Talk:Canada convoy protest/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Links to Alt-Right Groups

I've included the associations which are known to different groups and their sources. Some IP users are vandalizing or removing it. Matt Austin (talk) 05:15, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Please add to the section as you discover more.

• Yellow Vests Canada - Tamara Lich - Convoy spokeswoman and chief fundraiser - Involved with Yellow Vests Canada during protests in 2019. The Yellow Vests movement was widely seen as a platform for hate-based alt-right groups. The Facebook page for the convoy has also shared content from Wexit co-founder and Yellow Vest organizer Patrick King who has previously hosted counter-protests to anti-racism rallies, spread covid-19 misinformation and Great Replacement conspiracy.
• Maverick Party - Western Separatist group formerly known as Wexit Canada. Tamara Lich is Secretary for the party.
• Action 4 Canada - A member of the Canada Unity group inside the Freedom Convoy - Islamophobic and anti-LGBTQ conspiracy group with webpages about the dangers of political Islam, health consequences of 5G technology and underreporting of adverse vaccine reactions. Founded by Tanya Gaw who actively supported the Yellow Vests protests of 2019.

References

Extremist Communications

Added the following below to the main page to document extremist communications surrounding the protest. Statements are cited. Matt Austin (talk) 05:47, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

In the lead-up to the planned arrival in Ottawa, it was reported on January 25 that far-right and white-supremacist groups within the loosely-associated Freedom Convoy were hoping for violence on Parliament Hill and insurrection akin to the 2021 United States Capitol attack. This has caused organizer Tamara Lich to address convoy members and denounce violence.

Government Responses

As a result of identified extremist groups taking part in the protest, Ottawa City Councillor Katherine McKenney issued a statement denouncing the extremist elements as xenophobic-promoting militant racist, sexist and homophobic.

References

Operation Bear Hug

This is a Canada Unity Operation which intends to remove all vaccine mandates and fines and reinstate employees who were terminated due to vaccination status as outlined in the MOU. Does anyone have any more info on this? Matt Austin (talk) 16:22, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Radical group co-opting of a USofA fundraiser obstacle course for a noble cause for children by the Anti-Vax Neo-NAZi group fake Canada-unity

https://www.assistanceleague.org/fresno/philanthropic-programs/operation-bear-hug/

https://canada-unity.com/event/operation-bearhug/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.159.46.12 (talk) 07:46, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Truck count estimate

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Per [1], "There are estimates the Canadian convoy could comprise 50,000 trucks from the West, East, and even from the United States.". Do we have better source on the total count of trucks? I wonder if they added an extra 0 by mistake, because 5000 is plausible, but 50000 seems unrealistic. SystemEff (talk) 01:33, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

The 50,000 estimate was directly from one of the organizers and has never been confirmed. OPP in Kenora stated 200-300 moved through their location on Tuesday night. I cited that in the main article. Matt Austin (talk) 09:44, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Like I said in a few edit summaries, the claims from the organizers are so implausible as to be inappropriate to include even if we gave proper attribution. Their estimate of 50,000 trucks is more than the largest truck convoy ever recorded by a factor of 100. One of the organizers claimed that the convoy is over 70km long and that he measured it from an airplane, which is an obvious fabrication since he claimed that before any of the convoys had actually gathered, and any of the convoys that have been independently observed have been much smaller. I also doubt that you could even see an object the size of a truck 35km out the side of an aircraft at cruise altitude. The only plausible independent estimate I've seen is the Ottawa Police's plan to handle 2,000 protesters over the weekend, but even that is not an estimate of the number of trucks involved. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:11, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

The source I provided last night from Thunder Bay News Watch cited the OPP with an estimate of "400 vehicles in the convoy that crossed into Ontario from Manitoba Tuesday night". That seems to be the best estimate currently. Note that it says vehicles and not trucks - from my understanding it's not just trucks in the convoy. This does not include whatever trucks are coming from the maritimes. The other source in the article says police in Ottawa are prepared for 2,000 people to protest on Saturday. But that's just a best guess. [2] CaffeinAddict (talk) 14:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

I removed that estimate. It's a good estimate of the number of trucks coming from the west, but more are coming from the east. I'm looking for a source on that now; CBC PEI reported this morning that 70 vehicles crossed the bridge, but many of them turned around at the visitor centre in New Brunswick and headed right back. No numbers in that article on how many were trucks nor how many carried on to Moncton. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:44, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

More on this: CBC Nova Scotia reports that "10 to 15" trucks left Enfield this morning around 7am bound for the New Brunswick border. CBC New Brunswick reports that five (5) trucks left Aulac for Ottawa this morning, but didn't give a time. I can't tell if the 10-15 joined with the 5, or if 5 was the total that continued on from both groups, and also can't tell what happened to the PEI group. CBC London is also reporting that two groups from southwestern Ontario are getting together and plan to leave London at noon (in a few minutes, 17:00 UTC) but no estimate of numbers. There was also talk of a Newfoundland group, no idea where they are. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:55, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Ivanvector It looks like the truck number was updated again in the infobox - the Arnprior article has a unconfirmed estimate of 600 trucks going to Arnprior tonight before heading to Ottawa in the morning. Should this be taken down given it's not confirmed? Matt Austin (talk) 02:37, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Probably, but it's a developing situation and new editors are probably going to keep adding other estimates if we keep removing them. What's there now is better sourced, but still not complete. There should be better counts of the actual participation after today and then we can update. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:40, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Ivanvector Matt R Austin that was me on the most recent edit. It kept reappearing but it was wildly overstated. I'm indifferent to it being taken down or left up at the moment. Like Ivanvector said, a truer count will most likely be reported by the media by the end of the day. CaffeinAddict (talk) 13:47, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

For what it is worth, "Figures obtained by CTV News show 104,000 trucks crossed the border into Canada in the last week. That's down about four per cent from the same period in 2019, before the pandemic and before the vaccine mandate." https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-decries-fringe-views-of-some-in-trucker-convoy-as-police-prepare-for-its-arrival-in-ottawa-1.5755674 SystemEff (talk) 00:24, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Snopes says the 50000 figure is false. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/freedom-convoy-guinness/ SystemEff (talk) 03:11, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Snopes cites this to be a realistic estimate "David Akin, the chief global correspondent with Global News, cited a report from the Ontario Provincial Police that 113 trucks (as well as 276 personal vehicles) were recorded coming into Thunder Bay from Winnipeg. " SystemEff (talk) 03:13, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Kingston Police reported on Twitter at 9:45AM EST on 28Jan2022 the following #'s:

• full tractor trailers
• 104 tractors w no trailers
• 424 passenger vehicles
• 6 RVs

For the record, an editor is reverting an important figure regarding estimates. See Talk:Freedom_Convoy_2022#Selective_removal_of_timeline_updates and [3]. Specifically,

* "Ottawa Police expect approximately 2,000 vehicles and 5,000 pedestrians in Ottawa on January 29th" SystemEff (talk) 16:54, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Ottawa police now estimate up to 18,000 participants and 2,000-3,000 heavy trucks.

References

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 February 2022

’Freedom Convoy’ information on number of trucks being 8000 to 15000, is not factual. Multiple reliable publications have the number at at least 50,000.Mrs. Tate22 (talk) 11:33, 3 February 2022 (UTC) Mrs. Tate22 (talk) 11:33, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:42, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 February 2022

The section that notes that only 2,000 protesters were there is incorrect. I was there as an eye witness and it was at least 5 times that amount.

