 wounded, and 1,763 captured or missing).

Once again, Rosecrans's performance during the second day of the battle has been the subject of dispute among historians. His biographer, Lamers, paints a romantic picture: "One of Davies' men, David Henderson, watched Rosecrans as he dashed in front of the Union lines. Bullets carried his hat away. His hair flew in the wind. As he rode along he shouted: 'Soldiers! Stand by your country.' 'He was the only general I ever knew,' Henderson said later, 'who was closer to the enemy than we were who fought at the front.' Henderson (after the war, a Congressman from Iowa and Speaker of the House of Representatives) wrote that Rosecrans was the 'Central leading and victorious spirit. ... By his splendid example in the thickest of the fight he succeeded in restoring the line before it was completely demoralized; and the men, brave when bravely led, fought again.'"

Peter Cozzens, author of a recent book-length study of Iuka and Corinth, came to the opposite conclusion: "Rosecrans was in the thick of battle, but his presence was hardly inspiring. The Ohioan had lost all control of his infamous temper, and he cursed as cowards everyone who pushed past him until he, too lost hope. ... Rosecrans's histrionics nearly cost him his life. 'On the second day I was everywhere on the line of battle,' he wrote with disingenuous pride. 'Temple Clark of my staff was shot through the breast. My saber-tache strap was caught by a bullet, and my gloves were stained with the blood of a staff officer wounded at my side. An alarm spread that I was killed, but it was soon stopped by my appearance on the field.'"

Rosecrans's performance immediately after the battle was lackluster. Grant had given him specific orders to pursue Van Dorn without delay, but he did not begin his march until the morning of October 5, explaining that his troops needed rest and the thicketed country made progress difficult by day and impossible by night. At 1 p.m. on October 4, when pursuit would have been most effective, Rosecrans rode along his line to deny in person a rumor that he had been slain. At Battery Robinett he dismounted, bared his head, and told his soldiers, "I stand in the presence of brave men, and I take my hat off to you."

Grant wrote disgustedly, "Two or three hours of pursuit on the day of the battle without anything except what the men carried on their persons, would have been worth more than any pursuit commenced the next day could have possibly been." Rosecrans returned to Corinth to find that he was a hero in the Northern press. He was soon ordered to Cincinnati, where he was given command of the Army of the Ohio (soon to be renamed the Army of the Cumberland), replacing Don Carlos Buell, who had similarly failed to pursue retreating Confederates from the Battle of Perryville.

Although his army had been badly mauled, Van Dorn escaped completely, evading Union troops sent by Grant later on October 5 at the Battle of Hatchie's Bridge, and marching to Holly Springs, Mississippi. He attributed his defeat to the failure of Hébert to open the second-day engagement on time, but nevertheless he was replaced by Lt. Gen. John C. Pemberton immediately after the battle. There were widespread outcries of indignation throughout the South over the senseless casualties at Corinth. Van Dorn requested a court of inquiry to answer charges that he had been drunk on duty at Corinth and that he had neglected his wounded on the retreat. The court cleared him of all blame by unanimous decision.

Battlefield preservation
The American Battlefield Trust and its partners in battlefield land preservation have acquired and preserved more than 820 acres of the Corinth battlefield.

title: Second Battle of Corinth


text:
MTN Group

MTN Group Limited (formerly M-Cell) is a South African multinational corporation and mobile telecommunications provider. Its head office is in Johannesburg. As of December 2022 MTN recorded 289.1 million subscribers. MTN is among the largest mobile network operators in the world, and the largest in Africa.

MTN is active in over 20 countries, one-third of the company's revenue comes from Nigeria, where it holds about 35 percent market share.

MTN Group is the primary sponsor of the South Africa national rugby union team and sponsors English football club Manchester United and Zambian Super League. The Nigerian subsidiary of the group also has an existing sponsorship deal with the Nigerian Football Federation.

History
The company was founded in 1994 as M-Cell with assistance from the South African government. In 1995, it replaced its then CEO, John Beck, with Robert (Bob) Chaphe and founder Leena Jaitley. In 2001, the company reported that its controlling shareholder was Johnnic Holdings, and the chairperson was Irene Charnley. In 2002, Phuthuma Nhleko became the CEO, replacing then-CEO Paul Edwards, who had invested in expansion to Nigeria.

MTN's competitors in South Africa include Vodacom, Cell C and Telkom Mobile.

In May 2008, Bharti Airtel, an India-based telecommunications company, explored the possibility of buying MTN Group. Reliance Communications was also in talks with MTN for a "potential combination of their businesses". In July, the two companies ended discussions regarding the merger.

