Talk:Scott Reid (politician)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
 |
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group. | ||
[edit] Page title
Is Scott Jeffrey Reid or Scott Reid (politician) the preferred title for this page?
I prefer the former, on the grounds that Wikipedia should avoid parantheticals in the page title whenever possible. CJCurrie 19:22, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- I prefer the latter, because "(politician)" more usefully describes the man than "Jeffrey". I'm not sure what the Manual of Style says about this. --Saforrest 23:25, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Links
My respect for Scott Reid has just increased. Take a look at the links on his home page, and ask yourself how many MPs would have the bravery to do this. CJCurrie 02:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, what did Reid say about Wikipedia? (I missed the original broadcast, and I won't be able to check Hansard until tomorrow.) CJCurrie 00:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- He made mention to Wiki in explaining the term disabigious and how he related it towards the response from the Liberal Opposition Crtic. The Hansard should have it. It was around 6:15pm Est. --Aleeproject 05:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Here is Mr. Reid's speech: --Arctic Gnome 20:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Mr. Speaker, the member gave an interesting and intelligent speech. If we were to go to Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia, and type in a request for something that has more than one meaning, it would take us to what is called the disambiguation page. We would then signify whether we wanted to look up the member for Lanark--Frontenac--Lennox and Addington or Scott Reid the former public relations person for the former prime minister, and so on.
The member has done an excellent job of disambiguating between the multiple meanings of the word “nation” as they are used internationally and in the Canadian context.
This is a great service because she is doing what this motion is attempting to do, which is to disambiguate the different meanings that the separatists have deliberately attempted to conflate in order to cause situations in which Canadians of goodwill become reluctant to recognize the sociological facts of nationhood out of fear, on the one hand, that they will be giving recognition of an incipient national statehood to Quebec, but on the other hand, may cause Canadians to give their approval to that incipient statehood out of fear of causing another unity crisis over that misunderstanding.
The member is doing an excellent job of explaining why it is that one can support the notion of Québécois nationhood without giving any special status, aid and comfort to the overall separatist goal. I thank her for doing that.
