Talk:Josh Matlow

Untitled

Talk pages are for discussion; not for rival versions of the article. If you disagree with the current article either the article directly or discuss your objections here. Reggie Perrin (talk)

I disagree with version of Wikipedia article when Clearly Josh Matlow is a liberal who even ran s Ontario Liberal in 2002 Ontario Election This quoted in the original version of biography. Only a Liberal Member of Liberal Party can run.... Supported various re-election campaigns of both MP Dr. Carolyn Bennett and Dr Eric Hoskins......Ontario MPP...All this information is public knowledge and confirmed by by Candidates and various sources such as Local Paper town Crier. Reliable source has been provided such as Town Crier.

There is still the obvious omission of his father Ted Matlow Ontario Judge who was involved as a judge in the contraversial case of the St. Clair right of Way LAWSUIT of which he was accused of Conflict of interest..in a city of Toronto court Case... This article discussed Toronto Star May 2008 of which Josh Matlow...is directly quoted as school Trustee yet this addition to biography Excluded? Why? This crucial information is critical to Toronto city voters...who need to understand the importance of the st. Clair Right of Way discussion(case) and its influence to the CURRENT Toronto city LRT discussion of which Josh Matlow is a councillor.AND KAREN Stintz are playing a visible role..This St. Clair Project Disaster is still talked about by the Media(St. Clair Project Disaster) Toronto Star January 19, 2010. Judge Matlow is His father who had direct influence in the St. Clair Right of Way Lawsuit not only as a judge but as a Forest Hill Resident.

It is clear to me and several people who have tried making this valuable objective additions that certain individuals are trying to prevent this information from being known....This information is well documented in the newspapers such as the Toronto Star and the Toronto both of which Josh Matlow has written several articles for.

Any continued neglect of this additional information will only affect the reputation of Wilkipedia which will be viewed as providing inaccurate biased information to the readers who will rely on other sources for complete and accurate information..Any further accusations of smear is totally ridiculous.....My personal information has been disclosed. My name is Josie Erent and I live in the St. Pauls riding. of Josh Matlow.I would like to know the person's name who disclosed my full name in discussion...to make an false accusation of smear is one thing....but to divulge personal information is an issue of Federal Privacy Law. As a citizen of Toronto and yes Canada......I believe in accuracy of the information.....and therefore sign with my true name as a sign someone who is sincere in providing the truth and accuracy of this Law. AS a citizen and a voter, I am not hiding behind a false name and make false accusations of SMEARING..

No politician can pick and choose information that is simply flattering to them...and biased in their favour... Otherwise...we are dealing with PROPAGANDA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talentscout1964 (talk • contribs) 13:26, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

OK, so this is a good start to the discussion. However, there are several points you make that are outside the scope of this article. In addition, Wikipedia strives to establish a neutral point of view with text that does not make judgments one way or the other. Wikipedia would like readers to view and understand the facts with established and verified references thus allowing the reader to form their own judgment. Providing references also allows the reader to dig further and read the references for themselves if they wish to do so. The purpose of Wikipedia is to provide the facts that concerns this article and to not interpret them. You should review Wikipedia guideline articles such as WP:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for a greater understanding of these goals. You should also read WP:Biography to be clear on what should and should not be included in a biographical article such as this one.

So, what is OK to say about these issues?

1. It's OK to say that Ted Matlow is Josh's father. This is a fact, no dispute there. It's also OK to say that Ted is an Ontario judge. However, that is the limit for this item. Anymore and you are writing about another person. This article is about Josh Matlow the son, not Ted Matlow the father. It is OK to create and write an article on Ted Matlow which can be judged on its own merit and notability.

2. Another way to approach this issue is through the 512 St. Clair article. It would be OK to expand on this issue there and say that Ted Matlow was the judge who had a conflict of interest. Please note that you need reputable references such as the Globe and Mail or the Toronto Star in order to back up any additions.

On a personal note, I would advise you to keep your identity anonymous. Editing Wikipedia can be an enjoyable and fulfilling pastime, but adding text on certain issues can create conflicts among editors with different viewpoints. If someone knows your identity outside of Wikipedia that might lead to outcomes that are external to this website and no one wants anything untoward to happen. Some editors do publish their personal bios on their webpage and they are welcome to do so. You are the best judge of this. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 14:04, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Photograph

The image being used in this article, File:1joshmatlow2010.jpg, will be deleted from the Commons unless it can be shown that the copyright owner freely licensed it. The image description page indicates that Josh Matlow is the author (in fact, that it came from his facebook page), but we need an actual email from Matlow confirming this is the case. Instructions on how to do this are in the notice on the image description page. Please leave me a note on my talk page if assistance is required. Also, please leave a note here if the email has been sent in accordance with the notice's instructions. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:47, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Protected

I've reverted this page to the edition as on 25 March, and protected the page, due to the recent edit war. Please discuss the changes here and reach a consensus. Deryck C. 06:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 March 2012

I have been asked for a Reliable Source Regarding Josh matlow Staunch Liberal Affiliations...

