Talk:Michel Chartrand
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yes, as 'Cube Jaune', I will say: 'this article seems to talk about a different man than Michel Chartrand'
I would say as 'Cube Jaune': I understand that this article presents facts. The problem with it, is that the choice of the facts presented depicted an image of Michel Chartrand wich is inacurate. Rather than to give a fair image, the -subset- of facts choosen for this article make Michel Chartrand appear a bit like a terrorist , althrough one could find 10 times mores or more facts showing clearly that this man as acted in all his actions with love and deep respect to the democratic process and also for non-violent principle as they have been stated by Martin Lutherking and Gandhi.
On the basis of that, I believe that other work is still needed on this article.
Louis-Alexandre
Our edit was deleted as follows:
• (cur) (last) 23:34, 20 Sep 2004 User:Cubejaune (More neutral description, previous was evident Propaganda)
We NEVER insert propaganda or unreserched information OF ANY KIND AT ANY TIME. From the User contributions, it appears that another "unknown" Wikipedia user created the User:Cubejaune idemntity for a specific purpose and this is a deliberate removal of facts that they did not like.
REFERENCE for our edit comes from the Government of Canada official archives (http://collections.ic.gc.ca/flag/html/ch7b.htm) and the Globe and Mail newspaper (/www.theglobeandmail.com/series/trudeau/jgray2_sep30.html)
JillandJack 17:34, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
You're saying that Michel Chartrand as a terrorist, and he's not. He made a lot for the quebec society and we cannot see it in your description. Do you realy think that the Globe and mail and the Government of Canada are neutral to Michel Chartrand. This biography page from the university of Sherbrooke seems to describe another man... [1] CubeJaune 07:19, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
The information in this article was factual in all aspects but was removed twice. Following our reinstatement of the FACTS, an NPOV notice was inserted. One can only guess, because this was not accompanied by a note on the discussion page, that it must have been based upon the notion that the lack of other information makes it POV? Such being the possibility, we have corrected it with factual background and presented to the best of our ability in an NPOV manner. JillandJack 18:18, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Sources required, this close from flagging it as non-neutral
Weasel language ("As a member of the Quebec sovereignty movement, Chartrand staunchly supported the Front de libération du Québec (FLQ) terrorists"), no sources, not one... This article is certainly not worth a B, as was granted by evaluators from two projects. The worst part is the inference that Chartrand was a terrorist by association because he spoke at a rally on the fifth anniversary of the War Measures Act. Gee, has this piece been written by revisionist historians who didn't bother to read the Macdonald and Keable commissions reports? Give me reasons not to flag this article as non-neutral. Bouchecl 05:30, 28 July 2007 (UTC)