User talk:Reginald Perrin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome! 1.1 Finding your way around: 1.2 Need help? 1.3 How you can help: 1.4 Additional tips... 2 Pride FM 103.9 3 Agnes Macphail not a CCF MP 4 Misformatted comment (Categories) 5 Mark Warner (Canadian politician) 6 Barnstar 7 John Tory 8 AfD nomination of Mark Warner (Canadian politician) 9 Warner 10 Don Meredith (Canadian Clergyman) 11 Re: Your comments to me (Hyperionsteel) 12 An Invite to join Saskatchewan WikiProject 13 CIC 14 films about the labor movement 15 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot 16 Candidate Rivals 17 Apartheid 18 CNR Radio 19 Warner Candidacy 20 Radio station 21 DYK 22 Principal Secretary (India) 23 Quote from Islam Online in Mohamed Elmasry article 24 This Magazine 25 Fish, Food and Allied Workers Union 26 Image copyright problem with Image:Fpu.jpg 27 Requesting your assistance 28 John Gilbert Higgins 29 Feb March Saskatchewan Newsletter Award Announcement 30 Raul Castro 31 The Current Events Barnstar 32 WikiProject Saskatchewan Newsletter: Volume 2, Issue 3 - March 2008 33 Toronto Centre election 34 Donald MacDonald 35 Order of precedence 36 AfD nomination of Johannes Gerhardus Strijdom 37 AfD nomination of Ashley Alexandra Dupré 38 Joseph Bruno 39 Chris Tindal 40 AfD nomination of El-Farouk Khaki 41 DYK 42 DYK 43 Barnstar 44 Re Merle Terlesky 45 CfD nomination of Category:People with a single name 46 Sam Yuchtman 47 Taser and Taser controversy articles 48 Image copyright problem with Image:Paul Sauvé.jpg 49 Image copyright problem with Image:Fpu.jpg 50 Michener & Ont post-secondary 51 5/17 DYK 52 Bearcat? 53 Taser / Excited delirium 54 The Hockey Theme 55 Conrad Black 56 Taser controversy rename 57 39th Legislative Assembly of Ontario 58 Jan Dukszta 59 Vote at Fête nationale du Québec (Saint Jean Baptiste Day)

[edit] Welcome!

[edit] Pride FM 103.9

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article Pride FM 103.9, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Postcard Cathy 20:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Agnes Macphail not a CCF MP

Hi there:

I noticed you changed a category for Agnes Macphail, that lists her as a CCF MP. Although she was sympathetic to the CCF, she was always elected to the Canadian House of Commons as a member of the United Farmers of Ontario (UFO) party, not the CCF.--Abebenjoe 05:34, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I know she had a formal membership in the CCF between 1932 and 1934, but she never, ever sat in the House of Commons as a member of that party. She was a member of the Ginger group, but it was made up of more than the CCF. She only ran for the CCF provincially. That's why I have a problem listing her as a CCF MP. Clarence Gillis was the first CCFer elected east of Manitoba, and that was in 1940, the same election that Agnes lost (as an United Farmers of Ontario candidate). So I really don't think her page should have her categorized as a CCF MP...that would be officially inaccurate, though technically she was. Just making a murkier citation more cloudy.--Abebenjoe 02:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Misformatted comment (Categories)

FYI, if you want to refer to a category when you're talking on a talk page you have to put a : inside the bracket like so [[: otherwise you'll actually end up adding the talk page to the category, as you did here[1]. The other thing you can do is write <nowiki> and </nowiki> before and after so that whatever you're writing in between isn't "wikified". Type 40 23:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Warner (Canadian politician)

FYI, if you want to delete the biographical material from Mr. Warner's entry, at the very least you would have to do so from the entries for his competitors, Bob Rae and El Farouk Khaki, to say nothing of most other entries for politicians. The citation standard for Mr. Warner matches that of Bob Rae whose site is protected from edits. Your edits smack of vandalism, perhaps Mr. Warner's site should also be protected. --Canam1 12:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I have replied to this on your talk page. I will reiterate though that insisting on sources is not "malicious", it's policy and that your claims about Rae and Khaki's articles are untrue since, as far as I can tell, that material is sourced. Reginald Perrin 03:51, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

