Talk:Canadian Federation of Students/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

POV Nomination

it's unfortunate that is has come to this but i've nominated the article to be reveiwed/checkedDr sean chronic RSX 04:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

  • The POV Check template is not for disputes, as such, I have removed it. If you have further questions, please consult Wikipedia:POV check Also, for future reference, new conversations should be started at the bottom of the page, not the top. - pm_shef 22:52, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
OkDr sean chronic RSX 05:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

So what is the pov problem? When you nominate, you have to list the specific issues. Ardenn 05:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect information?

Apologies to other users if I have in some way violated internal 'rules' governing edits to postings; however, I am unclear why the correction of errors requires 'debating'. This website seems to be established in a rather backwards fashion. Incorrect information can be posted and those who wish to provide correct information must fight to have the changes made?

That being said, there are a number of inaccuracies that should be corrected--assuming of course that whoever is protecting the original posting isn't doing so for political gain and is "willing" to allow the "article" to be corrected.

a. The proposal to hold a "referendum to leave CFS" at Ryerson was not deferred but in fact rescinded. b. The student "governments" as you call them (student associations don't govern) that held votes to terminate their relationships with the other members of CFS did not do so because of differences over the Gulf War. It was, in part, because they wanted to establish an organisation that had different organisational structures. c.Undergrads at Carleton University have been members (consistently) of CFS since the early 1980s. d. Undergraduate students at the University of Toronto became members of the organisation for the first time a couple of years ago. They did not vote to leave in the 90s and then re-join. e. Grad students at Queen's did not vote to leave in the 90s and then re-join as a result of the formation of the CASA (as the article implies).

I hope these comments are helpful.

a. From what I've read, it was simply defered. But I'd be open to any evidence that you have to back up your claim. b. It doesn't matter the name. Some are associations, some are unions. c. Why did CU host the winds of change conference then? And where does it imply they ever left CFS? d. From what I can tell, I agree, U of T only joined CFS 2 years ago. e. How does it imply this? --Spinboy 06:38, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Here's what I know of the above;
  1. Don't know about Ryerson
  2. Student associations, at least in Canada, do in fact govern. They collect fees, often manage buildings, offer programs, and represent students. More importantly however, the CFS/CASA split was over a number of reasons, with the gulf war being one of the prominent ones. The Gulf War was certainly not the only reason, but it did play a factor (along with governance, political ties, and political slant).
  3. Spinboy is right, Carleton hosted the Winds of Change Conference resulting in the founding of CASA. That being said, they may not have actually joined the new organization after the conference. - pm_shef 22:58, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

POV

I don't feel this article is neutral. It states facts that are unsubstantiated, such as that tuition fees are skyrocketing, and that their actions caused fees to be frozen, if you can call it that. Spinboy 04:34, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

=/ Tuition may not be rising rapidly in your province, but it is in many others. The goal of CFS is not only to battle rising tuition fees, but also to lower them and improve how public Post-secondary institutions are run.

Take a look at Canadian Alliance of Students Associations and you might notice how NOT NPOV it is by your standards.

What I added was simply some events that took place, the cause and the result of the actions. Nothing personal. — LegolasGreenleaf 05:03, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Show me your numbers? And how exactly CFS contributed concretely to these "tuition freezes" that you claim. Where is your proof? And I mean other than a walkout that produces no concrete proof. Spinboy 05:31, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)


Didn't I say that tuition in BC have doubled in the past 3-4 years?!?

Exactly how CFS contributed to the tuition fees freezes would be too numerous to be listed here, but some main activities would include holding demonstrations and lobbying for by-laws to reduce tuition.

Concrete proof? Truthfully I do not have any. But you cannot just go on to say that what I have there are personal opinions. If you truly want to get technical, then on most pages in wiki you can put a NPOV sign.

One thing you have to know that by voicing your opinions as a voter the politicians would have to listen, for in CFS alone there are half a million potential votes in favor of the party that favor the choices of students. Half a million is a significant number in Canadian political context. — LegolasGreenleaf 05:44, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

But as we all know, not eveveryone votes for the same party, weather or not they are members of CFS (which is mandatory at member schools, by the way.) And demonstrations/lobbying is great, but that doesn't belong on a wikipedia page. It belongs on their own website. And before you point out that CASA schools have their members join mandatorily too, CASA is an alliance of student groups, not students. So it's the group that is the member, not the students. Spinboy 05:52, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)


lol what are you trying to say here?

Ya I agree that not everyone in a group will have the same opinions, but still what CFS organized is a part of their legacy, and putting that onto this page only informs people about what they did. Isn't wiki supposed to be a encyclopedia about everything? I try to be neutral in all of my posts and refrain from personal POV.

