Talk:University of Manitoba Students' Union
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
|
 |
[edit] Remove bias from 'Election controversy' section
This section was getting pretty bad, and I have moved it to the talk page in order to give people a chance to edit it into something a little more reasonable before we move it back onto the official page. I'm not even sure it needs to be on the UMSU page; it's mostly just a series of complaints about the last election and attacks on Sran, and is getting more than a little aged. I've moved the actual section into a subpage at University of Manitoba Students' Union/Sandbox, so it doesn't unnecessarily mess up the talk page. Crigaux 20:06, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Day of Action?
"However, their involvement in the February 2006 CFS Day of Action was much smaller than the previous year's large rally on the steps of the University of Manitoba's Administration building."
Can anyone actually verify this or is it just conjecture? My primary concern is that there was no CFS day of action in 2006 so I don't understand how this can be factually correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.7.164.221 (talk • contribs) 22:15, December 14, 2006
[edit] Election Controversy
I have heard rumours that the Winnipeg Free Press, which was running an unfavourable article on Sran, was not available at the University of Manitoba Fort Garry campus on Election Day. I would like this to be added to the election controversy section, if there are no objections. It is controversial and students are talking about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ACinfo (talk • contribs) 20:41, March 29, 2006
I haven't heard anything about that happening... you would likely need a source to put that on. (P.S., please sign your posts!) - Crigaux 01:49, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
The opposing slate were made aware of Sran's past through a third party and presented the information to the CRO at the time (Kaitlyn Brown). The fact that Sran ran under an alias and not his real name (Gurjeet Sran) was grounds for disqualification from running as per the UMSU rules and regulations.
Additionally the opposing slate was silenced after it was found they were 'presenting' Srans past to prospective voters. Due to this infraction they were given a 24 hour ban from campaigning.
~~Schecter~~
The Free Press Article was much different than the Sun Article. It wasn't mentioned in the Wiki 'Article' neither was it the case that Sran couldn't comment at the time, his publicist was quoted as saying that he was too busy to comment. It is also interesting to note that he did confess to being involved but later recounted that the Winnipeg Police had 'violently' beat it out of him...
There was definitely something different about that last UMSU election than the ones prior. I heard that the Head of the Dept of Ethics, in a TV interview said that it wasn't ethical for Sran to hide his criminal past and that he should voluntarily resign from the election... Does anybody by chance have a recording of that news report? In case this helps, here is the Free Press Article: Student serves time, hopes to head union Thu Mar 2 2006
HIS supporters hope Garry Sran's criminal convictions and jail time will help make him a good example of the power of education for students at the University of Manitoba. Sran, a U of M economics grad and current statistics student working toward a masters degree, is running for president of the University of Manitoba Students' Union in elections that are underway today and tomorrow. But along with being a student, Sran is also a convicted criminal and parolee. He spent time in jail last year and is currently on parole in connection with drug trafficking charges laid against him over two years ago. Sran was arrested along with four other people after a series of police raids uncovered one kilo of crack cocaine, 1.4 kilos of powdered cocaine, a sawed-off shotgun and almost $20,000 in cash. He was handed a three-year sentence. He served six months in prison last year and is now on parole. Sran also faced gun-related charges in connection to an August 2003 drive-by shooting in which a gunman shot up a parked car and building outside of the Latin Club at 500 Portage Ave. Those charges were dropped after a Winnipeg judge found police botched the investigation by delaying the videotaping of Sran's statement. Sran claimed in court he was beaten and degraded into making a false confession. "He was at the wrong place at the wrong time," said Rachel Heinrichs, Sran's campaign manager. "He got involved with people he should not have been involved with. But education has changed everything for him and he's turned his life completely around." Heinrichs spoke for Sran, saying he was busy with the election and was not able to comment directly. Caitlin Brown, chief returning officer for the UMSU elections, said there is nothing in the regulations or bylaws to prohibit a person with a criminal record from running for office. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.159.205.24 (talk • contribs) 16:16, November 15, 2006
- I feel that the page as it is currently is turning into an article on Sran. While he is the current President, the page is about UMSU, not him. Additionally, it seems as though the page is turning into a politically-motivated attack on him, which, I believe, would violate the WP:NPOV policy. As an example, the sole cited evidence for allegations of his actions at the ASBC are copies of the minutes, and quotations therein. Using minutes (a primary source) violates the WP:NOR policy, because providing interpretation and context for the minutes constitutes original research. Additionally, no alternative perspective is presented, and the selections from the minutes are quite short and could well be taken out of context. I am considering deleting some sections of the text that seem to violate these policies, but I will hold off for awhile to give the writer a chance to respond. Crigaux 22:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
