User talk:Ben MacLeod

Welcome!
Hello, Ben MacLeod, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! DS (talk) 20:14, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Life (sculpture)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:05, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Halifax Transit
Hey Ben, you called me out for being an "IP Hopper" in regards to the Halifax Transit page, but it is not me. I have no idea what IP hopping is. I placed the list of the future transit system months ago, fact based from the Halifax website. It was then vandalized and like you said, someone added a hoax of routes after the new route changes were implemented in Halifax in the fall. I put it back with a source and seen your post about how its changed a bit since it was announced and I agreed and never reposted the "Future Transit System" back onto the page. I have been using Wikipedia for years and am very knowledgeable about Halifax Transit as I rely on it everyday and would not vandalize the page, I was just attempting to make it helpful for people to look at the future routes of the system. I have never vandalized a page and have always made edits to sports pages over the years with no problems. I am trying to fix up the Transit page not ruin it. Please don't pinpoint me for something I didnt do. Debdeb18 (talk) 06:50, 8 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I retracted what I wrote at ANI. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Ben MacLeod (talk) 13:38, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, very appreciated and I hope we can get the Halifax Transit page as good as possible Debdeb18 (talk) 02:05, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Spouses of Prime Ministers
What infobox person doesn't have, but spouses of prime ministers do need, is succession information — i.e. links to who held the title before and/or after this one. So the spouses have to use an infobox that offers the capability of coding for that. Bearcat (talk) 15:54, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Original Research
Hi there!

I saw you had marked a significant amount of the entry on the WE Scandal page as original research. I was wondering which specific elements fell under this particular definition? I thought I had provided sources where necessary, but I definitely might have made an oversight and I will happily provide a source where required. If you think a synthesis of information occurred somewhere, I will gladly clarify the secondary sources in that regard as well.

I did my best prior to writing to verify the facts by cross-referencing three main timeline of events: CTV, CBC, and Global News. I think Global News has the best one, as they have links to primary sources almost every step of the way embedded directly; but they all agree on the series of the events. Additional information came from a variety of other secondary-news sources: The Globe and Mail, postmillennial, etc. Primary sources like direct statements came from places such as youtube, twitter, as well as statements from government committee minutes.

Regards, GTS

GaiusTranquillusSuetonius (talk) 21:10, 7 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi Thanks for the message. My revert was excessive and so I undid it. But I thought that some of the passages made claims that did not appear in the sources, and possibly verged into independent commentary. For instance, in the subsection about WE Charity's activities in French-speaking Canada, the conclusion, "The contention then, that WE Charity was the only organization capable of outsourcing to third-party contacts, is even more dubious", is not accompanied by any citation. The original heading "inability to serve French Canada" also strikes me as odd, considering that the hiring of an external PR firm is a means of serving French Canada. The headings "inappropriate lobbying activities", "labour law violations", "conflict of interest", etc. also seem inappropriately definitive given that the cited sources describe allegations and concerns only – rather than legal convictions against the organization. Ben MacLeod (talk) 09:32, 8 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I gave that concluding statement a reread and it definitely does come across in the manner which you were suggesting, the intention was to tie off the section but it sounds very conclusive. I agree that some of the sub-titles too could use work, I think you're 100% correct in that words like "allegations" in the context they appear on the page right do appear overtly definitive.

In regards to the service of French Canada, that could probably use some more fleshing out. Essentially, what happened was that WE Charity had contracted the serving of French Speaking regions out to a third party. That in itself is fine and normally how things work, but the problem was in this case WE Charity presented itself, and was presented as, as operating a nation-wide network; this was one of the reasons it was stated as 'the only option' and that was the reason it was ultimately chosen.

The third party, National, was not itself administering the program, but had requested a list of community organizations who could; directly from the Federal government in Quebec. The federal government could have just contacted these groups in Quebec directly without WE Charity being involved, if they were going to turn around and use the governments sources. This contradicts the notion that WE was uniquely situated to deliver a Canada-wide program.

The primary source from the government regarding their concerns about operations in Quebec were statements made by Jean-Yves Duclos, president of the Treasury Board, that were disclosed in the 5000 page data dump.

