Talk:Laurier—Sainte-Marie

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 articles

Canada: Quebec / Montreal / Electoral districts Low‑importance

	Canada portal 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Quebec.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Montreal (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Electoral districts in Canada.

New Numbers

This article needs new numbers up to date with the 2008 federal elections.Ithaka84 (talk) 04:10, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Violation of the principle of neutrality

I just undo a change, perhaps well meaning (unless it is machiavellian?), made by an anonymous user. He has created a box results for the 2015 elections in which the NDP Party is ranked first in the top of the list, followed by the Bloc Québécois and the Liberal Party, etc. This classification, conducted three months BEFORE the October 2015 elections, violates the principle of Neutral Point of View.

Indeed, this preference in listing could subconsciously influence the electorate in suggesting that future results will be achieved in that order.

Optimally, this box should be created AFTER the elections and should classify Parties according to their respective performances. Or possibly, if we want to create it BEFORE the elections, Parties should be listed in alphabetical order.

--Mario300 (talk) 05:04, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. In preparation for the next election, we've been adding the candidates ahead of time to save work. It is the policy to rank the candidates based on the order of finish in the last election. Please take a look at how things are done on similar pages before making huge changes to a particular article. Thanks! -- Earl Andrew - talk 14:27, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Answer

Well this policy is unacceptable, contrary to the principle of neutrality and should be abandoned.

PS I am a member of the French Wikipedia since 2012 but had not participated in the English Wikipedia until now.

--Mario300 (talk) 15:15, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Laurier—Sainte-Marie. 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/20150815061116/http://www.elections.ca/content2.aspx?section=can&dir=cand%2Fcanlim&document=index&lang=e to http://www.elections.ca/content2.aspx?section=can&dir=cand%2Fcanlim&document=index&lang=e

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 11:27, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]