Talk:2007 Ontario electoral reform referendum

message: I wish to flag that I have done considerable new work on this Wikipedia page, using what references I could find on line. While I have made many changes of a significant nature, I have not discussed all of them on this Talk page (which now appears inactive), although you will find a number of comments below. Should anyone want to track the changes made and the reasons for them, please use the View History page. Basically, my aim was to make this Wikipedia page as complete as possible and to include enough analysis so that readers could understand the result. --Reallavergne (talk) 20:14, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: General

message: Hey Schwede66 can you help me with something technical? See the side-box on the right of the page? It says No / Yes, but the choice was not between No or Yes. It was between FPTP and MMP. However, if I just change the words, the results disappear. It seems that the template is set up with just No / Yes, and I don't really have the skills to get involved in complicated graphics. Do you think this can be solved, or do we just have to live with it?--Reallavergne (talk) 12:56, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: This is still an issue. Madg2011 (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Side-box 

message: According to yourbigdecision.ca, "Ontario is divided into 107 electoral districts" not 103 ridings as indicated under the  Elections Ontario education campaign subtitle. Should I change that? --Mayfare 03:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are currently 103 ridings.  Effective the election, there will be 107.  Should you change it?  It depends whether the government is funding one part-time education officer in each of the current ridings, or one in each of the future ridings.  Since every other element of the election is organized around 107 ridings (since there are 107 candidates being elected), I strongly suspect it's the latter, but I don't have a source.  In fact, I'd say that last paragraph of that section needs a source, or it should be deleted. Sarcasticidealist 03:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  103 Ridings? 

message: The text that said that the Referendum question came as a surprise is too blunt. ("The question took many by surprise, including Fair Vote Canada, who were expecting a question requiring a Yes or No answer as had been the case in B.C."). It begs the question, Why does this matter? If it does not matter, why is this said? A bit more context is needed. For now, I have just removed this sentence. It could perhaps be reinserted with some explanation of why this matters. --Reallavergne (talk) 13:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referendum question 

message: "The Green Party of Ontario, who would have benefited the most from a proportional system in the 2003 election,[5] have also lent their support.[6]"
How would the Greens have benifitted the most? They did not receive the 3% required to gain any seats.Priester 02:36, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not know anything about the Green Party's support last election. However, today's polls suggest that the Green Party has 12% support, equating to 4 seats if an election were held today. --Mayfare 14:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Greens pretty well always poll above their actual vote totals (my uneducated guess is that it's because a lot of people disenchanted with politics say that they'll give the Greens a shot, but wind up just not voting), but that's irrelevant in any case.  The removed quote doesn't say "if an election was held today" (and if it did, it would be violating the portion of WP:NOT that covers crystal balls), it says "in the 2003 election". Sarcasticidealist 06:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greens 

message: I know the table I created is pretty slanted right now, but I just filled it in with the information I came across...please help flesh out all the endorsements. Padraic 15:24, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion the table should contain only current MPPs, lest it be filled with the 107 Green, Family and other minor party candidates (who no doubt support MMP), making the table impossible to navigate. Morgan695 19:04, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree the Greens shouldn't be on there, not because they aren't incumbents, but because their party already has an official position. I created the table because without an official Liberal or Tory position, it creates some context. Padraic 19:53, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I humbly disagree... While we Greens have always supported proportional representation generally, the Party is prohibited by Elections Ontario from stating a position on the Referendum... therefore only candidates can state their opinions.  As it stands now, the table is an ad for the Liberals with a couple PCs thrown in... I'll respect the wiki and not make the edits myself, but I think we should be there. Colin Carmichael 13:31, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would actually urge User:Colin Carmichael to not edit articles related to the upcoming election or the GPO - doing so would be a clear conflict of interest in violation of WP:COI. Morgan695 20:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then someone should tell Elections Ontario about this and this....Padraic 21:53, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

text: My involvement in this election does not preclude me from having knowledge that is worth sharing - indeed, if I were going to make nefarious political edits I would hardly have stayed logged in.  In fact, I was the first to have each of my opponents included in the candidates list as they were nominated.  Do not assume that simply because we are talking about politics, that everything is negatively motivated. In this case, I specifically DID NOT make the edits I think should be made because the conflict is clear - I will maintain, however, that filtering the list of candidate endorsements to include only Liberals and a few Conservative smacks of a hidden agenda to promote a particular political interest. Regarding those two links, in neither case does the Party advocate that voters choose one system or another. Colin Carmichael 02:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Individual candidate endorsements 

message: Has anyone come across reliable opinion polls as to the possible outcome of the referendum? Flibirigit 21:03, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Opinion polls

message: A quick update on the long entry below. This information was finally included in a separate Wikipedia page, and a link was make to it. --Reallavergne (talk) 13:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Results per riding

message: The devolopment and necesities of Toronto diverges for the rest of the provinces, the electoral reform is obiusly need for Torontians, where the old sistem is no representing they diversity; in the other hand the rest od the province still filing well reprersented with the actual sistem. Isn't time to split this overgrown province?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.197.95.10 (talk) 22:10, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The split of Toronto 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ontario electoral reform referendum, 2007. 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 https://web.archive.org/20061223042900/http://www.ontla.on.ca:80/hansard/committee_debates/38_parl/session1/ElectoralReform/ER003.htm to http://www.ontla.on.ca/hansard/committee_debates/38_parl/session1/ElectoralReform/ER003.htm#P473_151284
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080202185256/http://www.liberalsforelectoralreform.com:80/2007/10/liberal-mpp-lorenzo-berardinetti.html to http://www.liberalsforelectoralreform.com/2007/10/liberal-mpp-lorenzo-berardinetti.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071012044611/http://nommp.ca/about.shtml to http://nommp.ca/about.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The first paragraph of the background section included a comment on whom each elected MPP represents: "and is charged with representing all voters in the electoral district, except as limited by principles of party control". While this is not inaccurate, the question of how representation works under FPTP is more complicated than that. For instance, there is a distinction to be made between the service function of MPPs (represents all constituents) and the policy function (votes usually with the party as a representative of the party; party represents its base, seeks to maintain and grow that base and considers what is best for the province through the lens of that party's and the party leadership's values). It seems to me that a discussion of this subject is not necessary to understand the mechanics of the system, which is the subject of this paragraph and that adding a few words alluding to local representation and party control is a distraction. I have removed the comment. Reallavergne (talk) 14:34, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background