Talk:Margaret Wente

WP:CHICAGO
If the article has a category that is listed at WP:CHIBOTCATS, it will get ChicagoWikiProject added to its talk page during the twice a week bot runs through the categories to look for new untagged articles. If the category is unimportant to the article remove it so that this does not have it. If the category is important to the article our project would like to follow the article using the template.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:54, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Wente's republicanism
I've include a quotation about Wente's well-known, strong republican beliefs that are entirely relevant since she and the Globe and Mail's Jeffrey Simpson are, without question, the most vocal Canadian journalists advocating an end to the monarchy in Canada. G2's repeated removal of the quotation and replacement with a monarchist-slanted interpretation is simply another in a long list of attempts to stifle any popular republican opinion on Wikipedia (see User Talk:G2Bambino for his many reprimands for edit-warring on this very subject).

This is his version of the quotation. Can you tell it's written by someone who considers her views irrelevant?


 * A supporter of a republican form of government for Canada, Wente has commented often in her column about her views on Canada ending its personal union with the other realms of the Commonwealth, speaking unfavourably on the aspects of inheritance and tradition, as well as opining that the Canadian monarchy is an "insult" to Qubecers.

Note the terms "Personal union," "unfavourably on the aspects of inheritance and tradition" and "insult" with quotation marks. The only thing missing is a snort and an upturned nose.

Including the unedited quotation in full removes any biased interpretation, including by me.

BTW, as a concession, I've already made the quotation less dominant by changing it from a quote box to a small text quotation. - MC Rufus (talk) 21:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * If you have a problem with personal union, take it up with scholars of history and international law.
 * "Unfavourably" was meant to communicate that she does not favour them. Perhaps it could have been worded better, but reverting won't achieve that.
 * "insult" was her word; it's in the quote you keep placing here, in case you missed it. Glad you see the arrogant nature of her comments, though.
 * Further, you still haven't addressed the fact that Wikipedia bios do not include quotes unless they pertain to what the person is most known for, or are examples of the way the subject of the article commonly speaks. --G2bambino (talk) 23:31, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * This isn't a forum for you to espouse your monarchist views. It's a bio page that's supposed to convey to the reader what a person is about. Would Wente use the term personal union to describe the monarchy? I don't think so.
 * And no, I don't see any arrogance in her wording. It was the arrogant nature of your quotation marks around "insult" that I was pointing out, which are not necessary. - MC Rufus (talk) 10:09, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Again, please stick to the actual dispute. Wente is not the one writing this article, therefore we need not use the exact words she uses. We write the article, and must be NPOV in doing so. --G2bambino (talk) 17:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there an end to this struggle anytime soon? Including the related articles? I'd suggest you both go to Mediation. GoodDay (talk) 21:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Reference to Staple Theory needed
Wente exemplifies South-Central Canada ignorance of the Staple Theory, so ref needed to explain her ignorance. Ref to Danny Williams article is good but, as American, she is completely ignorant of how Southern Ontario / Southern Quebec is a parasite to, and exploits, the natural resource hinterland of Canada [see: http://www.amazon.com/Inside-Outer-Canada-David-Kilgour/dp/0919433863 ]. Thus, extra paragraph needed here to explain.

This is particularly cogent given her Republicanism; if Canada had had a US-style regional based Senate (example: Wyoming has 2 votes, New York has  2 votes; Wyoming has .5 million people, New York has 20 million people), Canada would have developed like United States, with massive secondary manufacturing and hi-tech development out in Prairies and Maritimes and West Coast, away from S.Ont/S.Que urban heartland, the way  auto manufacturing has developed in Texas, for example, or Microsoft in Seattle (just 90 minutes south of Vancouver-BC, even tho Microsoft Canada seems to think it needs to be 5,000 km to the east, in metro Toronto...).

Instead of current 60% of Canada's population on 2% of land area in S.Ont/S.Que corridor, Wente would see only 15% in Canada's corridor (as is the case in USA, with 15% of US population in BosNYWash megalopolis, 2% of USA land area), and understand that Newfoundland and rest of 98% of Canada's land mass (natural resource zones)are the real generators of wealth in Canada.

And deserve to be so-rewarded.

Instead of being derided as "deadbeat brother-in-law" and "most vast and scenic welfare ghetto in the world", thereby showing Wente's absolute and total incompetence -- [i]in failing to learn about Canada, her adopted homeland[/i] -- and ignorance, in, like the other 17 million in Upper and Lower Canada, refusing to acknowledge that Canada's bread and butter comes from its natural resources, not its government-created manufacturing and hi-tech industries of Southern Ontario and Southern Quebec ...

... Wente would understand that Newfoundland and the Maritimes and the Canadian Shield and the Prairies and West Coast and "North of 60" generate what the rest of the world (ex: China) really want to buy: natural resources. Not Blackberrys or government-created Auto Pact cars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atikokan (talk • contribs) 05:52, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Ummm ... what? You want a reference to something that she's ignorant about? Are you mad? Sorry, a more polite question would be "how would this strengthen the article?" Thanks, Hu Gadarn (talk) 06:43, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

plastic surgery? relevance?
Not sure if this is (i) correct but if so then (ii) relevant; did she have plastic surgery? I ask since this (current?) image does not look anything like this or this (former?) images. Maybe it's just a new haircut and better lighting and maybe it's irrelevant. Thoughts? Thanks, Hu Gadarn (talk) 20:53, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I have removed reference number one
Due to the fact that the link is dead to anyone who has not paid monetary tribute to the Globe and Mail. While I don't question the original author's intention, this is a very questionable source to begin with. It wouldn't be hard to imagine a national newspaper agency go a great length to protect one of their most valuable employees image from being spoiled. In other words, the source is possibly biased, regardless what types of facts or informations are backed by the link in this article. Thus the link and reference is removed.Gw2005 (talk) 21:55, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * BTW, as Wante is a highly controversial figure in the Canadian news community, a section of a list controversial topics by Wante is added (by me). List could potentially include just about everything Wante had written, but a few specifically highly controversial ones should be added for sure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gw2005 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Do keep in mind, however, that any "controversy" would need to be cited to some third-party source. We can't (per the no original research policy) have a list of her controversial articles or opinions based on what Wikipedia editors believe are "controversial". Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 04:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Waitress
If you read Wente's book An Accidental Canadian it is clear that her job at The Coffee Mill in Toronto was defining. She compares the build of pressure during a shift to the newsroom of journalists. She also roots her work ethic there, as indicated in the article text. Placement in category:Waitresses has been restored.Rgdboer (talk) 22:02, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * DEFINING doesn't mean the job meant something to her. I'm quite sure that many writers, journalists, dancers, artists, actors, and musicians had important experiences working as a waiter and that such experience influenced their work. However, that is not what "job" categories such as Waitress are for - they are for jobs where secondary sources regularly use the term "waitress" to describe her. In my perusal, I didn't see this. Can you provide evidence, e.g. some publication which says "Wente, a journalist and ex-waitress, today said xxx"? Her job as a waitress is not notable, and it's not DEFINING for the outside world either (regardless of how much it influenced HER). Also, please read the guidance on this here COP. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 22:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

OK. Will look for such publication.Rgdboer (talk) 22:30, 3 June 2013 (UTC)