This is the before text: On January 24, a convoy drove through Regina, Saskatchewan and was greeted by supporters.[42] According to police in Regina, about 1,200 vehicles reached the city.[43] On January 25, another convoy passed through Kenora, Ontario, where Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) in contact with the convoy stated that 200–300 vehicles would be passing through Kenora.[44] The convoys consist of three main routes across Canada, which will converge for the Ottawa protest on the weekend.[45] The Ottawa Police Service estimated up to 2,000 demonstrators in the city on the weekend.[46]

The below article estimates upwards of 10,000 people. https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/thousands-protest-covid-mandates-restrictions-ottawa-82553499

This is what I suggest: On January 24, a convoy drove through Regina, Saskatchewan and was greeted by supporters.[42] According to police in Regina, about 1,200 vehicles reached the city.[43] On January 25, another convoy passed through Kenora, Ontario, where Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) in contact with the convoy stated that 200–300 vehicles would be passing through Kenora.[44] The convoys consist of three main routes across Canada, which will converge for the Ottawa protest on the weekend.[45] The Ottawa Police Service estimated up to 2,000 demonstrators in the city on the weekend [46], however eye witness evidence estimates it could be upwards of 10,000 demonstrators.

You could then add my citation at the end. 2607:F2C0:953E:9800:219F:7E38:9CA:5872 (talk) 19:07, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Not done: Your source doesn't support your proposed text. Source says "The Parliamentary Protective Service expects as many as 10,000 protesters as part of a weekend-long rally." Also note that that section in our article is only describing an early estimate of the number of demonstrators expected. The infobox however, already gives 3-8,000 demonstrators as an estimated attendance. Cannolis (talk) 19:21, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

HEADS UP: This Movement May Become International

I have recently come across this advertisement of a "European Freedom Convoy" that was posted today: https://thelibertyclub.ca/event/european-freedom-convoy-lets-get-organized-join-us-on-telegram/2022-01-27/

It also includes an American Convoy. Says that more details ought to be released about these other convoys at some later time. I ought to leave out speculation and await to see how seriously these other convoys are taken. W.C Cross (talk) 07:58, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Update: I had just spoken with one of the organizers of the American Convoy and she had just told me that they are planning out the routes and are taking this seriously. It seems that this international movement may very well be legitimate. Time will tell if these other convoys manifest themselves. W.C Cross (talk) 08:23, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

It already started happening in a few places,

- Italy[4].

- Brazil[5]

SystemEff (talk) 14:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Already is, there is a great news piece and sympathy protest in Australia. Also many smaller countries have joined in now. Not just Trump and the Americans cheering them on. Kav2001c (talk) 15:24, 31 January 2022 (UTC)kav2001c

Judging from the pacing of events that the above two users have pointed out, I'd reckon we are in the early stages of a national movement becoming international. My opinion on the matter is so: Let's wait till the weekend and begin compiling an argument for why we'd ought to consider this 'Freedom Convoy 2022' movement to now be an international movement. W.C Cross (talk) 16:05, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Verifiable news sources now talk about its international influence. Some of these events have yet to materialize and are in planning stages upcoming in the next week or so.

CTV[6]

Toronto Star[7] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.98.95.245 (talk) 20:18, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Mandates not introduced by the "Government of Canada"

The "Government of Canada" is Parliament. The mandates on vaccination for truckers, aviation, and marine vessels was not a bill passed in parliament, which would be voted on by all members and become a Government of Canada legislation. Instead, these mandates are made by Order-in-Council, which is a decree by Liberal Party of Canada ministers and do not involve the government/parliament (which includes all elected parties). The article should state that the measures were introduced by Orders-in-Council made by members of Liberal Party of Canada under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's direction. Cdnshipsnote (talk) 06:31, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Source: https://orders-in-council.canada.ca/attachment.php?attach=41406&lang=en Cdnshipsnote (talk) 06:37, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Good point.--Tallard (talk) 18:20, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Trudeau in isolation

On January 27, Justin Trudeau said he is isolating after exposure to COVID-19 and tested negative for the virus..

This was reverted.[8] I believe it is relevant, and should be mentioned because Trudeau will not be available during the weekend protest. SystemEff (talk) 15:28, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

@SystemEff: we have a strict policy forbidding publishing harmful material about living persons unless it is directly relevant and very well sourced, which you violated by piping your link to "Justine Trudeau". A few years ago there was a browser script which automatically changed "Trump" to "Drumpf" which also substituted in the Wikipedia editor, and led to a number of innocent blocks of people who weren't intending to publish the error. If you are using something like that, I strongly suggest you turn it off. If this was an inadvertent mistake then I apologize, however if you do it again you will be blocked from editing to enforce the policy.

I am wary of including this, the source does not say he will not meet with the convoy because of his self-isolation, and otherwise it's not relevant to the protest. I believe there have been other sources that have said he was already not planning to meet the protesters for more relevant reasons, which we should include, but based on current sourcing I think it's WP:SYNTH for us to imply that he's not going because he's self-isolating. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:55, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

References

I don't even know what you are talking about regarding "Justine Trudeau" (with an "e"). Which change in particular are you referring to? SystemEff (talk) 19:26, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Oh this [9]. That must be an auto-complete mistake. The way you phrased "you violated by" suggests intention on my part. Please don't assume malice without evidence. SystemEff (talk) 19:28, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Also, "if you do it again you will be blocked from editing to enforce the policy." - this is the most stupidest threat I have received. What are you talking about? If I make another auto-completion error, you will block me? What in the fuck? SystemEff (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Ivanvector is a wikipedia administrator. CaffeinAddict (talk) 04:32, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

In regards to your second paragraph, why not state the fact without suggesting "because of"? Something along the lines of, "Trudeau, who is isolating due to COVID-19 exposure, will not be available at the capital for the next 4 days". It is quite relevant that the leader of the country will be missing. SystemEff (talk) 19:35, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Trudeau's isolation has nothing to do with Covid as his isolation is in direct violation of Ottawa Public Health rules. His disappearance is now being claimed for his safety after he was outed as using Covid as a fake excuse. Kav2001c (talk) 15:27, 31 January 2022 (UTC)kav2001c

Trudeau just tested positive for COVID-19 and it's not illegal to voluntarily self-isolate. This still remains irrelevant. CaffeinAddict (talk) 16:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Official Site Link?

Is there one official site for this? If so, it would be good to add at the end of an article. Most Wikipedia articles link to an official page. https://freedomfighternation.org/freedom-convoy comes up searching, but I can't find a clear confirmation of this. This site has some pretty extreme stuff on other pages so I would not think it fair to link it if not official. >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemus • feci) 20:28, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Most articles about protests and protest movements do not in fact have a central authority so there are not links to anything of the like. For example Black Lives Matter protests in New York City or 2021 United States Capitol attack. CaffeinAddict (talk) 20:52, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

There have been several websites set up claiming to be the "official" website, none of them authoritative, and in that case it's probably best not to include any of them. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:42, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Canada Unity is the de facto organizer of the protest. They have a website where they have organized people and a forum which has some very peculiar topics and discussions. Link: Canada Unity Matt Austin (talk) 02:21, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

OK, CaffeinAddict, I am not so familiar with protest articles: this has not been the focus of my editing. I was speaking more generally as most other Wikipedia pages link to the organization or official website of the person in question, even for highly controversial stuff like hate groups, and Wikipedia is usually helpful for determining which is the official site. >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemus • feci) 02:33, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeah - well I don't think there is any "official" site because it's not a very clearly put together movement for obvious reasons. CaffeinAddict (talk) 04:45, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Promoters

Maybe include Pat King, who was one of the largest supporters of this and include (Personal attack removed) ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ C3porice (talk) 17:29, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

This is the sort of WP:BLP-violating attack that will be met with blocks if they continue. Negative information about living persons must be cited inline where it appears on any page on this website, including talk pages. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:48, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

CBC news: Reliable in context of antigovernment protests

One statement early in the article, “the mandates would impact 26,000 of the 160,000 drivers in both countries who regularly cross the border”, is sourced to Only by CBC news. There might be others with only this source, I haven’t checked. As far as I know, the CBC is state media.

