Talk:Members of the 39th Canadian Parliament and same-sex marriage

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

For?

I find this use of "For" and "Against" vague. I take the terms to mean "For same-sex marriage" whereas on first reading, I would have assumed that "For" meant "would support a bill to overturn same-sex marriage".

NPOV

I agree with the For person above, I find it confusing and in violation of NPOV. Ardenn 01:07, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, what does a 'for' vote mean? Nice tables though. Paul, in Saudi 16:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the NPOV tag to a "Factual Accuracy" tag because there does not seem to be an allegation of bias in this article, but rather a problem with the accuracy. Martin-C 00:02, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Either way, so long as it gets resolved. Ardenn

NPOV

The colours in the table are confusing to the reader. I have no idea what they mean. Are they in favour of SSM or in favour of Harper's bill? Ardenn 19:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is rainbow Canada flag better?

On April 11, 2006, NTK replaced the Canadian flag in the "Gay rights in Canada" template with a rainbow version of the Canadian flag.

Since this is only one of the articles affected, please give your comments at this central location: Template talk:GR-C Wuzzy 03:40, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lists and colours

This article is WAY too confusing and all the colours are totally going against Wikipedia's Manual of Style. Please someone do something with it cause even I am lost. --Deenoe 23:52, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now colours have to be switched, because the first table says For or Against reopening the debate.. but then the table of individual members, it's for or against Same Sex Marriage ITSELF. --Deenoe 03:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tonks source?

What is the news source that says that Tonks's personal beliefs are against gay marriage?--Sonjaaa (talk) 16:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"The results came back tied." "Results have 52% in favour of marriage and 49% wanting to reopen the debate. I will be voting to reopen but with the purpose of getting the government out of the business of marriage altogehter....." Is "altogether" correct?66.74.176.59 (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Members of the 39th Canadian Parliament and same-sex marriage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:13, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]