Talk:C. D. Howe Institute

message: This article has multiple issues with having a NPOV tone. It's policy impact section has no sources, and is written in a non- neutral point of view. Below it is merely a list of quotes taken directly from their website. This section needs to be looked at to see if others feel the same, and if so, needs to be re- written completely.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpatrol156 (talk • contribs) 22:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. The cherry picked quotes praising the institute, for example, have little place in an encyclopedia. Pburka (talk) 23:03, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree. I don't feel that a simple copy and paste job from the Institute's own website gives a balanced viewpoint. I was the one who added the insertions from the Canadian Encyclopedia and from the Institute's 2007 Tax Competitiveness Report. I'm new to Wikipedia editing and will in future leave notes re my changes.Richard2001 (talk) 22:39, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I am going to take out the third paragraph in the introduction. Don't feel like it adds anything to the article other than self-promotion. There are several other parts of this article that would benefit from a neutral rephrasing. For example, is the "commentary on the institute" really necessary? Sens08 (talk) 02:44, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agree that the 'commentary section' should be removed but I disagree with removing the third paragraph in the intro. Quite common for the intro section to include recognition from third-party organizations.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.206.184.66 (talk) 18:40, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

text: The entire article was obviously created in order to promote the Institute on the basis of its own PR copy. This is extremely problematic. A former chair of this right-wing organization has now been named Minister of Finance in Canada.Human fella (talk) 16:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality issues 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on C. D. Howe Institute. 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/20121018235347/http://www.cdhowe.org/expert-review to http://www.cdhowe.org/expert-review
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 13:48, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on C. D. Howe Institute. 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/20130616144927/http://cdhowe.org/pdf/commentary_254.pdf to http://cdhowe.org/pdf/commentary_254.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140903174801/http://www.cdhowe.org/pdf/2013_AR_English_web.pdf to http://www.cdhowe.org/pdf/2013_AR_English_web.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) 07:54, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This page has a banner that says "This article contains content that is written like an advertisement…."  It would be helpful for readers if the page was improved, so that the banner could be removed.  
Some of the claims made are not supported.  For example, the page says "The institute has had considerable impact on Canadian public policy…." This statement does not have a citation, which it needs to be consistent with the Wikipedia core content policy of verifiability.  What would make it verifiable is a quote from a reliable source outside the C. D. Howe Institute making this claim.
The long list of researchers who have contributed to the research program does not have a citation.  This section would be fine if, for each person listed, there was a link to the C.D. Howe Institute publication they wrote.  That would provide the verification required.
The section called "Recent research" lists works published in 2015.  As it is six years old, this research cannot be called "recent".  
In the "Events" section, for two of the photos there is nothing in the photo or the description to indicate they were taken at a C.D. Howe Institute event.  The photo at the 2012 Benefactors Lecture says it featured Charles Evans, but Charles Evans does not seem to be in the photo.Lukebayy (talk) 21:38, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes that are needed to remove the banner