Talk:Anti-Quebec sentiment

message: I removed the Off-Topic tag from this section because "The Rise of Quebecistan" was widely understood as anti-French/Quebecois: the reaction of the Quebec Press Council (est. 1973) is solid evidence enough to make that call. I also trimmed the description down considerably: there is a full article on the controversy already, and too much detail here just obfuscates the section's relevance to the article. The new wording might need some editing but we certainly don't need every name and date, or the two lengthy blockquotes. Also, it's fair to say that many of the other examples need trimming as well. SteveStrummer (talk) 03:07, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Barbara Kay controversy

message: Landry's remarks no doubt induced a good amount of Quebec bashing, but the remarks themselves are not an example of it. I removed this subsection (disputed since 2008), and moved an edited version to the Bernard Landry article. SteveStrummer (talk) 21:28, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Bernard Landry

message: There is a ton of references to claims of anti-semitism of both english speaking and french speaking canadians in this article. I feel that most of these references are not relevant and need to be edited.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.168.229 (talk) 01:15, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-Semitism 

message: I've taken the liberty of removing the 5 year old "unbalanced" tag from the top of the article. Not only is the article sourcing all its claims and clearly NPOV in its writing, but the initial debate over this seemed to revolve around the idea that Quebec bashing doesn't exist despite evidence to the contrary because it's some sort of separatist conspiracy. If anyone has any objection to the removal of this tag, please state your reasoning here. 142.83.68.58 (talk) 10:15, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree entirely. The article sources its claims from questionable, politically biased sources, and on the whole, presents only one side of the argument. I am re-adding the flag, which is well-deserved. 142.176.57.222 (talk) 18:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if the POV claim is accurate, but one thing's clear: this article is not B-class. There are too many unnecessary "examples" and not enough explanation. Also, there's too much newspaper commentary for a topic like this: there should be more from government and academic sources. SteveStrummer (talk) 23:29, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Dismissing 115 sources and 9 books as being all questionable and politically biased, never mind that some of them are links to actual Quebec bashing, does not constitute a convincing argument towards adding the "unbalanced" tag. If you can point out which sources are unreliable and for what reason, then we can remove said sources and rewrite the article accordingly. Until then, please refrain from declaring it as not adopting a NPOV. I would also like to point out that 142.176.57.222 (talk) went on a slew of edits on Quebec related pages, noting them as unbalanced or not notable, then went on a vandalizing spree. Hence, I wouldn't consider his opinion on this matter to be relevant or advise paying attenton to it as his aim is clearly not to improve Wikipedia. 142.83.68.58 (talk) 06:25, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unbalanced Tag 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Anti-Quebec sentiment. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070311083415/http://cnews.canoe.ca:80/CNEWS/MediaNews/2006/09/21/1872721-cp.html to http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/MediaNews/2006/09/21/1872721-cp.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:11, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Anti-Quebec sentiment. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20070311075939/http://www.canada.com:80/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=7e75959e-b11b-4a7f-865d-2ec86fc78f4d&k=53879 to http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=7e75959e-b11b-4a7f-865d-2ec86fc78f4d&k=53879
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060602122016/http://www.cjnews.com/pastIssues/02/may23-02/community/community2.htm to http://www.cjnews.com/pastIssues/02/may23-02/community/community2.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:13, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Anti-Quebec sentiment. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20070311075939/http://www.canada.com:80/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=7e75959e-b11b-4a7f-865d-2ec86fc78f4d&k=53879 to http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=7e75959e-b11b-4a7f-865d-2ec86fc78f4d&k=53879
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:28, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Anti-Quebec sentiment. 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/20071021195745/http://www.barbarakay.ca/archive/20060817QuebecersindenialCounterpoint.html to http://www.barbarakay.ca/archive/20060817QuebecersindenialCounterpoint.html
*Added  tag to http://www.barbarakay.ca/archive/20061122saywhatyouwant.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Anti-Quebec sentiment. 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/20060521024315/http://www.journalmir.com/membres/2006-02-15/monde/allemagne/8.sn to http://www.journalmir.com/membres/2006-02-15/monde/allemagne/8.sn
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080303092726/http://www.unites.uqam.ca/sqsp/revPolSo/vol18_2/vol18_no2_potvin.htm to http://www.unites.uqam.ca/sqsp/revPolSo/vol18_2/vol18_no2_potvin.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.bibliotheque.assnat.qc.ca/01/mono/2006/10/916230.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710122829/http://www.dianefrancis.com/books.php to http://www.dianefrancis.com/books.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120421033847/http://www.westislandgazette.com/victorschukov/24172 to http://www.westislandgazette.com/victorschukov/24172
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090924235949/http://agora.qc.ca/liens/gacaldwell.html to http://agora.qc.ca/liens/gacaldwell.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930210429/http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/36/36565.htm to http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/36/36565.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100811161049/http://www.vigile.net/spip.php?page=archives to http://www.vigile.net/spip.php?page=archives&u=archives%2Fds-societe%2Findex-francophobie.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061113232823/http://www.cjnews.com/pastissues/02/jun13-02/front4.asp to http://www.cjnews.com/pastissues/02/jun13-02/front4.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725175125/http://www.er.uqam.ca/nobel/r24545/pdf/CES_2000/Potvin%20Media-Anglais%20CES%20final.pdf to http://www.er.uqam.ca/nobel/r24545/pdf/CES_2000/Potvin%20Media-Anglais%20CES%20final.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:31, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I was surprised by this section of the article. "Yeux Bridés" in French means "monolids" in English, not slanted eyes.
Sir John Falstaff (talk) 03:12, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yeux Bridés 

message: I added a short section on this topic to the article. The denial of the existence of a people or their nation is a common attitude among imperialists and thus I felt it belonged in this article. Akesgeroth (talk) 03:16, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  EMSB denial of Quebec nationhood 

message: I came back to check on this article and yet again, people have come here and slapped dubious and downright misleading "bias" and "citation needed" tags everywhere and deleted large portions of it. I've undone all these edits. As an example, asking for a source for Quebec's nationhood is like asking for a source for a statement like "a banana is a fruit." At this point, if you're asking for a source for it, you're not doing it in good faith. I'm going to request protection on this article so Timmy and Jimmy from Toronto can't come in here and deface this article every time Quebec doesn't do what Canada would want it to do. Akesgeroth (talk) 19:34, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW, Quebec (which is a province) is not a nation within Canada. The Harper government said that the "Quebecois"(i.e. French Quebecers) are a nation within Canada. GoodDay (talk) 17:49, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

text: PS - I will be opening an RFC on this matter, if my correct changes get reverted. GoodDay (talk) 17:56, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Your changes will not be reverted because, as you said, they are correct. I see a few competent editors have decided to get involved and I appreciate it. I'm not a regular or experienced editor myself, I merely keep an eye out for vandalism. Thank you for your help. Akesgeroth (talk) 13:17, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persistent vandalism on this article 

message: I'm making some edits to the "examples" section of the article. I'm going to list/discuss them here in case people want to suggest different changes or restoring some things I remove or change. I've renamed the section to "alleged examples" since in many of the most notable cases it's controversial whether the event/statement qualifies as Quebec bashing or was just legitimate criticism of Quebec society.
- At the opening of the section were several sentences describing events that are covered in greater detail later on (e.g., Richler, Deilise, Don Cherry, etc.). I've removed these sentences since they're redundant and to reduce the article's bloated length. 
- Similarly, at the start of the examples section there were several single-sentence descriptions of purported anti-Quebec statements or events. Although sourced, these seemed so minor and non-noteworthy that I removed them so that there wasn't just a paragraph listing a dozen unrelated minor news stories. I don't think we should strive to catalogue every reported instance of purported Quebec-bashing.
- I removed the "Lawrence Martin" sub-section. The gist of the claim here is that Martin wrote a negative biography of a Quebec politician, so it's Quebec bashing. The whole section was only here because it's used as an example in the Black Book of English Canada. There was a earlier discussion in the Talk archive where the sub-section was considered for deletion since it was not notable.
- I removed the "Yeux bridés" sub-section. This event is well-documented, but it's not clear from what's written why it qualifies as anti-Quebec sentiment and not just a controversy about a politician's faux pas. There is nothing in the section that explains how worries that the comments were prejudicial were Quebec bashing. This was also considered for deletion in the Talk archive, for similar reasons.
- I removed the "Richard Lafferty" sub-section for similar reasons. It documents how Lafferty defamed two Quebec politicians, but does not make any effort to explain how criticism of two nationalist politicians is an expression of prejudice against all of Quebec or Quebecois generally. Many it was somehow, but it must be explained. Not just any criticism of a Quebec politician expresses anti-Quebec sentiments.
   Hate is often hidden into criticism. A defining Quebec the same as Nazi's Germany is one of them. 2022-10-30 ac.
- I removed the "English Montreal School Board" sub-section. The section documents how the School Board denied that Quebec was a nation. It's taken as self-evident that this is somehow anti-Quebec, even though the sociological question of whether Quebec is a nation, or whether "nations" as social kinds even exist, is debated. I personally think Quebec is a nation, but doubting it is not automatically prejudicial.
    Existence denials is a basic form of hate and xenophobia. It should remains there. The examples is valid because of the demonstration of contempt. Ac 2022-10-30 
- I added the "2021 Federal Election Debate+ sub-section. This is a recent, high-profile public debate that took place which centred entirely on accusations of "Quebec-bashing." Since it's unequivocally related to the subject matter, it merits inclusion here.
- I removed a paragraph about how Quebec likes to remind English-Canada that racism exists in its history as well. This paragraph does not really contribute to the article, since it merely points out that racism exists in English Canada.
More to come.
Loquacious Folly (talk) 17:13, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a forum. Your opinion have no place here stick to the fact. 
70.81.55.61 (talk) 01:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples Section 

message: I think that this article is quite mature and complete, but since it controversial there is a lot of vandalism.
So I believe that it time to provide better protection of the article. 
I just Erased two hates comments containing the usual rambling about french canada and Quebec in the talk page.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.202.113.225 (talk) 02:01, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maturity of the article 

message: This is pretty one sided by making it seem that Quebec is an innocent.  There's nothing on Quebec's law banning visible religious minorities from many government jobs.  It doesn't cover Bill 96 which involves Quebec's attacks against English institutions.  It doesn't cover Quebec's recent efforts to defund Montreal English universities by dramatically raising tuition for non-quebec students and redirecting funds from those schools to French universities.  One would think that Quebec is far more of victim than the oppressor and instigator of conflict.  In fact there's no mention of the Legault government at all. 174.89.236.175 (talk) 12:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article doesn't cover much of Quebec's trangressions