1055:
the prospects of finding a clear survey or poll which asks how people think the NDP should be categorized, or a party press release for the explicit purpose of outlining what they can be called in terms of political doctrine is virtually nil, I am taking the written foundation of the party itself as justification for my edit. Additionally, though you have claimed I am required to find some form of public sampling which is indicative of my assertion, you have yet to provide such evidence by the same logic, as to why the article should remain in the form you support.
463:
397:
795:
The current NDP, taken by its actions and policies, is clearly a social democratic party like Blair's Labour, not a democratic socialist party. But those are facts outside the agenda of those who insist on characterise the NDP in a manner that suits them. I strongly argue that democratic socialist be removed from a description of what the NDP is and moved to a discussion of what it claims. What it claims should certainly not be the lead for this article.
1176:
the party to apply principles of democratic socialism however in practice the policies of the party more closely resemble those followed by social democrats." Recognizing that the phrasing I suggest could be improved, is the general idea workable? It seems to me that neither side of the reversions going on is completely correct and that this description says why there are two contradictory views each with some verifiable sources. --
535:
511:
545:
387:
483:
356:
272:
251:
772:
international co-operation and the abolition of poverty" & " The New
Democratic Party believes that social, economic and political progress in Canada can only be assured by the application of democratic socialist principles to government and the administration of public affairs." The NDP calls itself a democratic socialist party we may as well call them that here as well.
282:
220:
694:
643:
607:
1375:
956:
ballot or funding. That edit did not introduced any bias. However, I have now expanded on this and made absolutely clear the basis for the government's position and why it was controversial. I've also removed the reference to Gordon
Campbell since strictly speaking recognition of the official opposition is up to the Speaker, not the Premier.
1124:
leadership post. I have had to reread the sections several times to make sense of them, which shouldn't be a requirement for an encyclopædia article. Is there anyone who knows the dates and details who can reorganise these two sections (or, even make a third, the 1980s) and make them clearer? Cheers,
1175:
Thanks for that link. My suggestion would be to acknowledge both sides, since there is some basis for each, by changing "is a democratic socialist/social democratic political party in
British Columbia, Canada." to "is a political party in British Columbia, Canada. The party's constitution mandates
1123:
I find it awkward, to say the least, and confusing that the section on the 1970s (currently section 4) contains some information about
Harcourt and his actions as newly elected leader (though it is undated at this point in the Wikticle), and then section 5, about the 1990s, rementions him winning the
1054:
Once again, as the BC NDP identify themselves as adhering to the principles of democratic socialism within their party constitution, and by virtue of the fact the phrase "social democracy" is not even mentioned in the same constitution, the party must be referred to as a democratic socialist one. As
771:
Well we can have the debate if you want... but the constitution of the BC NDP clearly states the words democratic socialist four times in the preamble alone. "The New
Democratic Party is proud to be associated with the democratic socialist parties of the world and to share in the sturggle for peace,
955:
The purpose of my previous edit was to indicate that what was refused was "official opposition" status. The problem is that "official party", though used in this sense in Canada, is unclear since it can also refer to the recognition of a party for electoral purposes such as automatic presence on the
928:
Additionally, The Toms new additions could be construed as POV: "However, owing to the absence of a strong centrist force in BC provincial politics, a significant number of left-leaning federal
Liberals are members of the provincial NDP.". I'd argue that the BC Liberals are overall rather centrist,
905:
I felt no particular need to add any, considering the amount of historical information present without any visible scholarly evidence to back it up. I must admit, however, that in light of my further examination on this matter, the BC New
Democrats certainly are self-declared democratic socialists,
901:
The last edit you speak of was actually done by myself, not
MichaelM. My apologies for not including a citation in my changing Social Democracy/Democratic Socialism to plain Socialism. However, as I noticed only one citation present on the page to begin with (linking to a CBC article on Carol James
1427:
This article refers to the BCNDP as a social democratic, centre-left party. There is an increasing view that the party is/has moved more the centre. There are some articles that I've read that go so far as to call it "neoliberal." I believe that Third Way is more apt, but, nonetheless, it is not a
1008:
They have, no doubt, a handful of members who might describe themselves as socialists, but those members are not representative of either the past or current ideology of the NDP. As far as I'm concerned, the "issue" does not even exist. If you're so desperate to describe the NDP as
Socialists, the
794:
Is it safer to go by what a political party says it is instead of what it does? As a political scientist, I would be remiss if I chose to describe a political party by what it claims to be in its constitution. A far more interesting line of analysis would be to compare its actions with its claims.
