Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
My God, this article is about twice as long as the Wikipedia biography of Steve Jobs, and around the same length as the article for Winston bloody Churchill. Did the City of Toronto pay for this, or is it simply a labour of love on the part of someone with Asperger's Syndrome, a strange obsession with political mediocrities and a lot of time on his or her hands? If the latter, can I suggest that you move on to beefing up the profile of another equally prominent Canadian, such as Casey LeBlanc? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.181.7.213 (talk) 01:49, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Should be shortened, and de-fluffed. it fails to mention any of the contentious issues or criticisms of Miller. This obviously was crafted with heavy bias. Perhaps Miller wrote it himself?
Agreed This article definitely needs to be shortened. --Drewwerd12 (talk) 15:09, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
The section on Environmental policy is dominated by the discussion on garbage. I would like to suggest that the text regarding garbage be placed in its own section. The remaining section could be expanded to include Miller's support for other environmental initiatives such as the 20 minute makeover, Trees Across Toronto, Roundtable for a Beautiful City, Wet Weather Flow improvements to name a few. Any comments? Atrian 01:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
I might it might be better to have garbage disposal as a sub-section of the environmental policy section. (I'm currently expanding the page with reference to Miller's newspaper references, btw, and I'd have no problem if someone wants to supplement this with city press releases.) CJCurrie 01:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Why isn't there a heading on the article that he was the most useless mayor Toronto has ever had?
Toronto has become dirtier, scummier and bummier since he has taken power.
Maybe his legacy of empowering homelessness and the drifting tumbleweeds of trash swirling around Queen Street should be referenced?
I find that this article (David Miller's Wikipedia entry) seems to be very self-serving, considering the fact that Miller is running for Mayor this November 13th election. Jesus Christ, Albert Einstein, George Washington and Pierre Trudeau, all of whom I think most would agree had a greater impact on our lives, have smaller listings in the Wikipedia. Maybe we should not allow those running for public office to use this site for their own political gain. If allowed, guess I could put my own vanity page on as well, under the rules followed for Mayor Miller...User:lanceoak
This is an amazingly comprehensive article, better than many Wikipedia articles on premiers, prime ministers, and even presidents. Kudos all around to those who have worked on this page. Tyronen 18:53, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't mind a piece on Miller as a mayor of Toronto but I found this piece somewhat self-serving before an election. My question is, who did this piece and were they paid somehow by Miller to produce this somewhat long vanity page for the purposes of increasing his exposure for an election? Yes, I could increase information on those other pages I listed but I think they inform one of the person's importance within an easily read piece. Miller, I get bored reading about how great he is. I'm not running for mayor, nor supporting someone but, if we can all put vanity pieces like this in, I guess I should get writing and develop my own.
This is a fluff piece and hardly accurate. Where is the discussion and controversy surrounding the G20 illegal arrests, and Miller's subsequent support of the rights violations by police? Hmmm... interesting!
I trust this is real, and not an elaborate hoax. CJCurrie 23:04, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
It probably won't come as a surprise that I disagree with this notice. CJCurrie 02:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Having "David Miller" as the disambiguation page will make it easier to maintain misdirected links. As it is now, the Canadian mayor's article has a large number of links which do belong to it, but also a significant number of links which do not belong there, and it is very tedious and time-consuming to find them. OTOH, it is easy to find inappropriate links to a disambiguation page. Gene Nygaard 17:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't think tacking on "left-leaning" to Toronto Life or "right-leaning" to National Post is appropriate or necessary. As a subscriber to TL, I don't find particularly leftish, but more importantly, it is not appropriate to jaundice the reader's perspective on a source unless it is totally wacko, like the Communist Party organ (in which case, it would be enough to describe it as such, rather than "the crazy extreme leftist People's Daily). Ground Zero | t 00:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
The Toronto Star may also not come across as particularly leftish if you compare it to the People's Daily. CJCurrie has described it as left-leaning in his original wording and I support that. And this is of particular importance in an endorsement, such as in Mike_Del_Grande#As_a_City_Councillor, unless the endorser is a generally-accepted centrist source. If Miller got both the endorsement both the Star and Sun, then maybe the tacking on wouldn't matter as much. GoldDragon 01:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
GoldDragon writes: CJCurrie has described it as left-leaning in his original wording and I support that. Wrong again. CJCurrie 06:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I continue to disagree that TL is left-leaning. This is POV, unless you can provide a definitive source. Ground Zero | t 12:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
For CJCurrie, thanks for pointing out that SFrank85 also considers TL left-leaning. And CJCurrie did not challenge that until recently. Would we be in a deadlock situation? GoldDragon 14:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
So congratulations, you and SFrank are of the opinion that TL is left-leaning. Can you explain why your opinion about TL is a necessary qualifier here? And can you explain why it is appropriate to set aside Wikipedia policies on neutrality here? There is no deadlock if you can provide a definitive source on this. Otherwise, your opinion doesn't belong, even if another editor shares that opinion. Ground Zero | t 14:47, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, if you have the opinion that TL is not left-leaning, and if CJCurrie shares that view, of course we have a deadlock. Second, how does it violate neutrality, as everyone always mentions the left-leaning NOW or right-leaning National Post?