"I fear that collaboration with the UNIS Organization (WE Charity) is sub-optimal in Quebec, both in terms of image and influence. (By the way, being able to offer "bilingual training material" is one thing, but being able to exert its influence within a strong network of closely knit community organizations is quite another" https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1728015/justin-trudeau-affaire-unis-we-charity-documents-jean-yves-duclos&prev=search&pto=aue

Additional concerns were raised by Conservative MP Richard Martel.

There was an ongoing committee probing whether WE Charity had violated Federal Language laws, but they are yet to be resumed after the prorogation.

GaiusTranquillusSuetonius (talk) 18:03, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

2020 Halifax municipal election
Hello Ben, I'm the guy who's entries you archived. My source for the participation percentages come from the same source as the results. That is here: https://www.halifax.ca/city-hall/elections/official-candidates-2020-municipal-csap-election. I do need to make some small changes to the formatting, but the information is accurate (or at least trustworthy). I appreciate your due diligence though.

StuckInTheFridge (talk) 16:52, 3 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that. When I looked at the URL it still showed the original format without the electorate/turnout figures. I see the updated PDF now. Thank you for updating the article! Ben MacLeod (talk) 10:10, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

StuckInTheFridge (talk) 12:53, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * No issue, I can appreciate the scrutiny.

Your submission at the Did You Know nominations page
Hello! Your submission at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Michael Barera (talk) 19:50, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Avoid plagiarism by summarizing source material in your own words
You need to rewrite the content on the Iain Rankin site, you can not just copy and paste articles from the CBC website, your post will be removed due to plagiarism. Take the time to summarize source material in your own words. Or I will remove it.Snowy Badger (talk) 12:27, 9 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi Snowy Badger, I didn't copy and paste anything from the CBC website. I only contributed one sentence. I'm not seeing which parts were copy & pasted. In any case I've rewritten and condensed the rest of the section. Ben MacLeod (talk) 03:16, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Cycling in Halifax, Nova Scotia
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Halifax Transit, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dartmouth High School. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 24
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Highfield Park, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clayton Park.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Cumberland Regional Health Care Centre moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Cumberland Regional Health Care Centre, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. • Gene93k (talk) 21:10, 9 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I have beefed up the article so hopefully it's acceptable now. I plan to continue working on it over the coming month. Ben MacLeod (talk) 04:38, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Edits on Sylvain charlebois
I appreciate your recent edits on Charlebois, and you criticism on my recent edits (which to some extent were valid).

However, I do think that your edits are missing a key piece: the fact that Charlebois failed to disclose the Weston foundation grant as a conflict of interest. Moreover, Charlebois actually removed information of the grant in the CV, lied about the timing in a tweet, and then removed the CV altogether. All are verifiable facts that were reported in the media articles (including the Halifax Reporter) and can be traced back to tweets (from Charlebois himself) and The Way Back machine on his CV.

I know the intent of Wikipedia is to remain neutral, and that this space should not serve as a venue to attack any living person. But the above stated facts were quite at the center of the scandal. Your edits make it seem as if the Weston Foundation grant was the culprit of the backlash where, in fact, it was his attempt to hide this grant that drew most of the backlash.

I just wanted to run this on you instead of directly editing the page ,to avoid getting my edits reverted.

