Talk:2003 Ontario general election

message: Thanks for mentioning the NDP's visual aids. For a party that wanted to be taken seriously they were probably a big mistake. The Swiss cheese episode was particularly condescending. Trontonian 16:39, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know why, but a list of all the parties that ran seems appropriate. It's interesting both the Communists and the Libertarians appealed to no one. Trontonian 20:08, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: They ran candidates...if we could include the number of votes each party got (as well as the percentage), then there wouldn't be as many zeroes. Adam Bishop 20:09, 3 Oct 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: What's the consensus on using the same pages for federal and provincial ridings?  I've noticed that there are a few pages set up like this already, which strikes me as a recipe for confusion in the future (the federal and provincial parliamentary representations don't match up *now*, after all, and there's no guarantee that Ontario will continue to synchronize its ridings with the federal boundaries for the indefinite future).
My preference would be to have separate pages for the federal and provincial ridings, which is why I used the "(Ontario riding)" approach in my previous edit.  What does everybody else think about this? CJCurrie 17:24, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I am opposed to the idea. Districts have, have had, or will have the same borders than with their federal counterparts. People have noted that a district has an MP AND an MPP in numerous articles. If we explain in the articles about it's provincial and federal history, I don't see a problem. However, I don't mind seperate articles for pre-1999 districts however, as they are much different. Earl Andrew 22:27, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It is the law, actually! Earl Andrew 23:20, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well when that happens, we can put in (Ontario riding) but for now I say it shouldn't change. Earl Andrew 18:34, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay ... I'll leave it as it is. CJCurrie 03:03, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Riding Names

message: *Essex
*Kent & Lambton
*London
*Huron Shores
*Erie Shores
*Niagara
*Hamilton
*Halton
*Waterloo/Wellington
*Georgian Bay Shores
*York
*Etobicoke
*North York
*West Toronto
*North Toronto
*Central Toronto
*Scarborough
*Durham
*Central Ontario
*Near-Eastern Ontario
*Ottawa & Saint Lawrence Valleys
*Ottawa
*Northeastern Ontario
*Northwestern ontario
--  Earl Andrew - talk 20:42, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I was looking to use more regions than what we used for Ontario in the federal election. I was having difficulties with names, and logical groupings though, and that was the best I could come up with. On reading the districts from electionprediction.com, it looks like we could use those instead, with a few alterations. --  Earl Andrew - talk 00:36, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regions 

message: I would like to know. Jack Cox 13:24, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I was hoping we would use a different set of regions than the federal races. --  Earl Andrew - talk 22:41, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are these Riding Sections good enough? 

message: Hello everyone,
Recently, I've been adjusting some "election returns" entries to fit the following template:
|-
|-
|bgcolor="#D71920"|     
|Liberal
|(x)Dwight Duncan
|align="right"|19,692
|align="right"|54.92
|align="right"|+9.83
|align="right"|$76,321.27
|-
|bgcolor="#F28000"|    
|New Democratic Party
|Madeline Crnec
|align="right"|10,433
|align="right"|29.10
|align="right"|-5.06
|align="right"|$38,712.34
|-
|bgcolor="#9999FF"|     
|Progressive Conservative
|Matt Bufton
|align="right"|4,162
|align="right"|11.61
|align="right"|-7.17
|align="right"|$18,088.00
|-
| style="background:#; |  
|Green
|Chris Holt
|align="right"|1,315
|align="right"|3.67
|align="right"|+2.79
|align="right"|$5,031.71
|-
|bgcolor="gainsboro"|     
|Independent (Independent Renewal)
|Saroj Bains
|align="right"|253
|align="right"|0.71
|align="right"|+0.71
|align="right"|$0.00
|- bgcolor="white"
!align="right" colspan=3|Total valid votes
!align="right"|35,855
!align="right"|100.00
!align="right"|
!align="right"|
|- bgcolor="white"
!align="right" colspan=3|Rejected, unmarked and declined ballots
!align="right"|302
!align="right"|
!align="right"|
!align="right"|
|- bgcolor="white"
!align="right" colspan=3|Turnout
!align="right"|36,157
!align="right"|47.81
!align="right"|
!align="right"|
|}
The quoted results are from 2003 election.  I recognize that this format takes up more space, but it also permits considerably more information to be listed than does the current model.  
What would people think of using this here?  We could still list the constituencies by region, but the entries would be done an individual basis again.  
I should clarify that this template is not my invention, btw.  CJCurrie 02:09, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Save these for the individual riding pages -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:56, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Another change in format?

message: :Image:Ontndp.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:45, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Ontndp.jpg

message: The image :Image:Ontarioliberallogo.PNG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:Ontarioliberallogo.PNG

message: Note that anti-Wikipedians redirected evil reptilian kitten-eater from another planet here without any merging of the content and its references (this article currently has no refs).  I suggest someone carry out the merge. 24.64.168.161 (talk) 04:08, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge needed 

message: I have placed a POV tag on that section as unsourced pro-McGuinty personal analysis. --Mr. Guye (talk) 00:29, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evil kitten-eater bias