Editing Talk:Alberta separatism

{{Talk header}}
{{old XfD multi |page=Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Alberta separatism}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Canada|importance=mid|cangov=yes|ab=yes}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo                = old(365d)
| archive             = Talk:Alberta separatism/Archive %(counter)d
| counter             = 1
| maxarchivesize      = 100K
| archiveheader       = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadsleft      = 5
}}

== The article needs serious work on its neutrality ==

I understand that a lot of work has gone into making this article, and the main reason why I do not fix it myself is because I want to give the authors the chance to rework some sections into good content, and I feel I might be too heavy handed in deleting non-neutral content. The last thing I want is to start an edit war, but I'll gladly help if help is needed. (Ping me, as I might be occupied with other things)

Some work is needed to make the article neutral. It is clear that in some parts of the article, citations were taken from primary sources and then a less-than-unbiased narrative is written in between the quotes. Some parts of the article are even written in a way that is more like an essay supporting separation of Alberta than an encyclopedic article. For example, let's look at the section "2010s Liberals Again, Resurgence" is written in a way that implies that the United Conservatives support the separation of Alberta. (If that is true, then it needs to be properly cited and not just extrapolated from campaign speeches) There is a whole paragraph about Trudeau Jr. getting booed at a hockey game that is completely irrelevant to everything in the article. The excerpts from Peter Zeihan are lumped in with no explanation of their significance. Sentences like "Mr. Hopper correctly described the landlocked problems of an independent Alberta but did not argue the benefits presented by Mr. Zeihan and others" are borderline non-encyclopedic. The entire premise of this sentence is to dismiss the critiques of separatism by stating that he disregarded a portion of the evidence. I understand that it's sometimes difficult to present a subject in a neutral light, but when every single mention of separatism being criticized is followed up with an explanation of why the speaker is wrong, it becomes a problem. 

Other sections have minor problems, but seem to be less opinionated and more fact-based. These sections are clearly the way to go.

I'd usually remedy this myself, but I know next to nothing about Albertan Separatism. For example, I don't know if Zeihan's works are significant, some statements I might have removed myself might be able to be sourced somewhere, or rephrased with added context. They might also be able to be replaced with scholarly sources, which tend to be more encyclopedic in nature.

I'd really like to see this article flourish, as it's a frequently misunderstood of part of Canadian culture (at least if you live in the east, like I do) and I can see it being made into a very good resource to educate all Canadians about Western-Canadian issues and preoccupations.

Best, [[User:Acebulf|Acebulf]] ([[User talk:Acebulf|talk]]) 01:18, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

{{reply to|Acebulf|Acebulf}} I made significant write to this Separation article (July 2018), and see others changed what I wrote.  In no way do the United Conservatives in Alberta today support separation (but many of their members do want the conversation).  With lower economies and rising debt, separation sentiments rise - there is a cycle - and the cycle is political to the extent of who is in power.   Separatism sentiment rises when Liberals are in power, so a point made about Trudeau and a hockey game are relevant to that extent. But whoever did the edit on that seems to have run on too long with it. Likewise with the sentence about "Mr. Hopper correctly described the landlocked problems of an independent Alberta but did not argue the benefits presented by Mr. Zeihan and others." I don't recognize these sentences as my contribution. There is too many edits to click on under history but if you show me a list of words and sentences added since my contribution, I can rework the article back to unbiased status.   The entry should inform not promote Separatism.  [[User:Kermit7|Kermit]]

This article seems to promote an Alberta seperatist view as opposed to a neutral world view of Western Seperatism. It needs to be properly flagged as lacking neutrality.
I find it odd that the article describes almost every Eastern federal policy as being "catastrophic" for Alberta yet separatism sentiment often can't get a single candidate elected... the counter political sentiment that Alberta should remain in Canada seems largely ignored and provincial government responsibilities during economic downturns seem conveniently ignored. [[Special:Contributions/204.48.92.87|204.48.92.87]] ([[User talk:204.48.92.87|talk]]) 23:28, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

:The references list needs to be completely overhauled. Western Standard is not a credible source, nor are some of the forum based sources. The list is bloated and filled with mis and disinformation. [[User:Verity4good|Verity4good]] ([[User talk:Verity4good|talk]]) 05:42, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

== Spelling ==

prime minister and minister are not capitalised because they are not proper nouns. The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom or The Queen are proper nouns because they refer to a person. Therefore, it is prime minister the Right Honourable Justin Trudeau but, The Prime Minister of Canada.

"Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's" seems to be correct as is used elsewhere and is a title.  Should I change to be Right Honourable Justin Trudeau?  [[User:Kermit7|Kermit]]

== This article is rife with fringe sources ==

Seriously there's a lot in here sourced to youtube and some guy's soundcloud. These are not [[WP:RS]]. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 17:06, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

:{{ping|Simonm223}} Could you be more specific? I don't see any YouTube or SoundCloud references in the article. –[[User:LaundryPizza03|<b style="color:#77b">Laundry</b><b style="color:#fb0">Pizza</b><b style="color:#b00">03</b>]] ([[User talk:LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0d0">d</span>]][[Special:Contribs/LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0bf">c̄</span>]]) 16:23, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
::That is because I removed them. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 20:49, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Simonm223}} Are there any more sources left that you view as questionable? –[[User:LaundryPizza03|<b style="color:#77b">Laundry</b><b style="color:#fb0">Pizza</b><b style="color:#b00">03</b>]] ([[User talk:LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0d0">d</span>]][[Special:Contribs/LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0bf">c̄</span>]]) 22:35, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
::::Still evaluating. I tend to be a measure first cut once guy. YouTube and soundcloud are obvious inadequate sources. Beyond that I have questions about whether some of the cited opinions are [[WP:FRINGE]] but need to research further. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 06:38, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::all Western Post sources should be removed as well as non-credible forums. List is bloated and full of non-relevant references. [[User:Verity4good|Verity4good]] ([[User talk:Verity4good|talk]]) 05:44, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

== Addition of annexationism and fictional infobox ==

Should the change of scope to include movements to join the United States be included here as per the recent move? Rather than at [[Movements for the annexation of Canada to the United States#Albertan annexationism]] and [[51st state#Alberta]].  Should the infobox that portrays Alberta as a U.S. State since 1905 and run by a Republican be kept? The infobox is [[WP:UNDUE]] imo as the article barely has anything on annexationism overall, and seems to promote how Alberta would look like as a U.S. state. Other separatist movements don't have infoboxes at all. '''[[User:DankJae|<span style="color: black">Dank</span>]][[User talk:DankJae|<span style="color: red">Jae</span>]]''' 09:34, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

