Jump to content

Talk:Jack Layton

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by InternetArchiveBot (talk | contribs) at 10:57, 21 July 2016 (Notification of altered sources needing review #IABot (v1.1)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Quebec

with the NDP on the rise, especially in Quebec, Layton is playing up his Montreal-area origins, being from a suburb (Hudson), and born in Montreal itself... should more be added, with Layton himself promoting it? 65.94.45.160 (talk) 09:07, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance from more experienced editor

The recent Sun News report was added to the article but, due to it being an IP entry, it was tagged as a BLP or vandalism edit. The edit wasn't vandalism and did contain the proper news reference. However I would request a copy edit and trim from a more experienced editor who can shape the original entry into more neutrality to match the news piece. As it is it is accurate. But the wording could be altered or expanded to following with the citation. Thank you. 142.167.92.94 (talk) 02:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this entry said that the article had hampered his popularity. The article came out approximately an hour ago, if that, and therefore a statement like that made assumptions that are at least unfounded, and at most show a bias that mean this page should be watched closely. Guidedbyalan (talk) 02:06, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. You made the change you're speaking of—you certainly didn't mention that. I'll have a look at it. There were definitely unfounded assumptions in the edit. Guidedbyalan (talk) 02:08, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the lead to meet Wikipedia's neutrality rules and also added Mr. Layton's denial statement through the Toronto Star. I will also added the full new entry here:
On April 29, 2011 a news story about Layton with potential negative backlash was revealed by the Sun News Network, and also the Toronto Sun newspaper, that Layton had been caught naked in a massage parlour in 1996. The business had been under police investigation as a possible bawdy house which was employing underage prostitutes. When police entered the building a female, who had been arrested two weeks prior for prostitution, was seen leaving a private room and when police entered the room Mr. Layton was found without clothing. No charges were laid at that time.[1][2] Mr. Layton denied any wrong doing in a statement released by the Toronto Star newspaper. [3]
So that it doesn't get lost by partisan editors trying to remove referenced material from Wikipedia. The text, as it is written here (editors can't alter another editor's talk page posts) can stand in as record in case the page gets attacked. Someone can just grab the text from here and re-add. 142.167.92.94 (talk) 02:12, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's better. "retired police officer" is better for the lead. 142.167.92.94 (talk) 02:15, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article should be protected now. If I have anymore references I will add them here for a registered editor. 142.167.92.94 (talk) 02:39, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good sourcing, and diligence in undoing the vandalism that the other person was doing. Guidedbyalan (talk) 02:41, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll protect if the IP turns out to be the IP hopper that I've encountered in the past. Connormah (talk) 02:44, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Connormah. 142.167.92.94 (talk) 02:47, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Text as it stands is likely a BLP violation, below is an bit from the globe and mail.

The party’s lawyer released copies of a letter it had sent to Sun News.

“The facts are that Mr. Layton had obtained a massage from a massage therapist, but had no knowledge whatsoever that the therapist’s location may have been used for illicit purpose,” Brian Iler said.

“He does recall being advised by the police at the time that he did nothing wrong, but that the location was questionable, and to be stayed away from. Mr. Layton gave the officer his name and address, and nothing further happened.”

The letter goes on to warn media outlets not to go beyond the facts, as acknowledged.

Plus this seems to be very much in the tabloid range of information attempting to smear a person 48 hours from an election. --Snowman frosty (talk) 03:30, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All of the text remain neutral and cited. It can be expanded to include that Mr. Layton calls the report a smear campaign because the second set of references support that. But it cannot be removed for that reason as it is cited from sources which meet WP:RS. 142.167.92.94 (talk) 03:56, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This incident is being given too much weight and should be limited in the amount of detail given. See WP:UNDUE

An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. For example, discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and neutral, but still be disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic. This is a concern especially in relation to recent events that may be in the news. Note that undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements.

