Talk:National Party of Canada

	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.

Politics: Political parties Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as Low-importance).

National party[edit]

(Copied from User_talk:Ground Zero)

Is there a reason that the National Party's colour is green on Template:Canadian politics/party colours? I seem to remember black being their primary colour. Also there are already a bunch of parties using various shades of green, which doesn't look too great. See the 1993 resutls at Nepean—Carleton, for isntance. - SimonP 19:07, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

I agree that the cluster of green doesn't help matters, but I have pretty clear memories of green and white and black NP signs in Ottawa Centre in 1993, but maybe that was just that candidate. I will post this discussion at question at Talk:National Party of Canada to see what others remember. Ground Zero 13:52, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've been searching on the Internet, but havne't found much. I found one site that has a black and dark purple logo [1], this is roughly what I remember. I also found a picture of a teal coloured button [2]. - SimonP 15:19, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

The first one is the logo of the "Canadian National Party" (CNP), which was a different animal altogether. I think it was really just a webpage, rather than an actual party. It seems that I did not get around to creating an article for it, and now the wenapge is gone. See [3] The second one is clearly something from Hurtig's party. Ground Zero 15:49, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I can't actually swear to whether the National Party's colour was teal or not, but it definitely wasn't black. "CNP" isn't the same thing at all. Bearcat 23:58, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Two things... I'd originally assigned powerblue to the party simply because it was an ideological predecessor to the CAP, not because of any idea myself as to what it had been back in '93. I actually think I might have access to Hurtig's email from a friend of a friend, so let me try to go to the horse's mouth on this one. -The Tom 04:02, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aquamarine, black and white National Party button, as with the (unrelated separate party) CNP logo above, from Alex Ng's wonderful site. This is consistent with the National signs and literature I remember.

And now that I've found a source that confirms my memory Kurt Loeb challenged Hurtig for the leadership, and fills in some details, I'll add that to the article... Samaritan 20:02, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I won't send off that email if we're fairly certain it's teal. (Could you ask for a colour better-representative of a flash-in-the-pan movement from circa 1993 :) ) "mediumturquoise" would be the best-fit colour name for the template, I think. It's currently in use for the BC Unity Party, but that ought not to be a problem in terms of confusion or overlap. -The Tom 18:13, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And, on a related note, might I direct your eyes to Talk:Confederation of Regions Party of Canada -The Tom 20:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mel Hurtig's vote share - impressive or not?[edit]

I think Mel Hurtig's vote share was impressive. I don't have to agree with the National Party's policies and such to acknowledge that, for a new party, he did very well in his personal bid for election. GBC 06:54, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it to allow the reader to decide for her or himself whether or not it was impressive. For the record, I agree with you that it was impressive for a minor party candidate. The percentage speaks for itself, however, and does not need, in my opinion, interpretation by us. I think that "impressive" falls under the category of "peacock terms" which are discouraged. It is something that I should be careful of in my own writing -- I am sure that I am guilty of that, too. Ground Zero | t 14:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]