Talk:Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform (Ontario)

Untitled

An IP address added some POV on how the Select Committee's report was set up to biased for MMP, which is claimed to be more likely to fail. I removed most of it, but I don't know if any issues of bias were raised (particularly by the small parties listed in the article), so it would be good to know if such concerns were actually raised. Kelvinc 11:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above assessment. I know no one with that conspiracy theory. The fact that the Select Committee recommended a lower referendum threshold than the cabinet eventually decided on supports the general observation that they became supportive of electoral reform.Wilfred Day 04:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kinda moot now... I added a very brief result, but I will leave to others to flesh it out and perhaps write an aftermath section Observer31 23:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform (Ontario). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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) 06:46, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform (Ontario). 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/20121102231435/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=acbd6830-a01d-41b9-b9e1-de52f813176a to http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=acbd6830-a01d-41b9-b9e1-de52f813176a

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) 09:19, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion of politics

Could we create a 'discussion' section for analysis of why the measure failed? For example, we could incorporate these legacy sentences:

"I'm very disappointed there's been a lack of meaningful debate," said Catherine Baquero, Assembly member for Beaches-East York. "I'm disappointed that Elections Ontario's education campaign has been so toothless. What I expected was a more detailed discussion of the pros and cons of each system." [1]

"There's an awful lack of understanding on the proposition. I think that's too bad. Elections Ontario isn't doing its job," added Rick Browridge, another Assembly member. "There's been no real attempt at a major public education campaign, and that's what was needed." [2] Superb Owl (talk) 04:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Those need to be properly done as citations for inclusion, preferably with {{cite news}}, but definitely not as external links, which are expressly forbidden in article bodies outside of the "External links" section (and even then should not be URL-only links). Please see WP:INCITE. —Joeyconnick (talk) 18:51, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]