:That infobox has to go. It's just somebody's fantasy. Even if annexationism ever gets anywhere (which I personally doubt), there's no guarantee that any of the items listed there would turn out that way. [[WP:CRYSTALBALL]] also applies, I think. The flag and seal should also not appear anywhere in the article. Until reliable sources show actual photographs of the flag in use, it's just a web graphic created by a fringe group, and giving it such prominence in Wikipedia is [[WP:UNDUE]]. [[User:Indefatigable|Indefatigable]] ([[User talk:Indefatigable|talk]]) 20:31, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
::Since there hasn't been any support for the infoboxes, I'll go ahead and delete them. [[User:Indefatigable|Indefatigable]] ([[User talk:Indefatigable|talk]]) 17:38, 4 April 2025 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Indefatigable|Indefatigable]], well one was added back, but as long as it wasn't the fictional one. '''[[User:DankJae|<span style="color: black">Dank</span>]][[User talk:DankJae|<span style="color: red">Jae</span>]]''' 14:20, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
::::@[[User:Indefatigable|Indefatigable]], well someone didn't like this discussion as they removed this discussion entirely. Since removed the infobox again per here as the image was changed to Alberta in the United States, seems it is being used for POV purposes. I do wonder if the move to include annexationism should be reverted as nothing has been added to the article since the move and largely still [[WP:UNDUE]] as this article largely only has about one sentence on the annexationism in the body. '''[[User:DankJae|<span style="color: black">Dank</span>]][[User talk:DankJae|<span style="color: red">Jae</span>]]''' 17:11, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::Since reverted the move. It was undiscussed and annexationism is a very small part of this article, which nothing new added. There is more detail on the topic at [[Movements for the annexation of Canada to the United States#Albertan annexationism]] and [[51st state#Alberta]] than here.
:::::Of course if there is a case to expand it here, anyone is free to raise an RM, but before any such move. But it probably is best as in or as a separate article as they merely share the outcome of leaving Canada but not the end outcome. '''[[User:DankJae|<span style="color: black">Dank</span>]][[User talk:DankJae|<span style="color: red">Jae</span>]]''' 10:34, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::I agree with going back to the previous article name for now. As for the infobox, most of the really objectionable speculation has been removed from it, but I still think it's inappropriate to have it. First, it's "infobox  settlement", and the article is not about a settlement - it's about a political movement. Second, to echo a slogan from Quebec's history, "If Canada is divisible, Alberta is divisible". There's no guarantee that a separate Alberta would have the same boundaries as it currently has. Thus the area figures in the infobox are [[WP:CRYSTALBALL]]. Take them out, and there's nothing left in the infobox, so delete it completely. [[User:Indefatigable|Indefatigable]] ([[User talk:Indefatigable|talk]]) 13:29, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::::@[[User:Indefatigable|Indefatigable]], well it has since been edit warred back in by @[[User:FacilityII|FacilityII]], who first added it and keeps adding it back. FacilityII is there a reason how it meets [[WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE]]? it shows nothing important aside the map which can just be an image on its own. Does the size of Alberta matter? I don't think the article mentions that. '''[[User:DankJae|<span style="color: black">Dank</span>]][[User talk:DankJae|<span style="color: red">Jae</span>]]''' 19:08, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
::::::::If you look at the page from over a year ago, or from 2023, it is using (infobox settlement) and has a map with basically the same information in it (including area) as it does now. [[User:FacilityII|FacilityII]] ([[User talk:FacilityII|talk]]) 23:50, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
:::::::::When it was added doesn't necesarily matter as [[WP:CONSENSUSCANCHANGE]]. It was added undiscussed in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alberta_separatism&diff=1120806080&oldid=1116927385 2022]. It is now being discussed here, as it never was initially. Nonetheless the infobox doesn't really provide anything for a [[WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE]], the size of Alberta or how much of it is water is not a crucial reason for separatism. Therefore just a map is enough imo, like most other separatism articles of existing entities. If someone wants in infobox of Alberta they'll find it at [[Alberta]]. '''[[User:DankJae|<span style="color: black">Dank</span>]][[User talk:DankJae|<span style="color: red">Jae</span>]]''' 19:35, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
== "[[:Alberta separatism and annexationism]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] ==
[[File:Information.svg|30px]]
The redirect <span class="plainlinks">[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alberta_separatism_and_annexationism&redirect=no Alberta separatism and annexationism]</span> has been listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|redirects for discussion]] to determine whether its use and function meets the [[Wikipedia:Redirect|redirect guidelines]]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 May 9#Alberta separatism and annexationism}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> &#8213;[[User:GhostOfDanGurney|<span style="background:#ececec;color:#005475;font-size:0.9em;">'''''"Ghost of Dan Gurney"'''''</span>]] <sub>[[User_talk:GhostOfDanGurney|<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS';font-size=3em">(hihi)</span>]]</sub> 15:59, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

==Bias==

In the section on debates following the 2025 election, this quote (While Ontario and Quebec reject this, Albertans view the idea more positively, seeing their culture as more akin to that of Montana and the United States, than that of eastern Canada.) gives an impression that annexationist sentiment is far more common in Alberta than opinion polling bears out. Select interviews from a news article are more anecdotal than anything else. While I do acknowledge that pro-51st state sentiment is greater in Alberta than any other province, I would still wager that more Albertans feel connected to the rest of Canada than to the United States.<!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/205.193.94.40|205.193.94.40]] ([[User talk:205.193.94.40#top|talk]]) 16:10, 16 May 2025 (UTC)</small>

I changed it to this: "While still opposed by the majority, support for annexation is greater in Alberta than other provinces as some residents see greater cultural connections with the United States than eastern Canada." It still conveys the fact that pro-51st state sentiment is greater in Alberta than in any other province, but it doesn't create a false perception that this is a majority sentiment (as polling consistently shows that it isn't).<!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/205.193.94.40|205.193.94.40]] ([[User talk:205.193.94.40#top|talk]]) 16:15, 16 May 2025 (UTC)</small>

