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 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
I have moved to the proper name based on historical record, it was called the Canadian Labor Party, a proper record of this can be found at Alex Ross will run in Calgary, Calgary Herald June 8, 1926 --Cloveious 19:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC) Having Labour instead of Labor constitutes original research.[reply]
Does this historical record reflect the Canadian Labo(u)r Party's preferred spelling, or the Calgary Herald's house style? I don't think that we should be so quick to jump to that conclusion. (I'm not saying it should be chaned back, but that it deserves more research.) The Parliamentary website ([1]) uses "Labour". Ground Zero | t 20:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Robert Parkyn 1933 campaign flyer All sources I have seen from the period indicate Labor as being Labor, like this that was stored at the Glenbow Museum. Here is an example from the Edmonton Bulletin September 18 1926 in regards to the federal election Kindersley in the doubtfull list --Cloveious 23:13, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps this will be the best source for the moment in determining this, this article Calgary Hearld Election Forum June 19, 1926 was written by each party and Indepenedent F.C. Potts for publication on their 1926 platforms. --Cloveious 23:26, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The newspaper articles only confirm that newspapers used the American spelling during this period. this is not surprising as it was not until the Globe and Mail developed its own style guide in the early 1990s that Canadian newspapers started to switch from American style guides. The election flyer if not from a CLP candidate, but from an independent labor candidate, so I remain unconvinced that this issue is resolved. As I said before, I don't think that we have enough evidence to switch it back to "Labour" either. The Parliamentary site has been wrong about other things. Ground Zero | t 16:51, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, exactly. Looking at the newspaper I see instances of "labor" used as a word (that is, not part of an official name) as well as "color" and "favorite". To argue that "Labor" was the official spelling would, to me, suggest there was a period in which Canadians routinely used American spellings, which seems highly questionable. --Saforrest 04:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As some rather weak counter-evidence, the party is listed as "Labour" on a page about B.C. electoral history by the B.C. government: [2]. --Saforrest 04:32, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The party is referred to as 'The Canadian Labour Party' by the Canadian Encyclopaedia, by Norman Penner in 'From Protest to Power: Social democracy in Canada from 1900 to present', Lorimer: Toronto, 1992. and by various articles in: 'The Canadian Journal of Political Science', 'International Political Science Review' and 'Political Behaviour'. Excluding the book reference, all of which I managed to find in ten minutes. Academic consensus, then, apparently stands at 'Labour' party. Style guides for newspapers aren't generally very good. However, our best bet would be to look at a University style guide for Canada at the time, or failing that, a British university style guide. I'm going to 'be bold' or whatever and change it because there is apparently more evidence for 'Labour'. If anyone finds anything more concrete, I don't have books on Canadian history to hand or a university style guide, then we'll go with that. I don't think the word even needs a reference: if Canadian people and Canadian academics generally spell it 'Labour' today. Molotov2 (talk) 02:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've no idea how to change the name of the page, if someone could that would be good. Molotov2 (talk) 03:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I want to settle this debate once and for all. Here are the hand written minutes of a Manitoba Dominion Labor Party meeting clearly using Labor [3]. The Alberta Legislature Library lists The Dominion Labor Party as a publisher [4] There is also this advertisement for a Dominion Labor candidate Image:Dominion labor advertisement.JPG. The Alberta Labor News and the Canadian Labor Herald were actual publications put out by the party for many years in the 20's and 30's. Here is another good example that proves this debate, this article written by John Manley uses both Labor and Labour. Labor is used in reference to old publications and organization names such as The Canadian Labor party and uses the modern Labour when he is talking generally about Labour. We should be accurate in preserving original names as much as possible. The name Canadian Labour party does not jive with primary sources. [5] --Þadius (talk) 06:13, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified one external link on Canadian Labour Party. 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:
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: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