In June 2008, MTN Group agreed to purchase Verizon Business South Africa, which was a provider of data services to customers in South Africa and four other African countries. The acquisition was completed on 28 February 2009.

On 26 June 2009, MTN Group's subsidiary merged with Belgacom International Carrier Services (BICS), a subsidiary of Belgacom. The combined subsidiary functioned as the international gateway for carrier services of MTN.

In October 2012, MTN announced a partnership with Afrihost to provide DSL Broadband services in Africa.

In November 2012, South African holding company Shanduka Group acquired a minority stake in MTN Group's Nigeria business for $335 million. In 2014, MTN was named on the 2014 BrandZ Top 100 Most Valuable Global Brand rankings and named the Most Admired and Most Valuable Brand in Africa. MTN retained its ranking as the Most Admired and the Most Valuable African brand in 2015.

In March 2016, the company appointed Rob Shuter as chief executive officer. Shutter was replaced on 1 September 2020 when Ralph Mupita was appointed Chief Executive.

MTN Ghana IPO

On 31 May 2018, MTN Ghana launched its initial public offering (IPO). The IPO closed on 31 July 2019. A total of up to 4,637,394,533 ordinary shares of MTN Ghana, representing 35% of its equity was offered to qualifying applicants. This was part of the agreement between MTN Ghana and Ghana's National Communications Authority (NCA) in November, 2015 for MTN Ghana to deploy 4G LTE mobile services to its customers in Ghana. Among other methods of payments, MTN mobile money was included as a payment option for the MTN share offer subscription. This was the first time mobile money had been used as a payment method in an IPO. The current CEO of MTN Ghana is Mr. Selorm Adadevoh.

MTN Shuts Down Stores
On 23 February 2017, Nigerian protestors attacked a MTN office in Abuja, Nigeria as a counterattack due to violence targeted against Nigerians in South Africa.

In September 2019 MTN began closing stores in Nigeria and some of their stores in Johannesburg, South Africa due to rioting, looting, and attacks on some of their facilities.

Geoffrey Onyeama the Nigerian Foreign Minister stated at a press briefing on 4 September 2019, that MTN group along with Shoprite, stated that the targeted South African stores in Nigeria are "subsidiaries that are owned by Nigerians." And that "the property owned by Nigerians within Nigeria and the people working there are Nigerians."

Lai Mohammed, Nigeria's Minister of Information and Culture, reported that some of the South African companies that were attacked in Nigeria have Nigerian investors owning significant amounts of stakes, and Nigerian employees.

MTN has stated that they will continue to do business in Nigeria.

Services
In March 2019 MTN launched a WhatsApp channel to let its customers buy airtime and data bundles through the messaging app. Customers can also check their balances and store their credit or debit cards in the app for future purchases. The service is provided by another South African company, Clickatell.

In the same year, MTN launched a communication platform ayoba.

Cyprus branch re-branding
MTN sold its Cyprus branch to Monaco Telecom for €260 million in July 2018. It was later re-branded as Epic in June 2019.

In December 2019, former Deputy Finance Minister of the Government of South Africa, Mcebisi Jonas, was appointed as the board chairperson of the company.

Middle East exodus
In August 2020, MTN decided to sell its shares in Syria, Afghanistan and Yemen, and to divest its 49% minority holding in Irancell over time. The company's decision was based on the fact that their assets in the Middle East contributed less than 4% to group earnings in the first half of the year. MTN Group has transferred its majority 82.8% shareholding in MTN Yemen to Emerald International Investment, thereby exiting the market.

Sale of stake in Jumia
On 30 October 2020, MTN made public the sale of their shares in the e-commerce brand Jumia. The sale was worth 142.31 million dollars.

MTN Mastercard Collaboration
In February 2021, the MTN Group partnered with Mastercard to ensure safe and secure global e-commerce payments of their customer base in 16 African countries. A Mastercard virtual payment platform, that is linked to MTN MoMo (Mobile Money) wallets makes this possible.

Mobile Money spin-off
In March 2021, MTN CEO Ralph Mupita announced during the company's annual results call that the group was now considering spinning off its mobile money activities. "We see a separation and carve out of our fintech business as something that we have to do”. In April 2021, he estimated the value of the group's mobile money arm to at least US$5 to 6 billion.