:Is there an unbiased source that breaks down the location and demo of the polling that can be included as well? [[User:Verity4good|Verity4good]] ([[User talk:Verity4good|talk]]) 05:48, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

== First image ==

Seems there is a dispute over what should be the first image of this article. It has either been a map of Alberta in Canada, a map of Alberta as part of the United States, a separatist flag and the normal flag of Alberta. (and of course the infobox containing practically all)

Seems a bit POV or [[WP:CRYSTAL]] to promote or predict what a separate Alberta would look like. Best use the most certain, what Alberta specifically is now. So prefer the current flag, current map or an image of a current protest/rally for separatism. Or even no image? '''[[User:DankJae|<span style="color: black">Dank</span>]][[User talk:DankJae|<span style="color: red">Jae</span>]]''' 20:45, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

:A rally would be best. The current flag is not an illustration of separatism, and I'm not sure any particular proposed flag has such widespread support that it should introduce the article. None of the current images in the article seem that helpful, so no image would be fine absent something suitable. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 02:35, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
::{{hidden ping|Chipmunkdavis}}Removed the annexationist flag, as it was sourced from a 51st state group and this article is not purely about annexationism so [[WP:UNDUE|undue]]. I expect it won't last for a few hours though, something will be added again. '''[[User:DankJae|<span style="color: black">Dank</span>]][[User talk:DankJae|<span style="color: red">Jae</span>]]''' 21:05, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

== Percentage points in the opinion poles ==

In the table of opinion poles, there is confusion about the difference between percent (%) and percentage points (%pp). The columns "leave" and "remain" show percentages, i.e. what proportion of the population showed these preferences. However the columns "lead" and "margin of error" show the relationship of figures that are already expressed in percentages, therefore these columns must be measured in percentage points. [[User:Doric Loon|Doric Loon]] ([[User talk:Doric Loon|talk]]) 15:31, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

== Scott Bessent comment and the movement possible ties to the Trump government ==

I noticed that [[Scott Bessent]], the Treasury Secretary has openly expressed support Alberta separatism arguing that they can join the United States if succession happened.[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/trump-cabinet-member-weighs-in-on-alberta-separatism-9.7058082],  So I did a research and found a couple of articles mentioning that separation as a backdoor annexation plot for the United States.[https://edmonton.citynews.ca/2026/01/20/alberta-separatists-helping-trump/][https://www.nationalobserver.com/2026/01/08/opinion/danielle-smith-alberta-separatism-us][https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-a-referendum-in-alberta-could-be-donald-trumps-51st-state-opportunity/][https://nationalpost.com/news/after-u-s-outreach-alberta-separatists-will-head-to-latin-america-to-rustle-up-support-for-their-cause] I am wondering if this should be mentioned in the article and how should it be framed. [[User:Hiyournameis|Hiyournameis]] ([[User talk:Hiyournameis|talk]]) 23:49, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

== Merge proposal ==

I propose merging [[2025-2026 Alberta independentist crisis]] into [[Alberta separatism]], possibly under the subsection "US Involvement". {{tquote|"Independentist crisis"}} and the use of a military conflict infobox seems to be sensational (no reliable sources are describing a "crisis"). With significant overlap and the fact that the "crisis" article is short, I believe the Alberta separatism article (along with [[American expansionism under Donald Trump#Alberta|American expansionism under Donald Trump § Alberta]]) would sufficiently cover the topic. [[User:Nice4What|Nice4What]] ([[User talk:Nice4What|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Nice4What|contribs]]) – <small>([[Help:Notifications/Thanks|Thanks]] <span style="color:#4dac8b;">♥</span>)</small> 16:53, 30 January 2026 (UTC) <small>(<u>edited 17:12, 30 January 2026 (UTC)</u>)</small>

