Talk:Domestic policy of the Stephen Harper government

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Domestic policy of the Stephen Harper government article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Canada: Governments / Law High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Governments of Canada.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian law.

Taxation (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.TaxationWikipedia:WikiProject TaxationTemplate:WikiProject TaxationTaxation articles

Clean up grammar

Could someone please help me to clean up the grammar on this page. It is quite terrible at times. Thanks.

Jonelliott 16:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Economic policy

I will be transferring in a few days/weeks some of the economic policy info (all the way down to the fiscal imbalance) including the three budgets (including 2008) to a new article, although there is already article on both Harper budgets, maybe some of the budget info should be added into those two which will give more info then was it has right now. If any editor would have to add more economic material (i.e the Canadian dollar, oil, etc.) Any objection for that?--JForget 01:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I support creating an "economic policy" article. Kevlar67 (talk) 17:55, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Split of the economic section is done - although someone who is more expert on economic issues should probably add the government's view on other things and other policies. The other sections should stay as it is for now - they are not long and detailed (and notable?) enough for a separate article Now with the article at 41k, I've removed all split and quite frankly the merge tag should go - I think it's the Stephen Harper as Premier Minister article that should be merged.--JForget 16:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POV tag

I added this (again) because this page remains only a rehash of Conservative Party press releases and supporting commentary by allied media/pundits; there is nothing here about the Omnibus bills, native policy, democratic (non-)reform, or the provinces' or public's views about and so much more; this is advertising. I'd proposed deletion back during the 2011 campaign and openly POV/avowed conservative-ideology votes were counted against me, and I wound up blocked; it was for that reason I boycotted Wikipedia for a long time (only two edits in 2012, in fact) until I noticed that anti-native propagandists were POVizing and vandalizing the Idle No More and Theresa Spence articles, all on the same talking-points as Tory politicians; IMO all this series of articles need retitling to "Domestic policy of the Government of Canada". "Harper government" might seem ordinary to non-Canadians but it's well-known and scandalous in Canada that this government ordered bureaucrats to start using "Harper government" instead of "Government of Canada" on letterhead and in press releases. This is a POV ad-page and should not be up under this title, or with its current content, come the next election campaign (really already underway though the date has not yet been picked). As someone noted in discussing one of the others in the series, the article is flawed from the start as speaking from the Tory angle, with criticism only marginally included; the framework is Tory, pure and simple; the person who created these articles made the jejune argument that he thought it was "interesting" material about "an important prime minister" even though they were started just after Harper came to power in 2006; I hear that 'interesting' claim on things like the POV attack re Adrian Dix (see Talk:Adrian Dix) and the onslaught from mining industry p.r. hacks on Talk:Mount Polley mine disaster and elsewhere; disingenuous "interest".

Not that Wikipedians are known for their political acumen or fairness or their willingness to take on hard realpolitik about wikipedia being used as a p.r. platform for anyone with enough money to pay or recruit "volunteers" to churn out stuff like this; no doubt there will be equivocations posted defended this article on "guideline" and "sources" grounds; but it's POV as hell and meant as advertising, and there are other sources than those plumping up this government than those already here; back in 2011 I was finding Harper-mentions on all kinds of town and building/infrastructure articles of the "Harper gave away some money", "Harper slept here", "Harper cut a ribbon here" and so on.....then I found these. These remain offensive as POV spew and have decidedly controversial titles; yet the AfD was decided by a then-teen in Scotland based on biased attacks on me by conservatives in Australia and Virginia; none of whom know the Canadian political milieu or realize the monopoly-ownership nature of Canadian "reliable sources" (mainstream media). I see the Environmental policy of the Harper government article has a lot more "balance" by way of criticism but it, too, started out as advertising; the Foreign policy of the Harper government was a straightforward revisionist account of Canadian political history filtered through Tory-speak, and made little mention of what had come before. Where it stands now I don't want to look, the subject is nauseating and an embarrassment to the 60% of Canadians who do not like where he has taken the country, and are mortified by our new international image as a hawkish petro state with a bad record for exploitive and murderous mining practices in other countries.

