Talk:2018 Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario leadership election

Tanya Granic Allen Picture
The picture of Tanya Granic Allen seems to give a very poor representation of her persona. In the current image she looks angry and vicious - as far as I can tell this detracts from the neutrality of this page. Perhaps someone can upload a picture that better represents the image she normally portrays? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Honestly123 (talk • contribs) 20:06, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
 * If the Granic Allen campaign is willing to donate a photo or upload one to Flickr with the appropriate public domain copyright, someone can replace this photo. Unfortunately this appears to be the only one available for her in public domain at the moment.Canadianpoliticalwatcher (talk) 02:32, 6 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Tanya Granic Allen's campaign picture was recently added to Flickr, see here. At the moment I cannot insert it into the article, perhaps someone can?Honestly123 (talk) 14:10, 6 March 2018 (UTC)


 * It was uploaded to Flickr with all rights reserved, not under a CC license. Therefore we can't use it. RoyalObserver (talk) 03:00, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I agree that the photo should be changed. This photo is worse than no photo at all.199.7.157.111 (talk) 05:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * If you can find a better photo that is openly licensed, than please change it! Unfortunately we can't use the ones on Flickr due to their licenses. RoyalObserver (talk) 16:15, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with on this one. I don't want to say I knew from the beginning that this would be a point of contention, but having seen past debates on the topic of leader photos. There have been goofy or unfortunate photos of federal party leaders for years, and every once and a while, somebody will go in and change the photo in an article to that photo. However, this picture of Tanya Granic Allen is the only one that we have the rights to use right now.  if you can take a better picture of the candidate and allow Wikipedia to use the rights under a Creative Commons license, then we will absolutely use that picture. The problem is that all the other photos out there are copyright protected. Unless we get permissions from the owner of a "better photograph" to use their property, then it can't be uploaded to Wikipedia. Bkissin (talk)
 * The Flickr pictures' copyright licence were changed to CC0. One of TGA's official pictures was uploaded there with the permission of her campaign. Sorry about the complications. Honestly123 —Preceding undated comment added 15:03, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, ✅. Make changes if necessary! [[File:Tanya Granic Allen Official Campaign Photo.jpg]] Bkissin (talk) 19:51, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, deleted again. Anyone can copy a copyrighted photo to flickr and then license it as CC.  Said photo was copied from here.  We would need an OTRS from that website to use it here - I have deleted it. Black Kite (talk) 20:20, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Caroline Mulroney
Should Mulroney still be considered prospective? She has already been endorsed by multiple people, and has accepted these endorsements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stampman11 (talk • contribs) 18:08, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * She hasn't officially declared yet. Apparently will do so on Monday so wait until she makes an announcement.Nixon Now (talk) 18:21, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Former MPs or Nominated Candidates, which should take precedence?
So I was looking at the endorsement sections for the leadership candidates (Mulroney in particular) and I noticed several former federal MPs running for PC nomination (Paul Calandra, Parm Gill, Daryl Kramp, and Susan Truppe). This is not out of the ordinary, but I saw them listed under Nomination Candidates instead of Former MPs. Is there a preference one way or another as to where these figures should be? This also affects former provincial MPP's. Shouldn't their most senior position (Federal, Provincial, Municipal) be the deciding factor and we can leave the Nominated Candidates section for PC candidates who do not have any other higher position. The alternative option is to get rid of the Nominated Candidates section all together. I understand why it is there, given that we are so close to a provincial election, but I can't remember any other leadership election article that included that in their endorsement section. Thoughts? Bkissin (talk) 19:39, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Personally, I think it makes the most sense that candidates should be listed under whatever is their most current political "status". So someone like Paul Calandra is listed as a Nominated Candidate since that is his most current political status, whereas if someone like John Baird were to endorse someone he would be under Former MPs. I viewed this as a logical extension of someone like Bart Maves' endorsement of Elliott, he is under Municipal Politicians since he currently sits on the Niagara Regional Council despite also being a former MPP. If people disagree with this system I am definitely open to discussion... this is just my $0.02 about what makes a coherent system.


