![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
"Published in 1992, just after Quebec used the "notwithstanding clause" of the Canadian Charter of Rights to override the Supreme Court of Canada's decision to strike down the province's law that outdoor signs must be predominantly in French." I've deleted reference to the clause as it was used over two years prior to the book's publication (and 21 months before the New Yorker piece). Victoriagirl 16:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it is correct that the book was published "in reaction to Quebec's use of the "notwithstanding clause" of the Canadian Charter of Rights to override the Supreme Court of Canada's decision to strike down the province's law that outdoor signs must be predominantly in French." In fact, I'm not certain that the book was even written in reaction to the use, but was motivated more by the situation in general. Granted, it has been some time since I've read the book. Would anyone be able to provide a source? Victoriagirl 23:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
It is not possible to discuss this book without discussing Esther Delisle's research on anti-semitism in French Canada, which Richler used extensively. On the controversy around Esther Delisle and Richler, the best thing to read is La controverse Delisle-Richler Le discours sur l'antisémitisme au Québec et l'orthodoxie néo-libérale au Canada by Gary Caldwell http://www.agora.qc.ca/liens/gcaldwell.html . Unfortunately, I am not aware of an English translation. -- Mathieugp 16:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
While outrageous, a comparison to Mein Kampf was indeed made by Daniel Latouche in the pages of Le Devoir. The inclusion of this important referenced fact is not unencyclopedic as has been claimed. As the edit summary does not address the reasons behind the deletion of the remainder of the paragraph - which have nothing to do with Latouche or Mein Kampf - I have restored the entire paragraph. Victoriagirl 05:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
See my comments at Talk:Mordecai Richler.-- Lance talk 12:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The problem here is that these additions were initially made to advance the proposition that Quebec bashing exists, which is a matter of debate, and were never subjected to any, or any reasonable, scrutiny. It is time to do so.-- Lance talk 12:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
To allow such an assertion to be in the article without comment from either the Quebec Jewish community or, if it exists, the Quebec gentile community, leaves the article factually misleading: Richler's book is not comparable to Hitler's, and obviously not neutral, as it lacks appropriate reaction. Until the article is balanced and factually accurate I'm attaching a dispute tag.-- Lance talk 21:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
"Published in 1992, just after Quebec used the "notwithstanding clause" of the Canadian Charter of Rights to override the Supreme Court of Canada's decision to strike down the province's law that outdoor signs must be predominantly in French." I've deleted reference to the clause as it was used over two years prior to the book's publication (and 21 months before the New Yorker piece). Victoriagirl 16:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it is correct that the book was published "in reaction to Quebec's use of the "notwithstanding clause" of the Canadian Charter of Rights to override the Supreme Court of Canada's decision to strike down the province's law that outdoor signs must be predominantly in French." In fact, I'm not certain that the book was even written in reaction to the use, but was motivated more by the situation in general. Granted, it has been some time since I've read the book. Would anyone be able to provide a source? Victoriagirl 23:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
It is not possible to discuss this book without discussing Esther Delisle's research on anti-semitism in French Canada, which Richler used extensively. On the controversy around Esther Delisle and Richler, the best thing to read is La controverse Delisle-Richler Le discours sur l'antisémitisme au Québec et l'orthodoxie néo-libérale au Canada by Gary Caldwell http://www.agora.qc.ca/liens/gcaldwell.html . Unfortunately, I am not aware of an English translation. -- Mathieugp 16:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
While outrageous, a comparison to Mein Kampf was indeed made by Daniel Latouche in the pages of Le Devoir. The inclusion of this important referenced fact is not unencyclopedic as has been claimed. As the edit summary does not address the reasons behind the deletion of the remainder of the paragraph - which have nothing to do with Latouche or Mein Kampf - I have restored the entire paragraph. Victoriagirl 05:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
See my comments at Talk:Mordecai Richler.-- Lance talk 12:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The problem here is that these additions were initially made to advance the proposition that Quebec bashing exists, which is a matter of debate, and were never subjected to any, or any reasonable, scrutiny. It is time to do so.-- Lance talk 12:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
To allow such an assertion to be in the article without comment from either the Quebec Jewish community or, if it exists, the Quebec gentile community, leaves the article factually misleading: Richler's book is not comparable to Hitler's, and obviously not neutral, as it lacks appropriate reaction. Until the article is balanced and factually accurate I'm attaching a dispute tag.-- Lance talk 21:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)