You cannot sincerely say that the changes I made on this page are biased opinions. — LegolasGreenleaf 06:02, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure. I more think that it's something that belongs on their own website rather than Wikipedia. What they organized may be part of their legacy, but then why not contribute an entire section of it's history? About all their demonstrations, etc and perhaps even the percieved impact? This way it is more historical and covers not just the one event. That is where I think it looses it's neutrality. It's covering one specific event and making un-backed up claims. But turn it into a history section on all their "days of action" and I think that might certainly be more beneficial. Spinboy 07:19, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

New POV

The Article is not neutral and is not following wikipedia NPOV policies as well as being used as a means to defame and slander certain persons and or students' unions Dr sean chronic RSX 08:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

It's verified and cited, however, if you feel the wording isn't as neutral as could be, feel free to re-word it, without removing the entire content. It doesn't slander anyone. Please don't remove factual information. Ardenn 12:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
The article isn't a "feel good" of CFS, as wikipedia is not censored. Ardenn 12:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Even though Wikipedia is not censored I maintain my stance that this article is breaking at least 2 two wikipedia policies NPOV and after further readingSoapbox That is why I dispute the Neutrality of the article. Dr sean chronic RSX 17:08, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I must disagree. Those paragraphs aren't breaking any rules. Ardenn 19:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I would like to draw attention speciffically to History and Current Issues

"A 1998 article in the Simon Fraser University student newspaper The Peak accused CFS of being corrupt, bloated, Ontario-centred, and a form of clique, with their people getting jobs in the NDP or Liberal governments.[6] Even though there is references there are links to documents pushing a point of veiw that the CFS is "corrupt, bloated, Ontario-centred, and a form of clique" Thats a biased opinion by a student Newspaper that historically hates the CFS

In 1998 Current executive director of CFS-Services Philip Link (former National Director 1990) was previously charged for assaulting (but acquited) Miss Lana Many-Grey-Horses in 1998 after she allegedly criticised the CFS for not doing enough to aid aboriginal students [7]. Mr Lank was also convicted of assault in December of 1989. The CFS has investigated charges of racism against Mr Link 8. the second citation is not so bad but the Ciatation to the peak article is yet again pushing a hostile point of view and quite defamitory against Mr. Link who was aquitted. further more it is not a current issue nor is it helpful to the overall quality of the article. If people wish to find ways to say the CFS is corrupt, bloated, ontario-centered a form of clique, protects criminals and allows misoginy they are Free to start a Blog and post as much as they wish. Wikipedia is not The Smoking Gun

http://www.livejournal.com http://www.xanga.com http://www.blogspot.com http://www.myspace.com

Dr sean chronic RSX 20:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

No, it's not, but it is factual and sourced. It's not POV or soapbox. Wikipedia is not a propaganda tool. It's meant to be a balanced article with arguments from both sides. Ardenn 22:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Your logic is flawed. Wikipedia isn't meant to have a feel-good article about CFS. That's not what we're about. It's meant to be a blanaced article about CFS's strengths and weaknesses, including corruption, etc so long as it is verified and cited, which those items are. Ardenn 22:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Than prehaps a new section titled controversy should be created would that work?Dr sean chronic RSX 00:52, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Pointing out how many "controversies" they have surrounding them is soapboxical. Simply labeling the incidents for what they are is the most neutral way. Wikipedia is not a soapbox.
"[...] it isn't that we should not include the criticisms, but that the information should be properly incorporated throughout the article rather than having a troll magnet section of random criticisms." - Jimbo Wales Ardenn 05:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

History

Where is the proof to back up the claims of those results? Spinboy 03:14, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Serious 05:19, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC) Tuition fee freezes are not given by governments out of the goodness of their hearts. In Ontario, it took intense lobbying on the part of the Federation and its member schools to push the Liberals to put it in their election platform. During the campaign they threatened to back off that promise and had to publically state in a press release their commitment to legislate such a freeze. In other provinces similar efforts were necessary to secure such a freeze, even in provinces run by supposedly student-friendly NDP governments. Of course getting concrete proof is more difficult. Governments rarely grant any lobby organization credit for any of its policies. They try to take most credit for themselves as well as the fact that the Liberals try to placate both OUSA and CFS and singling one group would be seen as compromising from their point of view. Nonetheless, I think it is fair to say that CFS's work was the most impactful in influencing the election platform and the legislation of the Liberal government. It is just as legitimate to say this as it is to say "In its short history, CASA has developed an unparalleled rapport and profile with decision-makers and policy-makers within the ranks of the federal government, opposition parties, and the post-secondary eductaion sector"--which is also a comment that is not based on hard evidence.