Same as domestically, it's not the same country we knew, we don't recognize it anymore, just like he bragged to Republicans in the US before their help in getting elected to power in 2006. Not that I'm going to watchlist this again, but this was missing a POV tag; and really needs t he advert tag, which I see was removed frmo the environmental policy one with the claim "POV is enough, advert not necessary", as if biased content and spammmishness were the same thing; they're not, but again there you have a lack of political acumen and lack of acquaintance with the political milieu acting in the dark; or disingenuously; though that article has lots of anti-Harper POV now...it was still written and conceived from a Tory propaganda perspective. and should not be online during an election campaign as it's just advertising and very blatantly so and taht is against the law in Canada unless the cash value of the work is declared as election expenses and approved by the Chief Electoral Officer. Arguments that Canadian law does not apply are not valid; American border stations make a point of not violating that law, because of the size of their market in Canada; same should apply to Wikiepdia, where discretion should be more common than blind equivocation....but isn't.Skookum1 (talk) 07:09, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Domestic policy of the Harper government. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 23:19, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Domestic policy of the Stephen Harper government. 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: 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) 18:25, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Domestic policy of the Stephen Harper government. 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: 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) 06:19, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 37 external links on Domestic policy of the Stephen Harper government. 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: 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) 06:41, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was no consensus . Chidgk1 (talk) 13:26, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I propose merging Economic policy of the Stephen Harper government and Environmental policy of the Stephen Harper government into this article. I'd argue that it's better to be organized and have only two seperate articles rather than four. Both economic policy and environmental policy are pretty short too so it won't really do much harm if we add them to domestic policy. Ak-eater06 (talk) 06:22, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Merge – Wrote my reasoning above. Ak-eater06 (talk) 06:22, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as both the economic policy and the environmental policy of Stephen Harper are vast topics that have been the subject of substantive commentary. Both articles are beyond the start class, an could be expanded to cover additional policies and analysis. Merging the three article without a substantial trimming would create one article that is WP:TOOBIG (69kB total). Mottezen (talk) 21:28, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Coming from help desk. The two articles proposed for a merge are sufficiently long to be standalones. Normally when a section gets too long a fork makes sense for readability. This proposal reverses that. It's also easier to edit different sections and you're less likely to have an edit conflict. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 02:42, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: Topics do not seem significant enough to have standalone articles. Hcoder3104 (talk) 20:24, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The Harper government's economic and environmental policies received considerable attention and the standalone pages reflect that. The pages in question are sufficiently long enough to justify their split (and could probably be expanded even more); folding them back into the domestic policy page would clearly violate the WP:SIZERULE without substantial cuts, but there's no obvious 'fat' to me. Just because it's not the common way these pages are organized doesn't mean it's untenable. Note that we have a page on John Edward Brownlee as Attorney-General of Alberta— his tenure as a cabinet minister!— and it's a featured article. — Kawnhr (talk) 16:53, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kawnhr. RoyalObserver (talk) 14:35, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

User:Mottezen that rule was from 2007, when devices weren't able to handle such large articles. Plus I don't see articles such as Howard Government being split into multiple articles. Ak-eater06 (talk) 21:34, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The longstanding WP:SIZERULE has never been repealed. This is because many editors see value in having concise articles. My computer still has troubles loading, and especially editing, articles past a certain size. If we are to WP:IGNORE such a guideline, there needs to be better arguments than WP:IDONTLIKEIT and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Mottezen (talk) 21:48, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merger proposal - follow up

User:Kawnhr and User:Mottezen you guys voted in the previous consensus so I'm taking your thoughts into account. Let's settle on a compromise. We can at least merge Economic policy of the Stephen Harper government with Domestic policy of the Stephen Harper government...that would be under 60kB. Ak-eater06 (talk) 03:02, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yea I agree let's do that. Also, I read the two articles and found a bunch of outdated or unimportant crap. I removed them, rewrote some texts, and compiled them all in this draft: Draft:Domestic policy of the Stephen Harper government. I suggest that we use this text for the merged article. A new lead text might also be in order before the merge. Mottezen (talk) 12:44, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mottezen I think we should keep the Domestic policy article as it is...some may argue it's excessively detailed, however it's important to have lots of detail in order to understand the events. What's the difference between your draft and the current domestic policy article?

It seems like your draft of the domestic article is a bit small for someone who was PM for a decade, so let's stick with the orignal. We shouldn't be mass deleting content just for the sake of making it smaller. Ak-eater06 (talk) 15:11, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is a bit small indeed. However, the current article is almost exclusively based on the first two years of his premiership. It lists expenditures to each departments in the 2006 budget, and summarizes early initiatives of his administration that may or may not have come to pass in the described form. I encourage you to compare my draft with the first version of the merged article (see in the page history), and judge for yourself whether the text I removed is worth keeping. Mottezen (talk) 16:31, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mottezen later this day or tomorrow I will go over this article and delete excessive detail. Rather than creating a new article, we can just delete what seems excessive. Ak-eater06 (talk) 18:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not proposing to create a new article + I already deleted the excessive details. Just copy-paste my draft in the domestic policy article et voilà. Mottezen (talk) 04:37, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]