Talk:Will Ferguson

Limited viewpoint tag

I assume the so-called limited viewpoint being referred to here is the monarchy quotation. In fact, the author is a well-known anti-monarchist who has commented more than once in his books about his views. I could have also placed another quotation from his Canadian History for Dummies but I figured just one was enough. He's also been quoted in the media specifically about this subject many times, notably: New Canadians Magazine, Fall 2004 and the St. John Telegraph-Journal Oct 5, 2002. He's been interviewed about the monarchy on radio talk shows as well, including 980 CJME Regina's Murray Wood Show. If anything, his views on the monarchy are the one thing aside from his writing that he's notable for. So it's entirely appropriate to have at least one quotation to show this part of him. Incidentally, the instigator here (G2Bambino) is a well-known editor of the Wikipedia monarchy pages. I suspect, as a monarchist, that it isn't the style or format he's concerned about here, it's the presence of negative views about the queen. - MC Rufus (talk) 09:10, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Please stick to the actual dispute; Ferguson's anti-monarchical leanings are not in question. Despite the fact that quotations are not generally part of biography articles, the point is that countless quotations of Ferguson could have been inserted, but one was chosen specifically to highlight one particular political viewpoint; one is limited, and there's an obvious agenda behind it's insertion here. There are enough sources to support the assertion that he's a republican, and the book from which the quote is taken is one of them, but there's no valid rationale behind the inclusion of a direct quote that only points to one minor aspect of Ferguson's life. --G2bambino (talk) 14:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not a "minor" aspect of his life. In addition to his writing, he's a republian activist who is regularly quoted and interviewed about his views on the monarchy. The quotation is therefore quite relevant. - MC Rufus (talk) 03:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, you'll have to find more evidence of that. --G2bambino (talk) 03:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I gave more than enough evidence above. - MC Rufus (talk) 03:49, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

No, you did not. You said there was supposedly other evidence, but did not present it. --G2bambino (talk) 03:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

??What are you talking about?? Get your facts straight. I said I could have added another quotation but one was enough. You bitched on the other pages where you stalk me that my quotations should be in the body and not separate so I made this one part of the body. I've compromised enough. Again, my evidence that he's a republican spokesperson is sound. - MC Rufus (talk) 04:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

He's an outspoken critic of the monarchy; why do you need quotes to support this, when a cite is all that's necessary? There aren't quotations to support any of the other claims about him here. Plus, you haven't provided one single shred of evidence that he's a republican "spokesperson." --G2bambino (talk) 04:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

What are you afraid of, someone is going to read something bad about the Queen? Get over it. The guy is known as a republican, and he's a writer. I don't see the problem with supporting that with something he wrote about republicanism. Jaye Peghtyff (talk) 20:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Of course you don't see a problem; you see an opportunity to promote your political cause. This is made clear when one looks at the very obvious fact that a quote isn't necessary to prove Ferguson's republican leanings. Wikipedia uses only reliable sources as support for its content, not quotations. Quotations aren't even encouraged:

From WP:QUOTE:

• "Editors should try and work quotations into the body of the article, rather than in a stand alone quote section."
• "When editing an article, a contributor should try to avoid quotations when: a summary of a quote would be better. This may be due to lack of importance, lengthy articles, etc. On lengthy articles, editors should strive to keep long quotations to a minimum, opting to paraphrase and work smaller portions of quotes into articles."

The quote you two insist belongs here is simply an embelishment whose sole purpose is to draw extra attention to some negative commentary about the monarchy. If you have issue with this, start the dispute resolution process. --G2bambino (talk) 16:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

If there's a concern about Jaye Peghtyff's identity, one can get somebody to run a Checkuser on him. Personally, I think JP an MC should both become registered users, so as to end such suspicions. GoodDay (talk) 21:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I am a registered user. And how does that put a stop to the suspicion? - MC Rufus (talk) 05:48, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, your red name, threw me off. GoodDay (talk) 15:44, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

End of debate on Will Ferguson: republican

I've added four media references that refute G2's claim that Ferguson's republicanism is a "minor aspect of subject." I know of several more but these are the only ones I could provide reference links for. Therefore, the quotations are quite appropriate here. In the face of this glaring evidence, I expect G2 will refrain from another provocation of edit warring by reverting this entry again. - MC Rufus (talk) 17:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

