Talk:Star candidate

	Politics portal 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 has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Canada: Politics 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.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Political parties and politicians in Canada.

Here's a possible addition of a "star candidate": Olivia Chow, Jack Layton's wife. She has been the NDP candidate for her riding before Jack became party leader, but wouldn't her being the wife of a party leader make her, for this (and the last) election, a "star candidate"? I won't add her myself; just throwing out the idea.--Bjeversole (one of the only natives of North Carolina who keep up with Canadian politics) 09:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Olivia Chow, for the record, is a high-profile candidate because she is the wife of the leader, all right, but not necessarily touted as a star candidate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.191.137 (talk) 13:59, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just an honest question -- is it 'fair' or 'neutral' to call it being 'lured' into politics? The word is used twice, and seems to have a needlessly negative connotation. Can I safely edit that out?

For the record, "star candidate" is not a Canadian-specific term. Where on earth did that come from? Rebecca 03:20, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Subjective examples

This is a very strange article as it stands:

First, because it is limited to Canada. Second, because it discusses a common expression rather than a specific topic. Third, the examples are highly subjective. One might as well describe a "star" as "someone who already had a Wikipedia page before being nominated." I've never heard of Eric Hoskins, for example. It lists a couple of current candidates in Quebec that I've never heard of, but perhaps they are stars in Quebec. Perhaps a "star" is someone who is very well known at the provincial or national level and who is considered by the news media to be somewhat of a household name. But the line between a "star" candidate and a "strong" candidate is highly subjective. In short, this article serves no purpose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wilfred Day (talk • contribs) 21:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I tried my best to fix it, claiming that it may have been used in the U.S. as well, especially to describe Schwarzenegger's candidacy. Perhaps other people may add their respective countries, but I believe this definition is valid. (Anonymous)

One solution to start fixing this might be to start sourcing each and every entry here to actually having been labelled star candidates. If we could remove some of the dreck from the Canadian list, it'd probably make this a bit clearer in what to add for other countries. Rebecca (talk) 03:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the biggest problem here is that the editors who wrote this cast a very wide net. There must be thousands and thousands of politicians who could make this list. I can could probably name several hundred Canadians (including James Garfield Gardiner) just off the top of my head.

I also don't think translating this to the US really works. We list Arnold but almost every candidate for governor of any American state has to meet the lowly criteria established in the intro. Looking at my neighbour to the south, it would probably include every governor Washington has had since at least WWII (one federal agency chair, two county executives, one mayor of Seattle and two congressman but perhaps excluding a state senator and an AG). --JGGardiner (talk) 08:24, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I agree here. Could we set a tighter bar for inclusion here? Rebecca (talk) 10:47, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then, how to actually define a "star candidate"? I believe we must agree on a definition before we can start adding names for other countries or removing those on the current list. Also, take in account that many candidates who run in the primaries for governor don't fall into the definition set forth in the intro but the victors of the primaries often do. (Anonymous) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.186.132 (talk) 23:39, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive unsourced lists

I tried to remove the excessive and unsourced lists of "star candidates" and was reverted. (Apparently I tried the same thing 3.5 years ago and was reverted then as well). To re-state the obvious, I think the lists are excessive. They are certainly unsourced; virtually any political candidate in Canada with even a minimal public profile before running for office is listed. What makes a member of a provincial legislature a "star candidate" running for the federal legislature? Presumably nothing other than some Wikipedia editor making it up. User:力百 (alt of power~enwiki, π, ν) 01:46, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Worldwide tag

There is a maintenance tag calling for a "worldwide view". I'm not sure that's appropriate, almost all the coverage using the term "star candidate" I find is about Canada. There are a few hits for India as well such as [1]. The term simply isn't used in United States or United Kingdom politics, so far as I am aware. In the US the equivalent would be a celebrity candidate, perhaps. User:力百 (alt of power~enwiki, π, ν) 01:46, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

Where are the references? There's nothing there. Jenkowelten (talk) 02:04, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]