Archives

Index Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

I do not know if you still edit climate change articles. Anyway, for you and any skeptics lurking here is an article that could really use some skeptic if not denialist bashing, see Climate change in Maldives. It seems that what is is in fact political advocacy is stated as fact. If any skeptic here wants earn the community's admiration and show his skills in producing NPOV text this would be a good place to start. Not too much traffic with that $3 "climate tax" pending. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. - Or maybe you would just want to rename it to Maldivian advocacy for climate change alarmism or something. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 14:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Petri, you are joking with the tone of your comments above, aren't you? Cla68 (talk) 00:20, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Maldives...is in desperate need for help and solutions. Luckily, the President of the country has stepped up to the plate in the last couple years and really devoted his career to save the Maldives." Jesus Christ, who writes such a thing? Might be easier to rewrite the article from scratch. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 14:28, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you were a really good copy editor, you would remove nothing. You just attribute it and call it what it is, political advocacy. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 14:59, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Formally, I think, I ought to inform you of Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/Proposed_decision#Proposed_FoF: Minor4th has_been_disruptive William M. Connolley (talk) 21:50, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case you didn't add the page to your watchlist, I draw your attention to the following question.[1] A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 14:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[2] A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 16:36, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Advice from someone who means you no harm: You don't want to win an argument on points and lose because you were blocked for something or other. I'd refactor "bullshit" any way you want (remove it or make it a question or put it in the subjunctive ["would"]). Don't moon the jury (there's a page or section on that somewhere in the Arb pages). Also, when you have the better argument, you don't want anyone to be distracted from it. Several editors, and possibly arbs, will seize on something that looks uncivil. I'm sure you know all this -- we all need reminders sometime. -- JohnWBarber (talk) 18:50, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]