This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums
There is currently a rampant and sustained vandalism effort underway by the IP address undoing my revisions. They are adding silly, unsourced candidates like Daniel Craig or Olaf Scholz. I do not have the experience with Wikipedia editing to combat this moron who seems to be constantly refreshing to put his nonsense back up, "47.55.189.123" is the primary source of it but I suspect it is multiple accounts. Go troll on Twitter/X, this should be a source of informative facts not you goofing around. TrentBrownlee (talk) 20:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would say no, and that the standard should be improved to have a minimum threshold of two independent **and reliable** sources to be included on the list. - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 23:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's so early on I'd say it's best to have as many potential options listed. This news agency is a pretty reliable source generally, so until we start having a proper list we should only require 1 source. They also have different contact sources so they might know more about who's considering compared to other Newspapers. Politicsenthusiast06 (talk) 00:30, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My reading of both the CBC and Hill Times (not super reliable) references is that he wants to run, but is going to wait and see once the rules of the election get released. Thoughts on moving his name to a Decision pending or Announcement pending subheading? - Epluribusunumyall (talk) 23:38, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]