inaccuracies about Queens, York, and Ryerson

I removed that section of the article for accuracy reasons. Queens undergrads have never been members of the federation. They did recently join OUSA but that has no bearing on a relationship with CFS. Please see the Queen's University Society of Graduate and Professional Students website as proof (http://www.sgps.ca and scroll to bottom and see Local 27 banner). Second, a right wing coalition called "Progress Not Politics" did want to leave the Federation and began setting that in motion but in a recent election that ticket was swept out of power by the UNITY team led by Omari Mason (see election results http://www.yorku.ca/studgovt/results.php, see article in Excalbur http://www.excal.on.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=2) which is in support of the Federation and is committed to work with them and stay in the organization. Lastly, the Ryerson SAC initially passed a motion to have a referendum but after a overwhelming condmenation of this motion at RyeSAC's AGM the board of directors overturned its decision and decided not to hold a referendum (see Eyeopener http://www.theeyeopener.com/storydetail.cfm?storyid=1520)

I would strongly suggest Spinboy, that you are cautious about putting things on before knowing the facts. For someone who has put up almost all the canadian student union entries you seem a little behind the news.Serious 18:46, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I'll accept that. I didn't see the follow up article. My mistake. I would strong suggest, Serious, that you get off your high horse, and let's try to treat each other with a little respect and civility. That way these articles can be neutral and factual for the readers. I rather suspect you work for CFS, or one of their member unions. Spinboy 19:00, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Actually I don't but I am a supporter of the Federation, as you are clearly a partisan of CASA. I am not intending to be on a high horse, but I do have scruples when it comes to an encyclopedic website, and when people (and you aren't the only one Spinboy) make statements that are not based on factual evidence or indeed contrary to actuality (and i understand somethings are debatable) it rubs me the wrong way. So if I came off as pompous I apologize, but I don't apologize about my meticulousness.Serious 21:16, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

New Additions Concerning Criticisms

I have a problem with this paragraph and believe that it should either be removed or cited somehow. You say many students get arrested at CFS demonstrations. Firstly, only on very few occassions has anyone been arrested at a CFS called action. The term "many" implies significant numbers. Federation demonstrations are open and broad and peaceful and there is no need to warn people about impeding violence which never happens. If you can find some objective articles (ie not CASA's 50 reasons to leave the Fed) about CFS day of actions where there were "many" arrests then site them. Also, I know for a fact that CFS Ontario has met with over 80 MPPs this year leading up to the Rae Review Panel on Post Secondary Education, including sitting down with Bob Rae, the Ministry of Training, and other members of the panel. In Toronto, they meet regularly with members of City Council on student transit issues (helping secure a discounted pass for university and college students) and in Ottawa regularly make presentations to budget subcommittees. So although some may accuse the Federation of only protesting that accusation is not based on fact but rather inuendo. If you can rewrite this paragraph instead of me simply removing the section that would be best.Serious 21:40, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)


External Links Purely Inflamatory

I removed the external link because they are purely there to back up a biased point of view. We could list dozens of articles praising CFS, and conversely we would put a bunch of negative articles on the CASA site bashing that organization. If you wanted to include one news article (possibly the USC lawsuit one) that may be fine but don't use the site to push a criticism of the organization. A few points of contention are fine and balanced but too may defeat the purpose of an encylopedic website.Serious 04:25, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That's cool with me, I removed the links from the CASA article for the same reason. --Spinboy 05:29, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Sorry guys but wikipedia does accept POV external links. I think the number on this article was excessive but that doesn't mean there cant be a handful on both sides. AndyL 05:59, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hey, no problem here, so long as any articles affected have a proper amount of balance content wise. As I like to say, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I put all those links there, but I can easily write a paragraph on each one and put it in the article. --Spinboy 06:05, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Balance means putting in major criticisms as well as major laudits, not turning the article into a lengthy anti-CFS essay so exercise restraint. If you turn each critical external link into a paragraph about 80% of the article will consist of anti-CFS criticisms which would not be balanced, would it? Two or three laudatory links and two or three critical external links should suffice for anything that isn't a major article (and this isn't a major article)AndyL 06:13, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Lawsuit

U of Alberta, the one referenced in the link I provided, isn't a member of OUSA or CASA. Which other SU's are involved in the suit? --Spinboy 06:26, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Queen's AMS (OUSA), UWO (OUSA and CASA), UBC (CASA) so that's, what, three out of four? Five of five if you count the University of Alberta which is a founding member of CASA and was in CASA when it joined the suit. AndyL 06:46, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I re-wrote to say many were members of CASA, since U of Alberta is neither CASA or OUSA. Since CFS has no Alberta branch, they don't belong to a rival organization. I don't think it's fair to say other rival organizations, I've never known the OUSA to be a CFS rival.