 * As for the inclusion of nominated candidates, I think it is important in this particular election because we are so close to the next provincial general and there is a good chance a lot of these candidates may become part of the new leader's caucus. RA 0808  talkcontribs 17:05, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! I can definitely understand both sides of the situation here. I'm not sure if I totally agree, but I'm certainly not going to make any WP:BOLD changes to the article. I'm fine keeping the status quo. Bkissin (talk) 18:07, 6 February 2018 (UTC)


 * This is a unique leadership race. I would argue that the nominated candidates have outsized influence in this race because of a) the weighted system b) the imminent provincial election in which they are active participants. Arguably, they are the people most directly in touch with the rank and file members in their ridings given their on-going election readiness efforts. I certainly think the status of nominated candidates gives their support more weight than their status as former MP/MPP (who's influence comes from the respect they command, which wanes overtime). In fact, I would argue that they should be moved up and be listed immediately after the sitting MPPs.Milton Chan (talk) 18:40, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I definitely understand the argument about including the nominated candidates, and I am not opposed to including them in the endorsement section. Though, at the same time, how will that look after the election. Reminder that Wikipedia is not news or a crystal ball, and having nominated candidates for an election that took place two years from now seems counterproductive. Regardless, I don't see a reason to remove them.
 * HOWEVER, I would be opposed to listing them immediately after sitting MPPs. That gives undue weight to candidates who haven't even won/lost an election yet. Bkissin (talk) 14:44, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Rules and Nominations
This section seems inaccurate. Currently it reads that they must be a sitting MPP or candidate, however this National Post article (http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/doug-ford-says-ontario-pcs-trying-to-undermine-his-leadership-campaign-by-restricting-new-membership-sign-ups) states that "But Lefton said the requirement is only that leadership candidates go through the same vetting process as any other candidate for the party. They don’t have to actually be nominated as an MPP candidate before the leadership vote, he said." Could someone confirm the rules and update? As of now, according to this page, Doug Ford and Christine Elliott would not be eligible. - RoyalObserver —Preceding undated comment added 21:40, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I think Lefton's clarification may have been added to the article later. Either that or I missed it at the time.Nixon Now (talk) 21:54, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Tanya Granic Allen
Is Tanya Granic Allen's last name Allen or Granic Allen? This makes a difference when we're determining alphabetical order. Nixon Now (talk) 19:06, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Granic Allen according to the Star. https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/02/08/tanya-granic-allen-announces-plans-to-join-ontario-pc-leadership-race.html 19:22, 9 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Everything else I've seen lists "Allen." I believe the Star just assumed due to her lack of public stature. Therefore, she should be listed first. https://twitter.com/ChrisAReynolds/status/964188782252707841 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/tanya-granic-allen-ontario-pc-leadership-1.4535708 RoyalObserver (talk) 17:31, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * PC Leadership website has her as Granic in alphabetical order. I guess we can stick with that! RoyalObserver (talk) 20:23, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

As a note, when I uploaded the photo I took of her at the event and added it into the info box, I just chose the PC Blue Colour for her seeing as she hasn't released any branding. When someone see's the branding please feel free to update it! :) - RoyalObserver. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoyalObserver (talk • contribs) 20:19, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

I have moved Granic Allen to the Registered Candidates section and added her to the infobox due to her registration with Elections Ontario. Her infobox colour is still the PC blue because I have yet to see any promotional material for her campaign. - RoyalObserver 14 February 2017 15:06 EST


 * Based on her website, I've changed her colourcode to C71585. It's (unless my screen is messing with me), the colour she uses in her accents all over the website. - RoyalObserver 14 February 2017 15:15 (EST)


 * She's not listed on the PC Party leadership website which means she's not yet official. Better to keep her separate until she's nominated (ie paid her deposit) Nixon Now (talk) 20:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * She's registered with Elections Ontario, which in my opinion (and traditionally in the past as far as I'm aware) means she is official. The PCs could be a bit behind. Regardless, we can wait. RoyalObserver (talk) 20:32, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Your opinion, but not the PC Party's. Elections Ontario doesn't track whether or not a candidate has paid their deposit. If the PC Party is "behind" it's not for us to get ahead of them. Nixon Now (talk) 00:51, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Seems like it's all official... Chris Reynolds reported that she is participating in tonights debate and that the PC Leadership Chair has confirmed that "Allen has cleared the $100,000 bar required by the PC party to enter the contest" https://twitter.com/ChrisAReynolds/status/964188391725305856 https://twitter.com/ChrisAReynolds/status/964188782252707841 RoyalObserver (talk) 17:27, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Oh, okay then. Nixon Now (talk) 18:06, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Mulroney picture
If anyone has a picture they`ve taken themselves of Caroline Mulroney please upload it. The powers that be at Wikipedia are probably going to have the existing picture of her deleted for copyright reasons. See:File talk:Caroline Mulroney.jpg. Alternatively, if the Mulroney campaign can give permission for the image to be used, that would be helpful. Nixon Now (talk) 20:37, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, I've sent an email to the Mulroney campaign with information about donating a copyrighted image. No response as of yet. RA 0808  talkcontribs 17:02, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Added one that I took at an event. Not the best quality (thanks crappy cell phone), but better than nothing. RoyalObserver (talk) 23:51, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Great work! Thank you! Outback the koala (talk) 16:25, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Candidates' Profiles: Background / Policies
Within individual candidates' profiles I propose to remove the heading for "Background" and simply start the narrative. In addition, I propose to bring up "Policies" section to the top and merge them with the background. Objections? Truther2012 (talk) 14:57, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅Truther2012 (talk) 15:16, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion of Granic Allens Page
Articles for deletion/Tanya Granic Allen seems to be moving towards a merge decision, so we will need expand these sections. Outback the koala (talk) 15:28, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Resolved Truther2012 (talk) 23:27, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Interim leadership section
Normally there would not be an entire section containing a single short sentence. Particularly when the exact same sentence has already been repeated. Unless someone intends to expand this section, I propose to delete it altogether. Truther2012 (talk) 19:18, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Other prominent individuals endorsing Elliott
I removed a few "Other prominent individuals" from Elliott's endorsement list. Most of them do not have a proper ref (candidate saying thanks is not proper), have broken links or altogether questionable prominence. I pasted the list here, so you can improve and repost.

