Talk:Olivia Chow

Language Fluency

I believe all Members of Parliament must be fluent in both English and French at least. Can someone confirm she is also fluent in French? I've looked around and can't find anything to officially add that.96.52.225.195 (talk) 01:51, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

There is no condition that MPs be French/English bilingual. Many MPs from the western provinces speak only English. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 01:58, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Completely untrue - MPs do not need to be bilingual. Many (and not just from the west) do not speak French, and there certainly have been bloc MPs who don't speak English. The House provides simultaneous translation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.57.148 (talk) 05:26, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Olivia Chow

Why are there question marks after Olivia's name? Krupo 00:03, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)

I think it's supposed to have her name in chinese. I don't even see question marks. I see "()" How does one enable chinese characters? Earl Andrew 00:15, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• This is what I see: "Olivia Chow(鄒至蕙) is a..." I'm using Netscape 7.1. Often, if a page has Chinese text, you'll be advised (at least by Netscape), to download the necessary character set. Not in this case, though. Krupo 05:44, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)

If you use Windows, I think the easiest way to get it is to install Microsoft's Input Method Editor (IME) for the appropriate language. See [1] for more info. You could also try downloading the appropriate font. I believe there are some free Chinese fonts floating around out there called Sim Sun, MS Song, etc. Arial Unicode MS contains the characters for many different lanaguages and is distributed with lots of Microsoft software.

A good place to get more info on fonts, Unicode, etc. is http://www.alanwood.net/unicode/index.html.

You can also try playing around with the languages dialog in Windows' control panel. In Windows XP, there is a dialog in the control panel called "Regional and Language Options", with a checkbox labelled "Install files for East Asian languages". -spencer195 01:22, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Strategic Voting in 2004

I don't think that many voters in Trinity-Spadina actually thought that the Conservatives might win the riding. Anyone familiar with the riding would know how absurd the thought would be. The Conservative candidate ended up with 8.5% or so. It would have taken nearly one thousand such voters for Chow to have won. In any event, it is speculative analysis to suggest so and the current article does so with so-called weasel words.

Given the nationwide trend towards strategic voting, it is likely that some voters, though perhaps not enough to make a difference, did "vote strategically." There were people who voted strategically in this election in T-S; I've spoken to two online. Their logic is flawed, but essentially they believe that another Liberal is more likely to oppose the Conservatives/prevent a Conservative government than a New Democrat. - Cuivienen (Return) 23:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps. But that is extrapolation, which is against WP policy (as a form of original research). Frankly I think very few did in this riding. Maybe your guess is better than mine but this is not the place for guesses, even the educated kind. --JGGardiner 05:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

That Big Banner

Can someone please justify why that big banner of Olivia Chow is there? Eihterwhise this banner should be deleted from the entry. Pete Peters 19:38, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks a lot like an ad and adds nothing to the article. I think it should be removed. --Grstain 19:45, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Categories

I really don't think that all these categories are necceasry. LGBT activist? The entry has no mention of that. She may support LGBT issues, but I don't think she has been any activist of such sorts. Cancer survivor? Her thyroid cancer was benign, I am don't think she should be in that category. Pete Peters 14:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Although she is obviously very supportive of LGBT rights, I don't know if she has been active in the same way Layton has (e.g. during the bathhouse raids). As for cancer, though, I will have to disagree: she had cancer and she survived it, ergo she is a cancer survivor. - Montréalais 18:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Photo

I've reverted to the free-source photo. According to the template for fair use,

"It is believed that the use of this photograph

to illustrate the person in question,

in the absence of a free alternative,

on the English-language Wikipedia, hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation,

qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law."

Since there is now a free alternative, we should use the free alternative and in fact we may no longer be allowed to use the fair use photo. - Montréalais 13:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

You are correct per WP:FU#Policy section one. The use of non-free images therefore nolonger qualify for fair use and MUST be removed.  YDAM TALK 12:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Police commission

I changed the text about her leaving the police commission because it left the impression that the problem was simply her comments, when it was the way in which they were made – she tried to interfere in a police operation. I happen to think she was right about the operation, and I believe she acted because she thought she could keep people from being seriously hurt, but she does appear to have broken the rules and to have accepted that she broke them. Which also speaks well of her. Phrenesiac 15:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Religion

The citation supporting Olivia Chow's affiliation as United Church does not in fact do so. It makes the case for Jack Layton's religion but nowhere mentions her affiliation with the church. I'll take off the citation and request a citation for this. Homagetocatalonia (talk)

So-called housing co-op "controversy"

Regarding this "controversy" about living in co-op housing, I've looked over the cited sources, which discuss the material in a very different light. The sources note first of all that this story is 24 years in the past, that Layton and Chow were cleared of any wrongdoing, that Layton chose to increase the rent paid even before any criticism occurred, and that around the same time the Federation of Metro Tenants Association praised them for choosing to live in co-op housing. Layton characterized it as a "brilliantly executed smear attempt", and the Toronto Star's opinion page recently called it "the smear campaign that wouldn't die". I'm doubtful that the Wikipedia article should have any mention of this manufactured "controversy", but it's plain to me that the unbalanced way in which it was presented is a violation of NPOV and BLP policy. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 11:46, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I believe I worded it neutrally. They did live in a government-subsidized co-op. (NB: They lived there from 1985-1990. They only paid the additional rent for the last few months they lived there.)

It certainly was controversial at the time, and people protested against them. With Chow now running for the Mayor of Toronto, it has come up in the campaign, which explains why an event that happened 24 years ago is relevant today. Finally, although I cited it, the Toronto Star is certainly not a neutral source (their opinion page, moreso); they have a left/centre-left political agenda, which aligns with Chow's.

If Rob Ford's 1999 arrest is relevant to include in his wikipedia article, why should this not be relevant for Olivia Chow?173.230.182.230 (talk) 02:32, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

The Star, with the exception of the recent federal election has always supported the Liberal Party. The distorted story was originally introduced as part of a negative campaign by the Liberals and of course picked up by The Star. TFD (talk) 03:49, 2 April 2014 (UTC)