They don't in any way refute my claims; they just back up that his one book is quoted sometimes in the media. So what? --G2bambino (talk) 18:32, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Will Ferguson. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.wlu.ca/page.php?grp_id=2529&p=11314
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121227223357/http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/books/article/1280103--will-ferguson-takes-giller-prize-for-novel-419 to https://www.thestar.com/entertainment/books/article/1280103--will-ferguson-takes-giller-prize-for-novel-419

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) 19:24, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Biography Sources

(Almost) none of the biography is actually sourced, not even on his website. It'd be great if someone could find those sources, otherwise I'll cut this down to whatever I can actually find online. Per WP:BLP it should be gone immediately, but I'll give it a few days... 79.202.47.217 (talk) 08:54, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Misrepresenting the scope of his work based on references more than 25 years out of date

The opening section of this entry was a relic.

The author wrote exactly one chapter, in one book, 27 years ago (“God Bless the Queen,” Why I Hate Canadians: 1997) in which he made fun of the royal family and the notion of inherited status.

This was, apparently, quoted by journalists during a later royal visit. But the links cited in wiki — and this is telling --have ALL expired. (The reference to a quirky secessionist movement in the 1800s in northern New Brunswick, in Beauty Tips from Moose Jaw, is disingenuous to say the least. It has nothing to do with modern views of the British monarchy.)

In a humour book that he co-authored, How to be a Canadian (2001), he includes jokes written with his brother Ian about the monarchy. But that was 23 years ago. And even then, the gags in the book about the royal family are minor. The authors also mock televised curling, the beaver as a national emblem, Tim Hortons as a religion, etc. and ALL of those subjects get more space than the monarchy.

The notion that Ferguson is a “leading anti-monarchist” is demonstrably false by the fact that, on the death of Queen Elizabeth and the ascension of King Charles, not a single media outlet reached out to him for comment. He didn’t give any interviews or write any op-eds or articles about it.

Surely a “leading anti-monarchist” would have had something to say at such a momentous moment.

In fact, in the last 25 years, Ferguson has written far more extensively about:

· Quebec separatism (see his critical assessment throughout the 2005 edition of Canadian History for Dummies)

· sectarianism in Northern Ireland (Beyond Belfast: 2011. “Ulster? Not us, thanks,” Maclean’s magazine: 2002 )

· Japanese insularity (Hitching Rides with Buddha: 2006)

· the colonial roots of the Rwandan genocide (Road Trip Rwanda: 2015. “From Horror to Hope,” The Walrus: 2015. “In Rwanda, a Canadian working for the UN helps to reinvent the refugee camp,” Globe & Mail: 2014. “Return to Rwanda,” Canadian Geographic: 2014)

· the morality of Canadian political leadership (“Those Danged Right-Wingers,” Ottawa Citizen: 2000. “The Founding Scoundrel,” Maclean’s: 2002. “Why I joined the Liberals: a tale of El Weasel Supremo,” Globe & Mail: 2002).

Ferguson has written a travel guide, a memoir, and a novel, all set in Japan. (The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Japan: 1998. Hitching Rides with Buddha: 2006. The Finder: 2020).

Plus a newspaper column on Japanese customs (“East Meets West,” Charlottetown Guardian: 1996-1998) and countless articles (“Bulls, Baseball, and a Strong Thumb,” Outpost Magazine: 1998. “Prairie Zen,” Globe & Mail, 2010. “The Last Kamikaze,” Citizen’s Weekly: 1998).

Japan, where he lived for five years, has figured far more prominently in his writing, yet the wiki entry leads with the royal family.

Ferguson’s 2011 anthology Canadian Pie spans his writing career from his very first article, about a pair of Canadian brothers playing hockey in Japan (“He Shoots, He Scores,” Vancouver Sun: 1995), through to his work as head writer on the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics Closing Ceremony. The Canadian Pie collection didn’t include excerpts from his previous books, of course, as it’s an anthology of his magazine and newspaper writing. And, tellingly, nowhere in the anthology does he include any anti-monarchist tracts over the course of 25 years.

I could go on, but I think I’ve more than made my point. Any Wikipedia entry that reduces Ferguson to an anti-monarchist is misleading; it gives a skewed perception and, in doing so, presents a very inaccurate view of his body of work. 2604:3D09:1B7D:A2D0:5553:D554:9AC:C122 (talk) 17:22, 24 September 2024 (UTC)