Considering that removing PM Trudeau has become a main goal for many protesters, I’m not sure state owned media would be considered a problematic conflict of interest. If so, we should probably look for other sources, or remove, information sourced only from this source.

This isn’t concern-trolling or Agenda pushing, I am American and legitimately don’t know how well CBC can separate its conflict of interest from reporting on anti-government events.TheAmericanWarlord (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:15, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

CBC is a public broadcaster, not a state newspaper. It receives government funding, but the government does not have any sort of editorial control over the broadcaster. It is independent, it is reliable in general, and it is reliable for its coverage of Canadian politics. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 22:23, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Ivanvector thank you for the clarification. TheAmericanWarlord (talk) 22:46, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I concur with Ivanvector.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:17, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Exactly - CBC is a publicly funded broadcaster who is equally critical of all in the political spectrum. They are not state-run media, Canada is not a communist dictatorship. CaffeinAddict (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

This post is inaccurate

"Freedom Convoy 2022 (French: Convoi de la Liberté) is an ongoing protest conducted by truck drivers in Canada against COVID-19 vaccine requirements to re-enter the country by land introduced by the Government of Canada on January 15, 2022"

This post should read a "conducted by a small percentage of truck drivers and then joined by other non-truck drivers. It was initally organized by Tamara Lich who is not a truck driver."

Sources: https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/embarrassment-for-the-industry-not-all-truckers-support-the-freedom-convoy-1.5757952; https://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=2370972 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D08:A67D:1B00:407C:954D:1248:D110 (talk) 17:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

The source you cite above, [10] does not mention Tamara Lich, so we cannot use that source to support the claim that the convoy was "organized by Tamara Lich". Vexations (talk) 18:04, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Infobox needs redesign/change

The current Infobox is designed in a very strange way that makes it look less like a protest and more like a battle. Firstly, why is there a "casualties" section? Most other protests do not have this, instead, they have "Deaths, arrests and damages" (George Floyd Protests) or "Deaths, injuries and arrests" (Hong Kong 2019-2020 Protests). Secondly, why are the "Lead Figures" and "Number" sections split into two parts? This isn't a battle and thus, there isn't an official opposition to these protests. The police haven't done much of anything either, so you can't really argue to put those in there. As a result, both of these sections have their entire right sides blank. Not only does this give the wrong impression of there being a significant conflict with sides, but it also just looks bizarre to have vast empty sections in the box. Finally, in the Infobox, it says that these protests were caused by the "COVID-19 pandemic in Canada." This is a vast oversimplification. To be more specific, it is about the Canadian and Provincial Government's RESPONSE to the COVID-19 Pandemic. The truckers tend to oppose vaccine mandates. The Infobox needs to be fixed. Nathanzachary56 (talk) 21:25, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Infobox Civil Conflict is a pre-formatted infobox for all sorts of ... well, civil conflicts. A protest is a civil conflict. CaffeinAddict (talk) 06:36, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Goals and demands -- lacking coverage

The goals and demands is lacking. The convoy has expanded by fellow travellers with more expansive demands. The expansion of the goals covered on many news outlets [11][12][13][14], concerning removing all masking and vaccination and passport requirements should be covered, as well as the fact that most of these are not federal government issues, also covered by many news outlets, as they are provincial in nature.[15][16]

And the spin-off other convoys outside of Ottawa [17][18][19]

-- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 01:03, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 February 2022 (2)

Change: "is an ongoing protest in Canada against COVID-19 vaccine requirements to re-enter the country by land" To: "is an ongoing protest in Canada to end all COVID-19 mandates."

This is a more up-to-date statement to reflect the objectives of the Freedom Convoy 2022 as stated by the organizer, Tamara Lich. Janidanielle (talk) 21:39, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:41, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

"Overthrow the federal government"

Please add a "citation needed" to the first paragraph where it claims the protest wants to "overthrow the federal government". I would do it myself but the page is protected. —Internoob (Talk · Cont · Wikt) 01:57, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

 Already done Looks like someone provided a source Cannolis (talk) 09:37, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 February 2022

The count of the size of the protest should be updated from as the protest size was expanded to between 5,000 - 18,000 participants and 2,000 - 3,000 heavy trucks as an estimate provided by Ottawa Police Chief Soly.

Change: 551–1,155 vehicles[1][2][3] including:

121–230 trucks 430–925 personal vehicles 3,000-8,000 people[4][5]

To: 2,430–3,925 vehicles[1][2][3] including:

2,000–3,000 trucks 430–925 personal vehicles 5,000-18,000 peopleTrucker Convoy 50.98.95.245 (talk) 16:22, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please participate in the discussion above about the estimates of truck and participant counts. It is a somewhat complicated situation. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:49, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Neutral point of view - biased towards the government position

I don't think there is a neutral point of view in this article. It covers extensevely the presumed links to far-right, islamophobia and minor controversies such as the Terry Fox statue "desecration". First, I don't think a loose link to groups associated to far-right or islamophobia is enough to associate the main frame of the protest with racism, etc. In fact, the truckers themselves called out and told to leave a man who was carrying a confederate flag. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/man-with-confederate-flag-told-to-leave-by-ottawa-truckers-we-called-him-out Then, it mentions in the header how Terry Fox statue was "desecrated" but it does not mention how it was cleaned afterwards by the same protesters. https://globalnews.ca/video/8582676/trucker-convoy-protesters-clean-up-terry-fox-statue-in-ottawa-following-outcry/

In the misinformation section, the sole fact that they did not apply for a guinness world record does not affect the claim that they might or might not be the longest convoy ever, these are independent facts. I know comparison to other articles is not a valid argument, but the BLM protests article, which had associated with it riots and destruction of statues, does not mention any of it in the header. I also think there is a cherry picking of sources to focus on certain aspects. The examples I put are just some of the many subtleties that I think bias heavily the article. I wholeheartedly agree with the wikipedian that said this reads as an endorsment to the government position. While you may or may not agree with this view, the weigh and focus on certain aspects of the protests should be reconsidered. Mentioning what I said in the first paragraph, with the sources, in the same place as the criticism, would be a good start. Attentively, --CasuarioAlmeriense (talk) 11:14, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

You haven't proposed any specific change you want to make to this article. 139.138.6.30 (talk) 12:10, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Maybe my suggestion wasn't clear enough; I propose:

1. Either mention in the header "Terry Fox statue was cleaned afterwards by the protesters themselves" after the sentence "protesters were seen desecrating the statue of national hero Terry Fox"; or do not mention the Terry Fox incident at all in the header.

2. Either mention in the header "Protestors rejected the presence of members with extremist simbols" after the sentence "organizers and groups associated with the protest have histories of white nationalism, racism, Islamophobia, Q-Anon and other conspiracy theories"; or do not mention the presence of members linked to hate at all in the header.--CasuarioAlmeriense (talk) 13:05, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

You need to provide citations to reliable sources. Your two citations are circular in that they link to this very article you're discussing. Valgrus Thunderaxe (talk) 13:34, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

You may be clicking the wrong links. Global News and The Washington Examiner are very much reliable sources. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 16:03, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, I think you did not click on the proper links, as I linked what I believe to be reliable sources.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/man-with-confederate-flag-told-to-leave-by-ottawa-truckers-we-called-him-out

https://globalnews.ca/video/8582676/trucker-convoy-protesters-clean-up-terry-fox-statue-in-ottawa-following-outcry/ --CasuarioAlmeriense (talk) 19:53, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit extended-protected}} template. As this is clearly not an uncontroversial edit, the "edit-request" template is not appropriate in this case. Please attempt to develop a consensus for the change on this page first. PianoDan (talk) 21:03, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

References

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 February 2022

The following paragraph, part of the introduction to this page, includes statements in quotation marks but no sources:

‘The demonstration developed to include the "repeal of all public health measures", expressed a number of "antigovernment grievances", particularly against Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and called for "the overthrow of the federal government."’

