Talk:Climate Skepticism

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to climate change, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

General comments[edit]

Would editors interested in keeping Wikipedia 'neutral' please help ensure this page is not summarily deleted by those responsible for the one-sided coverage of this issue elsewhere!

The 'eyes' of the media are on this debate, and Wikipedia is losing credibility daily. Gemtpm (talk) 22:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Content forking. Thanks, MuffledThud (talk) 22:40, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Having read the 'coverage', it is quite clear that anyone wishing to find out about the views of those who dispute Climate Change - not just in detail but in genral - have no source of information to and no way to track down such sceptical views - which, whether right or wrong, are extremely relevant and important to coverage of the issue.

Gemtpm (talk) 22:42, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, but these views are already covered in Global warming controversy, and your edits there were reverted for various reasons. That's not a good reason to create a new article on the subject. If that were allowed, we'd have 90 articles on every subject, each giving a slightly different point of view. No doubt that article is incomplete, but please argue your case for your additions at Talk:Global warming controversy, rather than forking the page. Thanks, MuffledThud (talk) 22:52, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The views are NOT covered and there is no shortage of space for new pages. Neither you nor anyone else has the authority to delete pags on the grounds that you think they are only of 'minority interst'. Gemtpm (talk) 14:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]