Talk:Andrew Scheer

weblog issue

Here is a reference to the story of Scheer's weblog being hacked. [1]

I'm not sure if it's appropriate to put this in the article or not. Some future editor can make that decision, if the link is still live at that time.Hiddekel 08:04, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Due to the blanking without explaination I'm adding this source to the article to remove any doubt as to the legitimacy of this fact. Hiddekel 03:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Entries on other politicians do not include trivial stories about campaign incidents. Of all the facts and information about Mr. Scheer, why would a minor story about a campaign website be included? Maybe we should find out how many of his lawn signs had to be replaced or if he ever got stuck in the snow.

Because while your subjective opinion may be that it's "too trivial" to be noteworthy, the news media did not, hence the major media outlet newslink on the subject--unlike most of the other positive issues posted in the article, I should add. So unless you (or someone else) can come up with a better argument than "it's too minor to mention" (and I'll give you some time to figure one out), I'm going to put it back in. And might I add that this is Wikipedia, not Andrew Scheer's campaign site. Both the positive and the embarassing issues of his political career belong here, as long as they are presented in NPOV. Hiddekel 17:54, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

education

It is an undisputable fact that Mr. Scheer indeed attended university in Ottawa and again in Regina, however, nowhere on the world wide web was I able to find acronyms for academic degrees listed behind his name. I realize that the policy on biographies of living persons restricts poorly cited or libelous amendments. But I challenge my fellow Wikipedians to debunk this fact. Otherwise, I sincerely hope that my edit does not offend or anger Mr. Scheer. If you, brother and sister Wikipedians, find this fact to be unsettling, I desire for you to gather the necessary materials and write this dashing parliamentarian to encourage him to successfully complete his sojourn in academia. I, too, hope that my statements have been forthcoming in a manner congruent with the NPOV. 15 October 2006. GoodNinja

I'm going to have to agree with a recent anonymous editor's decision to remove the statement that Scheer never graduated. While I'm sure that he didn't given the available evidence, WP:BLP is unambiguous in stating that we have to have positive proof in the form of a reliable source before making contentious and possibly damaging claims about public figures. Otherwise it amounts to original research. Can't do it. Counter-intuitive though it may be, we'll just have to leave it as it is, as far as I can see, if we don't want to violate policy. --Hiddekel 15:45, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Sources

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Toronto Star Correction to "Abhorrent" comment (which was originally taken out of context)

"Correction – June 1, 2017: This column mistakenly states that Andrew Scheer referred to same-sex marriage bill as “abhorrent.” In fact, Scheer’s statement referred to the treatment of Roman Catholic Bishop Fred Henry being called before a Human Rights Tribunal for speaking out about the Catholic Church’s position on same-sex marriage. In his speech, Scheer said: “To think that a Catholic bishop must answer to a civil authority over matters of faith is abominable. It is abhorrent to me, to other Catholics and to every member of every faith community. It is abhorrent because the very essence of being a religious official is to teach the faith and instruct the faithful. There is an inherent right for religious officials to do so.” The headline on this article has been changed to reflect this correction." https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2017/05/30/some-have-no-choice-but-to-be-vigilant-in-wake-of-scheers-election-teitel.html 2607:F2C0:943A:B100:5D51:2E50:451:744C (talk) 20:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Profile Picture should be changed

Usually party leaders have photos of them smiling and looking at the camera. This photo is unnecessarily gloomy, and features a random person in the background photo-bombing.

There's a decent photo here: https://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/781184150917165056/sQtNj06U.jpg&imgrefurl=https://twitter.com/andrewscheer&h=400&w=400&tbnid=x8UjlynwQCeMhM:&tbnh=186&tbnw=186&usg=__AVZ2pStkChQkjMMBGDFfhLYiJSs=&vet=10ahUKEwji-9PqxafUAhUHxmMKHcAlAFQQ_B0IlAEwEQ..i&docid=pB8Ilbq5kuKF0M&itg=1&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwji-9PqxafUAhUHxmMKHcAlAFQQ_B0IlAEwEQ&ei=Pb81WaLpEYeMjwPAy4CgBQ Does anyone know how to add images? 2607:F2C0:943A:B100:5D51:2E50:451:744C (talk) 20:31, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

This picture is creepy. He is not a creepy looking guy; it's just a really bad picture. Please put up a better picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NewPicture84 (talk • contribs) 04:09, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Andrew Scheer. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150815061116/http://www.elections.ca/content2.aspx?section=can&dir=cand%2Fcanlim&document=index&lang=e to http://www.elections.ca/content2.aspx?section=can&dir=cand%2Fcanlim&document=index&lang=e

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 11:19, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Edits by IPs beginning with 2620:22:4000:110

