![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Evil reptilian kitten-eater from another planet page were merged into 2003 Ontario general election. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Thanks for mentioning the NDP's visual aids. For a party that wanted to be taken seriously they were probably a big mistake. The Swiss cheese episode was particularly condescending. Trontonian 16:39, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Why are parties that got 0% of the vote and 0 seats included in this chart?
I'm sorry I don't have time to fix this, but In my opinion this article doesn't have a very 'encyclopedic' feel to it. There seems to be some editorializing, especially in the 'mudslinging' section. If no one objects I would like to clean that up at some point.
Peregrine981 02:11, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)
What's the consensus on using the same pages for federal and provincial ridings? I've noticed that there are a few pages set up like this already, which strikes me as a recipe for confusion in the future (the federal and provincial parliamentary representations don't match up *now*, after all, and there's no guarantee that Ontario will continue to synchronize its ridings with the federal boundaries for the indefinite future).
My preference would be to have separate pages for the federal and provincial ridings, which is why I used the "(Ontario riding)" approach in my previous edit. What does everybody else think about this? CJCurrie 17:24, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I believe some used Carleton (Ontario riding) and Carleton (New Brunswick riding) to distinguish between two federal ridings with the same name but from different parts of the country (at different times in history). AndyL 20:11, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
--
Earl Andrew -
talk 20:42, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I am guessing that you are planning t srot the ridings by regions, awhich is commendable. But this is a lot of regions. Maybe a simpler approach would be nmore manageable: Toronto, GTA, southwest, central and east, north. Just a thought. Ground Zero 20:47, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think that Milton Chan's categories on the Election Prediction Project would be a convenient guide. http://www.electionprediction.org/2003_on/index.html CJCurrie 23:47, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I would like to know. Jack Cox 13:24, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I've changed "Central Toronto" to "Downtown Toronto", but it seems fine otherwise. CJCurrie 19:59, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hello everyone,
Recently, I've been adjusting some "election returns" entries to fit the following template:
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | Expenditures | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liberal | (x) Dwight Duncan | 19,692 | 54.92 | +9.83 | $76,321.27 | |
New Democratic Party | Madeline Crnec | 10,433 | 29.10 | -5.06 | $38,712.34 | |
Progressive Conservative | Matt Bufton | 4,162 | 11.61 | -7.17 | $18,088.00 | |
Green | Chris Holt | 1,315 | 3.67 | +2.79 | $5,031.71 | |
Independent (Independent Renewal) | Saroj Bains | 253 | 0.71 | +0.71 | $0.00 | |
Total valid votes | 35,855 | 100.00 | ||||
Rejected, unmarked and declined ballots | 302 | |||||
Turnout | 36,157 | 47.81 |
The quoted results are from 2003 election. I recognize that this format takes up more space, but it also permits considerably more information to be listed than does the current model.
What would people think of using this here? We could still list the constituencies by region, but the entries would be done an individual basis again.
I should clarify that this template is not my invention, btw. CJCurrie 02:09, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
Image:Ontndp.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:45, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
The image Image:Ontarioliberallogo.PNG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Note that anti-Wikipedians redirected evil reptilian kitten-eater from another planet here without any merging of the content and its references (this article currently has no refs). I suggest someone carry out the merge. 24.64.168.161 ( talk) 04:08, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
I have placed a POV tag on that section as unsourced pro-McGuinty personal analysis. -- Mr. Guye ( talk) 00:29, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
I've rewritten the section, using reputable sources. Kiteinthewind Leave a message! 01:55, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
I thought that this was a reference to TV series "V". Drsruli ( talk) 08:07, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Evil reptilian kitten-eater from another planet page were merged into 2003 Ontario general election. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Thanks for mentioning the NDP's visual aids. For a party that wanted to be taken seriously they were probably a big mistake. The Swiss cheese episode was particularly condescending. Trontonian 16:39, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Why are parties that got 0% of the vote and 0 seats included in this chart?
I'm sorry I don't have time to fix this, but In my opinion this article doesn't have a very 'encyclopedic' feel to it. There seems to be some editorializing, especially in the 'mudslinging' section. If no one objects I would like to clean that up at some point.
Peregrine981 02:11, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)
What's the consensus on using the same pages for federal and provincial ridings? I've noticed that there are a few pages set up like this already, which strikes me as a recipe for confusion in the future (the federal and provincial parliamentary representations don't match up *now*, after all, and there's no guarantee that Ontario will continue to synchronize its ridings with the federal boundaries for the indefinite future).
My preference would be to have separate pages for the federal and provincial ridings, which is why I used the "(Ontario riding)" approach in my previous edit. What does everybody else think about this? CJCurrie 17:24, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I believe some used Carleton (Ontario riding) and Carleton (New Brunswick riding) to distinguish between two federal ridings with the same name but from different parts of the country (at different times in history). AndyL 20:11, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
--
Earl Andrew -
talk 20:42, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I am guessing that you are planning t srot the ridings by regions, awhich is commendable. But this is a lot of regions. Maybe a simpler approach would be nmore manageable: Toronto, GTA, southwest, central and east, north. Just a thought. Ground Zero 20:47, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I think that Milton Chan's categories on the Election Prediction Project would be a convenient guide. http://www.electionprediction.org/2003_on/index.html CJCurrie 23:47, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I would like to know. Jack Cox 13:24, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I've changed "Central Toronto" to "Downtown Toronto", but it seems fine otherwise. CJCurrie 19:59, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hello everyone,
Recently, I've been adjusting some "election returns" entries to fit the following template:
Party | Candidate | Votes | % | ± | Expenditures | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Liberal | (x) Dwight Duncan | 19,692 | 54.92 | +9.83 | $76,321.27 | |
New Democratic Party | Madeline Crnec | 10,433 | 29.10 | -5.06 | $38,712.34 | |
Progressive Conservative | Matt Bufton | 4,162 | 11.61 | -7.17 | $18,088.00 | |
Green | Chris Holt | 1,315 | 3.67 | +2.79 | $5,031.71 | |
Independent (Independent Renewal) | Saroj Bains | 253 | 0.71 | +0.71 | $0.00 | |
Total valid votes | 35,855 | 100.00 | ||||
Rejected, unmarked and declined ballots | 302 | |||||
Turnout | 36,157 | 47.81 |
The quoted results are from 2003 election. I recognize that this format takes up more space, but it also permits considerably more information to be listed than does the current model.
What would people think of using this here? We could still list the constituencies by region, but the entries would be done an individual basis again.
I should clarify that this template is not my invention, btw. CJCurrie 02:09, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
Image:Ontndp.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:45, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
The image Image:Ontarioliberallogo.PNG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Note that anti-Wikipedians redirected evil reptilian kitten-eater from another planet here without any merging of the content and its references (this article currently has no refs). I suggest someone carry out the merge. 24.64.168.161 ( talk) 04:08, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
I have placed a POV tag on that section as unsourced pro-McGuinty personal analysis. -- Mr. Guye ( talk) 00:29, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
I've rewritten the section, using reputable sources. Kiteinthewind Leave a message! 01:55, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
I thought that this was a reference to TV series "V". Drsruli ( talk) 08:07, 13 August 2020 (UTC)