:I would like to point out its laid out that way because the very contact between the separatists and the US officials IS the crisis. Outlets and people included in the article have called it a crisis, and Canadian officials, as stated in the article, reacted harshly, with the premier of British Columbia calling it "Treason".
:The article does not focus onto Albertan independence persay, it focuses on this specific chapter of this controversial political topic. Its a diplomatic crisis between two sovreign nations that deserve a separate article. The infobox used is not incorrect or sensationalistic, its just used to show the dynamic of the crisis, which is what it showcases. [[User:VitoxxMass|VitoxxMass]] ([[User talk:VitoxxMass|talk]]) 17:06, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
::Diplomatic crisis? That's rather sensationalist. There's no reason that this molehill can't be part of the existing article. [[User:Nfitz|Nfitz]] ([[User talk:Nfitz|talk]]) 20:05, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
*'''Support''' no idea why this has its own article, should be a section in Alberta Separatism. [[User:Scu ba|<span style="color: red">'''Scu'''</span>]][[User talk:Scu ba|<span style="color:blue">ba</span>]] 17:07, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
*'''Oppose merge, support delete'''; some of the conclusions are OR or fringe. [[User:CoryGlee|<span style="color:fuchsia;">CoryGlee</span>]] 17:18, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
::Where do you see fringe theories? I see an analysis subsection that cites reliable sources, but maybe I've missed something. [[User:Nice4What|Nice4What]] ([[User talk:Nice4What|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Nice4What|contribs]]) – <small>([[Help:Notifications/Thanks|Thanks]] <span style="color:#4dac8b;">♥</span>)</small> 17:56, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
:::Use of the word "crisis" is a fringe theory. A handful of treacherous loons talking to the racist rapist is not a crisis. [[User:Nfitz|Nfitz]] ([[User talk:Nfitz|talk]]) 20:06, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
*'''Oppose merge'''. I'm inclined to think the (so-called) crisis is notable, as it involves a claim of foreign interference. That other article is not really about Alberta separatism, but [[Canada–United States relations]]. (In fact, that article would make better sense for a merge target.) [[User:StAnselm|<b>St</b>]][[Special:Contributions/StAnselm|Anselm]] ([[User talk:StAnselm|talk]]) 18:20, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
*'''Oppose merge'''. Per StAnselm above, this has become quite a big event in the global media with large articles on it in most of the world's highest grade [[WP:RSP]]s (no need to list here).  The element of foreign intervention has made it a much more material event that merits coverage. Obviusly, should have a section in the main [[Alberta Separatism]] article. [[User:Aszx5000|Aszx5000]] ([[User talk:Aszx5000|talk]]) 18:44, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
*'''Support merge''' A subject can be notable but still not best served by having an independent article - see [[WP:NOPAGE]]. This should be a subsection of the Alberta separatism article.  In addition, to call the recent meetings a “crisis” meriting its own article is also not NPOV; even if the merge proposal fails, that wildly biased title needs to be changed ASAP. [[User:Flipandflopped|<b style="color:Teal;">Flip</b>]][[Special:Contribs/Flipandflopped|<sup style="color:grey">and</sup>]][[User talk:Flipandflopped|<b style="color:purple">Flopped</b>]] [[Wikipedia:Civility|<b style="color:grey">㋡</b>]] 19:00, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
:* Indeed the use of the word "crisis" is sensationalist. This must change, at a minimum. I'd support an AFD. [[User:Nfitz|Nfitz]] ([[User talk:Nfitz|talk]]) 20:09, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
:*:We already are discussing a change of name, as i do agree with it. [[User:VitoxxMass|VitoxxMass]] ([[User talk:VitoxxMass|talk]]) 21:05, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
*'''Support merge''' this need more than 2 or 3 sentences in the existing article. A joke about the 11th province could create a "crisis" with the current regime in the USA. [[User:Nfitz|Nfitz]] ([[User talk:Nfitz|talk]]) 20:09, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
*'''Support deletion'''; the article seems to be giving this event far too much prose for its actual importance. Per [[WP:FORK#Caution]]: {{green|having a separate article on a controversial incident may give undue weight to that incident}}--and this, to me, seems like an open-and-shut case of that, given the page only showed up a few hours ago. As for what to do with the page, it's fair to say everything that should be covered on this page is already adequately covered, and thus the page can feasibly be deleted without a need for keeping its history for attribution. [[User:Departure–|Departure–]] ([[User talk:Departure–|talk]]) 20:36, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - At the moment, the rest of Canada doesn't seem to be in anxiety mode. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 22:59, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