Silverchemist (talk) 04:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's why I originally posted for assistance. And the text has been trimmed extensively and matches all the references. As for being weighted. This news story is currently being run repeatedly on every news channel in Canada. So it is noteworthy and will likely standout in a section titled "2011 Election" as important. 142.167.92.94 (talk) 04:03, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guidedbyalan, thanks for the good edit. I was about to make the same changes, but you were quicker than I was. Again, good edit. Silverchemist (talk) 04:29, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thanks a ton, Silverchemist. I thought it was the right change to make, glad to have a second on that one. Guidedbyalan (talk) 04:44, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And a third. Good cleanup. 142.167.92.94 (talk) 04:48, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Term start as Leader of Opposition

I have supplied a reliable source (since reverted) that Layton took the oath as Leader of the Official Opposition on May 18. There are *numerous* reliable sources that state such. There is an edit war going on regarding when Layton's term began AND when Ignatieff's term ended, with dates after May 18 being used. There is no single reliable source for term start & end - the parliamentary source has not yet been updated (giving only the month of May). A reliable source (already supplied) is the way to shut down edit warring. If it is determined LATER (acc to some other reliable source) that Layton's term start began before he took the oath, then an adjustment can be made later. WP is not about some abstract "Truth"; it is about what can be verified (by reliable sources)--JimWae (talk) 20:54, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Compilations/FederalGovernment/LeadersOfficialOpposition.aspx is used as the official source for List of Canadian Leaders of the Opposition. If it were as simple as the day he was sworn in, then the Parliament would say so. Also we don't know if Ignatieff resigned before the same date. 117Avenue (talk) 02:45, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's no evidence to even suggest Ignatieff resigned early. He clearly stayed on as leader of the Liberals past May 18th. There was absolutely zero in the news about any interim leader of the Opposition. The only question really is whether Iggy's term ended May 17 or May 18. I do see that, since 1956, the parliament site does have terms ending the day before the next one begins - probably at midnight. When the parliament site finally gets updated we could change it then. There's really no harm in putting either 17 or 18 now. --JimWae (talk) 03:54, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's retroactive to midnight, and so are the Prime Ministers. But this change wasn't made because of one stubborn editor who refused to recognize the cited law. 117Avenue (talk) 19:43, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm shocked that it's May 2, I was expecting May 18. 117Avenue (talk) 23:51, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Compilations/FederalGovernment/LeadersOfficialOpposition.aspx still does not give Iggy's end-date, so it is quite possible we will see further changes. Could they justify May 1? --JimWae (talk) 19:25, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It will be May 1. Look at the other dates, the change happens at midnight. But for some reason we use the day they resign, which is the same day as the oath. 117Avenue (talk) 01:26, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Death

Please remember to update the related articles Leader of the Official Opposition (Canada) , List of Canadian Leaders of the Opposition , New Democratic Party , Toronto—Danforth

70.24.246.151 (talk) 13:03, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And Stornoway (residence) and Olivia Chow. 70.24.246.151 (talk) 13:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New pictures?

There are a couple of pictures from this article, younger Jack and married Jack, that I think should be included here. The pictures are credited to QMI Agency. I don't know if they can be used but I'm sure someone else knows. NorthernThunder (talk) 15:17, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A letter to Canadians

Suggest adding the following to the last section -

Two days before his death, Jack Layton wrote an open letter to Canadians, to be released after his death.[4]

If a quote from the letter is wanted, try anything from this (the general section addressed to all Canadians) -

"And finally, to all Canadians: Canada is a great country, one of the hopes of the world. We can be a better one – a country of greater equality, justice, and opportunity. We can build a prosperous economy and a society that shares its benefits more fairly. We can look after our seniors. We can offer better futures for our children. We can do our part to save the world's environment. We can restore our good name in the world. We can do all of these things because we finally have a party system at the national level where there are real choices; where your vote matters; where working for change can actually bring about change. In the months and years to come, New Democrats will put a compelling new alternative to you. My colleagues in our party are an impressive, committed team. Give them a careful hearing; consider the alternatives; and consider that we can be a better, fairer, more equal country by working together. Don't let them tell you it can't be done.

"My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world.

