Talk:Alasdair Roberts (academic)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Canada / Ontario / Governments / Law / Education (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Governments of Canada.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian law.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Education in Canada.
 

Any of this author's books deal with Canadian issues?[edit]

I know the author is a transplanted Canadian, and the titles of the books mentioned in this article are all about issues from an American perspective. Just wondering if he wrote anything that includes tidbits that would interest Canadians? Ottawahitech (talk) 19:50, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Making Policy Behind Closed Doors[edit]

The following section has been removed been removed by a wikipedia admin:

In 1998 the Globe & Mail published a paper by Alasdair Roberts titled: Making Policy Behind Closed Doors which criticized the Canadian Department of Human Resources Development (HRD) for the way it handled the Software Development Worker Pilot which allowed for the fast tracking of visa applications of foreign workers. The paper made the point that the Canadian government handed decision making to a private organization named SHRC.

XOttawahitech (talk) 14:50, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I removed it. The Globe & Mail doesn't publish "papers". An unreliable source containing a "copy" of the "paper" was provided, including the page number; even if it existed, it is probably an ad or a "letter to the editor", rather than something under the paper's editorial control. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:55, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
I've just checked ProQuest to see the piece in question, and indeed it's a very short op-ed piece about an issue that doesn't have nearly enough substantive significance to actually warrant mention here at all — calling it a "paper" is a blatant misrepresentation of both the piece and its (nearly nonexistent) importance to a biographical article about Roberts. Academic journals publish "papers"; The Globe and Mail is not an academic journal. Bearcat (talk) 05:59, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
@Bearcat: It may be a short paper, but it is a paper none the less, complete with bibliography. XOttawahitech (talk) 14:49, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Nothing that has ever been published in The Globe and Mail in its entire history is any sort of "paper", short or otherwise. That's not what newspapers print. Bearcat (talk) 15:07, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Have to agree with Bearcat here, newspapers don't print papers. It is a op-ed piece, nothing more. -DJSasso (talk) 15:21, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
I have to echo this, op-ed publications are not reliable sources..period.Mrfrobinson (talk) 18:58, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Playing devil's advocate, it is possible that the op-ed is a notable example of Roberts' opinions. But that would require a separate source that it is notable. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:33, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
I'd have to agree, an op-ed piece can be a notable representation of an article topic's work in some cases — but it's not automatically notable enough to warrant mention just because it exists. For example, an op-ed piece could be notable if he made a controversial statement in it, which in turn led to other sources covering an ongoing debate about that statement; or if he advanced an innovative new position on a political issue which got taken up by one or more political parties in the next election. Or it can be notable if it's where a person first comes out as LGBT, or talks about the impact of their religion on their career, or other notable statements of fact about themselves. But a newspaper op-ed is not notable if you can't provide a credible reason for why I should care that he once wrote a newspaper op-ed — there needs to be a substantive reason, beyond just "it exists", why the op-ed merits our attention. Bearcat (talk) 19:50, 11 March 2014 (UTC)