:After talking with numerous wiki editors and seeing how the event unfolded in the following days, I, the creator of the article, would support '''merge'''. [[User:VitoxxMass|VitoxxMass]] ([[User talk:VitoxxMass|talk]]) 12:17, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

*'''Support merge''' - Clearly a notable development in the context of the overall movement, but not independently notable nor sufficiently prominent or separate to need its own article. [[User:GenevieveDEon|GenevieveDEon]] ([[User talk:GenevieveDEon|talk]]) 09:46, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

*'''Support merge''' - The new article would only be relevant if an actual referendum is held, otherwise its just another chapter of the same story. [[User:McCIrishman|McCIrishman]] ([[User talk:McCIrishman|talk]]) 10:06, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
*'''Support''' merge per [[WP:NOPAGE]], no reason to split off this one aspect when it can adequately fit within the main article. '''[[User:Thebiguglyalien|<span style="color:#0c4709">Thebiguglyalien</span>]]''' ([[User talk:Thebiguglyalien|<span style="color:#472c09">talk</span>]]) 19:24, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

== Alberta Prosperity Project page proposal ==

Given the mediatic attention around the group, should they have their own article? I am asking here before making a possibly other controversial article. Otherwise I'm merely going to add info about the group onto this article instead. [[User:VitoxxMass|VitoxxMass]] ([[User talk:VitoxxMass|talk]]) 00:13, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

== Bias in "Resurgence in the late 2010s and early 2020s" section ==

The "Resurgence in the late 2010s and early 2020s" section of this article emphasizes material by [[Peter Zeihan]] his views of the benefits Alberta would have if it were independent, it does not show other views that may challenge these assertions or address other issues that argue in favour of Alberta being within Canada. With this mentioning of Zeihan on this topic without other views on the issue it makes it seem as if Alberta independence is an obviously positive choice for Albertans without any challenges made about it. [[User:BlueberryA96|BlueberryA96]] ([[User talk:BlueberryA96|talk]]) 03:42, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

:Absolutely agree. I would also request that the article also indicate the latest support levels from the major polls and describe who supports/does not support the referendum or separation. [[User:Sloanhoo|Sloanhoo]] ([[User talk:Sloanhoo|talk]]) 18:25, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

== Polls ==

The selected polls cited in the text of the 'History' section of article make it appear that polls have been showing an almost 50-50 proportion between support and opposition for quite some time now. The list of polls at the end of the article, in contrast, suggest that support has been polling rather consistently around one quarter with some exceptions, making the prospect a decidedly long shot. Either the article body or the poll sample creates a misleading picture; it seems more likely to me that it is the article body that is artificially boosting the issue. 

Also, it is claimed in the lede that Alberta has a sense of cultural distinctness, but there is no or almost no information about this in the body of the article. The lede is supposed to be a summary of the body; if something deserves to be in the lede, it should be elaborated on in the body. [[Special:Contributions/&#126;2026-51230-3|&#126;2026-51230-3]] ([[User talk:&#126;2026-51230-3|talk]]) 21:34, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

:On the assertions of Albertan cultural distinctiveness that you mention that is in the intro and main body of the article without references I've placed citation needed notes where the assertions are made. [[User:BlueberryA96|BlueberryA96]] ([[User talk:BlueberryA96|talk]]) 00:55, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

== Removing false representation of quote of Canadian Prime Minister W. L. Mackenzie King ==

I am posting this to describe the removal of text from the article that falsely represents a quote of Canadian Prime Minister W. L. Mackenzie King. The text shows a part of King's quote in 1930 saying "I would not give them a five-cent piece" and claims that this was referring to any non-Liberal provincial government in Canada. I looked at the source that is linked to a copy of a book on the Internet Archive and the page that it says this quote is on is not shown there. I tried looking at the pages before and after what was shown in case the person who typed this typed the wrong page but I could not see this as it is not publicly available on that site.