1298:
Dropping by here, which I rarely do (if I ever did, in fact, I've forgotten completely), I wondered what the POV tag, dated 2001, was about; the previous section above dates from 2006 and, while I disagree with what is said there, and noting nobody bothered to answer the points made there, wonder
1039:
The "Young New
Democrats" are simply a faction within the larger party. It's completely irrelevant how they identify themselves. You have yet to establish that some sort of consenses exists amongst the media, political analysts, and the public that the NDP is socialist in character rather than
1308:
of 1996 is made at all, but I do not wish to be falsely accused of partisanship and my real name flouted in the media again so will refrain from any emendations or alterations, but leave the floor open to points others may make as to POVism here. Most political party articles are POV in one
1303:
matter a while back, pending anyone else fielding reasons why the tag should remain and/or what it was placed for. There are some vague and rather terse, sometimes misleading and incomplete wording/information in the Clark section, and I note that no mention of the
1259:
I would update the page myself, but.. I don't know how to make an SVG image, and I feel like that's the standard for Knowledge these days, so if someone is capable of doing that, there are JPG and AI versions of the logo on their site, so it should be pretty easy.
920:
There's a few places where it would seem that POV and opinion have taken over...example: "The Socred's electoral coalition was able to keep the CCF and the NDP out of power until the 1970s, when the tired, stagnating Bennett government was defeated."
1009:
burden of proof falls on you to provide some evidence, either from party press releases, or by establishing that some sort of consenses exists amongst the media, political analysts, and the public that the NDP is socialist in character rather than
678:
153:
1313:
POV here that I can see; only incomplete and at times a bit misleading or too vague. I do not care to edit political articles any more as too much bad energy and stressful, and had come here to check wording re the recent RM of the
1498:
1428:
social democratic party. Given Knowledge's plasticity, how would we go about creating an article that reflects reality? For example, some of the articles cited to prove the party's political identification are dated 1996. Thoughts?
1299:
what is here that warranted the POV tag placed in 2011. I will refrain from some observations I made while reading certain sections, due to false allegations of NDP partisanship and/or membership hurled at me in the course of the
1077:
regarding conflict-of-interest concerning members of organizations editing articles about those organizations. this is a general comment/warning being placed on all BC political party pages because of problems with some
1493:
939:
Since no one is responding to this for discussion, I've edited some of the POV statements in the article. I left in the issue above and hope someone will give me a supplementary reason to keep or delete it.
492:
370:
1435:
44:
1161:
No, Ken, I disagree. The NDP Constitution preamble itself describes its basic principles as "democratic socialism", which is not quite the same thing as "social democratic" (but close.) See
147:
1322:. To me there is a bit of revisionism going on here, but that's a given in a province where all media is heavily politicized and often overtly partisan...so not surprising. I see no
970:
The BC NDP identifies itself as being a "democratic socialist party" in it's own party policy publications. Please stop reverting it to "social democratic" and the like. Thank you.
1543:
1191:
Ken, I think that's a reasonable compromise. Meanwhile I keep having to reverse the change by the Belinda Stronach vandal. May s/he will stop when a change like this is made.--
891:
And he's at it again. I've added the dispute box and maybe some attention will be paid to this user, or maybe he'll give evidence or a cite to his edits (not likely, methinks)
190:
1146:
Doesn't a reading of both of these thorough and well referenced articles makes it quite clear that the NDP in BC are social democrats? That is what the articles say. --
1488:
1523:
621:
616:
521:
986:
we believe in a balanced and responsible approach to government, so that people can enjoy a strong economy, healthy communities, and a clean, sustainable environment.
1478:
443:
1528:
1513:
591:
883:
As he has done so often in the past, Michaelm has changed an article without providing any evidence for his change. Evidence for the revert is provided above.
845:
a few years ago, and the information doesn't seem to be available on-line. The national newspapers only covered the result of the second ballot (well ... the
1362:
929:
not extreme right-leaning except in direct comparison to the left-leaning NDP. Definitely the BC Liberals are nowhere near as right-leaning as the U.S. GOP.
