Talk:Economic impact of immigration to Canada/Archive 1

message: Citizenship and Immigration Canada likes to obscure the whole principal worker vs. dependant issue.  I'm not sure if I should directly call them on it in the article or not.  Here is a highlight quote from their website:
:CIC recognizes the benefits of attracting highly skilled workers. Nearly 59 percent of Canada's immigrants are in the skilled worker and business immigrant categories. They help fill shortages in our labour market or invest in our economy and contribute to Canada's economic growth.
If the majority of the 59% are dependants, how will they fill shortage in the labour market? Deet 05:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CIC misleading info 

message: Is it possible to make #2 "business class", which includes only investors, entrepreneurs and self-employed, and create a #3 for live-in caregivers and provincial nominees?
: OK. I tried it again. Let me know if you think that doesn't do the trick. Deet 17:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economic Class 

message: == GA nomination ==
Deetdeet - saw your note, good luck with the GA review. I think you're doing a nice job of cleaning up the article. As for the talk page, I wouldn't delete anything, maybe just archive it - that avoids anyone coming along and squalking about comments being removed.
I've taken a shot at the lead, rewriting it to avoid repetition of the words "economic" and "immigration". I've also moved the links out of the title; I believe that is preferred under the Manual of Style. I'm a bit rushed right now, but I'll try to read through the rest of the article in a few hours. Again, good work... --Ckatzchatspy 01:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that Canada has the highest per capita immigration rate in the world, it is certainly an important topic. I guess the question is how to best write the article. It would be great if you could give some more detailed feedback. I find this kind of cryptic feedback to be of little use to assist me in improving the article. A term paper usually has a thesis and conclusions... this article lets the facts speak for themselves. I can't help it if you find the facts disagreeable. Deet 23:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've decided to ask for a review to get better feedback on how to improve the article. WP:GA/R. Deet 02:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, that does sound like a much better reason to open an AFD (Which I think would not delete the article in the end) than fail a GA candidate. On a quick glance, the lead could use expansion, if you haven't already look at WP:LEAD for the general idea, in particular I recommend it be about two or three paragraphs, the rationale and impact sections can probably be made into one thought like a "The rationale seems to of led to...." sort of implication in maybe just one or two sentences, and maybe make another paragraph try to tie together the last three major sections. Also, parts of sentences like "It is important to note that, along with the principal applicants," don't seem quite right, important to note according to whom? Homestarmy 02:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I've made a couple of changes based on this.  I'm somewhat reluctant to expand on the lead for danger of introducing conclusions on the topic.  I'm more inclined to just let the facts speak for themselves.  If someone else thinks they can do a better job with the lead, have at it. Deet 12:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review

message: Deetdeet - saw your note, good luck with the GA review. I think you're doing a nice job of cleaning up the article. As for the talk page, I wouldn't delete anything, maybe just archive it - that avoids anyone coming along and squalking about comments being removed.
I've taken a shot at the lead, rewriting it to avoid repetition of the words "economic" and "immigration". I've also moved the links out of the title; I believe that is preferred under the Manual of Style. I'm a bit rushed right now, but I'll try to read through the rest of the article in a few hours. Again, good work... --Ckatzchatspy 01:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA nomination 

message: I think this article reads like an interesting term paper, but I don't think it fits the purpose of the encyclopedia very well.  On that basis, I'm not going to promote it to GA.  Appraiser 18:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that Canada has the highest per capita immigration rate in the world, it is certainly an important topic. I guess the question is how to best write the article. It would be great if you could give some more detailed feedback. I find this kind of cryptic feedback to be of little use to assist me in improving the article. A term paper usually has a thesis and conclusions... this article lets the facts speak for themselves. I can't help it if you find the facts disagreeable. Deet 23:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've decided to ask for a review to get better feedback on how to improve the article. WP:GA/R. Deet 02:16, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, that does sound like a much better reason to open an AFD (Which I think would not delete the article in the end) than fail a GA candidate. On a quick glance, the lead could use expansion, if you haven't already look at WP:LEAD for the general idea, in particular I recommend it be about two or three paragraphs, the rationale and impact sections can probably be made into one thought like a "The rationale seems to of led to...." sort of implication in maybe just one or two sentences, and maybe make another paragraph try to tie together the last three major sections. Also, parts of sentences like "It is important to note that, along with the principal applicants," don't seem quite right, important to note according to whom? Homestarmy 02:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I've made a couple of changes based on this.  I'm somewhat reluctant to expand on the lead for danger of introducing conclusions on the topic.  I'm more inclined to just let the facts speak for themselves.  If someone else thinks they can do a better job with the lead, have at it. Deet 12:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV?