Talk:Tom Flanagan (political scientist)

message: Im troubled that there is a description that Mr Flanagan is a 'revisionist'. There is more than one aveune of looking at the 'rights' accorded natives. I would like to see a balanced and nuetral point by point breakdown of his thesis by outside parties, preferably out of Canada and the United States that flatly can prove he is a revisionist. Shot of that im going to remove the remark
DRCarroll 22:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: MP Garth Turner has reported the names of the two Conservative officials who allegedly attempted to bribe Chuck Cadman as Tom Flanagan and Doug Finley (National Director of Political Operations, Conservative Party of Canada).
Should this be included as part of the article? Shame
DSatYVR (talk) 05:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conservative officials named in Cadman bribery allegations 

message: Flanagan was criticized for the decidedly pro-colonial slant of his research 'findings' within the report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services 1996), vol. 4, 199-386. Sarchristi (talk) 23:18, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Condemnation in Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996

message: Should probably be includedin the article:
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Complaint+filed+over+call+assassinate+WikiLeaks+founder/3932805/story.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.11.25.101 (talk) 12:26, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Please discuss the content dispute here, rather than more reversions. This doesn't need to turn into an edit war. Including the facts of his call for assassination are fine, but they do not rise to the level of inclusion in the lead. Please read the policies WP:RECENT and WP:DUE to understand how this works. One quote on a news show does not change the essence of who this man is. Elizium23 (talk) 02:53, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. He made a comment on the news, and is being investigated by police, but in ten years this will not be THE major point of his career. This is a perfect example of WP:RECENT and WP:DUE, and the burden of proof lies on the adding editor to prove that this material follows these policies. 174.115.241.185 (talk) 17:08, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if the Calgary RCMP follow up on the incitement charges against him, it will be the signal point of his career, or rather the end of it, as seen ten years from now....Skookum1 (talk) 22:09, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

text: Furthermore, the material should not be duplicated in both Political Activism and Call for Assasination sections. 174.115.241.185 (talk) 04:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It should not be in the lead as long as the lead is only one or two sentences.  It is ok for a lead to mention a half dozen notable things (a full paragraph or two), with this being one item.   Let's keep in mind, it's his politics, not his academic career, that makes him notable.  The Assange comment is part of that.  A good measure of the weight of a topic, is it's coverage by neutral sources.  Notice how the bulk of material in "Research and Scholarship" is referenced to Flanagan's own works.  Whereas, the assassination story, is obviously referenced heavily by many many reliable third party sources.  An article must weight a topic based on how independent reliable sources weight it, not how the subject would wish it to be weighed.  If anything in this article is receiving excessive weight, it is the large "Research and Scholarship" section, which is overwhelmingly reliant on works that Flanagan authored or co-authored.  Incidently, the Assasination call story has gotten another leg, with the allegation of another related threat.  --Rob (talk) 19:20, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This comment has nothing to do with the WikiLeaks controversy, but ... I should note that Flanagan's biography of Louis Riel is notable in its own right as a rather controversial work (as is "First Nations, Second Thoughts", for that matter). CJCurrie (talk) 23:45, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

text: It received substantial national attention.  It certainly was a scandal.  The article can be improved to discuss other things more.  But, to completely hide the entire thing, seems utterly absurd.  --Rob (talk) 20:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Assassination talk

message: He may have a job as a professor of political science, but the "political scientist" dab rather bothers me, given who he is and who he's worked for and the services he's provided them.  Isn't he a "political consultant" or "political advisor" more than he is a "political scientist"?Skookum1 (talk) 22:09, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen dabs, too, for "political activist" though that seems reserved for people from the other side of the political spectrum and/or non-government political spokesmen/consultants.Skookum1 (talk) 22:10, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I like "poltical scientist", as it's more broad, permanent, defining, and uncontentious.  His status as "political advisor" or "political consultant" changes from time to time, and it's debatable how important each is.  Until there is another notable political scientist with the same name, I wouldn't worry about it.  --Rob (talk) 23:24, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Dab issue

message: Would someone mind including in the article his citizenship? Did he ever become Canadian, take up dual citizenship, or is he still simply an American?  Oghma6 (talk) 15:19, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citizenship 

message: How did he study under John Hallowell who died 17 years before he was born?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.46.31.252 (talk) 17:52, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Study 

message: I've made some modifications to the books section to try and standardize the citations. I've noticed there are still missing book editions, so if anyone can add them, that would be great. I also believe we should break up collaboration books and textbooks from books where he is the sole author (One of the textbooks listed has 9 editions). EagleBoss (talk) 23:04, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Books Section