1483:
1463:
338:
328:
79:
1518:
597:
1538:
1473:
168:
1468:
453:
135:
1533:
472:
366:
1503:
1346:
85:
24:
304:
1318:
article and the associated dabpage and saw the citation and POV tags. Researching the citation tags is time-consuming but needs doing by
1458:
802:
567:
1439:
129:
1508:
1280:
756:
1372:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
998:
Could it then be ruled that they are both a democratic socialist AND a social democratic party? This issue needs to be put to rest.
419:
125:
824:(I'm putting this on the main BC NDP page, as I doubt many people have the leadership conventions page on their watchlists yet.)
749:
Eh? Democratic Socialist? THE BC NDP is centrist enough that social democratic would also be giving them too much credit/blame.
295:
256:
99:
30:
1326:
POV here, and wonder about the meaning of the POV tag, in relation to what wordings it was placed.... and if it should remain.
787:
558:
516:
175:
104:
20:
1059:
1033:
1002:
974:
1363:
https://web.archive.org/web/20090621232316/http://www.elections.bc.ca/docs/stats/2009-ge-ref/fres/GE-2009-05-12_Party.html
1279:
The leaders list would look better in a Table format than just a bullet-point list. Can this be changed? Anyone agree? --
1107:
659:
74:
1412:
410:
361:
231:
868:
convention? We *do* have the Sun reels for that period, but the Monday issue which covered the convention is missing.
727:
65:
655:
185:
141:
1366:
731:
199:
806:
1403:
1354:
760:
109:
903:
1284:
1212:
1387:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
237:
1353:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
1443:
1417:
1335:
1288:
1269:
1245:
1195:
1186:
1169:
1156:
1128:
1111:
1086:
1048:
1017:
992:
960:
944:
933:
910:
895:
827:
I haven't been able to locate the first ballot results for the BC NDP's leadership convention held on
810:
764:
1431:
1315:
1255:
The BC NDP appear to have a new logo from the one in the article. It can be found at their website:
1135:
1095:
798:
775:
752:
219:
1265:
1192:
1182:
1166:
1152:
735:
161:
55:
566:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
418:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
303:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1331:
783:
204:
203:
70:
1388:
1056:
1030:
999:
971:
907:
462:
1162:
1103:
1041:
1024:
1010:
51:
1218:
for any edits. Hopefully, the sock-puppeteer will just get bored. I've blocked about a dozen
1242:
1223:
1139:
941:
930:
922:
892:
884:
702:
287:
201:
1395:
1300:
550:
666:
1261:
1178:
1148:
1045:
1014:
989:
957:
1394:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1027:
544:
534:
510:
1452:
1327:
1219:
1125:
1083:
1074:
1066:
872:
847:
841:
779:
402:
1099:
836:
860:
For that matter, would anyone have the results of the first four ballots from the
1227:
828:
1367:
http://www.elections.bc.ca/docs/stats/2009-ge-ref/fres/GE-2009-05-12_Party.html
1305:
1208:.. for a week due to rampant revert-warring by sock-puppet editors. Please us
540:
392:
386:
355:
277:
693:
300:
726:) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
482:
1256:
1080:
If you are a member of this party you should not be editing this article!!
563:
1091:
This article has major bias and almost no in-text citation or sources.
281:
271:
250:
1382:
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
861:
670:
415:
1345:
Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on
1499:
Mid-importance Political parties and politicians in Canada articles
606:
865:
832:
1073:
To party members who may wish to edit the article: please see
980:
If you go to their actual website you'll find the following: "
871:
Thanks in advance for anyone willing to do a bit of research,
688:
637:
213:
205:
15:
851:
didn't cover the story at all, but that's another matter).
1494:
C-Class Political parties and politicians in Canada articles
641:
605:
481:
461:
1163:
http://bc.ndp.ca/upload/20060517145555_constitution2005.pdf
1025:
http://bc.ndp.ca/upload/20060517145555_constitution2005.pdf
951:
Refusal to grant the NDP official opposition status in 2001
1357:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1350:
493:
WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada
856:
Never mind, we have them now. But we still need this:
160:
562:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
414:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
299:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1028:
http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/000173.html
906:and should be described as such in further edits.