Technology

MTN South Africa provides GSM, UMTS, HSPA+ (21.1 Mbit/s), HSUPA (42 Mbit/s, 2100 MHz), VOIP, 3G, 4G, LTE and 5G services. On 1 December 2011, MTN became the second cellular provider to introduce 4G and LTE in South Africa They were also the first network operator in South Africa to launch a live public 5G network available in Johannesburg and Cape Town on 30 June 2020.

Coverage
MTN acquired Investcom, mainly under the Areeba and Spacetel brands.

As of Q4 2018, MTN is active in:

SuperSonic
Supersonic is an Internet service provider that was founded in Johannesburg, South Africa in 2018 by MTN Group in to provide FTTH (Fibre) Internet services to South African consumers. SuperSonic is owned by MTN Group.

Supersonic provides Fibre through most Service Providers including OpenServe and Vumatel. SuperSonic also offers “Air Fibre”, a 5G Based Mobile data service introduced in February 2021.

In July 2021, they were fourth from the bottom of a list of 16 big ISP's that were rated.

Sponsorships
MTN Group sponsored the CAF Champions League football competition, as well as APOEL FC, winners of the Cypriot First Division in 2009, 2011, 2013 and 2014, and participants in the 2009–10 and 2011–12 UEFA Champions League.

On 18 March 2010, it was announced that MTN signed a sponsorship deal with English football club Manchester United F.C.

MTN Group has been the title sponsor of the Ghana FA Cup, renaming the competition as MTN FA Cup, since 2010.

Since 2017, MTN Group is the primary sponsor of the South Africa national rugby union team.

Iran
MTN has been criticised for its activities in Iran's telecommunications sector. MTN has a 49 percent stake in government-controlled MTN Irancell, the second-largest mobile phone operator in Iran, and 21 percent of MTN's subscriber base is from the country. In January 2012, the US-based advocacy group United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) launched a campaign publicly calling for MTN to scale back its operations in Iran and end its business in the country. UANI alleges that MTN technology is "enabling the Iranian government to locate and track individual cellphone users which it says is a violation of users' human rights".

In June 2012, Reuters and the BBC reported an allegation by Chris Kilowan, a former executive for the company in Iran, that MTN Group may have been complicit in securing American telecommunications technology from Sun Microsystems, Hewlett-Packard and Cisco Systems on behalf of Irancell, in violation of trade sanctions against Iran. Oracle, which owns Sun Microsystems, said that it was investigating and denied involvement, saying that it complies with US export laws. Hewlett-Packard issued a similar statement. MTN Group denied the allegations, saying that it complied with US sanctions against Iran.

Turkcell court case
Turkey's Turkcell filed a $4.2 billion lawsuit in Washington, D.C., in 2012 alleging the company used bribery to win a mobile licence in Iran that was first awarded to Turkcell. The court delayed the case in October 2012 pending a US Supreme Court decision on the Alien Tort Statute, the US human rights law on which Turkcell's suit is based. In May 2013, Turkcell dropped its multibillion-dollar US lawsuit against MTN Group, citing a US Supreme Court ruling that hurt its case. On 27 November 2013, Turkcell resumed in Johannesburg.

Nigeria $5.2 billion fine
In 2015, the Nigerian subsidiary of MTN was fined by the Government of Nigeria through the telecommunications regulator, Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) for partial compliance of regulatory guidelines to Mobile Network Operators to disconnect from their network, all improperly registered Subscribers Identification Modules (SIM). The commission exercised section 20(1) of the Telephone Subscribers regulation (TSR) law on MTN, leading to a calculated fine of $5.2 billion, according to the constitution.

The compliance audit carried out by the NCC on MTN network revealed unregistered 5.2 million customers lines were not deactivated as directed. This led to the NCC fining MTN with the sum of $1000 for each unregistered SIM according to the Telephone Subscribers regulation (TSR) law, which amounted to $5.2bn.

What followed was major resignations among the top echelon of the organization including the chief executive officer, Sifiso Dabengwa, the Head of Nigeria Operation, Micheal Ikpoki and the Head of Cooperate Affairs, Akinwale Goodluck being replaced with Phuthuma Nhleko, Ferdi Moolman and Amina Oyegbola as new chairman, managing director and Head of Corporate and Regulation respectively.

The new management employed a diplomatic measure between the government of the Republic of South Africa and its Nigerian counterpart to ameliorate the burden of the liabilities from the fine. This action brought about the reduction of the liability to $3.2 billion.

South Africa
In September 2021, MTN announced that it will close its zero-rated access to the popular social network Twitter. As of early 2022, MTN has had poor internet connection throughout the country; the cause is still unknown.

title: MTN Group