Talk:Manitoba Liberal Party

Party position
I have reverted the edit on political position made by User 206.45.202.117, who argued the party "has undoubtedly taken a turn to the right over the past few years." This point is unsourced and not backed up by anything in the article or that of the article of the leader Rana Bokhari. User:Graham11 provides a 2010 reference of how the party was perceived by one observer in 2003, which does not help much with 2016. Party policy positions in the Rana Bokhari article reflect those of a party that could more accurately be described as Centre to Centre-left in the Canadian context. The party Facebook and Twitter pages describing them as "Modern. Progressive. Balanced." seem to echo this. Graemp (talk) 09:26, 13 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Am I correct in understanding that that assessment is your original research?
 * Am I correct in understanding that that assessment is your original research?


 * I fail to see how a vague party slogan from a Facebook page during one campaign can prove a party's ideological position. Furthermore, see WP:PRIMARY, which reads in part: "Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia; but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge." [footnote omitted]
 * I fail to see how a vague party slogan from a Facebook page during one campaign can prove a party's ideological position. Furthermore, see WP:PRIMARY, which reads in part: "Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia; but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge." [footnote omitted]


 * The article makes no reference to the party being left of centre either. But unlike your assertion that the party is to the left, the statement that the party is centrist is backed up by a reliable source.
 * The article makes no reference to the party being left of centre either. But unlike your assertion that the party is to the left, the statement that the party is centrist is backed up by a reliable source.


 * I would read the quotation from Barber in its entirety (and, preferably, in the context of the rest of the chapter). As indicated, this is from a book published in 2010, and only the latter portion of the quotation (the portion after the ellipsis) relates directly to the party's 2007 platform.
 * I would read the quotation from Barber in its entirety (and, preferably, in the context of the rest of the chapter). As indicated, this is from a book published in 2010, and only the latter portion of the quotation (the portion after the ellipsis) relates directly to the party's 2007 platform.


 * Moreover, the infobox needn't only reflect the ongoing election campaign (see WP:RECENT). And as I had quoted from Barber, "If one looks at Manitoba Liberal commitments offered over time, one finds a centrist but fluid ideological orientation". Graham (talk) 04:11, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Fair points. I will therefore restrict my response to the one source you use. Firstly, your 2010 published source relates to a paper written and presented by Barber in 2008. His actual quote is this "The Manitoba liberal Party today is a small-l liberal party similar to the moderate, centre-left federal liberal Party." which he uses to summarise the party position. He uses the comment made on the 2003 platform to provide background on where the party had positioned itself previously. On the basis of the above quote, one might conclude that the party should be described as centre-left rather than centre. However, I think to describe the party as centre to centre-left better reflects the entire paper. Graemp (talk) 08:54, 14 February 2016 (UTC)