(4) Nick Gahunia (Brampton Centre PC Riding President), Michael Giesbrecht (University of Ottawa Campus Conservatives President), Jim Kwan (Ontario PC Secretary), Gulab Singh (Director of South Asian Development)

--Truther2012 (talk) 21:28, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what this issue is here. Is it sourcing concerns? Inclusion? Outback the koala (talk) 15:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with keeping the ones with an official endorsement graphic/acknowledgement of endorsement from a leadership campaign, but not the ones ripped from a Facebook status/comment.Canadianpoliticalwatcher (talk) 00:14, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Well it's a 2 month campaign, so in my mind this is going to be extra messy; ie not all endorsements are going to be directly advertised by the respective campaigns. I think we should defaultly allow these additions to the page unless some type of dispute arises. Outback the koala (talk) 02:25, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * This is an encyclopedia first and most. (WP:NOTSOAPBOX) "Messy" is never the right solution - proper citation is the foundation. Truther2012 (talk) 17:41, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Further, putting something in a graphic does not make it a proper citation. Please, let's stick to current WP, such as WP:CITE -Truther2012 (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Honestly I don't understand. What graphic are we talking about? I think I am misunderstanding the issue you raising? I'm Sorry to ask, but could you explain this a little bit better for me?Outback the koala (talk) 19:24, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Graphics such as the ones being put out by Elliott and Mulroney (ex. this). Facebook comments don't really meet the appropriateness as a source for Wikipedia (although to be fair, almost none of the current ones do outside of ones published in news articles). But I do understand your frustration in finding appropriate sources - compared to the US, our media tend to focus less on candidate endorsements and it's difficult to find good sources to back them up. As for "prominent individuals" who are notable, I think riding presidents meet notability to be included as they usually do carry clout in their riding as they are elected by the membership to serve. Ditto for party executives - as they had to be elected party-wide and also hold more power in decision making by the party (such as opening up this leadership race).Canadianpoliticalwatcher (talk) 04:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Yet another crop of "notables". Let's all agree that we subscribe to WP:Notability. As such, people who do not qualify for a WP page can't be considered notable for these purposes. Also, you can't say "so and so endorsed me" - that is not a reliable source. That person's verified Facebook or Twitter account stating the same is. Let's keep it clean! Truther2012 (talk) 14:56, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, but notable in context. I see you deleted Jim Kwan, who is the freaking party secretary of the Pc party. If he's not a notable other individual in the context of a Pc leadership race, then who is? No one?Outback the koala (talk) 16:12, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Not sure, what's the difference between a freaking party secretary and a normal one is. What criteria would you propose? Is 9th VP of the party prominent, or should we cut off at the 8th? And what's with freaking no-name student groups who don't even have a website? This page need a serious cleaning. And it is up to us, encyclopedia editors (not party functionaries!) to keep it so.Truther2012 (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that despite the numbering for the Vice Presidents, they do not indicate any level of power over the lower numbered Vice Presidents, so they're all equal and don't carry any more weight than other Vice Presidents, just differences in roles they are tasked with (Fundraising, memberships, etc.). I agree student club presidents are not prominent. If the entire conservative campus club of a post-secondary institution decides to endorse a candidate, we can probably put them under organizations, but the President him/herself is not prominent. In my opinion, outside of persons with a Wikipedia page, CURRENT members of the party executive (as per official party list) are relevant to this leadership election, especially due to their role in organizing the leadership race and its rules. Canadianpoliticalwatcher (talk) 02:26, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Endorsements for withdrawn candidates
Proposal to compress withdrawn candidates sections. Specifically, eliminate the endorsement sections - irrelevant. Objections? -Truther2012 (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * What if we collapsed that portion? Outback the koala (talk) 02:23, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm ok with that, except that why? What is the value to know that X endorsed Y, when Y is no longer relevant? Most of the endorsers will probably migrate to current candidates anyway. Truther2012 (talk) 17:54, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Granic Allen Infobox Colour
