Talk:Hazel McCallion

message: Did Hazel graduate from secretarial college and, if so, which college did she graduate from, and in which year? Also, Hazel discusses her experience working for Kellogg construction company's Canadian division. My research has indicated that she was a secretary and office administrator, but I can not find any written sources - does anyone have any information to confirm this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.119.244.194 (talk) 16:53, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Education and private sector employment

message: This is quite a glowing article for a fairly divisive figure.  The section I marked makes assertations that are not backed up with evidence.  In fact, this article reads like even more of a mash note than her official biography.  The description of Mississauga as a shining suburban (sorry, "urban") paradise is questionable.
This article needs expansion. McCallion is a colorful, popular, and notorious figure.  To claim she is without "ideological pretensions" (with no evidence, of course) is misleading at best.  Cleduc 19:25, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: And it turns out: this suspect content was removed once before, and then added back by User:Mikerussell.  The same POV issues remain however.  I'm deleting the POV parts now.  Cleduc 19:30, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality and sufficient content

message: I've heard that Hurricane Hazel hasn't had to campaign for the past little while... that could easily be wrong, but it would be nice if it were true, eh? Kareeser|Talk! 17:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It very much is true.  During the last municipal campaign she took a vacation to China, and asked all her supporters offering donations to give the money to charity instead.  I added a small note about that in the article. Snickerdo 21:40, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Campaigning

message: I suppose this is rather belated, by six months or so, but it is the first time I read your comments and they sparked my curiousity. To say that Mayor McCallion has no ideological pretension means she does not closely or recurrently align herself with a clearly defined political party or right or left wing policy framework. You're definition must be different, at least I am assuming, so before I make a revision to the article in the future, I thought I would ask for an explanation to your problem with such an accurate assememnt. In the new edit I will add info on how she has worked with both provincial and federal parties and her own lack of a university education which may be a contributing factor in the absence of an ideological orientation. Also, the fact she is a municipal politician adds much, if not all-to-obvious, weight to her absence of defining herself as a party affliated politician. Quiet frankly, I think you are biasing the article out of your ignorance. --Mikerussell 07:08, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To write that she has no ideological pretensions or orientations is meaningless opinion and cannot be proven.  If it is meant to mean something else, then it should be written another way.  As it was written, I could read it to mean that McCallion holds no ideology above any other -- that, for example, she'd be equally comfortable with Trotskyite Communism and Mussolini Fascism.  If you wish to state "she does not closely or recurrently align herself with a clearly defined political party or right or left wing policy framework" then that's what you should write, and provide sources to prove.  I myself have some doubts on the latter part, and would watch for neutral, reliable sources to back it up (as opposed to original research).  Also, I respectfully request that you refrain from making assumptions about my ignorance on the subject.  Cleduc 19:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It strikes me as biased or POV to interpret the word ‘ideological’ in this article- a civic leader in Mississauga- in the fashion you have in your response. Do you seriously think the average reader would assume she is a Trotskyite? Get a grip on the language used, and not a strict, exaggerated interpretation of the word. We cannot assume every wikipedia reader is a moron; the context under which one writes cannot be debased by some irrational standard applied by a single opinionated contributor. Apart from taking a rather straightforward and frank assessment of your qualification on the topic, namely Mayor McCallion and Mississauga’s governance, too personally, you have failed to offer much in response to counter my original astonishment at the surprise I have at your edit of the article. I will try to add more and replace a picture that as taken down, but overall, unless you really think that it is prudent, logical, or good prose to make certain ‘ideology’ a word coined by Karl Marx and tied to his view of History, a word almost totally divorced from its original meaning, which currently covers a wide spectrum of political opinion, is used in some strict academic fashion, then I suspect we will meet again on the Hazel McCallion page. Thanks for the response. --Mikerussell 00:34, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I look forward to reading your changes on Hazel McCallion, and encourage you to look for sources which document her freedom from ideology.  Words are what we have to work with, and they matter. Cleduc 00:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't want to pick a fight, but in re-reading this whole exchange I thought I might clarify a point. The reason why I said "Quiet frankly, I think you are biasing the article out of your ignorance" is not anyway intended as an assessment of you or your background- that is why I said you misconstrued it too personally, but perhaps I was not clear. The statement was/is based on my reading of the article and your contributions to it (as seen in history listing) which do not provide any information on what ideological position she does have. My actual comment way back when (6 months ago) was she has 'no set ideological pretensions'- italics now added, which you saw as POV, but you have not ascribed her any ideology either, thus you must be 'ignorant' of what ideology she has, yet certain she has one. Well, what it is it then? You add info about ring tones, but nothing about her ideological views, why not? That is why I claimed you were 'ignorant', it was a 'descriptive' evaluation in my mind of what the article currently states. At any rate, just thought I would make that comment clear because it may be days before I get around to getting a usable picture and updating the article. When I do, I am sure you may have comments. However, you must also be prepared with, in your words, to have "neutral, reliable sources to back it up (as opposed to original research)" to support your own opinions. Thanks for debating. --Mikerussell 05:01, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hazel McCallion's "ideological pretensions" 

