Talk:Richard Ducharme

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.

Biography

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

Canada: Ontario / Alberta / Toronto Low‑importance

	Canada portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Alberta.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled[edit]

While Ducharme's exit story is mostly true, it should be verified with sources. FOr example was it Miller or Moscoe that fired him? Also, there needs to be a source for the David Gunn accusation. --Atrian 15:10, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Costs[edit]

Ducharme's claim is still a point of considerable dispute; we shouldn't be presenting it as fact. CJCurrie 01:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So is Bombardier's claim that it would generate $$$ in tax savings. So just not to muddy the waters, you should not just dispute one side's arguement while ignoring another. GoldDragon 20:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The details are now available in the linked article. CJCurrie 23:46, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, this is a Bombardier press release. It couldn't get more POV than that. GoldDragon 21:51, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sigh* ... I provided that source to convey Bombardier's position. CJCurrie 01:52, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ducharme in Edmonton[edit]

The difference in Toronto is that Ducharme did recommend to the board to have an open bid, but it was turned down. However, in Edmonton, the contract was already signed before he got there. The next time another contract comes back, we will see how Ducharme reacts. The existing wording is not that POV-ish but it does have the effect of making him look like a hypocrite.

Lastly, the main reason why Ducharme left was interference, as there were negotiations between Moscoe and the transit union behind his back, and he citing this to the media. We don't know whether Ducharme would have left because of just the Bombardier contract. GoldDragon 03:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]