In the last two months there have been about 25 edits re Mr Scheer by IPs with similar-looking addresses. I'm pinging them all: 2620:22:4000:110:1ffc:bcea:27f7:db00, 2620:22:4000:110:1ffc:c1d0:4a4:945a, 2620:22:4000:110:1ffd:3468:bcf1:660a, 2620:22:4000:110:1ffc:541c:ec79:5450, 2620:22:4000:110:1ffc:bbd9:687e:132f, 2620:22:4000:110:1ffe:7fa6:7864:4214, 2620:22:4000:110:1ffe:d581:f819:3651. My concern is that the edits seem to be unimportant dog-bites-man stories affected by WP:RECENTISM. Twice I reverted their edits and said take it to the talk page, twice I got re-reverted without any talk page input (which I believe is requested by WP:BRD and required by WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE). To the IPs that I've pinged: please all respond on this talk page, if you are different people. To other editors watching this talk page: please respond if you agree or disagree that there is a valid concern here. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 16:42, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

This same editor has put a lot of nonsense into the article with atrocious grammar and spelling. I consider this to be highly disruptive editing. The wording violated NPOV for BLP.2607:F2C0:95F1:E900:591C:18B4:3FB2:2F26 (talk) 23:40, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

I've left a message on the talk page of 2620:22:4000:110:1FFD:3468:BCF1:660A‎ but I realize pings and user-talk-page messages are unlikely to be read by editors who don't have to log in. I'll take it to WP:ANI if there's no other way. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 16:31, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

I have reverted the changes made by this editor. Many sources have been removed without explanation, and the wording of many sentences have been changes so as to not reflect at all what the sources actually say. PatrickPiper (talk) 23:03, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

The editor put some of the material back in. I have taken this matter to WP:ANI. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 23:33, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Update: one-week block of 2620:22:4000:110:0:0:0:0/64. But PatrickPiper is also blocked. I believe it's proper to revert all the editor's contributions affecting Andrew Scheer but am currently more concerned about other affected BLPs. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 17:47, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

I did a large edit today, removing this editor's edits done between October 13 and November 7. I do not oppose editors who see a legitimate reason for re-inserting some of them -- but please, unlike this IP, respect WP:BLP and WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE and have the courtesy to discuss on the talk page. I see that another editor has discarded some of the IP's more recent edits. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:55, 25 November 2017 (UTC) ... And within two hours NotSeenHere (talk) reverted me so all those changes are back again. NotSeenHere: did you notice this talk page discussion and all the times that discussion on the talk page was requested? Are you aware of WP:BLPREQUESTRESTORE? Are you willing to discuss your reasons for supporting each individual insertion the IP made? Peter Gulutzan (talk) 15:33, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

ToPeter Gulutzan, I have explained my reasoning check the history. However, when you removed the information you did not give an in-depth explanation of why all edits October 13 and November 7 needed to be removed. That's why I had to undo your edit in order to revert to edits made by User:Newimpartial which no one had an issue with. If you have an issue the user edits, please remove them individually and explain legitimate why and how they needed to be removed in the talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NotSeenHere (talk • contribs) 17:03, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

WP:BLPREQUESTORE says it's re-inserting (as done by NotSeenHere) that requires consensus, not reverting (as done by me) of insertions which never got consensus and which the original inserter wouldn't discuss. If others have concerns re the edits by the IP and NotSeenHere, please share. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 14:59, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me, all future changes will be explained in the edit summary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:22:4000:110:1FFC:B672:C41A:605D (talk) 16:55, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

This user (IP2620) is edit warring in changes that are very dubious. This includes the mass removal of sourced content, and the addition of misrepresented sources.204.225.214.71 (talk) 22:06, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

To 204.225.214.71), can you explain to me why do you think the changes that are very dubious and it includes the mass removal of sourced content. I need examples of your arguments otherwise you can me accused of suppression of information

I am not user (IP2620) but I will make changes to ensure make changes to satisfy both of you. I do warn both of you not to get into an edit war and both of you don't own this article. However,(talk) and (talk) please do not remove information that you don't like such as http://nationalpost.com/features/inside-ezra-levants-rebel-media: "The Rebel uses political organizing software—a platform called NationBuilder—to organize and monetize its audience. (It also sells access to its email list.) The man who implemented that system is Hamish Marshall." or https://www.nationalobserver.com/2017/08/17/news/scheer-shuns-far-right-website: ""This is a very good start, it's incredibly important that political parties stand up against this hate and racism, and we were really glad to see Mr. Scheer come around to finally acknowledging how dangerous the Rebel's discourse is," said Leadnow campaigns director Logan McIntosh Thursday." Otherwise, I will report you to the moderators — Preceding unsigned comment added by HamishScheer (talk • contribs) 02:39, 18 March 2018 (UTC)