Talk:Canadian Coalition for Democracies

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Neutrality of edits

So, Zlerman (talk · contribs) has asked me to check and comment on the neutrality of the edits to this article made by George Al-Shami (talk · contribs). There are two batches of edits in particular here, 1, 2. With respect to the first group of edits, I would say that some of them are POV-slanted. For example, a more Israel-friendly stance becomes an unabashedly pro-Israel stance. The word unabashedly has negative connotations to it. The second group of edits consists entirely of dropping the epithet "terrorist" from Hamas. I'm not going to even touch that issue. My only suggestion is to try to establish a precedent from consensus in other articles.

However, I have an overall gripe with this issue; the article itself is terribly sourced. In the current revision, there are no inline references, while in the previous there was one but only to establish a minor fact. Things like a "fair media presence" need to be referenced, the group's support or denouncement of groups should be sourced on a per-statement basis. I think that with adequate sourcing using inline references the vast majority of this article's problems could be solved (i.e., through pruning out things that cannot be verified in reliable sources). —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 23:30, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Canadian Coalition for Democracies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081122120956/http://en.epochtimes.com/news/8-5-15/70680.html to http://en.epochtimes.com/news/8-5-15/70680.html

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]