Talk:Saskatchewan CCF/NDP leadership elections

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: Saskatchewan / Politics 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 Saskatchewan.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada.

Untitled

Seriously? Somebody (who created their account less than a week ago) felt it was worth going in to change Lingenfelter's 55% and Meili's 45% to 55.07% and 44.93% respectively yet only did this for the final result, not the first ballot and not for any other results on the page? Wow...I've heard of sore losers but never sore winners! ;-)

Headtale (talk) 03:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is worth having the correct information posted.Sugarstars (talk) 20:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Every major media outlet is reporting the result as 55%-45% including NewsTalk980 and CBC. 55% - 45% *is* the correct information.

Headtale (talk) 02:45, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to NDP Convention Results the correct information is as listed. If information is to be listed it should be accurate. Other pages follow the same procedure of listing the results as they officially are. I will also edit the source of the information as sourcing from a blog is not recommended.Reliable Sources [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sugarstars (talk • contribs) 15:09, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fair enough. I guess in the end, it doesn't matter that much either way. Sorry for being so sensitive - I've had a few edit wars with Lingenfelter supporters (who'd often just created accounts that day!) over things like this throughout the leadership campaign and thought this was more of the same.

Headtale (talk) 20:24, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:British Columbia Liberal Party leadership contest, 2011 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. 117Avenue (talk) 03:05, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Saskatchewan New Democratic Party/Co-operative Commonwealth Federation leadership elections. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081022111459/http://canadianpress.google.com:80/article/ALeqM5iCEIaT74Rutqt2mn4ddSaHqDHvSg to http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5iCEIaT74Rutqt2mn4ddSaHqDHvSg

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:06, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]