Should we change the colour for Granic Allen? Currently she has a magenta colour scheme in the infobox but it doesn't appear to be a colour she is using in her campaign (website, campaign emails, etc.). It will also get confusing when we create a results map as her colour is really close to the purple Mulroney has (which is a colour Mulroney is actually using). From Granic Allen's website and logo it appears that she is using gray and dark red, outside of the usual shades of blue all candidates have. Is anyone opposed to changing the colour to dark red or grey? And does anyone have a preference for the colour? Canadianpoliticalwatcher (talk) 04:43, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I have changed Granic Allen's infobox colour to dark red.Canadianpoliticalwatcher (talk) 02:09, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I think that red still needs to be lightened up some more; even on my fairly new, high-resolution monitor I have to really lean up close and squint to actually differentiate it from Caroline Mulroney's colour. Bearcat (talk) 04:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Done! Canadianpoliticalwatcher (talk) 04:56, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Just for context, her initial website had that magenta colour scheme as an accent on everything, which is why I originally chose it! RoyalObserver (talk) 23:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Pro-life or anti-abortion?
The Canadian Press style guide holds that the term "anti-abortion" should be used instead of "pro-life" as the former is neutral. Similarly, the Associated Press style guide states "Use anti-abortion instead of pro-life and abortion rights instead of pro-abortion or pro-choice. Avoid abortionist, which connotes a person who performs clandestine abortions." Accordingly, please use the NPOV term anti-abortion in this article in regards to Tanya Granic Allen. Nixon Now (talk) 20:25, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Whatever term she uses to describe herself, I think we should use. Do we know what term she uses? Outback the koala (talk) 01:45, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * We don't use the wording that people use to describe themselves. See also "terrorist" vs "armed rebel group" vs "freedom fighter" etc.  The pro-life/anti-abortion discussion has been done to death previously and we should - and do - stick with the titles used in our articles. Black Kite (talk) 17:37, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I think we tend to use the wording that reliable sourcing tells us; in this case it seems to be mix, but mainly the media I think has respected her description of herself? I'm not sure what protocol on this would be generally as both terms seem equally accurate. Outback the koala (talk) 19:16, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Granic Allen is also pro-life on the topic of Euthanasia.104.247.233.166 (talk) 12:23, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
 * So then she's anti-euthanasia or would you prefer the term anti-quality of life. Nixon Now (talk) 17:29, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Patrick Brown's name on the ballot
Notwithstanding the Globe and Mail article which said Brown's name would remain on the ballot - it actually is not. The ballot is electronic, and not paper, and as he dropped out before voting had begun removing his name from the ballot only took a few keystrokes. As anyone who has voted can attest, Brown's name is not actually on the ballot. Nixon Now (talk) 01:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Nixon is correct. I just voted in the PC Leadership election, and Brown's name was not on the ballot. The vote is online. First, they mail you a PIN code. Then, you go on the website and enter the PIN code, personal information, and upload either one main ID (like a Driver's licence), or two minor pieces of ID (like a fishing licence). Then, the next day, after verifying your ID, they e-mail you a different code which you use to anonymously vote with. It was very easy to vote, but I don't trust online voting due to the possibility of hacking. Then again, I'm just an old lady, so what do I know.199.7.157.111 (talk) 05:26, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Some Declined Candidates not WP:V
Implied by this heading is that these candidates were either formally nominated by the party, approached informally to run, or at least the subject of RS media speculation about running. In many cases, however, the supplied sources do not support this. For instance, the reference given for McNaughton and Ambler states simply, "Monte McNaughton, Stella Ambler and others have chosen to sit this one out." Secondary sources aren't given for Bethlenfalvy and Levy, only their own tweets: "I’m proud to announce my full support for @celliottability as the next leader of the Ontario PC Party" —Bethlenfalvy, and "Nope I'm not interested in the job" —Levy. Compare to the properly referenced Baird who "...decided not to mount a leadership bid. Baird, also a former provincial cabinet minister, had been under intense pressure to run" —TorStar.

That some of these people were ever under consideration for or sought out the candidacy is not borne out by the given references. Unless others are interpreting the term "declined" differently, or there are objections, I propose removal of any that are not properly sourced. ―StvnW talk 05:20, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Right. Just go and remove them—if anyone has an actual argument to retain any of them, they can bring it here. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 07:30, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Why is the final ballot listed at the top
Usually final rounds are listed at the bottom. Why is it listed at the top in the infobox? SecretName101 (talk) 22:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC)