Talk:2010 Ottawa municipal election

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mayor Box[edit]

This box seems to be jumping the gun to me. Can it be edited to show at least all of the contenders who have had some media coverage? Both Haydon and Doucette are getting a lot of reportage.Andwats (talk) 19:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I included those two because a) they are the top two candidates in the polls and b) we have photos of them both. Maybe once we get photos for the other candidates, we can throw them in there as well. Not having a photo of Chiarelli is why I excluded him from the 2006 article's box as well. -- Earl Andrew - talk 20:56, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You have good reasoning here. I'm not 100% on Wikipedia's photo usage policy. And, I'm not sure how the photos here initially found their way into wikicommons. However, I doubt anyone will object if we use photos from campaign sites. Although, I can see there's some difficulty in so far as photos are often embedded in banners. Nonetheless, we should make an effort towards objectivity (journalism). This effort is especially important if you consider the fact that a number of the candidates who score low in the polls have been present in local news media. Doucette and Taylor have both had front articles in the Metro, and Haydon, who just entered, was on CFRA for an extended period. Keep in mind that the polls right now are early. So, if you can give me a link for the photo usage policy, I'll see if I can google up some links for photos that can be used. But it's kind of a shame that Hamilton, Ontario municipal election, 2010 has photo's for about 50% or 9 of it's mayoral candidates and we have only two photos. But I'm not really sure how to edit this sort of thing, so in the end I'll leave the task for someone else.Andwats (talk) 08:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I find Wikipedia's image policy difficult. One can't just grab photos off the web. I tried uploading a Bob Chiarlelli photo and gave it the same license and sourcing info that the leaders of the New Brunswick parties had, but that failed miserably. (See New Brunswick general election, 2010.) -- Earl Andrew - talk 12:37, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The easiest way to search for Commons-friendly pictures is to use Google Images and set Advanced Search to search only those that are "labeled for commercial reuse with modification," which is the copyright and licensing that Wikipedia allows (elaborated at WP:Image use policy). Since Google Images searches Flickr, this is how I found our current Watson picture (later cropped by Earl Andrew), originally located at http://www.flickr.com/photos/43661283@N00/3848743327. It should be noted that we can only use free-use images that allow commercial use and modification; though other images can be used in certain cases under fair-use, the only valid reason for doing so is that a) a free image could not reasonably be created (for example if the subject is dead, such as Major James Coldwell) and b) the image is vital to the article (such as a biography, but not an election). Two of the NB election images are being used incorrectly under fair-use; both currently contain deletion notices and will likely be deleted in the coming days have been deleted. -M.Nelson (talk) 16:25, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so I set google for "free to use, share, or modify even for commercial uses". Here's what I have. For Charlie Taylor: http://magyarhirlap.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/p8010231.jpg. For Clive Doucet http://www.ottawa.ca/city_hall/mayor_council/councillors/c_doucet_en.html. However, this is from a websearch and jumping to the images tab.Andwats (talk) 01:35, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I added Jane Scharf she ran in the last municipal election and finished highest out of the so-called fringe candidates. If there is not space for pictures of all the candidates then wait until the election is over to have their pictures included. Before I added Jane Scharf, it looked like this page endorsed Watson and O'Brien. I believe Wikipedians should be cognizant of the role Wikipedia itself can have in these elections as people turn to this page to get information about the candidates. Are there infoboxes available for all the mayoral candidates? Perhaps the Mayoral Election should even have its own separate page like the Toronto mayoral election, 2010 because of the number of candidates running. TurtleMelody (talk) 04:34, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(outdent) Re Andwats: Google Images is pretty twitchy when changing the advanced search settings; I've found that unless I make a search directly from the "Advanced Image Search" page [1] then I can't be sure that the copyright search is actually in effect. A "reuse and modification" search for Clive Doucet [2] comes up empty, and Charlie Taylor [3] shows results but I don't think that any are of this particular Charlie.
As for the whole concept of who to include, I think it only makes sense to include the "major" candidates (as determined by consensus); if we can't include all 18 (which we can't), I don't think that it makes sense to arbitrarily choose based on who has available photos. Perhaps we should have a discussion on which "major candidates" should be included in the infobox, and we could add additional pictures further down by the bios or in a gallery. -M.Nelson (talk) 05:17, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know it's rather arbitrary, but I think we should only add new candidates if they have photos. And we should only include Clive Doucet and Andy Haydon (in that order) if they ever get photos. If a poll comes out showing Haydon ahead of Doucet, then the order should be reversed. I would also support keeping them out until both have photos if that is preferred. -- Earl Andrew - talk 22:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I submit a photo of Clive Doucet. We have had several people try, several times, to post photos that are the property of the campaign and they have been pulled down. I'll check this edit box tomorrow to see an answer to the question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.9.56 (talk) 20:47, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for coming by. You can upload images to the Wikimedia Commons using this form. Cheers, -M.Nelson (talk) 21:59, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A poll showed Haydon ahead of Doucet. We need a photo of him for sure, now! -- Earl Andrew - talk 06:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I completely disagree with the mayor box. So you pick the top candidates according to polling done by outside organizations? The fair and reasonable thing to do would be to randomize the pictures of mayor in the mayor box. I'm sure this could be done automatically by someone on this board. Putting the top three candidates in the box is irresponsible and is exactly what the media is doing by holding debates with candidates who the media feels are the 'top candidates'. They thus ignore all fringe candidates. I would like to officially note my opposition to the mayor box. Again, Wikipedia is a source many people will use to determine their vote and by showing Doucet, Watson and O'Brien, Wikipedia is essentially endorsing these candidates.TurtleMelody (talk) 04:08, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Order of Candidates[edit]