Again, thank you for all your help in maintaining the wiki site. Jervis49 (talk) 11:08, 20 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello and thanks for your message. I'm fine with adding any information that is reflected in reliable secondary sources, and worded neutrally. It would be preferable to avoid citing primary sources, such as his Twitter or CV, if possible. My personal inclination is to contribute conservatively at first, and just wait for additional reputable news coverage to become available. I suspect we will see more media coverage come out as I understand Charlebois has been vaguely threatening legal action against the author of the "The Orchard" piece. Best, Ben MacLeod (talk) 21:39, 21 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I see you reverted a new editor's changes on this article with the comment . While one might argue that there was some whitewashing, you revert seemed a bit ham-fisted, removing seemingly well-placed maintenance tags, specifically in several places. It would be good if you restored those, minus the whitewashing.
 * Your edit summary was kinda WP:BITEY. Do you have a connection to the subject of the article? Toddst1 (talk) 05:08, 7 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't have any connection to the subject of the article. The article has been the focus of numerous blocked single-purpose / sockpuppet accounts – please see Talk:Sylvain Charlebois or Sockpuppet investigations/Janvez/Archive. I suspect the new account is more of the same, considering both their editing behaviour and the fact that the account edited Sylvain Charlebois right after becoming autoconfirmed (the page is semi-protected). I've reinstated one of the tags. If my edit summary seemed WP:BITEY it's because I don't believe this is a legitimate new user and because I rather resent it when people use Wikipedia this way. Thanks, Ben MacLeod (talk) 06:16, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. I see what you're talking about. It looks like that article has been a cesspool of COI.
 * I've made some BOLD edits to the article to try to make it a bit less promotional as an uninvolved outsider. I've added it to my watchlist as well to see if I can help with the efforts to remove the spin, both positive and negative.  Toddst1 (talk) 15:38, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Ben MacLeod. Thank you for your work on Nova Scotia Provincial Housing Agency. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

&maltese; SunDawn &maltese;   (contact)   00:56, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 21
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1801 Hollis Street, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Curtain wall.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 28
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Maritime Centre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Citadel Hill.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Clifford Lawrie Bolton Ritchie moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Clifford Lawrie Bolton Ritchie, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel 5969  TT me 10:49, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Recent edits on Sylvain charlebois
it looks like a sockpuppet has been trying to whitewash Charlebois’ name and change the tone on the scandal. the issue was at rest months ago, and the article reflected a neutral tone. However, since two days ago, a few users have been change it again. I reacted by either reverting the edits or adding more context to the edits. I believe, however, that the old version was quite fine, so I’m OK with you reverting my edits.

just want to put it out there that there has been an editing spree lately in favour of Charlebois. My involvement was to react to these Jervis49 (talk) 14:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes, seems to be more of the same on that article. Single-purpose accounts making pretty much the same edits as before. The article is semi-protected meaning accounts must have at least 10 edits to edit it. User:Ghertydjzww's 11th edit was this article. Ben MacLeod (talk) 10:01, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Both Jervis49 and Ben Macleod appear to be in COI with the subject matter. They have been vandalizing Charlebois' page for months now, responding to changes within hours, using "whitewashing" an a cover. Would ask editors to watch both of these individuals. Ghertydjzww (talk) 11:39, 17 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I have no COI with the subject of the article, which you probably know. Ben MacLeod (talk) 11:47, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you Ben. Since the user insisted ln having the university spokesperson in the article, I added the Radio-Canada source. It’s in French, but it includes and expanded quote. The Radio-Canada source directly mentions that the conclusions remained confidential and that no action would be taken.
 * That way, there is no spin on the spokesperson’s comment, since I translated the quote directly (which the CBC article does not fully include). Jervis49 (talk) 12:59, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * And now it’s ECP, to keep the socks out. Courcelles (talk) 20:46, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, sorry about the misclick rollback, Jervis. I’ve undone that. Courcelles (talk) 20:47, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for this. This ECP doesn’t allow me to make any further edits, but I’m OK with that and it’s actually quite freeing for a lot of people. It’s been draining to see every few months the status-quo of the wiki being brought down by sockpuppets to try and tweak the tone of the scandal, which has lead to  lots of  back-and-fourths.
 * The French version of the wiki has been ECP for years and it was due time the English version reaches this protection level.
 * best wishes Jervis49 (talk) 20:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Clifford Lawrie Bolton Ritchie
Hello, Ben MacLeod. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Clifford Lawrie Bolton Ritchie, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:04, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

The Center Line: Fall 2023
  Volume 10, Issue 1 • Fall 2023 • About the Newsletter • A New Future for Road Articles Online  Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
 * Features
 * —delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of  Imzadi 1979  →  on 19:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Clifford Lawrie Bolton Ritchie


Hello, Ben MacLeod. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Clifford Lawrie Bolton Ritchie".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Hey man im josh (talk) 10:50, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of 2024 Halifax municipal election for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2024 Halifax municipal election is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/2024 Halifax municipal election until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Bearcat (talk) 15:30, 16 January 2024 (UTC)