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 sourcedmust 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 page is about an active politician who is running for office or has recently run for office, is in office and campaigning for re-election, or is involved in some current political conflict or controversy. Because of this, this article is at increased risk of biased editing, talk-page trolling, and simple vandalism.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography 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 Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism 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.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion. Explanation for inclusion in WikiProject LGBT studies: LGBT rights activistLGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT 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.
as in Canadian politics reaching over 50% of the population is rare. In the last election Justin Trudeau received 5,556,629 votes to Erin O'Toole’s 5,747,410 votes out of 38,250,000 which means only around 14.5% of the population or 32.6% of voters voted for Justin Trudeau yet he is the prime minister. He has been plagued with scandals and in the last few months a lot of his coverups have come to light. https://globalnews.ca/news/10120546/ipsos-poll-justin-trudeau/amp/He is the most corrupt politician in Canadian history with the worst ethics track record as can be seen on the Canada scandals page. https://www.thetoptens.com/leaders/worst-canadian-prime-minister/2001:1970:4AE5:A300:F890:2AD4:2C26:9FED (talk) 07:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is obviously heavily biased, and blogs are not RS. Mediatech492 (talk) 17:59, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Global news is a RS and is a left leaning organization as rated by Media Bias/Fact Check and all sides and neutral by Ad Fontes Media https://ground.news/interest/global-news
These are two of the largest media organizations in Canada
I feel like the proliferation in recent years of these fact-checking and bias-evaluating aggregators could ultimately have been a net negative for folks' media literacy. Remsense诉 04:40, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to your www.topten.com reference. It is clearly a blog, and therefore not suitable. Furthermore the other articles you reference do not support your assertion. Yes, Trudeau's poll numbers are not good, but "Worst prime minister ever" is not substantiated. Mediatech492 (talk) 05:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we have to be careful about reading too much into current polls for an historical judgment. That strikes me as a form of WP:RECENTISM. After all, when Pierre Trudeau took his walk in the snow 40 years ago, his poll numbers were terrible. When Mulroney resigned in 1993, his numbers were also terrible, to the point that his party was wiped out in the election. Yet today, Pierre Trudeau has high marks as one of the better prime ministers, and the recent coverage of Mulroney shows a much more balanced take on him than in 1993. I just don’t see the merit of relying on évanescent polls to state definitively that Justin Trudeau is the worst PM ever. That epithet was tossed around with both his father and Mulroney. We’re not in a position to make a statement. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 19:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RECENTISM states article has an inflated or imbalanced focus on recent events. It is writing without an aim toward a long-term, historical view.
This is not imbalanced or recent as it’s judged on his 8 years and worst ethics record of any prime minister. This specifically takes into account a long term historical view. And is being sited by all the major networks and I’m sure the RS takes into account recentism. It’s also hard to claim it’s bias as his father was voted most liked which means the people that liked his father don’t like him. 2001:1970:4AE5:A300:B849:9539:1E3E:40CB (talk) 22:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To make a claim that he's the worst PM ever you'd need something more concrete than 3/10 people voting him for that. The sources given also don't do enough to make that argument. It won't be possible to add that he's the "worst PM ever" because there won't be enough of a consensus on that by the media and historians. It's ridiculous and a waste of everybody's time to try to argue for the inclusion of such a statement. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:10, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With 23 different options it will be rare to get anything higher than 30% as already previously explained he only received 33.12% of the votes to become prime minister to the oppositions 34.34% of the vote yet he is our prime minister. This is how democracy works. The more options the less of a percentage they get. He is almost double the next person beneath him. 2001:1970:4AE5:A300:B849:9539:1E3E:40CB (talk) 22:20, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's nice. That in no way helps to establish a consensus that he's the worst PM ever. It's going to be impossible to get a neutral consensus on that. Let's not waste our time, because that's what any type of discussion about this is going to be, a waste of time. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:27, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a tabloid; it's completely inappropriate to cite a single random opinion survey as a basis for historical rankings of politicians. We have an article, Historical rankings of prime ministers of Canada, which makes some effort in this regard, but uses much better sources such as collections of essays written by scholars of Canadian history, not a random selection of people who happened to answer the phone one day. The IP editor is demonstrating why this is an unsuitable source: they are pushing to include it because "it's judged on his 8 years and worst ethics record of any prime minister", but the source cited does not support that conclusion nor anything of the sort. It just says that respondents were asked to rank the "best" and "worst" from an arbitrary list of PMs, it doesn't suggest what question was asked and certainly doesn't try to explain why respondents voted the way that they did. Public opinion surveys of this sort always attract widespread news media attention, because they're easy clickbait, not because they're informative. Widespread attention does not suggest importance, and by this time tomorrow those publications will be on to something else. We should not mention it in this article at all, nor anywhere else. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:33, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a point of comparison: the most recent prime minister that we do mention a historical ranking for is Jean Chrétien, who has been retired from politics for over 20 years. That's about how long it takes to develop a stable consensus among experts for historical rankings of Canadian politicians. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's also a flawed poll on its face: by setting the arbitrary cutoff that they did, the survey omitted Macdonald, Laurier, King, Pearson: all the PMs (other than PE Trudeau) who are consistently ranked by scholars as the top Canadian PMs. It seems like an exercise in comparing JT to his father rather than a genuine attempt to derive a ranking. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 23:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Odd that you personally accept these “tabloid” style articles when they are written against the freedom convoy that are unverifiable, clickbait,recentism opinion pieces that are often refuted with video evidence that won’t be credited as a R.S. yet refute negative claims made about Trudeau no matter the RS and the amount of evidence. These scholars don’t represent the opinion of Canadians. North Korean scholars will tell you how North Korea is the greatest. This study also only took into account the prime minister’s over the last 50 years because nobody has personal experience with the other prime ministers to compare it too 2001:1970:5A6A:A200:3D7C:66D5:4300:41FF (talk) 00:16, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By definition, if the poll only considers PMs in the last 50 years, it cannot support the claim that Trudeau is the worst PM in Canadian history. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:20, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Plus, 70% of the respondents to the survey did not agree that Justin Trudeau was the worst PM. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It supports the claim he’s the worst prime minister in recent history. “No, the video is not the basis for our article. The basis is how reliable sources reported on the event. If you think that the Vancouver Sun, Associated Press, Ottawa Citizen, Toronto Star, Global News, CTV News, The Independent, CBC News, the Globe and Mail, NBC News, the Ottawa Police Service, Citynews, and The Conversation all reported on the event incorrectly or unfairly, take it up with those publications. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:43, 23 February 2024 (UTC)”. I have half those quoted sources and the majority of the rest of them wouldn’t be relevant 2001:1970:5A6A:A200:3D7C:66D5:4300:41FF (talk) 00:31, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Worst ethics violations in Canadian history? These ethics laws were brought in by Stephen Harper Black roses124 (talk) 23:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Trudeau's carbon pricing policy is already mentioned, and it has an entire linked article dedicated to it. Mediatech492 (talk) 04:51, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And it terms of “worst”, it doesn’t seem to me to match the outrage that either the NEP or the GST triggered, under two other PMs. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 23:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SCANDALS
i see them listed in various parts of other sections, but can we add a section just for them or a master link that lists them out instead or also? Dennizenx (talk) 14:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should not be a section but incorporated into the article as a whole WP:STRUCTURE as is done here. "Segregation of text or other content into different regions or subsections, based solely on the apparent POV of the content itself, may result in an unencyclopedic structure". Pls review WP:CSECTION. Moxy- 15:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
15:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)