![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
9 June 2006: 1758MST To say that Stephen Harper had a “rise to power” due to a group of political science professors like Barry Cooper is simply preposterous. This article reeks of an angsty U of C Young Liberal.
1) Harper rose because the Liberals failed Canada, and voters wanted to convey their disappointment.
2) There are leftist profs at UC, you know. Like Donald Ray, Brenda O'Neil, Pablo Policzer, why don't we write an article about that, and how they were single handedly responsible for Jack Layton's rise to power?
Phobal 20:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
As long as this flawed article defines the School as "a group of like-minded academics from the University of Calgary’s political science and history departments in Calgary, Alberta, Canada", Harper is not to be grouped into this School. He's not an academic and although the author correctly framed Harper as being a UC alumnus, he never academically participated in either of those departments. More proof of a hidden agenda from upper Canada. Phobal 20:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
I've just re-organized the article and added a lot of content to it. Areas that should be included:
The articles I've cited are quite long and can probably be used for a lot more material. Padraic 05:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
The photos posted to give it a sense of credibility are cute. Phobal 20:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
This tripe hinges way too heavily on an internet article from a C list magazine. Let me get this right, the only source of information illustrating the academic opponents of the so-called Calgary school is a general interest magazine called "The Walrus"? Furthermore, "The Media" is not a single general interest magazine called "The Walrus". As such, I am changing "The Media" to "The Walrus". Until then, don't use the pretentious term "The Canadian Media" until you have a plural amount of credible media sources acknowledging the Calgary School. "The Walrus" magazine is barely a credible source. Maybe the kid from upper Canada that wrote this article should join justin trudeau's campaign. Or just get it over with, and work for the CBC. Phobal 20:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
I removed the suggestion that Cooper openly subscribes to the Calgary school under the citation of an article that is not even linked or accessible. Further, don't use the term "other media sources" without actually citing "other media sources" that directly critique the school. All of these "other sources" from C list newspapers in C list cities only discuss the right leaning philosophies of these supposed members of 'the school', not their 'organization'. David Orchard is not a media source. The Walrus is "The Walrus", not an encompassing body of "other media sources". It's been just under a year and I'm still waiting for these "other media sources" while others quietly revise the article to look legitimate without speaking up. Phobal ( talk) 07:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Image:LeoStrauss.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 14:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
I removed the description of Leo Strauss as a neoconservative. As influential as Strauss may have been on some neoconservatives, it is simply incorrect to call him a neoconservative himself. The term (in its modern usage) barely existed at the time that he died in 1973. BenA ( talk) 14:49, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
The section "Decline of the Calgary School influence" doesn't say anything about the decline of the Calgary School influence, it just describes other academic work happening at the University of Calgary and implies that this work represents rival schools of thought to the Calgary School. Of course, it is possible for more than one school of thought to flourish in the same institution. Is there any reliable source saying that the influence of the Calgary School has declined or is declining? FirstPrimeOfApophis ( talk) 19:56, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
OK, I'll change it. FirstPrimeOfApophis ( talk) 21:16, 30 September 2022 (UTC)