Talk:Premiership of Stephen Harper
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] NPOV Tag
This artical is totaly biased agianst Harper. The opening section: Cabinet, does not actualy detail his cabinet, but rather discusses (from a liberal point of view) the crtisims of the cabinet.
Artical needs serious clean up. I will start the process but some help would be appreaciated. Macutty 13:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- After reading through the qhole artical I have a couple suggestions: If the artical is to be a description of Stephen Harper as Prime Minister then we need to strip out all "reactions" "views" "responses" of other political parties and cut this down to just the facts. The whole artical is written as a critique of his term and is littered with Liberal party criticisms. As well, the topics chosen for discussion are all the controversial subjects that the Liberals have used as political action items since Harper took office. We need to re-write this whole artical NPOV rather than from a Liberal party members view.
- I'll start later today adding more of the actual business the Harper gov has conducted since taking office and will start to remove the offending info. Any help would be appreaciated. Macutty 16:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Um, without having read the article in question, your proposal makes no sense. We're supposed to say what he did, but not how it was received? Politics is always a long sequence of action → reaction → counterreaction → reaction to counter-reaction, etc.
- Many of Harper's actions as Prime Minister have clearly been in response to criticism from the Opposition, so gutting the article of any mention of the opposition would be making things less comphensible.
- Now, the article should not obviously look like a giant polemic against Harper, but that's mostly a question of the way in which it's written. Gutting all mention of anyone outside Harper's cabinet is not the way to go. --Saforrest 09:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- This Article needs to be completly re-written, it really says nothing about Harper's time in office , save mentioning anything that is conterversial and that the Liberals/NDP have used agaisnt him. For example it references the recent cut to womens programes anounced in the throne speach, but does not mention that funding for women's programes have increased 42% overall under his administration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.212.91 (talk) 02:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Revert
I caught some apparant vandalism at the top of the page, and changed it, but immediately realized that I should've reverted rather than changing it. Unfortunately, if I try to, I get the error "The edit could not be undone due to conflicting intermediate edits.". Could someone who knows what they're doing please revert it?
Thanks. Laser Dude 03:25, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

