Jump to content

Talk:Barbara Kay controversy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Should This article be deleted?

[edit]

Consensus has never been achieved on this article. Is the topic really notable? Three years later, and on sober second thought, let's discuss the advisability of deleting this article entirely. See NT:TEMP:

"Similarly an existing topic might be deleted if a later review of evidence suggests that the topic did not actually achieve notability. This can sometimes happen when notability was not discussed earlier in its history or was discussed but there was no clear consensus; when there was a flurry of media reports but it has since become clear the topic was not notable; after a significant cleanup (e.g., to remove improper or promotional material) when it is easier to judge notability; and in certain editorial disputes where time allows a more dispassionate appraisal of enduring noteworthiness." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.27.68 (talk) 01:05, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "French-speaking Université de Montréal welcomed them [i.e., Jews]"

[edit]

The inaccuracies at Quebec bashing have been reproduced here. I am reproducing my comments at Talk:Quebec bashing herein and removing the aforementioned inaccuracies.--Lance talk 10:35, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

COUNTER EXAMPLE: Re: "French-speaking Université de Montréal welcomed them [i.e., Jews]"

“ONE OF THE MOST BIZARRE STRIKES IN CANADIAN HISTORY”

The French-speaking Université de Montréal (hereafter, U of M), had an official policy of restriction against Jews in this French-Catholic intitution.

There was not a total exclusion of Jewish people, however, but the small numbers of Jews that did attend U of M were subjected to harsh and intense harassment.

On March 13, 1929, for example, l’Association générale de l’Université de Montreal, (AGEUM), gave the rector of this university a petition demanding the expulsion of all Jews from the University. (See: Pierre Anctil, “Interlude of Hostility: Judeo-Christian Relations in Quebec in the Interwar Period, 1919-1939.” In: Antisemitism in Canada: History and Interpretation. Edited by Alan Davies, Wilfred Laurier University Press, 1992, p. 147, from an author who is an apologist for French Quebec antisemitism.).

In June 1934, there occurred what historian Irving Abella has called, “one of the most bizarre strikes in Canadian history.” (See: Irving Abella, A Coat of Many Colours: Two Centuries of Jewish Life in Canada. Toronto, Canada, Lester & Dennys ltd., 1990, p. 179.) Dr. Samuel Rabinovitch was both fluent in the French language and a recent graduate of the U of M Faculty of Medicine; with the highest grades in his graduating class. Dr. Rabinovitch was offered, in June 1934, an internship at Hôpital Notre-Dame, a French-Catholic hospital associated with U of M. When Dr. Rabinovitch, a Jew, began work at Hôpital Notre-Dame all of the other French-Catholic interns went on strike to protest having to work with a Jew. The French-Catholic interns picketed outside the hospital; refusing to even accept emergency cases. The anti-Jewish strike received favorable front page coverage by major French-language newspapers such as Le Devoir (Ibid.). When the French-Catholic interns began to lose some of their of their initial enthusiasm, and were considering whether or not to continue with the strike, “five other Catholic hospitals joined the strike.” (See: Lita-Rose Betcherman, The Swastika and the Maple Leaf: Fascist Movements in Canada in the Thirties, Fitzhenry & Whiteside, 1975, pp. 39-40.) Following this expanded walkout, the nursing staff of all of the hospitals involved also threatened to strike if a Jewish doctor would be allowed to work in a French hospital (Ibid., p.40). Within three days Dr. Rabinovitch was forced to resign (See: Pierre Anctil, op. cit., pp. 147-148.)--Lance talk 10:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Documents relating to what is identified as the "Interns Strike" can be found at:

http://faculty.marianopolis.edu/c.belanger/QuebecHistory/docs/jews/index.htm --Lance talk 10:38, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV

[edit]

I think it's quite obvious this is a completely biased representation of the issue, from calling the demonstration anti-Israel (which I keep having to revert to "in support of Lebanon", the latter doesn't imply the former). Using the word "detractor" instead of critics, and presenting essentially Kay's versions of the events to support her thesis, emphasizing on the "French canadian" nature of the critics (did the author of this article bother to look for other critics? Definitely a case of confirmation bias). The list goes on. A much shorter case against this article would be WP:NOT#OTHOUGHT it's an opinion on current events from 6 months ago. It might as well be nominated for deletion.--Boffob 22:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deal with facts not your opinions; that are, indeed, quite irrelevant.
  • I agree with the last comment. It is Boffob that is POV pushing around here.
If I may, I suggest that the opinions of 132.211.195.57 and 132.206.58.39 - who, in good faith, I assume to be two different users - might carry a bit more weight if they'd at least sign their posts. Victoriagirl 22:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't mind if they cared to elaborate on this. Merely stating one's opinion does not constitute an argument. They have yet to give a reason why my edits constitute POV pushing or how the article isn't POV.--Boffob 22:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV: Unsubstantiated claims, editorializing

[edit]

The section on Kay's detractors needs to be completely rewritten. It is incredibly biased and littered with subjective statements and unsubstantiated claims such as this:

As a past alderman of the Town of Mount-Royal, Tetley disingenuously evoked the existence of Jewish quotas in the English-speaking Mount-Royal, which, he falsely claimed was not the case for neighbouring French-speaking Outremont, where physical and verbal attacks against the Hassidic Jewish community is common.

Not only is this grammatically incorrect, it is also blatantly biased. Unless a quantifiable source is provided for this statement, it should be struck from the article. As a resident of Mile End who interacts daily with Hasidic Jews, I also find it ridiculous. --Kilgore MTL 09:35, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The entire article is a mess, at present. Changing it has been on my "to do" list for a while. CJCurrie 06:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Textual changes

[edit]

As the original author of substantially all of this article, except for the nonsense retained from the text taken from 'Quebec bashing,' I take great offence to any of my edits being labled as vandalism.

Justify further edits herein prior to making any further changes. Bofslob deleted my additional addition of an external link; and had the chutzpah to call my edits 'vandalism.' Absolute rubbish!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.211.195.38 (talk • contribs)

Please sign your posts and remain civil. First: are you admitting to being a sockpuppet of User:Lance6968? Second, your original text did not comply with the neutral point of view guidelines as it included a lot of personal opinion, weasel words and outright misrepresentation of the events. Because of this, numerous users have made substancial changes to make this article closer to being up to Wiki standards. The repeated reverts of such edits by a number of Montreal-based anonymous user IP's therefore constitute vandalism.--Boffob 00:18, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Barbara Kay controversy. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 04:30, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Barbara_Kay_controversy&oldid=1205721898"