"All my very best, "Jack Layton" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.254.157.247 (talk) 16:58, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Personal life

What's with the personal life section here, why is it so short? I know brevity is the soul of wit, but this is ridiculous. Did someone delete some stuff? I admit I don't know much about Mr. Layton but he seems a colourful character, and I'm sure he's done more than sing some 60s folk songs in his life. I think there should be more on here about his life outside politics. Can people assist in fleshing this bit out? Maybe some bits can be migrated from other sections. Thanks in advance. Kaleeyed (talk) 00:25, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is an immediate fix: [1], but probably some more restructuring is required. –xenotalk 00:35, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That looks much better, thanks. I've done a bit of work myself. Kaleeyed (talk) 13:36, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Massage incident

The part regarding Jack Layton being in a massage parlor that was under investigation by police should also include the fact that he was found naked after receiving a massage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.95.59.216 (talk) 01:13, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As opposed to what? Have you ever been for a real massage? They're always performed with the recipient either naked or in their underwear, at their own choice, under a sheet; it's the norm, not something unusual or worthy of special mention. Bearcat (talk) 03:35, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In IP’s world, masseuses are supposed to work on people fully dressed… LMFAO! — TheHerbalGerbil(TALK|STALK), 19:59, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not meaning to slag a dead guy but facts are facts and the name of the "community clinic" should be provided to give some perspective. He was found at the Velvet Touch Massage Parlour.

A link to article with the name of the parlour is here: http://www.torontosun.com/2011/04/30/mammoliti-had-suspicions-about-velvet-touch

So the guy liked to get rubbed down, big deal but simply passing it off as visiting a "community clinic" is misleading and sad both on his part and that of his fans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.72.160.40 (talk) 16:55, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Considering it was brought up 15 years after the fact, the name of the clinic seems irrelevant. The 15 years after the fact is the story, not the name of the clinic. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 17:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Rajkbasdeo, 23 August 2011

Jack Layton was born in Hudson, Québec not in Montréal, Québec

Rajkbasdeo (talk) 02:55, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the article, which has this sourced, he was born in Montréal and raised in Hudson. So do you have a source to make the change? --Jnorton7558 (talk) 03:33, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hudson is a small town just outside of Montreal; it's entirely possible — even quite likely, especially given that he was born in 1950 when Hudson would have been unlikely to have its own hospital yet — that a pregnant woman from Hudson would be taken to a hospital on the Island to actually give birth. So we'd need a real source to indicate otherwise. Bearcat (talk) 03:40, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think he was born in a Montreal hospital, from what I remember of the bio Maclean's published last month. (he was born before Lakeshore General in Pointe-Claire was built; Montreal is closer than Cornwall or Ottawa, Malone NY, other places with likely hospitals) 70.24.246.151 (talk) 05:04, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Danforth Riding

In all the many articles that mention Layton's death, his replacement as head of the NDP has been made clear, but there's no mention or explanation of how his seat in parliament (Danforth) will be filled. How is this handled in Canada, and can a mention be added to the article? siafu (talk) 17:10, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At some point, a by-election will be called by the Governor General, on the advice of the Prime Minister. Seats can often sit vacant for quite a while before that happens. -- yycguy81 (Talk) 17:13, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Within six months, a by-election must be called.PoliSciMaster (talk) 20:27, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify in case anybody's unclear on how this works, the announcement that a by-election has been scheduled has to occur within six months, but the by-election itself occurs another four to six weeks after that. So the seat could conceivably be vacant until April of next year, if the Prime Minister waits until the last possible minute to call the by-election. The by-election, for what it's worth, is very rarely called very quickly after a sitting MP resigns or dies, unless the Prime Minister thinks his party has an especially good chance of winning it — so while anything's possible, I'll be quite surprised if the by-election happens any earlier than January. Bearcat (talk) 00:04, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Profession 'Professor'?

The infobox says his profession was 'professor'. Is this correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.209.52 (talk) 21:15, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Parliament of Canada website identifies him as such, here. (He had a PhD in political science, and was a professor at Ryerson University.) Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 21:20, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Chablitt, 28 August 2011

PC, PhD

Chablitt (talk) 02:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 02:49, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In the context of the above section, I think the user wants the PhD added to the post-nominals. 117Avenue (talk) 05:11, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blockquote