message: The new article Mikerussell wrote looks really good.  There are a couple of points I'd like to establish some references for:
* Biographical notes. Is there a comprehensive source for this, like a printed biography?
::I will try to get a citable reference.
* CP rail spill & subsequent evacuation. good source?
::Need to find one.
* Conflict of interest. Source?  All I can find is this person and I'm thinking I don't want to hang an argument on that.
::I really don't have any knowledge of this issue but from this article, I assumed it was true, or at least possible, but maybe it is one of the things that someone planted and nobody ever did the research to confirm its validy. 
* Anglophone exodus linked to Mississauga's growth.  Unfortunately, Wikipedia is fairly silent on this... the Montreal article deafeningly so.  Is there a source which can document this, and more specifically the link to the growth of Mississauga?  It makes sense, but I don't want to draw this conclusion without a source for cover.
::This, I must confess on reflection is partially based on my personal, ancedotal experience as a child in Mississauga and having so many new classmates from Baconsfield and other Montreal anglophone, upper-middle class neighbourhoods enroll in school. Howvever, there must be clear, objective sources which document the flight of corporate head offices and jobs from Montreal to Toronto. Families left as jobs left, but also many left because of Bill 101, the law which mandated French language schooling for all children unless each parent had been taught in English in Quebec. In fact, if I had more time now I would try to do a better job of researching this myself, but it is a fact that many anglophones left in the late 70s because they feared a further erosion of their 'rights'- and the Quebec government and population did not much object to the migration. This might be why the migration is not mentioned often, there is a tincture of racism to the whole thing perhaps. Although whether it was racism correcting racism is another issue; after all, the history of the Province was one in which the minority group (the English-speakers) were disproportionatly found in high-paying, commercial or adminstrative positions, partially because English was the language of business and commerce, if not law and government, and French was the language of the 'masses'. For a francophone to rise to a position of power they had to learn English, if not work and live in English. The article of Bill 101 gives some insight into this- in that the change under the PQ was a clear and decisive policy to end the dominence of English in the 'upper classes' or 'business world', and thus diminish the disadvantage Francophones had in employment and government. I think even to be a Montreal Police officer before the PQ you had to speak English, not French, whereas a French Cop would have to know both languages. So maybe this is way too much to incorporate in the Hazel McCallion article, but some objective statistics should be found that testify to the population and business shift to Toronto. Right now I don't have time to do the research, but somebody might, or I might try later. --Mikerussell 03:57, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: again, good question, there should be a usable source, but i will need more time to get it. --Mikerussell 04:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Perhaps we should use the <ref> system to footnote these points. Cleduc 04:41, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Noting references

message: Is she the oldest mayor in the world? Or of Ontario? or something?--Sonjaaa 18:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: oldest

message: Does anybody have her maiden name? It would be less awkward to write "Hazel McCallion (born Hazel xxxxxx)" in the first section... 64.228.130.138 04:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hazel McCallion's Maiden Name? 

message: Hazel was accused of racist remarks a few years ago, 2001 or 2002 I believe. The nature of the comments were basically an implication that people of ethnic heritage (particularly South Asian) were draining the health care system. She also mocked their "native costumes." I haven't had much luck finding the articles, maybe someone else has seen them recently. This, and Hazel's recent car accident, would give her article a greater sense of balance. 72.137.224.24 01:20 17 October 2006
:Somebody should remind you what the word "accused" means.--Mikerussell 04:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hazel was accused of racist remarks 