596:This article has not yet received a rating on the
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
839:). Queen's University stopped receiving the
174:
8:
1544:Knowledge articles that use Canadian English
1222:sock-accounts on both this article and the
796:
773:
706:, which has its own spelling conventions (
505:
350:
245:
669:may be able to locate suitable images on
1489:Mid-importance British Columbia articles
1524:Mid-importance political party articles
1436:2604:3d08:5282:8a00:51e6:1045:5a67:9377
1309:direction or another; there is nothing
1257:http://www.bcndp.ca/newsroom/logo-photo
507:
352:
247:
217:
1479:Mid-importance Canada-related articles
1529:Political parties task force articles
1347:British Columbia New Democratic Party
734:, this should not be changed without
25:British Columbia New Democratic Party
7:
1514:Unknown-importance politics articles
556:This article is within the scope of
408:This article is within the scope of
293:This article is within the scope of
236:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
965:
14:
1484:C-Class British Columbia articles
1464:Low-importance socialism articles
1349:. Please take a moment to review
1069:(conflict of interest guidelines)
1519:C-Class political party articles
1373:
692:
543:
533:
509:
395:
385:
354:
280:
270:
249:
218:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
1539:Knowledge requested photographs
1474:C-Class Canada-related articles
448:This article has been rated as
333:This article has been rated as
313:Knowledge:WikiProject Socialism
1469:WikiProject Socialism articles
1196:06:25, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
1187:21:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
1018:06:44, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
1003:03:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
576:Knowledge:WikiProject Politics
316:Template:WikiProject Socialism
1:
1534:WikiProject Politics articles
1270:01:40, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
1246:05:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1170:07:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1157:05:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
1112:04:58, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
1060:13:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
993:00:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
975:12:18, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
945:16:28, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
934:18:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
911:04:29, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
896:04:03, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
853:Does anyone have the results?
790:) 7:09, 7 February 2005 (UTC)
614:This article is supported by
579:Template:WikiProject Politics
570:and see a list of open tasks.
490:This article is supported by
470:This article is supported by
422:and see a list of open tasks.
307:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
1504:All WikiProject Canada pages
617:Political parties task force
473:WikiProject British Columbia
428:Knowledge:WikiProject Canada
1336:17:29, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
1275:Leader List in Table Format
1087:01:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
1049:17:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
1034:04:03, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
431:Template:WikiProject Canada
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
1560:
1459:C-Class socialism articles
1444:05:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
1289:17:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
1129:08:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
961:22:18, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
902:election as party leader)
879:Democratic socialist again
598:project's importance scale
454:project's importance scale
339:project's importance scale
1509:C-Class politics articles
1418:02:22, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
925:23:25, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
887:13:56, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
875:02:27, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
613:
595:
528:
489:
469:
447:
380:
332:
265:
244:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
1423:Political Spectrum Issue
811:20:54, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
1341:External links modified
1204:Article fully protected
966:We've been over this...
820:Request for information
765:20:33, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
650:It is requested that a
434:Canada-related articles
646:
610:
486:
466:
226:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
1136:Democratic Socialists
645:
609:
485:
465:
296:WikiProject Socialism
100:Neutral point of view
1316:New Democratic Party
732:relevant style guide
728:varieties of English
673:and other web sites.