Would Miller get such a high rating from other publications that are more centrist or right-leaning? And just mentioning the TL rating Miller would mislead the reader into believing that it is representative of the spectrum's view of him, unless we could also find other ratings from other publications. GoldDragon 22:28, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Since you asked, here's a Toronto Star clip from 28 October 2000:
Yes, the teacher hands out "A" grades as if they were solid gold. They are. So are the four - Olivia Chow, Jack Layton, Case Ootes and David Miller - who earned top marks.
The original source document is an overview of the amalgamated council after its first term. The author, if you can believe this, was Royson James. CJCurrie 00:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Fine, so we will say that Royson James gave a grade... GoldDragon 16:57, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
"Well, if you have the opinion that TL is not left-leaning, and if CJCurrie shares that view, of course we have a deadlock." Right. So it would be POV to write "The non-left-leaning Toronto Life" or the "right-leaning Toronto Life", or "the middle-of-the-road Toronto Life", or the "left-leaning Toronto Life". So the only NPOV thing to do is to call it just "Toronto Life". Unless, of course, you can provide a source that identifies TL as "left-leaning (third request), and I think the only source that would be credible here would be a statement by the magazine or its editor-in-chief self-identifying the magazine as left-leaning. Since you have not prvided one yet, I'll add a "fact" tag to the statement. Ground Zero | t 13:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Gold Dragon's preferred version:
CJCurrie's preferred version:
I think that we should look at how much detail is appropriate here. I think that GD's version provides an overview of the relationship between the two, while CJC's version gets mired in detail that, while interesting at the time, doesn't shed much light on the relationship, and covers a relatively minor episode (the use of "corruption"). I'd opt for GD's version. Ground Zero | t 12:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
I can accept that the debate over the word "corruption" was a minor episode, and will not object to its removal. (There are a number of other minor episodes that should be cut from this page as well; I'll have to do a comprehensive update shortly.)
As against which, I still find GoldDragon's reference to the funeral of Miller's mother to be somewhat problematic in this context. It's hardly unusual for political opponents to be civil, even accommodating to one another during memorial ceremonies: one thinks of the recent cross-party demonstrations of grief over the death of Dominic Agostino in 2004, or for Shaughnessy Cohen a few years earlier. While I don't doubt that Lastman's gesture toward Miller was heartfelt and sincere, I'm not certain it sheds any light on their interpersonal relationship, and it seems a bit too close to "junk news" for comfort.
A couple of other minor gripes: (i) Miller's plans to run for mayor were already well known before Lastman's outburst, (ii) Lastman's remark was widely ridiculed at the time, for the obvious reasons.
Could I suggest this revised version:
CJCurrie 23:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh yeah, Lastman's outburst was ridiculed, but there is no need to rub it in as it speaks for itself. That is why I feel that this is excessive and not adding any useful information: Lastman's remark was widely ridiculed in light of his own history of gaffes. Second, Miller's support was in single digits and far below Hall and Nunziata in early 2003, so its not certain if it really raised his profile. GoldDragon 00:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
If Siemens' contention that it could have provided the cars for $100m less is here, then Bombardier's challenge to that claim should be here as well. From what I understand, there wasn't much substance to Siemens' claim. Ground Zero | t 12:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, this was a topic of dispute in Howard Moscoe and Rick Ducharme. If we included the Bombardier challenge, we could also include Bombardier's lobbying efforts with Adam Giambrone, Moscoe and Miller's links to Bombardier's union, etc... In general, I feel that it is not NPOV to only dispute Siemen's claim. GoldDragon 14:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Um... no. Siemens made a claim. Bombardier disputed it. That presents both sides of the story. Saying only that Siemens made a claim presents one side of the story. The Bombardier lobbying is a separate issue. Ground Zero | t 14:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Could I please request that someone comment on these matters? CJCurrie 04:45, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
And as long as I have everyone's attention, could I once again request that the following paragraph be added to the article, concerning Miller's relationship with Lastman?