message: I agree with the statements above.  McCallion is on record as insisting that Council must look at issues and in reaching decisions from "a corporate point of view".  She is on record as saying "We don't operate like the Federal and Provincial government.  Thank God.  Thank God I say again."
The Federal government (Canada) and the Provincial (Ontario) have opposition parties.  The other thing is all debate at both levels are in the Hansard records.  The public can read every word uttered at both levels of government.  
Mississauga isn't like that at all.  It's, shall we say, "efficient".
One of the more revealing insights into Hazel McCallion's ideology can be found in this 16 minute video on Google Video when she took on Councillor Carolyn Parrish.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5486668015046113293
Perhaps that might be of help in defining McCallion's Mississauga.  You know, her own words and actions?  Hope this helps. 
This is for Mike Russell.  I've been reading this debate here with great interest.  I also read your bio.  It reads, "I was born, raised and educated in Toronto; I have no real expertise or insight on any matters pertaining to my contributions and I don't take wikipedia too seriously." 
And we are now supposed to take your contributions on Hazel McCallion seriously?  Do you attend Council meetings or General Committee meetings or standing committee meetings?  Do you read the agendas and the minutes of each one?  At attend Peel meetings too?  Do any Freedom of Information research on Mississauga municipal governance to verify statements posted at mississauga.ca?
User:The Mississauga Muse  July 31, 2007
:You have failed to contribute much but your own opinion, so it is not helpful. You are attributing quotes to McCallion without references, meaning from legitimate sources where others can read beyond this website, and without context. Moreover, you are unclear about what exactly point you are trying to contest or reply to. You want readers to spend 16 minutes listening to a video or read a Hansard in vain since Mayor McCallion would never be found in any record of the House of Commons or Queens Park- she is a municipal politician. Do you mean Mississauga City Council minutes? Why don't you try explaining what is at issue, before misleading readers and contradicting yourself.--Mikerussell 04:22, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am still a little mystified at why you have such a misplaced sense of indignation at me, at wikipedia, and MCallion. First and foremost anybody can edit any article on wikipedia. My contributions are no more important than any other's editors. Nor do I believe I have added much info that relates to the daily politics of the city. If you have info that relates to this add it here and elsewhere and the weight of other editors will shape it over time. You really do exhibit a kind of "wacko" unbalanced tone here against the Mayor in my opinion, who is not a totalitarian despot, nor does she run the government alone. If you have reason to cite all this video junk- and it is junk in my opinion because they are out of context and people just have no idea what the point is with them, please explain the issue. Lets be honest- anybody familiar with municipal government will tell you that a few citizens can get very angry with the city. There is a reason why they install plexiglass at a lot of city's bylaw depts and tax depts, if you know what I mean. You seem to have some uindisclosed personal axe to grind, and if you can offer the readers of wikipedia evidence that McCallion is oppressing the civil rights of people who compalin about Parks & rec or whatever- just add it and let the other readers of wikipedia judge. otherwise, you are just wasting your time and making yourself look foolish too.--Mikerussell 02:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoa, Mike, what a lot of rhetorical and sophistical doubletalk! Are you sure you aren't being groomed by McCallion to replace her as Despot of Mississauga when she croaks? Lol. BidingMyTime2 (talk) 17:11, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality question (July 31, 2007)  By: The Mississauga Muse 

message: Not to disparage that an 88-year-old is still passionate about politics and her community, but is there any way to engender discussion on why the people of "Missed"-issauga, keep re-electing her, 11 times, ... at her age?  It really begs the question: "Do Mississaugans really care?  Is it a real community ... or just a convenience?"
You'd think there'd be some passion to their politics, if they are the sixth largest "city" in the country (me-thinks: they are not a city ... they are a suburb !!   Just like Surrey or Laval).  But then, the fact that there seems to be simply a "ho-hum" attitude amongst Mississaugans to just continue re-electing Ms. McCallion, over and over and over and over and ...
... well, the fact that she just keeps getting re-elected well into her golden years is, de facto, proof that Mississauga is not a real city but, rather, just an endless collection of ticky-tacky "little boxes" and strip malls.
--Atikokan (talk) 04:16, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not a place to discuss our dismissive personal opinions of McCallion or Mississauga. Like it or not, the woman is a force of nature, whom the residents of Mississauga quite honestly feel is still doing a very good job. Whether you personally agree with her politics or not, whether you personally think she's an old biddy who should shuffle off into a retirement home or not, it's hardly the case that mass civic disengagement is the only way she could get re-elected — it's entirely possible and valid that her style of leadership is what the people of Mississauga want. But at the same time, it should be noted that she hasn't had any real opposition on the ballot, i.e. nobody with the public stature to be a genuine contender for the mayoralty has dared to run against her, in many years now. Bearcat (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion on why re-elected 11 times, at 88 

message: I have removed some very considerable excessive detail from the personal life section, as well as some unsourced opinion.  DGG ( talk ) 00:34, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Over-detail

message: If only you won eleven straight elections, if only you had a 92% approval rating, if only you had zero debt and 700 million in reserves, you should be able to write your Wikipedia article any way you want to...--Oracleofottawa (talk) 23:48, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: If Only

message: 680 News has reported she is not running in this year's election. Doesn't seem to be mentionned in this article. But will check for an article confirming that she is not running for re-election.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.21.72.195 (talk) 21:38, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Not running in this election

message: Among its other issues, the article needs to be brought up-to-date.  I noticed this sentence under "Political views": However, Mississauga may have to borrow money to build new capital projects in 2012.[23].
McCallion is indeed not running for re-election on October 27, 2014. 10 candidates are running to replace her.  http://www.mississaugavotes.ca/infoforvoters/whosrunning
Steve Mahoney and Bonnie Crombie led a poll taken on August 3 2014, each with about 30% support. http://www.torontosun.com/2014/08/03/mayoral-race-close-in-mississauga-poll
Mathyeti (talk) 17:28, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done some work to tidy it up, remove duplicate statements, and otherwise make it appear to be less of a hagiography. However, a lot still needs to be done to flesh out the various events that marked out her early life and political career.Raellerby (talk) 09:31, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article not current August 2014 

message: found dead inside her home Adshead123 (talk) 22:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Journeaux found dead 

message: Shouldnt we add how she died i.e of old age, its not clear right now when she died, and how? A Guy Learning and Knowing (talk) 17:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Journeaux died of pancreatic cancer Adshead123 (talk) 19:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: exactly important stuff we needa add it 2607:FEA8:4A9C:9E00:91F7:2EB6:164E:9FAC (talk) 18:40, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hazel Mccalion Deaths