Is there some reason the quote from Layton's final missive needs to be highlighted in a separate blockquote? An editor called it "highly notable", but that just seems to be personal opinion. As I understand it, blockquotes are supposed to be used for long quotes or for quotes used more as examples or textual illustrations of adjacent text. The quote in the article is neither. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 02:29, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Miesianiacal: the Layton quote received wide media play and is now found on over 150,000 websites, including over 300 that Google displays as news sites. That seems to support the assessment of it being worthy of a cquote. As well, your interpretation of quotation usage does not seem to be mandated by WP:Quotation. Best: HarryZilber (talk) 03:01, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Umm, since when is notability of a quote relevant to anything? No one is even questioning the inclusion of the quotation in the article, and while notability isn't a criterion for inclusion of a quote, it is the closest notability could get to making sense here. While WP:Quotation doesn't seem to say anything to support Mies, that may be because it isn't actually relevant. Rather, you should look to WP:MOS#Block quotations, which says they are for long quotes. {{Cquote}} shouldn't be used for normal block quotations at all; rather it is reserved for pull quotes, which is certainly not how the quote from the letter is used. -Rrius (talk) 04:05, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mmm.. I guess "quotes used more as examples or textual illustrations of adjacent text" was my rambling and not entirely accurate way of saying "pull quote". Thank you for raising the proper term. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 04:11, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Religion

According to the CBC article pertaining to his funeral jack belonged to the Metropolitan Community Church, yet it says United Church of Canada on the article. Should this be fixed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.166.24.28 (talk) 18:39, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MCC isn't exactly a distinct denomination the way the United Church is; it's a non-denominational community church attended by people who identify with a wide variety of religious denominations. Although it certainly appeals well beyond its original constituency, its original intention was to be an affirming and welcoming church for LGBT people of faith who felt excluded from their home churches — so it's not really a denomination in its own right, so much as a cross-spectrum community of people from multiple denominations who might still identify themselves as Roman Catholic or Anglican or United or Presbyterian or whatever even while attending services at MCC instead of their "home" churches. So strictly speaking, there's no contradiction — but it's certainly worth clarifying anyway. Bearcat (talk) 03:00, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
He certainly was raised United, and some of his ashes will be going to a United Church cemetery. I do wonder whether or not he did go to a United Church in his later years though. -- Earl Andrew - talk 04:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've actually found a media reference which explains this in more depth; apparently, he identified as United and was a member of the Bloor Street United Church, and only sometimes attended the MCC. My guess would be that he went to the MCC's Christmas masses at Roy Thomson Hall, but not necessarily to the weekly services at the main church — but that's just a guess and I can't really source it. Bearcat (talk) 18:25, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right Honourable title

Jack Layton has been bestow by the prime minister with the title 'right honourable' as oppose to just 'honourable'. Shouldn't the new elevated official title be used as oppose to the older version? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.216.15.80 (talk) 01:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since that didn't actually happen, no it should not be used.PoliSciMaster (talk) 20:22, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When and why was Jack given the title "honourable"? It is not mentioned in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MJBloxam (talk • contribs) 05:04, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It came with the PC title, but I thought "honourable" was only applied to alive persons. 117Avenue (talk) 05:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The final metastasis.

Did it ever get announced what the third cancer was? I remember being told that it spread but to date, no-one's breathed a word as to the type of cancer it was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.173.83 (talk) 04:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Burial Site

I just came from St. James Cemetery, where the staff advised me that no portion of Jack Layton's ashes are interred there. The article should be edited to reflect this. fishhead64 (talk) 19:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Until there is a reliable source that contradicts the existing one, there is nothing that can be done. 117Avenue (talk) 04:24, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly the media got it wrong, and it is a scattering, not a burial. The staff wouldn't know about a scattering. 117Avenue (talk) 04:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The response of the person at the desk was a definite, "Jack Layton's ashes are not here." She sounded like she'd been asked this many times before, which I'm sure she has done. But, hey, if an inaccurate article is better because the inaccuracy is referenced, who am I to complain? fishhead64 (talk) 05:40, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Layton did not fully endorse the "Queen" but the idea of statehood

I noticed that a minor edit war has been brewing about whether or not Jack Layton really supports monarchism, as it exists in Canada. He was rather vague in his answers when asked about this, both before and after becoming leader of the NDP. His answers include the following, taken from Citizens for a Canadian Republic --

  • "It depends on what you mean by Canadianized. If you're talking about the governor general becoming the official head of state, I'm all for it."
  • "I do believe that Canadians struggle, as the years go by, with the issue of relevancy. On the other hand I think we've had Governors General, and certainly our current Governor General would be a good example, of someone representing the Crown - I don't mean an individual but the phenomenon, the concept of our collective statehood - in kind of an interesting way."
  • "Canada's New Democratic caucus has not taken an official position on this issue, to this point. This decision could be considered by a future caucus of the New Democratic Party of Canada."

