Talk:2020 Mi'kmaq lobster dispute
 | This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Requested move 10 November 2020 edit
Should this not be given a more neutral title as to avoid any implied bias?
Suggested article name 2020 Nova Scotia lobster dispute — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.222.1.2 (talk • contribs)
- Not opposed to this concept. I may make a discussion on this. CaffeinAddict (talk) 05:30, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Extensive deletions? edit
Here [1] it seems to me that a lot of material has been deleted from the page without explanation. I think it should be put back. What do others think? ☺Coppertwig (talk) 22:55, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- I went ahead and reverted. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 23:16, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- The same one guy keeps coming back and vandalizing the page. I've just manually reverted it myself, but something should be done about this User talk:Acadianraider character. Loquacious Folly (talk) 17:53, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
- I just reverted again after deletions by Acadianraider again. I had to do some work to retain good edits by Egeymi. Acadianraider should stop deleting without first convincing editors here. The material has refs so it should stay unless there's a good reason to delete it. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 19:43, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
- The same one guy keeps coming back and vandalizing the page. I've just manually reverted it myself, but something should be done about this User talk:Acadianraider character. Loquacious Folly (talk) 17:53, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
BLP concerns edit
After reviewing Wikipedia's Biographies of Living Persons policy and some of the references, here's my opinion.
I support these edits by Acadianraider deleting statements about poisoning lobster. As far as I could find, none of the references actually say the lobster was poisoned. One says that someone else says the lobster "appear" to have been poisoned, and one says someone claims their catch was destroyed. Based on these references, the article should certainly not say the lobster was poisoned. I prefer just not mentioning the alleged poisoning of lobster in the article, because it's only one sentence or part of a sentence in each reference and this article is only a brief summary of all the references; but if it's mentioned it would definitely have to be careful, as in the references, to make it clear it's only something someone said and/or only an appearance or whatever it is.
I think we should not be giving the names of ordinary people (who are not major public figures) who have been charged with crimes.
I apologize for not having thought this through earlier, and for having acted hastily and impatiently. I thank Acadianraider for being patient and working towards consensus and compromise by deleting only part of what was deleted before. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 14:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Content by CaffeinAddict also used in Mi'kmaq article edit
I copied the first sentence from 2020 Mi'kmaq lobster dispute lead added by User:CaffeinAddict on 2 November 2020 8:33 PM to the related section in the article Mi'kmaq along with a link to this article as the main article.Oceanflynn (talk) 17:51, 21 September 2023 (UTC)