559:WikiProject Politics
105:No original research
730:. According to the
667:WordPress Openverse
660:improve its quality
658:in this article to
1406:InternetArchiveBot
1119:Possible Confusion
665:The external tool
647:
611:
487:
467:
411:WikiProject Canada
319:socialism articles
232:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
1434:comment added by
1294:2001 POV template
1185:
1155:
1115:
1098:comment added by
1042:social democratic
1011:social democratic
813:
801:comment added by
791:
778:comment added by
755:comment added by
742:
741:
687:
686:
674:
636:
635:
632:
631:
628:
627:
582:politics articles
522:Political parties
504:
503:
500:
499:
349:
348:
345:
344:
212:
211:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1551:
1446:
1416:
1407:
1380:
1377:
1376:
1240:
1237:
1235:
1224:Belinda Stronach
1217:
1211:
1177:
1147:
1140:Social Democrats
1114:
1092:
984:social democrats
767:
703:Canadian English
699:This article is
696:
689:
683:
681:
664:
644:
638:
584:
583:
580:
577:
574:
553:
548:
547:
537:
530:
529:
524:
513:
506:
436:
435:
432:
429:
426:
405:
400:
399:
398:
389:
382:
381:
376:
373:
367:British Columbia
358:
351:
321:
320:
317:
314:
311:
290:
288:Socialism portal
285:
284:
274:
267:
266:
261:
253:
246:
229:
223:
222:
214:
206:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1559:
1558:
1554:
1553:
1552:
1550:
1549:
1548:
1449:
1448:
1429:
1425:
1410:
1405:
1378:
1374:
1355:this simple FaQ
1343:
1301:Talk:Adrian Dix
1296:
1277:
1253:
1251:New (2011) Logo
1233:
1231:
1228:
1215:
1209:
1206:
1144:
1121:
1093:
1071:
968:
953:
918:
881:
822:
750:
747:
736:broad consensus
679:
677:
642:
581:
578:
575:
572:
571:
551:Politics portal
549:
542:
519:
433:
430:
427:
424:
423:
401:
396:
394:
374:
364:
318:
315:
312:
309:
308:
286:
279:
259:
230:on Knowledge's
227:
208:
207:
202:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1557:
1555:
1547:
1546:
1541:
1536:
1531:
1526:
1521:
1516:
1511:
1506:
1501:
1496:
1491:
1486:
1481:
1476:
1471:
1466:
1461:
1451:
1450:
1424:
1421:
1400:
1399:
1392:
1370:
1369:
1361:Added archive
1342:
1339:
1295:
1292:
1276:
1273:
1252:
1249:
1205:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1143:
1132:
1120:
1117:
1070:
1063:
1052:
1051:
1021:
1020:
996:
995:
967:
964:
952:
949:
948:
947:
917:
914:
899:
898:
880:
877:
821:
818:
817:
816:
815:
814:
746:
743:
740:
739:
697:
685:
684:
675:
663:
648:
634:
633:
630:
629:
626:
625:
622:Mid-importance
612:
602:
601:
594:
588:
587:
585:
568:the discussion
555:
554:
538:
526:
525:
514:
502:
501:
498:
497:
488:
478:
477:
468:
458:
457:
450:Mid-importance
446:
440:
439:
437:
420:the discussion
407:
406:
390:
378:
377:
375:Mid‑importance
359:
347:
346:
343:
342:
335:Low-importance
331:
325:
324:
322:
305:the discussion
292:
291:
275:
263:
262:
260:Low‑importance
254:
242:
241:
235:
224:
210:
209:
200:
198:
197:
194:
193:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1556:
1545:
1542:
1540:
1537:
1535:
1532:
1530:
1527:
1525:
1522:
1520:
1517:
1515:
1512:
1510:
1507:
1505:
1502:
1500:
1497:
1495:
1492:
1490:
1487:
1485:
1482:
1480:
1477:
1475:
1472:
1470:
1467:
1465:
1462:
1460:
1457:
1456:
1454:
1447:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1422:
1420:
1419:
1414:
1409:
1408:
1397:
1393:
1390:
1386:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1368:
1364:
1360:
1359:
1358:
1356:
1352:
1348:
1340:
1338:
1337:
1333:
1329:
1325:
1321:
1317:
1312:
1307:
1302:
1293:
1291:
1290:
1286:
1282:
1274:
1272:
1271:
1267:
1263:
1258:
1250:
1248:
1247:
1244:
1241:
1239:
1225:
1221:
1214:
1213:editprotected
1203:
1197:
1194:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1184:
1180:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1168:
1164:
1159:
1158:
1154:
1150:
1141:
1137:
1133:
1131:
1130:
1127:
1118:
1116:
1113:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1097:
1089:
1088:
1085:
1081:
1076:
1068:
1064:
1062:
1061:
1058:
1050:
1047:
1043:
1038:
1037:
1036:
1035:
1032:
1029:
1026:
1019:
1016:
1012:
1007:
1006:
1005:
1004:
1001:
994:
991:
987:
985:
979:
978:
977:
976:
973:
963:
962:
959:
950:
946:
943:
938:
937:
936:
935:
932:
926:
924:
916:POV problems?
