Jump to content

Talk:Brad Trost

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brad Trost. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:19, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Brad Trost. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:05, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brad Trost. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:19, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

anti-choice vs. pro-life

[edit]

My undertanding is that wikipedia uses "anti-choice" rather than "pro-life" as it's more accurate and unbiased. Can you explain why you are editing to use "pro-life" here? Hirolovesswords BlewsClews (talk) 17:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In this article the term "pro-life" is only used in the names of two organizations, the Pro-Life Caucus and the Saskatchewan Pro-life Association. It would be inaccurate to call the groups by other names. Hirolovesswords (talk) 19:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But the "pro-life" caucus is not a proper noun, as it is not a formal caucus like the party caucuses are.Hirolovesswords I defer on the "Saskatchewan Pro-Life Association because it is the name of an actual organization. BlewsClews (talk) 02:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus has been around since 1998 and appears well-established under that name [1] --Hirolovesswords (talk) 14:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That article doesn't prove a caucus is a formal organization. "Pro-life" here is just a basic descriptor. Caucuses aren't a formal arm of parliament. It's just a group of MPs stating their common agreement on a given topic. There could be a "pro-bitcoin" or "pro-cat" caucus and be the same. Also, your article is from "Canada's Life and Family Magazine" so whatever nominclature that magazine uses is obviously biased. Wikipedia's standard language here should cleary be "anti-choice." Note the lack of capitalization as well. BlewsClews (talk) 00:48, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Response to third opinion request:
I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Brad Trost and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.
We should use Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus. That is the name of the secretive group as used in sources, both reliable and unreliable (e.g. The Toronto Star, Macleans), meaning that calling it that is not a POV use of wiki-voice and that readers who are pointed toward the name will be able to continue their research about the group.
@BlewsClews: I am not aware of any community policy or guideline that recommends anti-choice over pro-life. I would be glad to learn about one if it exists. I do know our article on Anti-abortion movements has consensus for the use of anti-abortion over pro-life, as discussed in that talk page's FAQ. You might push for phrasing here along the lines of "the anti-abortion Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus" although I lean slightly toward that being redundant. You might also push for the name in lowercase, which seems to be the preference of a few outlets, including The Globe and Mail. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 18:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Anti-choice redirects to Anti-abortion movements, perhaps due to this discussion, and so does pro-life, so if this had been all about usual Wikipedia terminology (which it isn't but which might have been appropriate for WP:MOS talk) maybe "anti-abortion" would get slight preference. The poorly justified change to "Anti-Choice Caucus" was by 207.195.10.21 who also changed "traditional" to "regressive". Peter Gulutzan (talk) 20:05, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brad_Trost&oldid=1206431669"