Talk:Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada

Will the Commission 'investigate' crimes

Does anyone know whether the commission will be in fact investigating on any crimes at the Indian residental schools? I realize that the Commission will be looking at reports of abuse, but I want clarification as to whether the information gathered can or will open the door to criminal charges. A previous author used the word "investigate crimes", which suggests that criminal charges may be laid. However, if criminal charges are never going to be laid due to information gathered during truth commissions, this is something that needs to be stated openly and not put into a Wikipedia page..DivaNtrainin (talk) 22:50, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Due to past ineffectiveness of judicial systems to bring about justice in cases of systematic abuses by governments throughout history, the purpose of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission is to, in lieu of justice, to at least unveil truth and seek apologies. It is considered that without amnesty, the truth would never even come out. Psychologically and philosophically, it is also considered that in the healing process "truth" is just as useful as "justice". This aspect is however questioned by scientists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.245.231 (talk) 07:13, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Removal of info about Taber Gregory

There are the following problems with the paragraph about Taber Gregory:

- It is not correctly sourced. The source information needs to be more than saying there is something on APTN and the National Archive of Canada. We need to be able to look up the reference.

- Its not clear if Taber Gregory's experience meets Wikipedia's guidelines. Even if we wanted to include this, the portion of the citation that is relevant to this article is how this case affects the scope of the commission, and not about Gregory's citizenship status.

Since I am going to be making the same edits to the Sixties Scoop page, I am suggesting that if people disagrees with these edits, that they provide feedback on the Talk:Sixties Scoop page in order to avoid duplicate arguements.DivaNtrainin (talk) 00:15, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

User:WV NYC stated "The edits I added regarding changes to the mandate of the trc-canada, that is just common knowledge amongst everyone who is familiar with the trc, it's such common knowledge that its not even something that has been separately reported on. on my private talk page. I am moving the discussion here so that others can comment.

First, if the mandate of the TRC-Canada has changed, then it should be listed in the mandate posted on the website or the final report. Here is a link to the posted mandate. Please explain where the TRC- Canada has indicated their mandate has shifted, including a specific reference. The comment that "everyone knows" is not a valid reference. Also, the information on Taber Gregory is not a notable case, in relation to the TRC-Canada. This Wikipedia page is about the TRC-Canada. This page is not going to be a listing of every person who spoke at TRC Commission. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Rather this page should be about what the history of TRC, how it was created, notable events related to the overall TRC, and it overall impact after it was completed.The issue of notability and proper references has been discussed with you on Talk:Sixties Scoop and Talk:Pearl S. Buck. I suggest you re-read the comments and re-review Wikipedia's policies before posting again. This continued activity may result in you being blocked from posting for a period of time.DivaNtrainin (talk) 13:27, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia Administrator is suggesting that the information provided - that Taber Gregory is the 1st and currently the only victim of Canada Scoops placed in USA to be given a victim file number/recognized by TRC-Canada that this information is not relevant to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission - Canada Wikipedia Page. It is, of course, relevant because as was explained in original post, it/recognition of Taber Gregory - a victim of Canada Scoops who was not kept within Canada but who was instead placed in USA - by this TRC-Canada IS an example of the result of the original mandate of this truth and reconciliation commission. That the post originally ALSO included mention that based on that TRC-Canada recognition Taber Gregory also received his US Citizenship only further shows the weight of importance that TRC-Canada recognition of victims endows victims with. You think that the weight of TRC-Canada decisions including recognition of who is and who isn't a victim, isn't important to a description of Truth and Reconciliation Commission (Canada)? It's a primary purpose of a truth and reconciliation commission; isn't that something that administrators editing this page should be aware of? 4.35.92.19 (talk) 11:59, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I have moved the comments from WV NYC / 4.35.92.19 to this section, because this is just a continuation of the previous conversation

First off, you still haven't provided any reliable sources for anything you have posted on this page or on Sixties Scoop Wikipedia page. The issue of what a reliable source is has been discussed with you on this page and on other talk pages. Until you even start to provide a reliable source, even on a talk page, your edits shouldn't stand.

Second, you still haven't explained how recognition of Taber Gregory meets notability requirements. Beyond the fact that there are no good references, it sounds like giving Taber (assumely you) this file number and recognition was a one-off thing, and not indicative of the overall goal of the TRC. In fact, it may have been a mistake and against the mandate, but people who were working the commission were compassionate people who don't want to turn people away. Wikipedia pages are not intended to document every single activity that occurs regarding an event. It's suppose to summarize the main points, trends and significant activities. It is very common to exclude minor activities in Wikipedia articles that occur during a large complex event, like the TRC. What would make this minor event significant would be is if the US Citizenship and Immigration Services came out with an announcement regarding a policy change that was related to TRC, but that reference isn't something you provided. Whether your US citizenship was affected by your testimony in TRC is not relevant to this Wikipedia article.

