Orphaned non-free media (File:Manitoba_CHT_logo.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Manitoba_CHT_logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 22:46, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
I should let you know that I've (provisionally, at least) re-added Doer's non-portfolio ministerial titles to the infobox. I understand your point about the box appearing cluttered, but I also think that these positions are significant enough to include, and I've included them on several other pages in the past. I'm open to suggestions as to how to take both of our concerns into account. CJCurrie (talk) 01:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Young Liberals of Canada, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. 117Avenue (talk) 03:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
The Right Stuff: January 2012
On January 21, The Conservatism Portal was promoted to Featured Portal (FP) due largely to the contributions of Lionelt. This is the first Featured content produced by WikiProject Conservatism. The road to Featured class was rocky. An earlier nomination for FP failed, and in October the portal was "Kept" after being nominated for deletion.
Member Eisfbnore significantly contributed to the successful Good Article nomination of Norwegian journalist and newspaper editor Nils Vogt in December. Eisfbnore also created the article. In January another Project article was promoted to Featured Article. Luís Alves de Lima e Silva, Duke of Caxias, a president of Brazil, attained Featured class with significant effort by Lecen. The Article Incubator saw its first graduation in November. A collaboration spearheaded by Mzk1 and Trackerseal successfully developed Star Parker to pass the notability guideline.
Another discussion addressing the project scope began in December. Nine alternatives were presented in the contentious, sometimes heated discussion. Support was divided between keeping the exitsing scope, or adopting a scope with more specificity. Some opponents of the specific scope were concerned that it was too limiting and would adversely affect project size. About twenty editors participated in the discussion.
Project membership continues to grow. There are currently 73 members. Member Goldblooded (pictured) volunteers for the UK Conservative Party and JohnChrysostom is a Christian Democrat. North8000 is interested in libertarianism. We won't tell WikiProject Libertarianism he's slumming. Let's stop by their talkpages and share some Wikilove.
Clickto keep up to date on all the happenings at WikiProject Conservatism.
Articles about the GOP presidential candidate and staunch traditional marriage supporter have seen an explosion of discussion. On January 8 an RFC was opened (here) to determine if Dan Savage's website link should be included in Campaign for "santorum" neologism. The next day the Rick Santorum article itself was the subject of an RFC (here) to determine if including the Savage neologism was a violation of the BLP policy. Soon after a third was opened (here) at Santorum controversy regarding homosexuality. This RFC proposes merging the neologism article into the controversy article.
The Abortion case closed in November after 15 weeks of contentious arbitration. The remedies include semi-protection of all abortion articles (numbering 1,500), sanctions for some editors including members of this Project, and a provision for a discussion to determine the names of what are colloquially known as the pro-life and pro-choice articles. The Committee endorsed the "1 revert rule" for abortion articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is invited to contribute, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Talk:New Democratic Party, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Me-123567-Me (talk) 00:40, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Citation Barnstar|
|Good work on the Broadbent Institute! Pburka (talk) 00:48, 20 September 2012 (UTC)|
You want me to cite the english language?
Where is the citation for the claim that "Brigette DePape is a Canadian activist"
Is she certified by the Canadian Board of Activists? I inserted additional information about her interruption of the 41st Parliament of Canada, you want me to cite what exactly? Why is this woman on Wikipedia? What are her accomplishments...? Showing up on the newscycle for two days?
Some bubble tea for you!
|For your exceptional googling skills (better than mine, apparently ) that discovered the meaning of "DU" as post-nominal letters in Canada. LukasMatt (talk) 04:58, 1 May 2014 (UTC)|
Hello! I actually wasn't the one who added the Greens to the infobox (I just added the "GRN" since no picture of Alain Landry is on Wikipedia) but from what I remember the reasoning behind it was that the Greens are doing well enough in the polls (as they are likely represented by most of the "Other" voters) that they've met the general consensus for being added to the infobox (as I recall, I think it's something like if a party is continually polling above 5%...). Anyway, hope that helps. Tholden28 (talk) 04:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)