Talk:United Party of Canada (2009)

Politics: Political parties Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Canada: Politics Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada.

Added[edit]

I added a bit more info to the page to spruce it up a bit if you guys don't mind —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bodo101 (talk • contribs) 04:03, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, but you have to add citations from reliable sources. "Citation needed" tags must be left in until these citations are provided. If citations are not provided within a reasonable period of time, the information should be removed. Please review Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. Wikipedia is not free web space or a discussion board. It is a encyclopedia. Ground Zero | t 13:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I realize that, I use the source from the website - though I'm not sure how to use citation tags in terms of quoting as I would just list the sources the info was from Bodo101 (talk) 21:43, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To add a source, put:

<ref>the information describing the reliable source</ref>

And put

at the bottom of the page to generate the list automatically. I'll help clean up if it doesn't work right for you.

Be sure to review Wikipedia policy on reliable sources. The party's own website is not a reliable source. Look for sources like newspapers or online news sites. SO far, it looks like the "United Party of Canada" is just a website that someone created in a couple of hours. There is no evidence that the party exists beyond the website and the good intentions of one or two people. Ground Zero | t 22:39, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The citations tags were removed again today by an anonymous editor. I have restored them. The next tiem they are removed, I will assume that there are no reliable sources for this information, and remove it per Wikipedia:Verifiability. Ground Zero | t 21:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The contention that the party has members (and who they are) seems to be supported only by their website. That is not a reliable source. Anyone can do up a website like that on their home computer in a few hours. That does not make it a real party. I am beginning to suspect that there is nothing to do this "party", and that the information should be removed from Wikipedia as being apocryphal. Ground Zero | t 17:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually what you said isn't true at all, in fact check this out http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?section=pol&document=index&dir=par&lang=e&textonly=false#upc UPC is nearly a federal register party - just need to full-fill one more requirement to do so —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.216.14.196 (talk) 06:03, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Election results[edit]

User:Goldpcg has removed the election reults from the article with the edit summary "as election is over and bears no reason to have it on the page at this time". I disagree. Wikipedia has a lot of informaiton about histroical events. Other Canadian political party artiucles have election results in them. There is no reason for this article to be different. Ground Zero | t 21:42, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two parties?[edit]

What's the deal with the new United Party? Is it related to the previous one in any fashion (organized by people involved with the first, claiming to be a continuation or revival, etc) or is it wholly its own thing and just happens to have the same name as an old party? If the first, this page should probably merge the information rather than the strict delineation currently employed; if the latter, then this page is set-up incorrectly, and each party should have their own pages. — Kawnhr (talk) 22:08, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think the only thing they have in common is the name. Ground Zero | t 22:08, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think a page Split would make sense, the two parties are completely unrelated. WanukeX (talk) 17:12, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarifications and input. I went ahead and split the page. Perhaps moot now that neither exists, but… — Kawnhr (talk) 09:16, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]