Finally, the issue of whether to include so called notable-cases of TRC testimonies need to be a separate discussion. According to the TRC website, if someone requests that their testimony be destroyed, they will remove it from the archives, and not be accessible. References need to be from sources that there is some expectation that they are going to be maintained over time. Think of it this way, let's say someone were to look at this page in five years. If some of the references are not accessible, either on the web or not, then the quality of the Wikipedia page diminishes. The fact is the main TRC website, the final report, and a variety of other TRC documents will be maintained for a long time. However, individual testimonies may not be maintained or accessible over time. If we want to discuss whether to have any notable-cases (if they even exist) on this page, then that is a separate discussion. However, it seems you don't want to discuss other cases, just your own.DivaNtrainin (talk) 00:01, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

I have merged the comments from WV NYC / 4.35.92.19 to this section, because this is just a continuation of the conversation. No changes have been made to the content

Until victims of Canada Scoops placed in USA and west Europe are mentioned on this page, the page is incomplete.

In 2012, The commission recognized 1 victim of Canada Scoops who was not placed in residential school system within Canada but who had instead been placed in USA adoption and foster care system. It's since been reported that a minimum of 1,800-2,000 (and that is a very conservative minimum) victims of Canada Scoops were also placed in USA and west Europe and not kept within Canada). References include Court case, Victim File in National Archives of Canada and documentary news programme and then newspaper articles that feed off of those primary sources). 4.35.92.19 (talk) 10:29, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Your login account "WV NYC" has been banned from editing for a week due to your behavior on Wikipedia. The use of this IPO address is a violation of sock puppetry. This topic as been discussed to death. The fact that you indicate that only one person of the Canada Scoops spoke at this commission only the fact that this was a one-off thing and not reflective of a larger pattern. In fact, I have suggested that it may have been a mistake made by a well-meaning person. This is not notable.DivaNtrainin (talk) 15:34, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I have merged the comments from WV NYC / 4.35.92.19 / 208.105.47.108 to this section, because this is just a continuation of the conversation. No changes have been made to the content

I had 5 people read the self anointed 'Diva In Trainings' comments made today, 2 are professionals within the publishing industry and none understood what she is referring to. The Diva In Training is especially confusing when she says something about only 1 person at the TRC/on the commission commented, we couldn't understand what she was referring to; It's like in her comments she criticizes information that we never even provided in the first place.

She then also disputes the validity of information that we have provided.

As far as 'sock puppetry', no edits were made from my ISP only comments on the talk page. If I were going to be devious I could just use another ISP. Instead I'm hiring a firm to do this for us, a few thousand a month is well worth avoiding these conversations with 'divas in training'. 208.105.47.108 (talk) 00:37, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

You haven't responded to any of the points that I have listed above. Instead of copying and pasting the points I have already raised or have been raised on Talk:Sixties Scoop or other Wikipedia talk pages, I will just refer to the comments already made. You are currently banned from editing and if you just post on Talk pages, then I won't report you. However, if you choose to edit pages while banned, then I will report you for Wikipedia:Sock puppetryDivaNtrainin (talk) 03:00, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Article name, should it be Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada?

In its formal documents, and throughout its website, the TRC is identified as “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada”, rather than “Indian Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission” as this article is currently titled. The document, cited in this article as, establishing the “Mandate for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission” (PDF, part of the Indian Residential School settlement) refers to it only as “Truth and Reconciliation Commission”.

So, I propose moving this article from “Indian Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation Commission” to “Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada”; making clear in the introductory paragraph that the TRC was established by a mandate from the Indian Residential School settlement. —GrantNeufeld (talk) 18:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree with this.DivaNtrainin (talk) 22:27, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

This Page Is Just Really Poor - Wikipedia Needs Specialists Editing It

This is a best example of how come Wikipedia needs real topic specialists editing this pages because this page should not be this bad, this ill-informed. Not least because it is a really, very important issue. Surely there are some administrators who feel the same way and can outweight the other less professional there at Wikipedia? 64.134.240.40 (talk) 11:05, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Rather than saying it’s “really poor”, might you instead consider giving specifics of what you consider to be inaccurate or absent from the article? Just calling it bad gives us no basis to understand what specific concerns you might have with the content of the article. —GrantNeufeld (talk) 15:05, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Just get editors/administrators who are actually specialists on at least the topic of truth and reconciliation commissions if not the TRC-Canada itself. I'm not going to break the weaknesses and out and out voids in Wikipedia entries related to these topics again only to have to debate them again. I'm guessing there must be some way by which Wikipedia actually calls for specialists. 64.134.240.40 (talk) 11:42, 12 July 2015 (UTC)