CJCurrie 04:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
This is an old dispute that GroundZero settled, ruling against CJCurrie. I also would ask, is it okay to describe Howard Moscoe in similar terms to how CJCurrie is trying to describe Lastman? I expect a no and so I don't understand why CJCurrie would insist on treating them differently, unless he is POV pushing. GoldDragon 16:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
I'll respond shortly. CJCurrie 21:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
It might be worth noting that the Sun's editor didn't apologize for "Miller as Hitler" cartoon. CJCurrie 21:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Someone at the Sun did apologize to Miller. GoldDragon 22:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
I see that there are intentions of trying to make this article a future FA. Although Did anyone considered nominating this article for at least GA-class? There are probably a few one sentence paragraphs that can be moved into another and maybe some wikifying in some spots and may be a bit too long but otherwise looks neutral, well written and it's not the reliable sources that are missing. Any thoughts about upgrading the class of this article?JForget 18:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
I find that columnists such as John Barber of the Globe and Mail and Royson James of the Toronto Star have certain opinions that bias their columns to suit a particular point of view. Using them as sources for articles tends to skew the article towards their own personal viewpoint. This makes them unreliable as sources for articles on people such as David Miller who easily polarize opinions. I suggest they be excluded as appropriate sources. Comments? Atrian (talk) 16:31, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
The Royson James about casting a protest vote stands out in particular, so that and another lead-up paragraph were removed.
However, regarding this section: Miller later described Harper's 2007 budget as a "step backwards", criticizing its lack of revenues for long-term transit funding and permanent infrastructure.[203] Globe and Mail columnist John Barber, however, has noted that this was not echoed by other city mayors and described the One Cent Campaign as "wishful thinking". A second opposing POV is needed because the first assertion says that Miller is right and Harper is wrong. GoldDragon (talk) 20:47, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
The recent attempt to shorten this article proved to be a failure as some people couldn't agree on what form the daughter article should take. Even the title, David Miller's role as mayor prompted a dispute over neutrality. My suggestion would be that one or more articles could be created based on the evolution of Toronto's post amalgamation government and structure. This content could include much of what makes up the discussion on policy issues that are included in the Miller article but could be expanded to include what happened during the Lastman days as well. While these issues are heavily influenced by Miller, I don't think they are specifically related to him, ie. they go well beyond what is traditionally included in biographical articles. Is this material better suited to a discussion on Miller as mayor or on Toronto as a city? EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 15:20, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
David Miller was so insignificant to Toronto that there shouldn't be a daughter article and this article should be cut way down. This article looks about 6 times as long as Mel Lastman (which is preposterous) and 3 times as long as Rob Ford (even more preposterous). Whomever is controlling/promoting this page appears to have an pro-Miller objective and agenda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatrickGSB (talk • contribs) 21:11, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Wow! Just checked. This article is longer than the article for Jesus. I think that says it all Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatrickGSB (talk • contribs) 21:14, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Who keeps deleting the material about the 2008 Toronot explosions and how Mayor Miller was absent in the aftermath of the explosions??? Just because it looks bad on Mayor Miller, it CANNOT be erased! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.235.221.33 (talk) 21:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
It's rare to find any article on Wikipedia that gives information without a positive or negative spin, but this is one. No editorializing, just the facts. Well done.
Wannabe rockstar (talk) 19:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
To say that this article is unbiased is to say that the universe is full of marshmallows. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PatrickGSB (talk • contribs) 21:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Is it necessary to note that David Miller is responding to the recent handgun violence in Toronto.Jupiter.solarsyst.comm.arm.milk.universe 00:35, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Well, Wikipedia has some strange nationality procedure...so going by it, shouldn't he be considered to be a Canadian-British-American lawyer? Wikipedia should really work on the issues of nationalities and ethnicities. Norum 05:06, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on David Miller (Canadian politician). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:32, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 13 external links on David Miller (Canadian politician). 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:
{{dead link}}
tag to http://webhome.idirect.com/~jleeson/council_ratings.htm{{dead link}}
tag to http://communities.canada.com/nationalpost/blogs/toronto/archive/2007/09/11/david-miller-s-grip-is-slipping-council-ready-to-undo-cuts.aspx{{dead link}}
tag to http://www.torontocopsaretops.ca/index.cfm?pid=15403{{dead link}}
tag to https://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070412.TORBUDGET12/TPStory/TPNational/Ontario/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).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:27, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.