U of Alberta may have been a member at the time, but they aren't a member of CASA now. --Spinboy 06:50, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I suggest that we cannot seem to agree on this, I'll put up a request for mediation. --Spinboy 06:52, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

So, it's accurate to say four of the five are current or former members of CASA. is it not? AndyL 07:38, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I don't see the point of saying weather or not they are members of CASA matters. Maybe instead we should list the students assoc's that are suing them, and let their own articles tend to their affiliations? --Spinboy 08:42, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well as was mentioned earlier, U of A was a member of CASA when the lawsuit was initiated and when they signed on. One of the reasons they are still on the suit although the student union is no longer a member of CASA is because the executives who signed onto lawsuit agreed to cover the costs of the suit even if they dropped out. Secondly, there is are two member locals of CFS in Alberta, the Alberta College of Art and Design and the graduates at the University of Calgary, so yes there is competition between the CFS and CASA in the province. Thirdly, the lawsuit is largely driven by AMICUS the General Managers association that networks GMs across the country and have used their influence to pursuade these four schools to joijn the lawsuit.Serious 05:24, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"I don't see the point of saying weather or not they are members of CASA matters." The question isn't whether or not you "see the point" but whether you have a good reason not to mention their affiliation. So far you haven't come up with one reason. AndyL 07:07, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I don't see a good reason --to-- mention it. --Spinboy 20:46, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That's not what I asked. It's factual information and is of interest. Unless you have a good reason not to include it then there's nothing to discuss. AndyL 01:35, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Members

You shouldn't remove the list of members who have left CFS. Spinboy 04:59, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

You can't have linkage between articles, sorry (ie you can't remove something from one article because of a disagreement in another article). My objection is not to listing schools that have left CFS but to listing schools that have left CFS *without* also having a full list of CFS members and/or schools that have joined CFS - I was quite clear about that.

The CASA article has a list of "founding" membes and a list of "current" members which demonstrates the groups growth plus a list of members who have left. If you want to list the third in the CFS article you need to balance that out with the other facts, otherwise you're creating a biased picture. I"m sorry spinboy but your pro-CASA POV pushing is not only tiresome, it's getting irrational. If you want to have a list of schools that have left CFS then also put in a full list of CFS members in order to provide balance. The fact that you want to list negative information about CFS without also listing the positive suggests that you are not interested in NPOV editing but instead have your own agenda. AndyL 05:06, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

And your pro-CFS POV pushing is tiresome and irrational as well. --Spinboy 05:11, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Spinboy, if you look at my edit history you'll see that I've added both positive and negative information on CFS. For instance, I added sentences that stated that a number of schools left CFS in the earlyh 1990s because they felt the organisation focussed too much on "non-student" issues such as the Gulf War. You, on the other hand, have added only negative information about CFS to the CFS article and positive information about CASA to the CASA article and now, since you can't bear to say anything good about CFS you prefer to remove factual information from the CASA article. AndyL 05:26, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Being on the correct talk page, my concerns:

- "A 1998 article in the Simon Fraser University student newspaper accused CFS of being corrupt, bloated, Ontario-centered, and a form of clique, with their people getting jobs in the NDP or Liberal governments."
- Membership list issues.
- Wording: "In 1999 the University Students' Council at the University of Western Ontario filed suit against the CFS in relation to the ownership by its subsidiarly, CFS-Services, of Travel Cuts. [5] (http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/1998/September/18/default.htm) The lawsuit has since been joined by CASA schools University of British Columbia, and University of Alberta and unaffiliated Queen's University."

--Spinboy 05:53, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It would be helpful if you stated what your specific problems with those passages are. AndyL 13:24, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I can see the problem with the first one, at least. Although not strictly speaking [Wikipedia:Avoid weasel terms|weasely], the significance of a single article written seven years ago in a student newspaper is certainly debatable. It also appears at first glance to have been put there to further a political agenda, although I certainly can't speak to the original editor's intentions. As for the Travel Cuts lawsuit, I fail to see the problem with that. There is a lawsuit ongoing, and it is a major issue for the CFS. So what if you don't like it? If you (spinboy) have a suggestion on rewording it, say so. However, just stating you have a concern without elabourating isn't particularly helpful. Haunti 17:00, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The Travel Cuts lawsuit isn't the problem. At least not with me. I'm the one who put it in. Tagging what organizations the unions suing CFS is a problem. It's up to the article of the individual union to say who they are affilaited with, not that paragraph. --Spinboy 19:47, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I'll restore the NPOV tag. I'm still waiting for some justification for the "Factual inaccuracy" complaint. AndyL 17:12, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Tagging what organizations the unions suing CFS is a problem. It's up to the article of the individual union to say who they are affilaited with, not that paragraph.