There are no sources given for Bob Rae's education or for El Farouk Khaki. As there is no ssourcing for the education for the American Mark Warner, or for Chuck Daly etc. In fact, the Warner cited to an article that mentioned that he was born in Trinidad, and cited to a third-party source that documented his educational qualifications. Please restore Mr. Warner's articles forthwith. What specifically is not sourced? I am not trying to attack you personally, I just don't see that the Warner entry is any different from that for his competitors. Why are you holding him to a higher standard? In response to your various posts, further citations were added. Why then would you take the extreme step of requesting the deletion of the entry? --Canam1 10:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I would also add that there are also no citations to the Personal section for Bill Graham, the outgoing politician who Mr. Warner is seeking to replace. By contrast, at the time the article was deleted, there were over twenty references to the Mark Warner article. The Bob Rae references to his personal life are arguably to his own autobiography. How is that more legitimate than the third-party reference used in the Mark Warner article. Please note also that in the discussion of the Bob Rae article, a link is provided to changes made by his wife, no less.... And similarly, on his Facebook site, El Farouk Khaki publicly thanks one of his volunteers for creating and editing his site. Why, in light of this, is the Mark Warner article being singled out for deletion? --Canam1 17:15, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

With the greatest of respect, I would ask you to reconsider and reverse your request for the deletion of this article. As regards the alleged violation of WP:AUTO & WP:SPAM, where is the substantiation for that? And furthermore, even if it were true, how could that be correct in light of the comments above?

With respect to WP:N, how can the candidate for the governing party be the sole candidate not to be notable enough to be referred to among all the opposition candidates listed along with him in the Toronto Centre article? This does not seem to be particularly neutral, especially in light of the fact that the deleted article referenced impartial third-party materials - including newspaper articles - referring to the facts contained in the article.

In light of the above, will you please undelete the article or return the underlying code so that a new article that complies more with the standard (as opposed to the standard in the Bob Rae, El Farouk Khaki and Bill Graha articles) can be created. --Canam1 18:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I didn't delete the article, didn't put the "speedy deletion" tag on it and have no power to undelete it. I believe there is a deletion review process, I'll look it up and give you the link. Reginald Perrin 23:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. The process as I understand it is for me to ask the Administrator who removed it to reconsider. However since you initiated this chain of events [03:39, 3 September 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board‎ (→Requests for comment)], in light of my comments above, I would really hope that you would be willing to ask User:Y to re-consider especially since many of the edits you refer to where additions of sources requested by you. I really would know you justify the demand for sources in the Warner article that are not there for Bill Graham, the American Mark Warner, etc. to say nothing of Bob Rae and El Farouk Khaki specifically in reference to childhood and education. I am honestly stunned by what has happened here. If this is allowed to stand, Wikipedia will really have been damaged in my eyes for the reasons listed above none of which you or User:GreenJoe have attempted to rebut directly. --Canam1 00:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, my view is the article was likely deleted since it wasn't seen as meeting the threshold of notability and concerns about autobiography. I suspect the deleting editor will also direct you to Deletion Review. I'll see about listing something there on your behalf. As for Rae etc, I'd be hard pressed to argue that Bob Rae isn't notable. Khaki seesm to have been referred to a number of times in the press independent of his political candidacy due to his involvement in the liberal Muslim movement. Reginald Perrin 00:12, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

On autobiography, I would be interested in how you would respond to my note about Rae's wife editing his article (See the Rae discussion) and E Farouk's Facebook admission that his Director of IT for his campaign created his article? As for notability, your comments above suggest that you may not have had a close enough look at the newspaper articles (Globe & Mail, Toronto Star, Financial Times etc.) quoting Warner, his publication of a leading Canadian trade law treatise and citation in a third-party publication on leading lawyers around the world. So in your view this makes Warner less notable than Chris Tindal his Green opponent who is also mentioned in the Toronto Centre article and worthy of an article here? I am really struggling to see how anyone can possibly reagard any of this as neutral, but I don't mean to impugn your motives or those of User:JoeGreen. I just think this was obviously done in haste in thw wee hours of the a.m., and the decent thing to do is to admit the error, and correct it. --Canam1 00:32, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I didn't delete the Mark Warner article and didn't suggest that it be deleted, another editor, User:GreenJoe, nominated it for "speedy deletion" and a second editor, User:Y, deleted it (see their posts on your page, above, and [1]) so your argument is with them, not me. As for Bob Rae's education, see footnote 7 on the article's page, the citation is given as "Rae, Protest to Power, p. 28." - and yes, an autobiography published by a recognized publishing house is considered a "reliable source". As for Khaki's education, the citation listed in the article as footnote 1 is this Toronto Star piece [2]. I don't know why you insist these references aren't cited but they are. Reginald Perrin 23:35, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