This is from a Toronto Local paper Called SNAP Toronto discussing Re-election of Dr ERic Hoskins that includes Josh Matlow. This information also appeared on Dr. Eric Hoskin's MPP website as well.

SNAP Toronto - August 2011 Re-election Announcment of fellow Liberal Eric Hoskins MPP St. Pauls... Torotno.

Dr. Eric Hoskins Campaign Office Grand Opening

Dr. Eric Hoskins, Ontario Liberal candidate in St. Paul's, kicked-off his 2011 re-election campaign on Wednesday, August 17th with his official Campaign Office Grand Opening.

Dr. Hoskins was joined by campaign volunteers, community members as well as local MP Dr. Carolyn Bennett, City Councillor Josh Matlow, George Smitherman and Greg Sorbara, MPP for Vaughan.

Dr. Eric Hoskins wants to keep St. Paul's and Ontario on track.

On track for job creation, on track for protecting the environment, on track for investments in healthcare and education.

For more information, please visit www.erichoskins.onmpp.ca. Talentscout1964 (talk) 21:30, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

All you can say here is that Matlow supported Hoskins for re-election. You cannot infer from this that he is a Liberal. You need to let the reader make his/her own judgment based on this information. I suggest you review WP:NPOV for more information. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 23:16, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

So why are you not making changes to make information more accurate....? The current biography is biased and inaccurate... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talentscout1964 (talk • contribs) 15:29, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Untitled

My name has been already disclosed...and I have been falsely accused of smearing. by this person. My name is already public... see history of Edits. My articles such as Toronto Star were ignored....regarding Ted Matlow.. This is all true. You people have allowed this to happen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talentscout1964 (talk • contribs) 14:13, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit from March 17, 2015

The factual statements, and sourced, made about Josh Maltow's views on the 'Scarborough Subway' was removed.

The author of the edits "Ookpik25" stated in the edit that "/* TTC subway extension into Scarborough */ The information recently added to this section (and prior to the current edit) was completely biased and cast this politician in a negative light, rather than providing an objective account of Matlow's position.". This author is incorrect when states that the passage cast Matlow in a negative light. The material was sourced from numerous Toronto publications and is an accurate account of Josh Matlow's actions on Toronto city council.

The current edits are not objective, and do not express the sentiment contained in the previously referenced articles prior to March 17, 2015. The editor suggests that the past information was "completely biased". This is false and is evidenced in the articles sourced - there needn't be the complete removal of information, just minor edits if bias is suspected. The edits of March 17,2015 have been removed.Aletheia V. (talk) 04:41, 18 March 2015 (UTC) Aletheia V.

Of course the edits presented Matlow in a negative light and did not even represent the sources. And it makes it appear as if opposition to the Scarborough subway is a fringe position, when most councillors from Old Toronto opposed it. TFD (talk) 05:15, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure that this is the right place to do this but I guess there's no harm in trial by error. TFD, I made a mistake in the last sentence of my previous post when I said that the edits of March 17 were removed. I meant the previous edits including the Scarborough section. You spoke to a few points that I will address in turn. (A) from reading the passage before the March 17 edits and looking at the sources - it seemed to me (it still does) that the quoted material came out of the referenced sources. I see where it might have been a little skewed but I don't agree with deletion of the whole thing. Are not edits enough? (B) I'm not sure what you mean by 'Old Toronto', but the Toronto City Council approved the Scarborough Subway, including provincial and federal politicians. If Toronto City councillors did not vote in support of the subway extension then how did it get accepted?

1. A majority of city councillors supported the Scarborough subway plan. I think in the western electoral system 51% is enough for support.

2. Support for the subway was made by a majority decision (not by a few politicians acting alone) by current city council (not 'old toronto' councillors) and has been publically supported by the provincial and federal governments.

Therefore, I still don't think that the current section, by Ookpik25, is accurate. Aletheia V. (talk) 02:25, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

"Old Toronto" is a term used to refer to the city before amalgamation. Of 51% of councilors support a position then it is tendentious to portray the 49% who oppose them as fringe. (Of course the vote was wider, but Matlow was one of many who opposed the subway plan, including most in Old Toronto. TFD (talk) 04:25, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for explaining that term; it means what I had suspected. Well, I'm not sure what the relevance is of pointing out 'Old Toronto' councillors. East York, York, Etobicoke, Scarborough, Toronto, and North York (then called Metropolitan Toronto) became the City of Toronto. I agree with you that the minority (ie. 49%) of councillors opposed to the 'Scarborough subway' does not represent a fringe. I don't know what the significance of 'Old Toronto' councillors being opposed to the plan would be. I believe most city councillors that served in 1997-1998 are no longer on city council, and what part of the city a councillor represents has no bearing on the weight of their vote. Aletheia V. (talk) 16:21, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

