Talk:Ottawa: Difference between revisions – Wikipedia

	Ottawa was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
	Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia’s Main Page in the “On this day…“ column on June 29, 2004, December 31, 2007, December 31, 2009, December 31, 2010, December 31, 2012, December 31, 2013, December 31, 2014, December 31, 2016, December 31, 2017, December 31, 2019, December 31, 2020, and December 31, 2023.
Current status: Former good article nominee

The redirect Cedardale, Ottawa has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 31 § Cedardale, Ottawa until a consensus is reached. Cremastra (talk) 21:19, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Woodridge, Ottawa River, Canada has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 31 § Woodridge, Ottawa River, Canada until a consensus is reached. Cremastra (talk) 21:22, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the Central Experimental Farm climate data chart from the article for the following reasons.

• There is already a climate data chart for the readings at the airport. Most cities only provide one chart (Montreal, Vancouver, etc.) and it is most often from the airport.

• The climate data from the Central Experimental Farm is an anomaly. It is essentially fields in the centre of the city. They do not absorb heat in the same fashion as the rest of the city and it is not an accurate representation of the city’s climate. 2605:8D80:5A2:4D7D:E403:44C1:85FF:42EA (talk) 13:59, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My last nomination (this article’s 2nd) was rejected a few years ago, but I still believe this article probably meets GA nomination standards. I want to gauge if anyone actively involved in the page has opinions on whether it should be attempted again. Kwkintegrator (talk) 20:48, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What’s changed since it failed last? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:47, 6 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Great question @Nikkimaria. I was of the opinion it was GA quality back then, but since then:

1) Climate section has been pulled out from geography

2) Demographics and arts/culture sections have been buffed

3) Many more images added

So there have been some changes but not a huge overhaul. Citation quantity remains dense, but I haven’t been yet able to revisit citation quality, since it feels like it would be premature to go through 200+ citations if there wasn’t already buy-in among the people who know this page to pursue a nomination. Kwkintegrator (talk) 20:07, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing and source-text integrity were raised as issues in the previous review, so those are definitely things that would need reviewing before renomination. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:22, 12 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]