And without wanting to beat a dead horse, Warner's education was footnoted in the publication listed in the first footnote, and his place of birth footnoted in the Towncrier article. Again all of this begs the question (that you repeatedly decline to answer) how is it that no sourcing of such things is required for Bill Graham, Mark Warner, Steve Gilchrist etc. Isn't it time to simply admit an error here? --Canam1 00:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Chris Tindal does not have his own article, he has a section in a longer article on Green Party candidates. Rae's wife seems to have removed inaccurate material which is a bit different from writing the entire article. As for Khaki, you can bring that up in his discussion page if you wish but as long as the article is written in a neutral tone and everything is cited it's acceptable, as far as I understand policy. You'll also note that Rae's article, in particular, has critical information in it and is not a promotional piece. Evidently some editors feel the Mark Warner article was promotional in nature. Anyway, feel free to argue your points on the deletion page where I have opened an entry on the article. Reginald Perrin 00:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it awfully generous to conclude that Rae's wife's edits were minor correction. Just one example, changing a reference to Cabinet "scandals" to "minor scandals" is minor? Her changes were extensive. Please have a closer look. --Canam1 00:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

The Steve Gilchrist article could do with more sources, however, Gilchrist (and Graham) are former cabinet ministers so they definitely are notable. Warner's notability is questionable unless you suggest we should have articles on everyone who has a law degree. Reginald Perrin 00:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I am confused. You make a point about sourcing norms. I reply showing you - with examples - that the norm is not as you state it, then you switch the defense to notability? Which is it? When you began this there was no mentin of notability. As for Warner just being another guy with a law degree, I really think you should have a much closer looks at the references cited in the article and discussed above. --Canam1 00:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an admin. I didn't close it, I didn't delete it. I did go to the review and posted my comments. GreenJoe 01:15, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I hope Canam1 realizes that even if DRV succeeds, it'll just end up on AFD, and could still be deleted. GreenJoe 01:23, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

It's okay. Thank you for your help with Mark. GreenJoe 01:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Really, I heard enough about this! Thanks. -- Y not? 00:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thanks for being a super Wikipedia editor, and for your patience with this one matter. GreenJoe 01:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] John Tory

I just popped back to the article to remove the YouTube reference to the "U of Zero" incident, having learned it might be a copyright vio, when I saw your note about removing the qualifying adjectives. I am content that it should be so, as long as the same standard is applied to the whole of the article. Thanks Bielle 02:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Mark Warner (Canadian politician)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Mark Warner (Canadian politician), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Warner (Canadian politician). Thank you. GreenJoe 20:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warner

Reginald,

Plz see Warner's talk page for discussion. I changed one of your edits so I'll drop this FYI here.

Cheers :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grandmasterkush (talk • contribs) 01:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Don Meredith (Canadian Clergyman)

Reggie, I don't seek an extended debate with you, but the site lists one current Member. Who is that? Surprise, it is the Rev. Don! You appear to have done some additional research to show that there may at one point have been other members. Can you point to anything that suggests that there is, in fact, at present more than one member, the Rev. Don? While you are at it, good luck finding any reference on google to the Rev. Don's church in Richmond Hill. Does it exist in fact? Can you offer any independant support for that other than the Rev. Don's own web site? I think the article is timely, and not a bad start at an article, but I sure wish we had more to go on to substantiate some of the claims made on the Rev. Don's web site. While you are at it, perhaps you can find some independant support for the fact that he has actually been ordained? I don't intend a war with you. I know you hold your views tenaciously, but I hope you will consider some of the points above in the spirit in which they are offered. --Kibomt (talk) 03:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I have asked another editor to review the edit history and discussion page for Don Meredith (Canadian clergyman) and our dispute. Can I suggest that we await his input before making further edits to that article. --Kibomt (talk) 01:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

The Towncrier aricle does note that there is large LGBT community in Toronto Centre, and also has some mumbo jumbo about no vote coming again, and he would never discriminate and that his personal views are irrelevant. Earth to Rev. Don? Come in, Don? --Kibomt (talk) 01:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

yes, i saw the Xtra article. Should we add the fact that he endorsed the Siskay bill? That appears to have outraged some conservative bloggers. See http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=1129705 --Kibomt (talk) 14:14, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Your comments to me (Hyperionsteel)

I respectfully disagree with your interpretation of my edits to biographies as attacks. I am careful not to editorialize or use inappropriate language and I always cite specific, credible sources to support my work. Also, I do not delete positive information posted on these bios by others.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 23:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC))

I don't think I editorialized in my contributions, but if I did, it was a mistake on my part. I will be careful about this in the future.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 02:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC))

[edit] An Invite to join Saskatchewan WikiProject

[edit] CIC

About this, critics dont have to be notable in order to be included. Please see: <a href="/wiki/Wikipedia:N#Notability_guidelines_do_not_directly_limit_article_cont