This was deleted in one of the edits: "According to a January 28, 2022 article in The Guardian, the stated goals of the convoy quickly "spiralled from frustrations over vaccine mandates into calls for the repeal of all public health measures—and even the overthrow of the federal government."

References

I request that if this paragraph be retained, sources be cited, particularly for the last line, ‘and called for "the overthrow of the federal government.”’, the accuracy of which is questionable at best. If inadequate sources can be located, I suggest this paragraph be altered or removed. 2601:1C2:200:60A0:980D:7B9C:9BF6:797A (talk) 03:23, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

In the body of the article under opposition, "On CTV's January 30 Question Period he said that some voices in the crowd of protestors are "really disturbing and unacceptable" and "must be condemned"; this included those carrying signs with swastikas and Confederate flags, and those who "called for the overthrow of the government." Of which is backed by two sources, CTV and BBC. Neutral on the rest. -- • Apollo468•  03:42, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:57, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

condemned by trucking industry groups

Neither of the groups sourced to this statement "condemn" the protest. CTA's statement was "The Canadian Trucking Alliance (CTA) does not support and strongly disapproves of any protests on public roadways, highways, and bridges."([20]), while the APTA ranged from "we encourage our drivers not to participate" ([21]) to "doesn't support" ([22]). - Floydian ^τ _¢ 04:48, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

In my opinion, that sentence expresses strong and inaccurate wording, and can be understood as a biased opinion. It should be reworded or removed. How I understand it, the industry groups do not support the protests, but certainly do not condemn them. The CTA's statement of disapproving the protests on "public roadways, highways, and bridges" is often (in many sources) taken out of context as a disapproval, although it is followed by an approval of a lawful protest on Parliament Hill. - Emilija Knezevic (talk) 06:02, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I think the term condemned is fine. CaffeinAddict (talk) 14:35, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I think "is not approved by" would be more fitting than "is condemned by" - Floydian ^τ _¢ 23:51, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I agree with user Floydian - Emilija Knezevic (talk) 01:44, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

The CTA has issued two statements about the protests, Canadian Trucking Alliance Statement to Those Engaged in Road/Border Protests (Jan 22) and Statement by Canadian Trucking Alliance President on Ottawa Protests (Jan 29). In both, they spoke against protests that interfere with public roads, referred to the vast majority of Canadian truckers that are already vaccinated, and encouraged compliance with the mandate instead of protesting. They suggested that members who wished to protest should hold a lawful rally at Parliament Hill and then leave the city, which was not what happened; they stopped well short of approving such a protest, had there been one (what actually happened was far from it). They issued a third specifically denouncing the defacement of monuments but in that one they didn't talk about the rally as a whole. I read these as active disapproval of the event, not just that they don't support it.

Various reliable sources say:

• Washington Post: "The Canadian Trucking Alliance said it doesn’t support protests 'on public roadways, highways and bridges.'"
• BBC: "While the [CTA] does not support the convoy and has said the industry must adapt to the mandate, it is said the measure could remove as many as 16,000 drivers from those routes."
• CBC: "The convoy does not have the support of the Canadian Trucking Alliance, the Saskatchewan Trucking Association or other groups."
• New York Times: "The Canadian Trucking Alliance said in a statement last Saturday that it “strongly disapproves” of the protests on public roadways, highways and bridges."
• Al Jazeera: "The Canadian Trucking Alliance, a major industry group, has said it “strongly disapproved” of the gathering in Ottawa."
• National Post: "[The CTA] has strongly denounced any protests on public roadways, highways and bridges and has urged all truckers to get inoculated."

Personally I think that "does not approve" or similar wording is not strong enough to neutrally reflect the CTA's position as described by reliable sources. It would be absolutely ridiculous to say that they support any part of the protest in any way. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Organizers of the convoy Tamra, is indigenous and Ben is Jewish. So how are these claims of white nationalism and neo-nazi ties founded?

Organizers of the convoy Tamra, is indigenous and Ben is Jewish. So how are these claims of white nationalism and neo-nazi ties founded? 142.127.190.230 (talk) 13:27, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Please provide a source and a suggestion why this point made should be notable. CaffeinAddict (talk) 15:18, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Both confederate and nazi flags were flown at the rally. Flalf^Talk 18:35, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes I'm aware of that - if it's to be put into the article, it should be done so with a reliable source. CaffeinAddict (talk) 19:06, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

It's already in the article, and has sources. Was explaining to the IP how the links are founded. Flalf^Talk 19:10, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

In any type of protest group this large, you're always going to get some bad apples which will get disproportionate reporting. Not to make any type of excuses for this behavior, but the very few instances of swastikas I saw weren't meant to infer the flag-bearers' allegiance to Nazism, but to draw an analogy to the people they oppose as being or acting Nazi-like. I think that's a subtlety that's sometimes lost in the reporting. Valgrus Thunderaxe (talk) 19:14, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

^ this seems to be a hard point to get across to people in this day and age of sensationalism. Someone showing up to an event and shaking your hand doesn't mean you have ties to them. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 19:23, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Neither are for us to WP:SYNTH - the article should merely state the obvious: some people showed up with Swastikas CaffeinAddict (talk) 19:26, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

This is a pretty classic red herring. Métis and Jewish persons can hold abhorrent views, even views which would seem to be detrimental to their own self-interest, just like white people. There is nothing to be gained from discussing this. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 22:26, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I find all of these swastikas and confederate flags to be appalling. 139.138.6.30 (talk) 22:55, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

"all of these swastikas and confederate flag" You mean all three of them? Out of how many other flags being flown with respect? You are all narrative driving pigs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.44.108.215 (talk) 00:32, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

From CBC which is considered a reliable source - 'worst display of Nazi propaganda in this country,' anti-hate advocate says. "It's not just a few malcontents... This convoy seeded the ground for the worst display of Nazi propaganda ever seen in this country" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50kHdAumXvA 139.138.6.30 (talk) 09:48, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia supports the media position. That really is the beginning and end of it. WP:NOTTRUTH is an official Wikipedia policy, and we mean it. Adoring nanny (talk) 00:28, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

That statement could be misread, so to clarity, Wikipedia is dependent on information and views expressed in media coverage. We look for what is verifiable, not what might be considered someone's "truth." -- Zanimum (talk) 01:44, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Should add new section titled: Freedom Convoy in Australia

Content: 'Convoy to Canberra'- Inspired by the 'Freedom Convoy' staged in Canada, hundreds of drivers travelled to Canberra to protest the vaccine mandates. Dailymail report on Convoy to Canberra. A.--192.114.3.241 (talk) 13:33, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

We can't use the Daily Mail as a source, but if there are other protests that gain media attention for being related to the Canadian one then we probably should include something about it here. A separate section on "related convoys" or something like that, probably near the end. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:52, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Lede

I've attempted to shorten the lede in my two most recent edits. Any other ideas? CaffeinAddict (talk) 15:38, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

