Talk:Carolyn Bennett

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Canada: Ontario / Toronto / Politics 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.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alpha Gamma Delta

I've removed the following sentence from the article "Dr. Bennett is also an alumna of Alpha Gamma Delta." I've been referencing the Alpha Gamma Delta notable alumnae list (where she appears) and cannot find her on the AGD site and I cannot find any reference to her actually being in AGD besides wiki mirrors. If anybody can find a reference please add it back in. --ImmortalGoddezz 04:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try contacting Tau chapter at the University of Toronto. They have pictures of her in photo albums. Writerchick

Resources for article building

candidate cats

This article belongs in Category:Liberal candidates in the 2008 Canadian federal election for the same reason George W. Bush is in Category:United States presidential candidates, 2004 (subcat of Category:United States presidential candidates). Also, Category:Liberal candidates in the 2008 Canadian federal election records which election she's in, which the other categories don't (lumping Liberals throughout time). If you want a category just for losing candidates, make an appropriate named category just for that. Although, even then, if somebody wins one election, and loses another, then they'ld belong in that category. It's nonsense to say that once somebody wins one election, they should suddenly be removed from all "candidate" categories. --Rob (talk) 06:22, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has rules about how many categories an article should be in. Bennett would also have to go into the 1997, 2000, 2004 and 2006 candidate categories, not just 2008, which is pure excess. And some other MPs would be even worse: Herb Gray, for example, would have to be in 13 of them simultaneously. You can also take note of the fact that excluding Bennett, Category:Liberal candidates in the 2008 Canadian federal election only contains 22 entries, not a single solitary one of which is a sitting MP. Its sibling categories for prior elections don't contain people who were actually elected. The other party candidate categories don't contain people who were actually elected. They were all created with the intention of grouping "people who ran in an election and are notable enough for articles even though they didn't win", and that's exactly the way they've been used until now — they were never intended to be "every single person who ran in this election whether they won or not".

The category system is the wrong place to create a complete record of which elections every individual politician in Canada ran in whether they were elected or not — that's what lists and election articles are for. By Wikipedia's own categorization policy, categories aren't meant to serve that kind of purpose.

You can always go to WP:CWNB if you'd like to build a consensus for a new approach to these categories, but right now you're arguing that Bennett alone somehow deserves to be treated differently than any other incumbent MP, because nobody else is currently categorized that way. Bearcat (talk) 14:19, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to create a category for a purpose other than how it's currently named, then you should rename it appropriately, or make appropriate subcats. You haven't addressed the analogy to Category:United States presidential candidates, 2004. George W. Bush has the same "problem" of being in a lot categories. Also, I won't be going to WP:CWNB, as you can't override global Wikipedia policy by local decisions or personal decisions. It's nonsense to think the term "Candidate" varies in meaning so much. And finally, Bearcat, don't bother citing how the categories have been misapplied at the moment. We both know that you personally do most of the categorization (and miscategorization) of Canadian politicians. Anyways, at a bare minimum you need to place a proper description of every category. If you insist on using a category for some nonobvious purpose, you need to provide a description. The American candidate categories are inconsistent, but at least they tend to explain what goes in each. You need to start thinking about ordinary readers, and not what works for you personally. --Rob (talk) 16:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did not create the categories or decide how they should be applied; the former was done by somebody else, and the latter was by consensus. It has nothing to do with what works for me personally — my personal view, in fact, is that precisely because of the proliferation issue these categories shouldn't actually exist at all. But as long as consensus favours using them in the way that they're used, it's not my place to arbitrarily delete them just because I don't see them as necessary. And George W. Bush does not have the same problem of being in a lot of candidate categories; he's only in two of them and will never be in a third because of term limits on the U.S. presidency.

Furthermore, the request for comments section on WP:CWNB most certainly is the appropriate place to post a request for outside user input into a dispute of this type. And you still haven't explained why this applies just to Carolyn Bennett in the 2008 election, and not to any of the other elections in which she's previously run or to any other incumbent MP who's running for re-election in this campaign.

You have a really condescending habit of personalizing every disagreement you have with established practice on Wikipedia into being about me personally, and that needs to stop immediately. I'm not here to be your personal target for every little thing you dislike about how Wikipedia does things. If you have an issue with established practice, then try to build a consensus to change it in the appropriate forums for that and without engaging in ad hominem attacks. If you dislike me personally, though, that's not my problem, because I'm acting entirely in accordance with established practice, not with special rules that I made up for myself. I do a lot of category cleanup on politicians, yes, but apart from asking for clarification in some cases where there were inconsistencies, I've been entirely uninvolved in deciding what the categories are and how they should or shouldn't be applied. Bearcat (talk) 17:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've no response to arguments against straw men. I never said this article should be treated differently then all others. I limited my re-categorization to just this article (that happened to be on my watch list when I added a photo), since it's always prudent to start with one article. Anyways, what's needed now is a general review of political candidate categories throughout Wikipedia (not just Canada), and some consistency. Regardless of what approach is taken, categories need proper names and descriptions. A central discussion will ultimately be needed for that, but that shouldn't be on the talk page of a single candidate. --Rob (talk) 18:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Current convention is that candidates who have ever been elected are not in these categories. I agree with Bearcat that including these people in all relevant categories - which would be the logically sound thing to do, I suppose - would result in great overcategorization, but not having in them in here does rather diminish the usefulness of the categories. I'm definitely against including MPs in the categories, but may not be adverse to deleting the categories (notwithstanding the hours of work I put into the sub-catting during summer 2007 - sigh). Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Carolyn Bennett. 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) 03:26, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Carolyn Bennett. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140607001915/http://results.elections.on.ca/results/1995_results/valid_votes.jsp?e_code=36&rec=0&district=St.+Andrew-St.+Patrick&flag=E&layout=G to http://results.elections.on.ca/results/1995_results/valid_votes.jsp?e_code=36&rec=0&district=St.+Andrew-St.+Patrick&flag=E&layout=G

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:28, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Resignation as MP

It still hasn't happened, according to the House of Commons website; and Elections Canada has not announced her seat being vacant. G. Timothy Walton (talk) 17:01, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]