Tasty monster (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Tony Sidaway (talk | contribs) →Voluntary CC article restriction: Thanks. I'll sign it to provide moral support |
||
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
I was unaware that Climate Cover Up was cited in the article, but in any case you seem to believe that I object to the source because he owns a blog. No, I object to the source because it lacks authority on matters of science (my edit summary was clear on that). Looking at Climate Cover Up I see that it was co-written by science writer Richard Littlemore, and received what Littlemore himself described as a "very flattering" review in Nature. Comparing your chosen source to that doesn't seem sensible. [[User talk:Tasty monster|Tasty monster]] (=[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|TS]] ) 09:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC) |
I was unaware that Climate Cover Up was cited in the article, but in any case you seem to believe that I object to the source because he owns a blog. No, I object to the source because it lacks authority on matters of science (my edit summary was clear on that). Looking at Climate Cover Up I see that it was co-written by science writer Richard Littlemore, and received what Littlemore himself described as a "very flattering" review in Nature. Comparing your chosen source to that doesn't seem sensible. [[User talk:Tasty monster|Tasty monster]] (=[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|TS]] ) 09:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC) |
||
:And ''Illusion'' was favorably reviewed by a geologist in the magazine of a [[learned society]]. [[User:Cla68|Cla68]] ([[User talk:Cla68|talk]]) 01:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC) |
|||
==Voluntary CC article restriction== |
|||
Please consider signing the CC restriction, as explained [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:General_sanctions/Climate_change_probation/Requests_for_enforcement#Sign_up_for_the_CC_restriction here]. [[User:Cla68|Cla68]] ([[User talk:Cla68|talk]]) 01:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC) |
|||
: Thanks. I'll sign it to provide moral support, although I totally withdrew from article editing many months ago and have made only one article edit there (you probably know the one) since then. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|TS]] 01:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:58, 6 August 2010
User talk:Tony Sidaway/Notices
Reminder
WP:DFTT. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 13:29, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
- Talk:Global warming. You're referring to this edit.
- On balance, I think steering the discussion onto the subject of the massive evidence is better than my first response, which was to collapse a patently ridiculous suggestion.
- Even as, by some data sets, we have just experienced the hottest twelve month period ever recorded in terms of global average temperature, ignorance of the fact and ongoing effects of global warming are surprisingly widespread, so it cannot do any harm to mention the strength of the evidence whenever somebody reveals ignorance or outright denial. Tasty monster (=TS ) 13:54, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Interesting discussion going on
On User talk:Jimbo Wales#And beyond climate change (scroll down to the latter part of the discussion). Essentially some editors are advocating a postmodern approach in which all viewpoints would be given equal validity and treatment, no matter how fringe they are within the relevant expert community. SlimVirgin is advocating a change to WP:UNDUE to make this possible. -- ChrisO (talk) 02:42, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
- It's apparent that something has to give in our reporting of science-based political controversies. I would be in favor of moving in the opposite direction to the one Slim Virgin favors, but I'm not particularly interested in discussing great reinterpretations of policy because I expect the arbitration committee to make that determination one way or the other. If they do so I'll follow their lead. If by any chance the Committee fails to provide clear direction, I'll probably just drift away, because it is becoming very difficult to write encyclopedic articles about science in the context of the current anti-science trends in the United States.
- In any event the prospect of my returning to actively editing climate change articles is zero. Most of the changes I want to see made seem to get made without my direct agency, and if by any chance they could not be made then there would be little that I could do as one editor. I've always thought that my most powerful edits were in discussion. --TS 12:57, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Soon and Baliunas
[1] You removed Hockey Stick Illusion as a source, but left in the book Climate Cover Up as a source in that article. Climate Cover Up was written by a non-scientist and founder of a blog, the same as the author of Hockey Stick Illusion. So, why did you remove one and not the other? Cla68 (talk) 07:36, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
- By the way, your edit is also being discussed here, near the bottom of that thread. Please reply here or there or both. Cla68 (talk) 07:39, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
- Cla68 is openly conducting a breaching experiment to make a point. Don't let him bait you. -- ChrisO (talk) 08:39, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
I was unaware that Climate Cover Up was cited in the article, but in any case you seem to believe that I object to the source because he owns a blog. No, I object to the source because it lacks authority on matters of science (my edit summary was clear on that). Looking at Climate Cover Up I see that it was co-written by science writer Richard Littlemore, and received what Littlemore himself described as a "very flattering" review in Nature. Comparing your chosen source to that doesn't seem sensible. Tasty monster (=TS ) 09:56, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
- And Illusion was favorably reviewed by a geologist in the magazine of a learned society. Cla68 (talk) 01:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Voluntary CC article restriction
Please consider signing the CC restriction, as explained here. Cla68 (talk) 01:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'll sign it to provide moral support, although I totally withdrew from article editing many months ago and have made only one article edit there (you probably know the one) since then. --TS 01:58, 6 August 2010 (UTC)