I also made some edits to the lede after CaffeinAddict had a run at it. Opinions welcome. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:24, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

The lede seems to have ballooned since I was last here. CaffeinAddict (talk) 06:36, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm just letting it happen at this point. There's one editor adding a lot of content in spurts that badly needs copyediting, but each time I try they launch into a new edit spree, and a lot of it is going directly in the lede. I'll come back to it later when things settle. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 11:56, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

My issue currently, besides the length is there is inconsistent numbers between the lede and the infobox about the amount of protesters. The police chief said one thing, the media claimed another. CaffeinAddict (talk) 16:04, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

I think we're going to have to have a section in the article that discusses the numbers of protesters, since there are so many sources quoting different figures, or just counting different things altogether. I still think it'll be a while before there's a reliable estimate of involved protesters in the city, versus people/vehicles that are just trapped there. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:06, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

A similar section is in the article Inauguration of Donald Trump#Crowd size. CaffeinAddict (talk) 16:10, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

I took another crack at shortening the lede for brevity sake, removing redundancies. CaffeinAddict (talk) 16:41, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 February 2022

Edit request: Below the first paragraph of "Links to far right and separatist groups" add "Some protesters on the ground expressed frustration at the apparent extremist views of organizers, with one saying "Whatever their agendas are, that’s not what we’re here for" and "They need to go home. We don’t need them. We don’t need their numbers." cited to this global news article - https://globalnews.ca/news/8543281/covid-trucker-convoy-organizers-hate/

I believe the apparent divide between the organizers and the protesters on the ground is relevant due to being covered in a RS Global News about organizer extremism. TheAmericanWarlord (talk) 22:41, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Erin O'Toole controversy section

O'Toole's ouster is of note. But I'm not sure that a paragraph deserves its own section.

Should it be mentioned chronologically based on the date of his meeting the truckers, or based on the date of his removal? -- Zanimum (talk) 23:21, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Okay, different question. I decided to move the info down to Statements and reactions > Canadian Politicians > Opposition, where he was already discussed. But the provided reference doesn't seem to support the statement. Can someone else give the article a go, and see if they feel it does support the statement made? -- Zanimum (talk) 23:27, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

I believe most information about Erin O'Toole and his leadership and loss of leadership should be on his own page don't we think? It's kind of a consequence of this debacle but this page should focus on the protest itself? CaffeinAddict (talk) 01:12, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Agreed, O'Toole resigning is of little direct consequence to the protest in any shape or form. We should mention his support as the then leader, followed by a summary or quote from Bergen to indicate the current stance. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 01:44, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Truck and protester count estimate - February 3

Now that we have more information - we have wildly differing estimates on how many protesters and trucks were involved in the main protest/convoy. Let's lay out our sources here and come up with a consensus on how to best display these in the article. CaffeinAddict (talk) 01:20, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

5,000 to 18,000 is an estimate from CBC, according to Ottawa Police... any advice on how to display such a huge range? [23] CaffeinAddict (talk) 05:44, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Seems fine to just list the range estimate as "5,000 to 18,000." Seems doubtful that there will ever be a clear consensus on size. DirkDouse (talk) 09:43, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't think that's a reliable estimate, it's hyperbole from a frustrated public servant who has everyone against him right now, trying to justify their now highly-criticized [lack of] response. In the long run I think it'll be best to rename the "misinformation" section to something like "estimates of convoy size", and then just lay out all the different estimates there. I think DirkDouse is right that there will never be a reliable count at this point. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

The media seems to be readily quoting the police chief however their earlier estimates were around 8,000 protesters tops on the Saturday, dwindling to 3,000 Sunday. I agree we should rearrange the misinformation section, include all estimates and it can include the refuted claims from organizers. CaffeinAddict (talk) 18:22, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

I would support that rework. There's enough discussion/debate on the actual size of the convoy that a full section discussing this seems warranted. DirkDouse (talk) 18:28, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

I've made the initial change, hopefully it is expanded. As for the infobox... ? CaffeinAddict (talk) 19:23, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Fork: COVID-19 vaccination mandates in Canada

Some content from this article may have been temporarily used to create the new article COVID-19 vaccination mandates in Canada. There is a construction template on this new article but editors are strongly encouraged to contribute. It might result in temporary "edit conflicts" which are often minor and helpful copyedits, so please save a duplicate of your edits. Thank you for your contributions.Oceanflynn (talk) 17:31, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Lead figures for the government side

The article can add Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson and Police Chief Peter Sloly below Justin Trudeau on the lead figures for the government side of the civil conflict. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.9.201.26 (talk) 04:40, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

No injuries reported

In the infobox it states 19 injured. But when checking the source: https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/trucker-convoy-traffic-disruption-continue-downtown-as-mayor-urges-protesters-to-leave the paramedics actually said they assisted 19 people downtown over the weekend, but as part of their everyday activity (intoxications, etc) and they never claim these injuries are associated to the protests. Most other sources report no injuries at all:

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/trucker-convoy-more-trucks-expected-on-saturday-traffic-impacts-expected-to-worsen https://www.france24.com/en/americas/20220130-hundreds-of-truckers-block-ottawa-in-freedom-convoy-to-protest-vaccine-mandates https://www.northernnews.ca/news/national/freedom-convoy-2022-police-report-no-injuries-no-incidents-of-violence-after-first-day-of-protest

Therefore I think this should be changed, as most references indicate there are not 19 injured people because of the protests. --CasuarioAlmeriense (talk) 19:44, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the paramedics were specifically talking about the protests. I'm sure there were more than 19 EMS calls over the weekend for a city of just under 1 million... CaffeinAddict (talk) 21:21, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

>>the exact quote is “Marciano said paramedics assessed 19 patients in the downtown core over the weekend, mostly for minor issues or intoxication.” Regardless of wether it is specifically referring to the protest, I don’t believe intoxication should be counted as an “injury” in a civil conflict infobox.TheAmericanWarlord (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 01:54, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Just because the protesters did it to themselves doesn't mean it's not an injury related to the protest. CaffeinAddict (talk) 03:58, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

If we included intoxications at concert related tragedies, the whole audience would be injured. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 04:14, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

• As of yesterday, Ottawa Police were reporting that there were no injuries related to the protest. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:48, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

I’m agnostic on this. I added the source due to paramedics claiming they had seen 19 people in the downtown core over the weekend, most due to intoxication. If it’s not notable enough to be mentioned in the infobox - let’s remove it. CaffeinAddict (talk) 15:27, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

I see it has been changed, thank you, it is to be appreciated when these requests are considered.--CasuarioAlmeriense (talk) 11:18, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

That has changed. There’s was four injuries on February related to a protest in Winnipeg.

https://globalnews.ca/news/8597464/hit-and-run-truck-convoy-manitoba-legisltature/amp/ Efuture2 (talk) 03:23, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Ongoing edits related to "Organizers" and "Links to far-right and separatist groups" sections

I believe @Oceanflynn: implemented the rework from "Links to far-right and separatist groups" to "Organizers," but section was reverted back by (I think (?)) @CaffeinAddict: at some point.

Left some comments on this topic under "Links to far-right and separatist groups" excessively long previously. Seems to be some dispute over whether organizer associations are best covered under that section or under what it was reworked into at some point to "Organizers."