Should we use alphabetical ordering of candidates in the ward? This would make editing easier and match the official list.Andwats (talk) (talk) 01:34, 19 September 2010 (UTC) 19:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've given a fair amount of time for objections. Before the end of the weekend I will likely edit the article so nominees are listed alphabetically.Andwats (talk) 01:36, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Final Nominee List[edit]

The final nominee list is up: http://www.ottawa.ca/city_hall/elections/nominations/index_en.html Please check it before editing out or in candidates. Andwats (talk) 19:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Hume[edit]

Can't find any references which say that Peter Hume is running for his councilor position. Its not on the list here: http://www.ottawa.ca/city_hall/elections/nominations/index_en.html Andwats (talk) 22:45, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a reference given, linking to this news article. It is possible that he hasn't filed his papers yet, keeping him off the city's list. -M.Nelson (talk) 06:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wicked. Thanks. Andwats (talk) 02:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gloucester-Southgate[edit]

The tables for Gloucester-Southgate and Beacon Hill have been lumped together. This is beyond my ability to fix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andwats (talk • contribs)

Done; someone forgot to close the box. -M.Nelson (talk) 14:39, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clive Doucet "Support for NDP"[edit]

I have changed the section that says CLive Doucet supports the NDP because the conclusion is a spurious one. The assumption of the previous author, given their source, is that by virtue of being at an event for a candidate who won a nomination in a federal riding, that he supported the party. This is a thin assumption. Clive doucet has also been at events hosted by or to celebrate Liberals and Conservatives, does that make him a supporter? Hardly. Without the person in question stating they support a party it is un-objective to assume otherwise. I have tried to integrate a couple of other articles into the mix and make it more objective by discussing the candidate as without party-lines for municipal interests. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.9.56 (talk) 19:16, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He is an NDP supporter though, I'll add another reference. -- Earl Andrew - talk 22:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm gonna argue this one again. How has he supported it? In principle? Well the principles of the events he have shown up at are principles, they are not parties. The fact that he participated at a reading of the CCF manifesto doesn't make him an NDP member (there is no mention of him being in the NDP or supporting it in this article). All this article proves is that he supports a broad system of principles. That he supported the activist community doesn't make him a partisan. To emphasize his support for one party over others (when there is overwhelming evidence that he has supported others as well) is partisan. Without a published statement or reference to him being an actual supporter of the NDP as a party this can not stand as a legitimate claim. Adhering to ideas that are held by a party does not make you ipso de facto a member of that party. In the same article there are a number of people who are members of the socialist and communist parties, are we to assume that they are NDP as well. Not all things are reducible to party allegiances. I am changing this again and will elevate the objection if it re-appears as single party support without a more substantial reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.9.56 (talk) 21:31, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He is an NDP supporter, I know this. Are you on his campaign? If so, your edits are a conflict of interest, and you shouldn't be discussing this topic. You're trying to keep the truth from appearing here. The comment was that he has supported the NDP in the past. Not that he was a member (though, I suspect he has been). This is true, and those sources back that up. I'm sure it was in the paper somewhere too, otherwise sites such as this one: http://members.shaw.ca/alexehng/ndp.html wouldn't claim him to be an NDP supporter. -- Earl Andrew - talk 06:18, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a member of the NDP because if you are these edits are in CONFLICT OF INTEREST. All your additional sources prove is that he has been endorsed by them once and that he has been at events. Your sentence should read "He has been supported by the NDP in the past" if anything. The truth is clear, and what you are saying is the case is nowhere actually borne out. No where that I can find has he said he is a partisaned supporter of the NDP, in the past or otherwise. Until you find something that says that, your wording is biased and partisan. It is NOT enough to say that you're sure it was in the paper somewhere. Find the evidence, present the truth and then worry about it being buried. By dragging out old websites and community event reports that say substantially nothing you're bending this to fit a partisan agenda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.9.56 (talk) 02:17, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, please be civil. There is no conflict of interest for me, but the truth. I may be an NDP supporter, but I am not even voting for Doucet (especially if this is how his campaign team treats me). But I digress, I think your recent edits will be a good compromise for now. -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies if my recent post appeared un-civil. My interests are only in assuring that all parties are fairly represented in a way that reflects historical record. I am not a member of any political party and have no agenda on this matter. In addition to my earlier comments about the validity of the sources, I'd like to also add that the verifiability of these sites is questionable. I maintain that two of these sites do little more than report on events that do not bear out the connection alleged, and the site that refers to NDP endorsed members lacks any form of either editorial oversight or an official site that could confirm much of what is on there. As the wikipedia policy on verifiability states, anyone can create a site or pay to publish a book and then claim to be an expert. Without some form of corroboration from additional sources, this site by Alex N.G. is only an individual site and lacks verification. Additionally, perhaps we should keep who we're voting for and politics off of the discussion page about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.9.56 (talk) 12:45, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't you the same Earl Andrew who said "this is a municipal election and has nothing to do with the NDP. .. There is absolutely no favouritism" (at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Timiskaming_District_municipal_elections,_2010)? So why are you bringing party politics into this page at all? I wonder if the P.C. Party and the Liberal Party and the Green Party would all agree that you demonstrate no bias toward the NDP. It's a good thing you declared yourself to have no favouritism because I might not have known it otherwise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.138.148.102 (talk) 23:54, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Ottawa municipal election, 2010. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:12, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Ottawa municipal election, 2010. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:19, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010_Ottawa_municipal_election&oldid=1196571908"