Assertion is not argument. What is your argument against identifying the affiliations of those student unions suing CFS? I can see no reason for not including this factual information. The fact that it is included in the articles on the individual schools is not, in and of itself, sufficient grounds for not including the info in this article. We dont' expect users to check out every link in an article. AndyL 22:27, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

NPOV

I still object to the listing of orgs that left in the CASA article, and not here. -- Spinboy 04:05, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

UPEI

The CFS website lists UPEI as a member. A google search reveals a 2004 article stating that the UPEI student council was considering leaving CFS but no later article indicating that they had done so, certainly none stating there had been a referendum and its results. Until we have some definitive proof that UPEI has left CFS I don't think we can say it has. The precedent is the CASA article where Spinboy insisted the article could not state that a university (can't remember if it was Manitoba or Saskatchwan) had left CASA until we could cite something other than a discussion board entry verifying this had occured. If Spinboy insisted on such criteria for a school leaving CASA, he should have the same standard in this case. AndyL 18:58, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

disability rights and CFS

I have two related comments. I find the term "accessible" confusing because clearly CFS advocates mean "financially accessible" whereas the disability rights community uses it to mean something else. I think it should be modified. Also, not a single word about the National Educational Association of Disabled Students (NEADS) which, as far as I can tell, has a healthy relationship with CFS.--Ravi

Then put it in, make sure it is verified, and cited. Ardenn 12:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Many Students' Unions have a disabilities liason and usually do work on the local level, CFS has a disabilites costituency caucus that meets at General Meetings to discuss issues facing disabled students. Dr sean chronic RSX 01:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

History Section

My concern with the history section is that it unnecessarily contains back and forth arguments from CFS proponents and opponents. CASA article's history section contains mostly NPOV materials or references to the POV of the organization, whereas the CFS article's history section already touches on the "controversy" surrounding the CFS. I think the section should be edited to be at least on par with the same section in the CASA article. Tony Kao 02:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I feel the same way but too many freaks, geeks and weirdos hound this page for that to happenDr sean chronic RSX 06:54, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Statement of Claim is it possible?

I feel that the current version of the page is defamatory and could open up Wikipedia to being sued for allowing defamitory content on it Dr sean chronic RSX 23:55, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Can you be more specific? Please see WP:LEGAL. Ardenn 00:04, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
The paragraph about philip link i beleive he could sue for slander if he wanted to the language is dodgy not place specfic blame but I am quite sure considering the paragraphs sources are what they are its gives an impression of the type of POV the poster of paragraph wished the readers should feel because there is no counter sources Just negative onesDr sean chronic RSX 00:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
It's cited, and factual. I honesetly don't see a problem there. Ardenn 00:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm 100% in agreement with Ardenn on this one. There's nothing "dodgy" about the language, and it (unlike some other parts of the article) seems to be written in a totally NPOV and factual manner. I really can't imagine where this "feeling" of the section being defamatory is coming from. - pm_shef 01:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
There are alot of inacuracies in the source material and I am in fact considering contacting Mr. Link Myself to get his side of the story not the peaksDr sean chronic RSX 03:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
You are welcome to do that, but be sure to read WP:NOR and WP:V. Ardenn 03:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
  • You can contact him all you want, but as a party to the dispute, any information that comes directly of the conversation would not be considered a valid source - pm_shef 23:00, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Travel Cuts

Is it not only 74% owned by the Federation and 26% between USC (UWO) UASU (Alberta) AMS (UBC) and I think two other? FullSmash26 04:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Its True Dr sean chronic RSX 04:25, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Really? Was that the result of the lawsuit? - pm_shef 23:00, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
26 percent of ownership was given to the plaintiffs they are creating a seperate entity that gets to appoint 2 board members to the travel cuts board. But the Federation is still own the bigger chunkDr sean chronic RSX 00:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Student Health Network

Can someone verify that its offered through blue cross, because I always thought student health plan is offered through a company called Green-ShieldDr sean chronic RSX 04:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Whoooooops, you're right. Sorry about that, I got the two confused. - pm_shef 23:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/a/n/Talk%7ECanadian_Federation_of_Students_Archive_1_9d3e.html"