I think that Jack's identity as a true monarchist is in question, as he endorses removing the Queen as Head of State. Until more evidence is unearthed, I would suggest that we remove the listing of Jack Layton from the category "Canadian monarchists" as he did not truly defend keeping the Queen as our monarch, but was in favor of replacing her with the concept of a "collective statehood". --Skol fir (talk) 18:00, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done It took only 4 minutes for User:Bearcat to follow my suggestion -- diff here -- whether he read my above comment or not. :-) --Skol fir (talk) 18:35, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, without a proper reliable source indicating that he specifically identified his views as monarchist, the category doesn't belong here — the onus doesn't fall on those who want the category removed to prove that he wasn't a monarchist, but on those who want it added to prove that he was one. It's worth noting that the same editor also added the category to Thomas Mulcair at the same time, even though his article doesn't say anything about his views on the subject either. Furthermore, the entire Category:Canadian monarchists needs a careful review, as I just randomly checked seven of the 34 remaining articles to find that not a single one of them sourced or even mentioned their subjects' views on the monarchy one way or the other either. Bearcat (talk) 18:22, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for these remarks. Yes, I agree that categories should be treated in the same way as statements made in the article. They need proof, or anyone could just randomly assign categories to anything they wanted. That goes against the reliability of Wikipedia. --Skol fir (talk) 18:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I've posted a request at WP:CANTALK for some assistance in source checking the whole category. I've spotchecked two more articles since posting my initial comment — one of them actually did contain a proper source for the characterization, but the other one failed that test too. So that's 10 problematic articles in a batch of 11, which ain't good. Bearcat (talk) 18:50, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's great! We need to clean up that mess. :-) I don't have time to help right now, but in the next week, I'll try to assist you there. --Skol fir (talk) 18:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Well, I think the idea of having a constitutional monarchy rather than a republic has worked pretty well for Canada. I do believe that Canadians struggle, as the years go by, with the issue of relevancy.
I'd like to note that one of the above quotes is taken out of context:

  • "Well, I think the idea of having a constitutional monarchy rather than a republic has worked pretty well for Canada. I do believe that Canadians struggle, as the years go by, with the issue of relevancy. On the other hand I think we've had Governor-Generals and certainly our current Governor-General would be a good example, of someone representing the Crown- I don't mean an individual but the phenomenon, the concept of our collective statehood- in kind of an interesting way. I don't hear from Canadians the sound of a stampede to make a change. It comes up from time to time. I feel that we've got precious amount of debate time and work time in parliament and there are a lot of issues that come before reform to the constitutional monarchy." (http://www.jjmccullough.com/Layton.htm)


As well as:

Can we put it back now? Wilson (talk) 11:18, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a misconception that because Mr. Layton may have had a different view on what the monarchy means to Canada he is not a monarchist. I feel this view is fallacious. Otherwise the only monarchists would be absolutists since any step away from complete royal control would be decried as *republican*. (Wilson(cc), not signed in) 207.148.131.106 (talk) 22:59, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jack appeared numerous times on Canadian TV. Most notable are appearances on CBC's satire shows over the years (Air Farce, 22 Minutes, RMR), in addition to frequently being parodied by them. He also gave a weather forecast on CTV's "Canada A.M." program, as well as doing the "Hip Flip" with Nardwuar on MuchMusic.

In short, there's plenty of material with which to expand this section. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HuntClubJoe (talk • contribs) 18:10, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and the Raffi song using the words of Jack's letter to Canadians! Not a smash hit or anything, but Raffi is reasonably well-known in his own right. Maybe worth a mention.HuntClubJoe (talk) 18:43, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Another one: Appearance on Marc Emery's Pot TV, talking about cannabis and the failed drug war.HuntClubJoe (talk) 18:45, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Jack Layton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:09, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Jack Layton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:17, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Jack Layton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:43, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jack Layton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:40, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jack Layton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/924574695001
  2. ^ http://www.torontosun.com/2011/04/29/layton-found-in-toronto-bawdy-house-former-cop
  3. ^ http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/983321--layton-camp-denies-alleged-massage-parlour-incident?bn=1
  4. ^ http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/08/22/pol-layton-last-letter.html
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jack_Layton&oldid=730833253"