Seems like we should try to get some kind of consensus here one way or another. I would support changing to Organizers for the reasons stated previously--section is confusing, and some of the content under that section is not far right or separatist (e.g., 5G, anti-lockdown, etc), and would be better covered under a different section heading. DirkDouse (talk) 09:56, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

In my opinion the current title is warranted by WP:BALANCE. Pretty well every reliable source that has reported on this has highlighted the organizers' history of far-right organizing and links to/current positions within far-right/separatist/extremist groups, as well as the participants' displays of far-right symbols, and Wikipedia should follow that POV by highlighting this in the section title. Some of the organizers (Tamara Lich) have insisted that it's a small fringe of participants, while others (Pat King, James Bauder, Jason LaFace) have claimed that's just PR spin and that the convoy really is about advancing a white nationalist agenda and/or overthrowing the government, by force if necessary. Changing to "organizers" is falsely neutral, but we could discuss compromising somewhere in between. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:56, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

The issue I have is not as much with whether the section title is neutral, but more that there are subpoints that are offtopic, but still relevant to include somewhere in the article. DirkDouse (talk) 18:27, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ivanvector: If LeFace, or any of the other organisers, is on record stating that the goal is to advance a white nationalist agenda, why doesn't that appear in the article? 46.97.170.225 (talk) 15:54, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Add section on protests in other cities?

Protests have now spread to Toronto, Winnipeg, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.9.201.26 (talk) 04:38, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Probably yes, particularly the Toronto one which has a counter-protest being organized. These could be added to the "related protests" section. I hadn't heard about Winnipeg, but I also know there was a slow-roll protest planned today in Charlottetown, but has been postponed because of the weather. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:19, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Parliament Hill during protest Freedom Convoy 2022.png (discussion)
• Trucks line Wellington street Freedom Convoy 2022.png (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:37, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Since there's an allegation that these images have been republished from the original source by an intermediary without permission, I have removed them from the article. If they turn out to be free use they can be added back. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:53, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

There's been no discussion on either of these images over at commons. CaffeinAddict (talk) 05:03, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Sourceless claim

“Illegal acts committed by protesters drew widespread condemnation.”

Which illegal activities, drew condemnation from whom? 172.58.176.92 (talk) 14:22, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

It's discussed throughout the article, particularly in the "Ottawa" and "Statements and reactions" sections, as well as the two sources citing the following sentence. We typically don't include references in the lede for information that's sourced in the article, but this article hasn't matured to that point yet. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:46, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Jagmeet Singh's brother

I have twice removed the text about Jagmeet Singh's brother's large and supposedly inadvertent donation to the fundraiser, citing our policy which directs to remove information that violates the policy without waiting for discussion. I realize after having done so that that particular section does not apply since that refers to poorly sourced information, I was thinking of WP:NPF which doesn't direct immediate removal, so apologies to the editors who added it back.

However, I think this should be discussed. NPF suggests that we should not include contentious or possibly defamatory information about persons who are not well known, unless the information is directly relevant to that person's notability, and as far as I know Mr. Dhaliwal is not a public figure and is not notable at all (by Wikipedia standards). On the other hand his donation has been well covered, but we don't write about everything. What do other editors think? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:42, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

It was newsworthy but it almost doesn’t feel relevant. Obviously a lot of people donated to the GoFundMe… CaffeinAddict (talk) 16:26, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

CBC News, National Post, The Times of India, Narcity, Global News, Maclean's, The Ottawa Citizen all covered the story. It's not enough to get him his own article on Wikipedia, but then most of the figures here don't have articles.

Yes, there were a lot of donations. But did any individual donation receive media coverage? Did it receive a reply from a national figure? Even at the end, Dhaliwal was near the top of the list in terms of amount, with the last cache by Wayback Machine suggesting he was only surpassed by four other donations.

This isn't Dhaliwal's first newsworthy actions. During the 2020–2021 Indian farmers' protest, there were near constant convoys of cars in the north and east areas of Brampton, Ontario. Dhaliwal left his car on an arterial road to physically attack another man. He was charged with assault causing bodily harm, which received coverage in National Post, a local outlet, and OPIndia (which apparently is on the spam blacklist, though I can't find it on the local or global blacklist).

It's a footnote to the story, but it is part of the story. -- Zanimum (talk) 05:10, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

This article is inflammatory and rife with inaccuracies. Please remove it or write the truth

Remove the article or have it written objectively. This is pure propaganda meant to discredit the populist peaceful demonstrations of Canadians demanding their freedoms and expressing opposition to the over reach of government. 207.148.176.53 (talk) 17:50, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

If there are more specific sections you want to discuss feel free to post or join discussions in other threads. But the article has at least dozens of editors; there's no one person who can just rewrite the whole thing without coming to a consensus with the other people on this talk page. DirkDouse (talk) 17:56, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

You are correct mister. I had a stub here talking about how this movement was becoming international. In the stub, me and two other users had organized a search for sources throughout the weekend to make a case for why this movement was becoming international. This was after we had gone through some preliminary sources suggesting so. And before we could do it, the stub was taken down. Don't worry, you aren't alone; Wikipedia always had a left-wing bias when in came to anything remotely political in America. So don't feel as if you need to make a stand here, because you will always be overwhelmed by the opposition here. W.C Cross (talk) 18:09, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

W.C Cross Your comments were not removed but archived, you can still find your comments here: Talk:Freedom Convoy 2022/Archive 2#HEADS UP: This Movement May Become International. CaffeinAddict (talk) 18:53, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia always had a left-wing bias when in came to anything remotely political in America. Most of the news outlets Wikipedia cites are for-profit capitalist news sites and last time I checked, leftists hate capitalism. This protest also isn't in America. X-Editor (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

What is inaccurate about the article? Please be more specific. X-Editor (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

I want to chime in and say that this article does appear to have an anti-protest lens rather than a neutral one like Wikipedia should have. It seems to highlight fringe incidents, loose unfounded connections to alleged extremist movements and diminish the size and scope of the protest (for example, infobar statistics highlight 250 people when Toronto today had tens of thousands, if not over 100,000). I do think this article needs to be reworded a bit to support neutrality.Spilia4 (talk) 00:31, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

This article is currently only about the Ottawa protests with the Toronto protest as a related one. A new article should be created if it’s notable. CaffeinAddict (talk) 01:03, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

The connections to extremism come from reliable sources. If you have any evidence that the accusations are unfounded, please provide evidence. As for the fringe incidents, they are obviously going to be highlighted because they got a lot of attention. X-Editor (talk) 03:51, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

References

Lead sentence edit suggestion

Tying in with the suggested page move, any thoughts on tweaking the lead to make it clearer that "Freedom Convoy 2022" is a self-applied name, and not a universally used name? Maybe something like "An ongoing protest in Canada…referred to by participants as Freedom Convoy 2022…" Trivialist (talk) 23:00, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Trivialist See discussion above. CaffeinAddict (talk) 01:15, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

At this point in time, I believe it would be best to hold off on making such a change. MrJ567 (talk) 01:22, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Progress on lawsuit discussed in legal

The lawsuit discussed under legal had it's first hearing today, where organizers for the protest stated they would limit the hours of horns being sounded. The court refused to issue an injunction as the justice was concerned with enforceability as they were unsure who to direct the injunction against. I'd try my hand at an edit, but protections prevents me. Sen17 (talk) 03:30, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

References

Can we update this from protest to terrorism?

Since these "people" do not speak for Candians.... and they have occupied assaulted and damaged lives people and property.... this is not by definition a protest anymore. It's domestic terrorism.

More over this is a handful of truckers handful of Canadians. It's not a movement it's a farce. 30% of Canadians could not elect a PM of any party. Nor could 30% of the house or opposition initiate a non confidence vote federally.

This act of terrorism even if it was not violent untrue and insane also only just barely meets the minimum requirement to out a party leader as we say with o toole this week.

