Talk:Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives

	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.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Another example of User:Michaelm's campaign to plaster the "social democratic" label all over Wikipedia. If he had bothered to do research on the organization, say by checking the website linked at the bottom of the article, he would have found this:

The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives is an independent, non-partisan research institute concerned with issues of social and economic justice. Founded in 1980, the CCPA is one of Canada’s leading progressive voices in public policy debates.

Notice how it says "progressive", and not "social democratic"? Kevintoronto 15:04, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Those guys are decidedly on the Left, they said it. Non-partisan only means not linked to a party, not politicaly neutral.

Depends what you mean by "Left." The CCPA follows Keynesian theories on economics which are centrist; they seek a compromise between the Left and Right. But today Keynes would probably be labled a Leftist, if not directly called "socialist" or "communist." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.31.118 (talk) 16:05, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So let's just leave out the opinions on this topic (whether the majority of members or contributors have one leg shorter than the other) all together, shall we? And focus on providing some verifiable, reliable, third party references to support the contents of the article. I will try to get back to this, time permitting. Garth of the Forest (talk) 18:30, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removed adjective "very" in the intro since using National Post editorials probably aren't the least biased on labels either. I see that other policy think-tanks in the List of Political and economic think tanks based in Canada rarely use the labels "left" or "right" (although some look like adverts from the groups' websites themselves.) I'll see if I can scrounge up some references from journals rather than using an op-ed, and try to standardize if possible. Fourloves 01:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fourloves (talk • contribs)

Corrected the 'Bruce Campbell' link Oct 2011. It linked the Director of CCPA to the article on the American actor (Burn Notice, Army of Darkness) of the same name. Sorry, I think this is a different Bruce Campbell, guys. LTomBear — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.98.86.107 (talk) 21:24, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up and Infobox

I think the article can be cleaned up without too much effort, grouping the existing information into subsections such as History, Publications or Projects, etc. I can also add more complete citations, though they may still be mostly primary sources. Mattramsden (talk) 15:28, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any reason not to add an Infobox? I assume Infobox Organization would be the template to use, with whatever basic information is readily available to start, and adding the logo. I'll take a stab at that. Mattramsden (talk) 15:28, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]