This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
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
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
This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Untitled
To michaelm: As I said before, it's not necessary to have *both* the soc-dem and dem-soc links in the introducation, given that the terms are more-or-less interchangeable in the Canadian context. (Note also: there *is* a dem-soc wikilink further down the page.) CJCurrie 17:01, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Multiple issues??
This article has had a "multiple issues" notice, referencing both "tone" and "more citations needed" problems, since 2016. I question whether these issues still apply to the article in its current state. Comments? — Richwales(no relation to Jimbo)04:17, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why is Alberta NDP labeled more left wing then BC NDP?
The article for the UCP has an absolutely beautiful, stunning, and riveting policies section. I think this article ought to have one as well, though I doubt it will compare. Kaotao (talk) 08:01, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is disingenuous. We can see from your contribution history that you wrote that section a few minutes before posting this comment. --Yamla (talk) 12:26, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]