Talk:John Rustad
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This page is about a politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. For that reason, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Party Affiliation
[edit]Can I work for the Conservative party on voluntary basis in BC. I am of South Indian origin and would like to do part time volunteering for the party. I had involved in politics at university level in India other than that not much pedigree in the politics. 57 yrs. old and holds a postgraduate diploma in management from the university of wales UK. Your opinion in the matter is requested. Thank you. Joby Paul MOOLAN, 101-5955 Yew St. Vancouver BC. 209.161.250.210 (talk) 07:55, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Opponent opinions
[edit]On 2 October 2024 PoliticalPoint added in the lead about racism, anti-LGBTQ, anti-human rights, conspiracy, eating bugs, etc. I reverted with edit summary = "Undid revisions as of 2 October 2024 by PoliticalPoint. This makes much of the lead a list of accusations by political opponents. Perhaps seek consensus on the talk page?" Instead of doing so, PoliticalPoint re-inserted with edit summary = "exceptionally well-sourced". Actually I believe that at least some of the sourcing is poor or doesn't directly support, but what should be clarified first is: WP:BLPUNDEL says "If [contentious material] is to be restored without significant change, consensus must be obtained first." Apparently PoliticalPoint doesn't follow that policy so I am appealing for input from others. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 13:41, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think we can fully ascribe Rustad's own public statements which have been reported on in the non-partisan press as "opponent opinions". Dan Carkner (talk) 17:53, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Update: Ak-eater06 has removed. Good. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 16:41, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
Update: PoliticalPoint reported Ak-eater06 on Administrator intervention against vandalism, without success. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 19:10, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- That lead was added in without any consensus. I reverted it. Deathying (talk) 22:33, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- The content is in accordance with biography guidelines as it is supported by multiple reliable sources. --PoliticalPoint (talk) 22:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- You can keep saying that all you want and I will keep reverting it. In my opinion it violates WP:NPOV, and has your opinions mixed into it rather than presenting what your sources actually discuss. Deathying (talk) 23:09, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- The content is in accordance with biography guidelines as it is supported by multiple reliable sources. --PoliticalPoint (talk) 22:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- The conspiracies and controversies should be covered in the lead as is the case on the article for Mark Robinson (American politician). --PoliticalPoint (talk) 22:55, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- User:PoliticalPoint This will not do anything as me, User:Deathying and User:Peter Gulutzan, have already agreed that you should not promote your personal views on the lead of an article such as this. You can "warn" me all you want, but you in reality are the one who is creating vandalism. Ak-eater06 (talk) 23:20, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- It looks like PoliticalPoint has created a sock puppet User:Factsoverfiction118, who joined Wikipedia a couple minutes ago exclusively to edit this article. Deathying (talk) 23:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Always be careful before accusing someone of sockpuppetry. Best to get confirmation first. Masterhatch (talk) 23:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- No idea who PoliticalPoint is but spam deleting direct sourcing from CBC, Global news and the National Observer seems a pretty clear violation of wiki policy. Factsoverfiction118 (talk) 00:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- I think you need to get consensus here before re-adding it. The onus is on you to get that consensus. Please stop edit warring. Thanks! Masterhatch (talk) 01:10, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- No idea who PoliticalPoint is but spam deleting direct sourcing from CBC, Global news and the National Observer seems a pretty clear violation of wiki policy. Factsoverfiction118 (talk) 00:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Always be careful before accusing someone of sockpuppetry. Best to get confirmation first. Masterhatch (talk) 23:39, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- It looks like PoliticalPoint has created a sock puppet User:Factsoverfiction118, who joined Wikipedia a couple minutes ago exclusively to edit this article. Deathying (talk) 23:32, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- User:PoliticalPoint This will not do anything as me, User:Deathying and User:Peter Gulutzan, have already agreed that you should not promote your personal views on the lead of an article such as this. You can "warn" me all you want, but you in reality are the one who is creating vandalism. Ak-eater06 (talk) 23:20, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Update: Factsoverfiction118 has been blocked. The article has been fully protected till October 8. Do we mostly agree that the lead can stay as is? If so, if anyone has suggestions about making changes that are not in the lead, perhaps that can be a in a new thread about the specific issue? Peter Gulutzan (talk) 14:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that the lead should mostly stay as-is. There are sections in the article for his opinions and statements. Deathying (talk) 19:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- Personally, I think a line in the lead describing conspiratorial views would be more than appropriate. This is not to support the way it was done during the revert war. But those views are the reason he was removed from the Liberal Party and ultimately moved to the Conservatives, and support for conspiracies within the party has become well known and attracted plenty of independent coverage. Other justin (talk) 20:21, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. A line addressing it in the intro is appropriate, not only because it's in the article, but because it's regularly mentioned in news coverage of him. Dan Carkner (talk) 21:31, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with @Deathying; the reverted additions were NPOV violations. I support the lead staying as is. While he has expressed some controversial opinions it doesn’t seem to me to have defined his identity to the extent of other politicians, so I think mentioning notable instances in the body is enough. JSwift49 16:21, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Personally, I think a line in the lead describing conspiratorial views would be more than appropriate. This is not to support the way it was done during the revert war. But those views are the reason he was removed from the Liberal Party and ultimately moved to the Conservatives, and support for conspiracies within the party has become well known and attracted plenty of independent coverage. Other justin (talk) 20:21, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
Revert war
[edit]Article talk page discussions should focus on content, not conduct. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:21, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
|
---|
This revert war is getting silly. You guys better stop b4 blocks are handed out. Factsoverfiction118, clearly you need to come to the talk page to get consensus. So, please stop and come to talk. Masterhatch (talk) 23:46, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
|
Protected edit request on 6 October 2024
[edit]It is requested that an edit be made to the fully protected article at John Rustad. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, so that an editor unfamiliar with the subject matter could complete the requested edit immediately.
Edit requests to fully protected pages should only be used for edits that are either uncontroversial or supported by consensus. If the proposed edit might be controversial, discuss it on the protected page's talk page before using this template. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request. When the request has been completed or denied, please add the |
Remove "despite being accused of fear-mongering and misinformation on Indigenous rights and reconciliation" as this appears to be unsourced. JSwift49 17:48, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
- Biography articles of living people
- Active politicians
- Start-Class biography articles
- Start-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Start-Class Canada-related articles
- Low-importance Canada-related articles
- Start-Class British Columbia articles
- Low-importance British Columbia articles
- Start-Class Political parties and politicians in Canada articles
- Low-importance Political parties and politicians in Canada articles
- All WikiProject Canada pages
- Wikipedia fully protected edit requests