I grew up on free speech.... but when the speech chosen is this.... maybe don't give them a voice as they do not deserve one. 2604:3D08:267C:1600:9CDB:30FB:60FC:3937 (talk) 15:03, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Vote to keep Freedom Convoy

Messy Thinking (talk) 15:24, 6 February 2022 (UTC) Also vote to maintain "protest" rather than "update" to "terrorism." Actual terrorism comes with violence, which is not something this wiki normally goes into.

No, we cannot at this time change to calling this a terrorist incident. Wikipedia relies on reliable sources to make that determination for us, and as far as I've seen there are no reliable sources calling this terrorism. Some have just started to shift to calling it an occupation but we're a long way from anything definitive other than "protest" and "convoy" at this point. If you have sources that indicate otherwise, please provide them. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:29, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree with the other two users who oppose the change here for the reasons they stated. DirkDouse (talk) 17:58, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

I disgusted by this person request to change the title from convoy to terrorism. Number one is the fact that most of the violences has been by counter-protesters/Anti-Freedom Convoy protesters especially the fact that five people were arrested in Vancouver. Cite: https://vpd.ca/news/2022/02/05/vancouver-police-arrest-five-during-day-long-protests/

One driver was arrested for plowing into 4 protesters in Winnipeg on February 5.

A majority of Canadians want the restrictions to be dropped and end according to a new poll released in early February 2022. Efuture2 (talk) 19:17, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately it is too early to call it that. Though I'm confident that reliable sources will eventually lable it what it is. More and more reports are coming in of violence, vandalism and attempted arson, and the deflection to antifa is all too familiar from January 6. I'm confident that it's not a matter of if, but when this will be calld domestic terrorism. We just need to wait for further developments. 46.97.170.225 (talk) 15:50, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Strongly Oppose: You talk about 30% not being able to elect any party however in the previous election the minority governing liberals got around 32.6% of the popular vote. This is actually the same amount of people that currently strongly support the convoy https://abacusdata.ca/freedom-convoy-public-reaction-february-2022/, and also 54% separately support the idea of dropping all mandates https://toronto.citynews.ca/2022/01/31/majority-of-canadians-want-covid19-restrictions-to-end/. It has also never been referred to as a terrorism event nor comes even close to that scope. This proposal is demeaning to the term terrorism and would set a terrible precedent. Currently the support for the protest is higher than the current governing party. Your proposal is rife with inaccuracies.https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/more-of-the-same-messaging-from-liberals-affecting-ballot-support-nanos-1.5748025 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.98.95.245 (talk) 20:29, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

WP:NOTAFORUM 46.97.170.225 (talk) 10:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Really? Really? A bunch of truckers block roads and you want to call that "terrorism"? Oh boy... Winston von Ripplechip (talk) 00:21, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

I strongly oppose this as well, do you have any proof/evidence of any official outlet or any government agency calling this “domestic terrorism”, this is an encyclopedia whose material comes from reliable sources that must be cited. If you find anything else that supports your claim, bring it up in a new discussion and be sure to show your evidence. -Toast (talk) 02:24, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

RfC - Scope

Based on my understanding of WP:TOPIC I would like to request comments on the scope of the article as it stands. Mainly: is this article currently and will continue to be about the Ottawa protests with the related protests occupying the space they currently have, or is this article to include all Canadian protests related to the Freedom Convoy movement, loosely based on the same movement?

Currently, knowing that wikipedia is not a WP:CRYSTALBALL, the other protests are not as notable as the Ottawa protests and continued occupation, and therefore exist in the sectional space that they are in currently. CaffeinAddict (talk) 15:48, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

My two-cents: seeing as how the protests in other cities are direct offshoots of the Ottawa one, I think it makes sense to keep them in a (small) section in this article. --Nsophiay (talk) 18:14, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

The article is about the protest convoy which originated nationwide and converged on Ottawa. Offshoot and related protests are being covered appropriately and in my opinion with due weight. A change of scope is not warranted. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:58, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Neutrality of this page

I believe this article violates Wikipedia's neutrality policy. The article quotes several people who oppose the protest, but very few people who support it. The article also implies that the protest is associated with Trumpism by listing the "Trumpism in Canada" article under "See more." Furthermore, the first sentence accuses the protestors of being "right-wing, fringe, anti-union." As a participant in the protest, I find this article to be discriminatory, hateful, and inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamestbrink1105 (talk • contribs) 01:23, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Supporting the convoy lists 14 politicians whose support received significant press coverage. Opposing includes seven. We then go on to list fourteen more American politicians supporting it, and one former US Ambassador to Canada opposing it. Others has General Wayne Eyre commenting on one aspect, followed by four random people's opposition.

So that's 32 to 8 quoted. If neutrality is a number, as you imply, then we should be adding 24 more opposing viewpoints. -- Zanimum (talk) 03:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

But every opposing viewpoint is described with a quote or a rationale, whereas the supporting people are simply listed. 98.113.141.82 (talk) 22:02, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

I reacted to the same thing. Also, responding the "if neutrality is a number" comment: The section that discusses the "opposing" is twice the size as the one discussing the "supporting". - 138.233.138.234 (talk) 13:25, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks and caution

Thanks to the editors who have been working so hard keeping up with a constantly changing story. I suggest that going forward, all major additions to the lead could be done on the talk page first. The article has attracted half a million viewers in the past 30 days and over 40,000 today. The first sentence of the lead does no longer seems to reflect the article or the reality of the demonstration but calling all the protesters right-wing, etc goes too far. "The Freedom Convoy (French: Convoi de la Liberté) is an ongoing protest in Canada against COVID-19 vaccine requirements for truckers to re-enter the country by land introduced by the Government of Canada on January 15, 2022.]Oceanflynn (talk) 01:46, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Potential addition to the lead: I am planning on adding the sentence "Teamsters Canada, representing 55,000 professional truckers including 15,000 long-haul truckers—90% of which are vaccinated, said that the so-called "freedom convoy" not only "delegitimizes truckers real concerns", their "despicable display of hate...does not reflect the values of Teamsters Canada." in the paragraph in the lead that begins with "The convoy has been condemned by trucking industry groups, I have already added similar content to the list of organizers who oppose the convoy. Any comments CaffeinAddict, X-Editor, Ivanvector, Zanimum, Somedifferentstuff, Jfhutson, Oceanflynn (talk) 00:49, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Personally I think the lede is getting too long again. It's supposed to be a summary, not a rehashing of the intricate details of the subject. I'm in favour of removing and keeping out all of the individual quotes, and just summarizing the overall response. The Teamsters statement would be covered by "condemned by trucking industry and labour groups", if we wanted to make that change. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:06, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback Invector, I will not add this to the lead. You, and others, have been working at high speed, high intensity for days helping to maintain protocols and quality in this article. Thanks for this.Oceanflynn (talk) 16:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

References

Ottawa convoy protest against federal government concerning provincial and local mandates

The article seems lacking in discerning that some of the demands of the people in the Ottawa protest are about mandates implemented by provincial and local governments, but is demanding the federal government remove them (or overthrow the feds, and have the Senate remove provincial/local mandates). There should be something about the demand that the feds breach their constitutional jurisdiction to dictate to provinces about their purview in health matters. Some politicians also seem to have ambiguously voiced support for the feds removing provincial restrictions (seemingly federalizing health care, removing it fromo the provinces) -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 15:32, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@65.92.246.142: I agree, but we need a source. I'm sure I saw one previous, but they're not obvious when searching. Are you aware of an article on the convoy where this was mentioned?