• Made aware of this after a post was made to the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive219#Josh Matlow. I have no idea who Matlow was before reading this article. First a seperate section and four paragraphs seems very undue for a subway extension. Second the current version is very poorly sourced for a BLP (youtube, primary and self published - not to mention some empty ones). There may be scope to discuss the accuracy of the original version, but the current one is clearly unacceptable in its current form. Bad enough that I am going to revert it back to the original and let wp:BRD play its course. AIRcorn (talk) 10:14, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Looked a bit more and many of the quotes seem cherry picked. I would suggest removing all of them and to be perfectly honest triming the whole thing to a single sentence or two under "politics". AIRcorn (talk) 10:40, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

I am confused by some of what you wrote. What is a BLP? I'm not sure what you have referred to about "revert it back to the original" because the passage about TTC Scarborough subway is still there? I don't understand what were you going to change. In the last part you mentioned trimming and 'cherry picked quotes' ... Because of my confusion about what you wrote here I'm playing it safe and not changing anything until I am more clear about what's happening. Aletheia V. (talk) 02:25, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

"BLP" is biography of living person. Click on that to read the policy. And please read all polices before editing - I posted links on your user talk page. TFD (talk) 04:28, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry I should have been more clear. Basically in Wikipedia we have strong sourcing requirements for articles about people that are still alive. The version of this article that I saw shown here used sources that are not reliable for biographies of living people (youtube is very seldom reliable for any article and self published sources should generally not be used for controversial or potentially controversial material. What I did was return ("revert") the article back to the version that did not have these sources (you can see my edit here). My aim was not so much to add or change anything but to simple get the article to a version that did not contain the unreliable sources.

My comment about trimming and "cherry picked quotes" reflects my opinion on what is wrong with this section. I had never heard of Matlow before reading this article and you will have to take my word that I have no stake in the matter one way or the other. The only reason I am here is because you made this post and I happened to see it.

Basically I suggest trimming as I am struggling to see why this incident needs so much of a mention. I have never been a fan of quotes and when having a quick peruse of the linked articles got the impression that the quotes were chosen because of the opinion expressed more than as a representation of what the source says.

Another guideline that I think is important is Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. This basically means that if someone makes an edit to an article someone else disagrees with it can be reverted and then discussed at the talk page. It can help prevent everything from being complete chaos (or more commonly an edit war). You are doing well discussing here and bringing it up at the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard was also acceptable. It would be good if Ookpik25 (talk · contribs) participated too. AIRcorn (talk) 06:45, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay. I will read more of the background Wiki information. Thanks for explaining what you meant.

My interest is to reduce the political bickering in my city now; regardless of side. I created this wiki account after I noticed the change. I haven't made any changes, and I thought asking would be a good first step because I have heard of surreptitiously made edits by biased parties. My interest is to use this as a learning experience, and to allow for the whole truth to be presented, not just one side - in all honesty, I think making edits to Wikipedia is a long lesson in futility as the changes can be done and undone ad nauseum.

I will read up on those guideline and thanks for posting it to my talk page. Aletheia V. (talk) 16:21, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

We part of the new city a councillor is from does affect their vote. Partly that is because much of city spending is directed to specific areas of the city. I note too that Matlow is not a particularly controversial councilor and is usually described as a centrist, so I do not see the need to reduce the political bickering, particularly when involves adding offensive material. TFD (talk) 22:21, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Pardon me TFD. I don't understand the crux of what you said. Are you saying that councillors that represent 'Old Toronto' have more votes, or their votes on council mean/weighted more than other councillors? I'm haven't at all spoken about Matlow's political affiliations - I don't think that matters to the context of the issue I originally raised - and additionally political affiliation shouldn't matter on Wikipedia. I think the material on his page now, as is represented by the Scarborough subway addendment is biased. Aletheia V. (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Josh Matlow. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110518175306/http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20080131_150113_8040 to http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20080131_150113_8040
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120314073618/http://election.toronto.ca/epr/eprDetail.do?022,111,309,203,404, to http://election.toronto.ca/epr/eprDetail.do?022,111,309,203,404,

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) 09:42, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Josh Matlow. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120911124259/http://www.openfile.ca/toronto/blog/2012/exec-committee-asks-staff-work-metrolinx-and-other-gta-cities-transit-funding to http://www.openfile.ca/toronto/blog/2012/exec-committee-asks-staff-work-metrolinx-and-other-gta-cities-transit-funding

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) 23:12, 30 November 2017 (UTC)