Talk:Representative of the Government in the Senate

Fair use rationale for Image:Can-pol w.jpg

Image:Can-pol w.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Infobox for Representative of the Government in the Senate

@MikkelJSmith2, GoodDay, Kawnhr, and Arctic.gnome: et al.,

With news that the Prime Minister's Office has announced that Senators Harder and Mitchell would be stepping down from their positions as Representative of the Government in the Senate and Government Liaison in the Senate, respectively, effectively December 31, 2019, and that the latter would continue only in the Liaison (former Whip) role until a successor is named to that position, I've updated the infobox for this position to show its abolition date.

We've not historically created an article for the Whip of the Government in the Senate. So, should we:

1. Remove the abolition date and add a narrative that this position was effectively merged into the Government Liaison in the Senate (former Whip of the Government in the Senate) effective 1 January 2020. We would also add a separate section to the list section of the article that indicates the position was merged into the new title (note that we would still track the officeholders via the infoboxes on the individual senator article pages even if this option is chosen);
2. Keep the abolition date, possibly expanding on the narrative I added, and do not create a separate article for the Government Liaison in the Senate;
3. Create a new article for the Government Liaison in the Senate (this will require researching its historical background and backfilling prior Whips of the Senate); or,
4. Some other alternative.

I favour Option 2, but would be amenable to Option 1 or, potentially, some other Option 4. I am less keen on Option 3.

Please !vote with support option n, where n represents your preferred option number. Please feel free to add any rationale and, if choosing no. 4, make sure you clearly state your option.

Thanks,
--Doug Mehus T·C 17:55, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

I'll go along with whatever the rest of you decide. My knowledge on the Senate of Canada is quite limited. GoodDay (talk) 18:02, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

GoodDay, Sounds good. Thanks for your reply! Thanks also for keeping the standings up to date! Doug Mehus T·C 18:15, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Dmehus, I'm honestly not sure if we should make a new page or just put the old position in a history sub-section and stay on the same page . MikkelJSmith (talk) 19:51, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

MikkelJSmith2, Yeah, that's why I'm favouring option #2 or, secondarily, option #1. I would be fine with either one. Options 1 and 2 are the easiest. Option 3 seems a bit like overkill and, rightly, for consistency, should have prior Government Whips backfilled in. Doug Mehus T·C 21:14, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Dmehus, I would agree that Option 1 & 2 are the easiest. Btw, unrelated, but did you fix the issue with the Senate map? You didn't respond to the message I wrote on my talk page. MikkelJSmith (talk) 21:19, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

MikkelJSmith2, sorry was busy over at a long-standing AfD I initiated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erica C. Barnett, a non-notable Seattle city hall journalist turned blogger that finally closed as delete, and my own school work. Will look now. Doug Mehus T·C 21:24, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Dmehus, it's fine. I'm also busy at times. I've barely touched that policy table in my sandbox for example. MikkelJSmith (talk) 21:25, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

I'm a little confused. Where are you hearing that the Representative role is being abolished/folded in with the Liason? I know Harder's resignation is effective on the 31st while Mitchell is staying on for a while after that until a successor is chosen, but I haven't heard anything more. Both the CBC and the Canadian Press say a successor will be named for Harder "in due course". This just sounds like a vacancy to me. — Kawnhr (talk)

Dmehus, Kawnhr is correct here. I wasn't informed enough and was a bit tired the other day, sorry. To add to what Kawnhr said, I've read other articles that confirm what he said. See the Global News one and Hill Times one where they speculate about who will replace them. So we have four sources saying that - MikkelJSmith (talk) 21:01, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

An IP user has made some good edits by the way, and they seem good. Kawnhr if you want to add sources/stuff based on the sources here, feel free to do so. MikkelJSmith (talk) 21:06, 1 December 2019 (UTC)