915:
913:
912:
909:
904:
897:
894:
890:
889:
888:
886:
878:
876:
874:
869:
867:
863:
858:
857:
854:
850:
849:
848:National Post
844:
843:
842:Vancouver Sun
838:
834:
830:
825:
819:
812:
808:
804:
803:24.68.240.108
800:
793:
792:
789:
785:
781:
777:
770:
769:
768:
766:
762:
758:
754:
744:
737:
733:
729:
725:
721:
717:
713:
709:
705:
704:
698:
695:
691:
690:
682:
676:
672:
668:
661:
657:
653:
649:
640:
639:
623:
620:(assessed as
619:
618:
608:
604:
603:
599:
593:
590:
589:
586:
569:
565:
561:
560:
552:
546:
541:
539:
536:
532:
531:
527:
523:
518:
515:
512:
508:
495:
494:
484:
480:
479:
475:
474:
464:
460:
459:
455:
451:
445:
442:
441:
438:
421:
417:
413:
412:
404:
403:Canada portal
393:
391:
388:
384:
383:
379:
372:
368:
363:
360:
357:
353:
340:
336:
330:
327:
326:
323:
306:
302:
298:
297:
289:
283:
278:
276:
273:
269:
268:
264:
258:
255:
252:
248:
243:
239:
233:
225:
221:
216:
215:
196:
195:
192:
189:
187:
183:
182:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1426:
1404:
1401:
1381:
1371:
1344:
1323:
1319:
1310:
1297:
1281:209.207.71.9
1278:
1254:
1229:
1207:
1160:
1145:
1134:Are the NDP
1122:
1090:
1079:
1072:
1053:
1023:You got it.
1022:
997:
983:
981:
969:
954:
927:
919:
900:
882:
870:
859:
855:
852:
846:
840:
837:Carole James
835:(and won by
826:
823:
797:— Preceding
774:— Preceding
757:64.230.54.83
748:
723:
719:
715:
711:
707:
700:
651:
615:
557:
491:
471:
449:
409:
334:
294:
238:WikiProjects
184:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
1430:—Preceding
1094:—Preceding
1078:articles...
942:Kickstart70
931:Kickstart70
923:Kickstart70
893:Kickstart70
885:Ground Zero
829:November 23
751:—Preceding
701:written in
148:free images
31:not a forum
1453:Categories
1413:Report bug
1306:Salmon War
1226:article -
652:photograph
1396:this tool
1389:this tool
1262:Jermdeeks
1179:KenWalker
1149:KenWalker
1046:Serpent-A
1015:Serpent-A
990:Serpent-A
716:travelled
310:Socialism
301:socialism
257:Socialism
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
1432:unsigned
1402:Cheers.—
1328:Skookum1
1193:WikiMart
1167:WikiMart
1108:contribs
1096:unsigned
1084:Skookum1
1065:Note re
873:CJCurrie
799:unsigned
788:contribs
780:Veenoghu
776:unsigned
753:unsigned
745:Untitled
656:included
573:Politics
564:politics
517:Politics
371:Politics
186:Archives
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
1351:my edit
1320:someone
1126:Lindsay
1100:Schnarr
724:analyze
720:realize
452:on the
337:on the
228:C-class
154:WP refs
142:scholar
1311:overly
1220:WP:SPA
1075:WP:COI
1067:WP:COI
862:May 20
712:centre
708:colour
680:Upload
671:Flickr
425:Canada
416:Canada
362:Canada
234:scale.
126:Google
1324:acute
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1440:talk
1332:talk
1285:talk
1266:talk
1183:Talk
1153:Talk
1104:talk
1057:g3a3
1031:g3a3
1000:g3a3
972:g3a3
958:Bill
908:G3A3
866:1984
833:2003
807:talk
784:talk
761:talk
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
1365:to
1138:or
982:As
662:.
654:be
592:???
444:Mid
329:Low
176:TWL
1455::
1442:)
1334:)
1287:)
1268:)
1234:is
1216:}}
1210:{{
1181:|
1165:--
1151:|
1110:)
1106:•
1044:.
1013:.
988:"
864:,
831:,
809:)
786:•
763:)
722:,
718:,
714:,
710:,
624:).
520::
369:/
365::
156:)
54:;
1438:(
1415:)
1411:(
1398:.
1391:.
1379:Y
1330:(
1283:(
1264:(
1260:-
1243:☺
1238:n
1236:o
1232:l
1230:A
1142:?
1102:(
1082:.
805:(
782:(
759:(
738:.
600:.
496:.
476:.
456:.
341:.
240::
191:1
188::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