However I found a full copy of the quote that does exist and it does not say that he opposed economic support to all of the non-Liberal provincial governments for unemployment to all but to any Tory government, Tory of course referring to the Conservative Party of Canada at the time and its affiliated provincial parties. In 1930 Alberta was not governed by a provincial party affiliated with the Conservative Party of Canada at that time, it was governed by the left-wing [[United Farmers of Alberta]] that governed Alberta from 1921 to 1935. The full quote is below

'''''"With respect to giving moneys out of the federal treasury to any Tory Government in this country for these alleged unemployment purposes, with these governments situated as they are today, with policies diametrically opposed to those of this government, I would not give them a five-cent piece."'' W. L. Mackenzie King, April 3, 1930''' (https://nationalnewswatch.com/2024/04/03/today-in-canadas-political-history-april-3-1930-mackenzie-king-makes-his-infamous-five-cent-piece-comments-in-the-commons) 

[[User:BlueberryA96|BlueberryA96]] ([[User talk:BlueberryA96|talk]]) 03:32, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

== Rewrite needed for this article ==

This article needs a serious rewrite to adequately address the topic.

Currently there is large amount info that is about the history of Alberta that not connected either directly or through influence to Alberta separatism. 

The history section should focus on [[Western alienation]] that has been an issue in Alberta and other provinces for years due to views of Canadian federal politics being dominated by interests in [[Eastern Canada]], especially Ontario and Quebec, with Alberta separatism being one of the responses to this. Opposition in Alberta to Canadian federal government policies that affect its oil sector have played a key role in Western alienation in Alberta that has led to rising Alberta separatism. Also opposition to the [[Liberal Party of Canada]] over claims that it has not represented the interests of Alberta has been an important part of Western alienation in Alberta.

With all the content currently in the history section just focused on the history of Alberta in general not directly related to Alberta separatism in this article it makes it seem as if Alberta separatism has been a big issue since the beginning of Alberta or that Alberta separatism was somehow historically inevitable. Alberta separatism was fringe up until the [[National Energy Program]] being established by the Canadian federal government led by the Liberal Party. Then it rose, declined, then issues of Western alienation by multiple Western provinces were sought to be addressed by the [[Reform Party of Canada]] later rebranded as the Canadian Alliance which merged with the [[Progressive Conservative Party of Canada]] in 2003 that created the [[Conservative Party of Canada]] that has had a large base of support in Alberta. With the Liberal Party of Canada elected in 2015 Alberta separatism then rose among those who opposed the government of Justin Trudeau and angered with the re-election of the Liberal Party of Canada led by Mark Carney in 2025 was a fourth consecutive election victory for the Liberal Party.

I currently don't have references ready to back up the content on history that I've just said above but I guarantee that anyone having the time will find be able to find references confirming this history. Immediately I don't have time to do so right now.

Also as mentioned by a user in 2018 and by me recently there is content in the article about the merits of Alberta separation by [[Peter Zeihan]] but it fails to describe what significance Zeihan's perspective has. [[User:BlueberryA96|BlueberryA96]] ([[User talk:BlueberryA96|talk]]) 22:47, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
:: @[[User:BlueberryA96|BlueberryA96]]. Just to add I do not disagree with your comments. If there is no other objections please remove any information that does not references separatism. [[User:Hiyournameis|Hiyournameis]] ([[User talk:Hiyournameis|talk]]) 00:39, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
:With no further objections, the material has been removed. –[[User:LaundryPizza03|<b style="color:#77b">Laundry</b><b style="color:#fb0">Pizza</b><b style="color:#b00">03</b>]] ([[User talk:LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0d0">d</span>]][[Special:Contribs/LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0bf">c̄</span>]]) 23:38, 6 March 2026 (UTC)
:I am very uncomfortable with the framing of Alberta’s grievances as “Western Separatism” as it has very little relevance to and support in British Columbia. It appears to me that by framing it as an East-West issue, Alberta is trying to say, “it’s not just us.” As a BC resident, I say, “Yes, it is. Focus on what being in the Prairies is about. I doubt Manitoba wants to be included in this group, either. [[User:Sloanhoo|Sloanhoo]] ([[User talk:Sloanhoo|talk]]) 18:34, 16 March 2026 (UTC)