As for federalizing healthcare, that's news to me. -- Zanimum (talk) 23:34, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

The federal government has a lot of power over health care through the federal spending power - very basically, the federal government can give provinces money (or not give them money) for pretty much any reason at all, and health care is an enormous provincial expense that is federally subsidized. It came up a lot when Ralph Klein was premier of Alberta. It's well outside the scope of this article to discuss it here, but I have seen a few sources mentioning that the protest in the federal capital is misdirected for this reason. The "background and goals" section touches on this. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 23:41, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 February 2022

Joe Warmington incorrectly titled “editor in chief” of Toronto Sun. Joe is a columnist and contributor.

Adrienne Batra is the EiC re: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrienne_Batra 65.95.179.71 (talk) 20:58, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done Cannolis (talk) 21:09, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Missing citation Feb 08 22

“Protesters have stated that they will not leave until all COVID-19 restrictions and mandates have been repealed, and some have called for the federal government to be overthrown“ These are two different statements, and each should be cited, even if it’s from the same outlet, we should still have two opinions to increase credibility. -Toast (talk) 02:33, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

These are both backed up by cited material in the article. I share concerns about "called for the federal government to be overthrown", that seems to be sourced to Jagmeet Singh believing that was the case, not to any actual statement by a notable protester. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:08, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

I've added a couple of sources. It's getting close to WP:OVERCITE, but it can be trimmed later. BilledMammal (talk) 14:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Additional sources can be found at Ottawa Citizen, PBS, and The New Statesman. BilledMammal (talk) 14:47, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Vaccine

Aren’t they just anti-lockdown mandates? Apparently many of them are fully vaccinated. 2607:FEA8:EE3:B300:989:3CA3:1803:7220 (talk) 14:12, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

The organizers say the protests are about the requirement for unvaccinated travellers to self-isolate for 14 days when returning to Canada. Other protesters and involved groups have different goals, but it's generally understood that the ongoing protests are demanding repeal of all COVID-19-related public health mandates. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:25, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Presumed arson attempt at apartment buildings

The media referenced states as the only source for the incident an individual tweet thread that has been widely labelled as of "dubious credibility" at best, and completely fake at worst. https://twitter.com/jonkay/status/1490525934948081666?cxt=HHwWhICzkZrctK8pAAAA Ottawa police are investigating, but no official sources have confirmed the attempt yet. Therefore, I think it is advisable to remove it until an official statement is made that confirms the claim, or at least specify it is a "presumed arson attempt under investigation" and not a confirmed one, as the lede suggests.--CasuarioAlmeriense (talk) 15:30, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Include Template:POV

I don't think there is a neutral point of view in this article. It covers extensively the presumed links to far-right, islamophobia and minor controversies such as the Terry Fox statue "desecration". First, I don't think a loose link to groups associated to far-right or islamophobia is enough to associate the main frame of the protest with racism, etc. In fact, the truckers themselves called out and told to leave a man who was carrying a confederate flag (it is mentioned in the article but not in the lede). https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/man-with-confederate-flag-told-to-leave-by-ottawa-truckers-we-called-him-out Then, it mentions in the lede how Terry Fox statue was "desecrated" but it does not mention in the lede how it was cleaned afterwards by the same protestors. https://globalnews.ca/video/8582676/trucker-convoy-protesters-clean-up-terry-fox-statue-in-ottawa-following-outcry/ Also, as far as I have read, the Canadian Trucking Alliance does not support the protests https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60164561 but that is very different from saying "the convoy has been condemned by trucking industry groups".

It also mentions in the lede the presumed arson attempt, which has yet to be confirmed by the police, as stated in another section of the talk page (only source at the moment is an individual tweet thread). I know comparison to other articles is not a valid argument, but the BLM protests article, which had associated with it riots and destruction of statues, does not mention any of it in the lede. I also think there is a cherry picking of sources to focus on certain aspects. The examples I put are just some of the many subtleties that I think bias the article towards the government position. While you may or may not agree with this view, the weigh and focus on certain aspects of the protests should be reconsidered.

For all these reasons, I think the Template:POV should be added at the beginning of the article, since there are wikipedians such as myself (and several others, as you can check in the talk page and the archives) that dispute the neutrality of the article.--CasuarioAlmeriense (talk) 15:55, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

I disagree with adding shame tags to the article, but let's take each of these points individually. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Links to extremist groups

Our article covers "extensively" the links to extremist groups because that's what most reliable sources have reported - that prominent organizers have connections to these ideologies. However, the way that we have presented a laundry list of individuals and organizations involved does not always follow proper sourcing - there's some synthesis going on there resulting in conclusions that are not supported by the sources. For example, Pat King's involvement cannot be connected to his endorsement of the great replacement conspiracy unless a reliable source highlights that connection in the context of the protests, otherwise we're making it up. We should be checking that these sources really support the conclusions given. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Terry Fox statue

The vandalism of the Terry Fox statue is highlighted in the lede because it was reported as a significant event, and the backlash from that and the desecration of the other monuments were very widely reported. Conversely, the fact that some of the protesters returned later and cleaned the statue was not treated by those sources as particularly significant. The story here is that the vandalism occurred at all. IMO this is weighted appropriately. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Apartment fire

I believe there's already a separate section about this, but I'll try to find better sourcing. I'm also not sure this is significant enough to be included in the lede. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

RfC: Moving this to more of a movement

With the current growth of the Freedom Convoy protests, I think we should be looking at this article potentially moving to a similar template/style as the Yellow Vest protests. There are parallels and with mimic protests now taking place worldwide, this is more than just Canada specific (although started in Canada).

New York(USA), New Zealand, Australia, Europe:

• https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/08/australia-trucker-protest-canberra/
• https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/09/freedom-convoy-protests-australia-new-zealand-europe/
• https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/inspired-by-canadian-protests-french-freedom-convoy-gets-underway-1.5774266
• https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/waving-canadian-flags-french-freedom-convoy-gets-underway-2022-02-09/
• https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/new-zealand-convoy-protesters-clog-streets-near-parliament-1.5772221 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.98.95.245 (talk) 18:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Ultimately, there is nothing stopping users from creating Freedom Convoy movement or similar. This article, however, is primarily about the Ottawa-bound convoy and its direct spin-offs, without only passing reference to those beyond. Simply, there are already 37 sub-headings in this article, it cannot be expanded geographically with comprising existing coverage. -- Zanimum (talk) 22:53, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 February 2022

The article states without evidence that "First Nations members were also seen among the protesters..." That has to be removed since it is contested by First Nations, see https://www.aptnnews.ca/national-news/algonquin-elder-says-interlopers-need-to-go-as-ottawa-braces-for-convoy-protest-surge/ Rosellam (talk) 19:57, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

"Some Indigenous people do support the movement, and a few Every Child Matters flags and other Indigenous flags can be spotted around Ottawa." We can maybe add more context, suggest some language. GordonGlottal (talk) 20:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Please remove or amend the statement "First Nations members were also seen among the protesters, carrying "every child matters" flags,[44] which are used to express anger at the coverup of deaths in residential schools." The presence of a flag supporting an Indigenous cause is not evidence that First Nations members were present, it is only evidence that a flag present. Specifically identifying that First Nations members were present when no other ethnicity or cultural community is identified is misleading and allures to the fact that Indigenous Peoples broadly support the movement. The opposite is true. First Nations broadly have come out against the movement including the Algonquins of Pikwakanagan, the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation Tribal Council and the Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg to whom this is within their traditional territory (Please see press releases from individual Nations). Further, First Nations community groups on the ground in Ottawa have broadly condemned this movement because of the impact to their vulnerable constituency. Inglewitch (talk) 20:44, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

To all above, it appears that the content has been removed. -- Zanimum (talk) 22:59, 9 February 2022 (UTC)