This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Alberta New Democratic Party article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 730 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | 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. |
To michaelm: As I said before, it's not necessary to have *both* the soc-dem and dem-soc links in the introducation, given that the terms are more-or-less interchangeable in the Canadian context. (Note also: there *is* a dem-soc wikilink further down the page.) CJCurrie 17:01, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
As it is, the page is almost unreadable. It took me a while to figure out what this group's philosophy was. I think a lot of the issues of the page could be addressed with some decisive edits. Rajvansh Upadhyay ( talk) 20:30, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
This article has had a "multiple issues" notice, referencing both "tone" and "more citations needed" problems, since 2016. I question whether these issues still apply to the article in its current state. Comments? — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:17, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
BCNDP is labelled as center-left but ANDP is labelled as center-left to left, but in reality BCNDP is much further to the right of Alberta NDP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymousioss ( talk • contribs) 18:22, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Alberta New Democratic Party article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 730 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | 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. |
To michaelm: As I said before, it's not necessary to have *both* the soc-dem and dem-soc links in the introducation, given that the terms are more-or-less interchangeable in the Canadian context. (Note also: there *is* a dem-soc wikilink further down the page.) CJCurrie 17:01, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
As it is, the page is almost unreadable. It took me a while to figure out what this group's philosophy was. I think a lot of the issues of the page could be addressed with some decisive edits. Rajvansh Upadhyay ( talk) 20:30, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
This article has had a "multiple issues" notice, referencing both "tone" and "more citations needed" problems, since 2016. I question whether these issues still apply to the article in its current state. Comments? — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:17, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
BCNDP is labelled as center-left but ANDP is labelled as center-left to left, but in reality BCNDP is much further to the right of Alberta NDP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymousioss ( talk • contribs) 18:22, 24 June 2023 (UTC)