This user page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles 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.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Section = 109 BLP articles labelled "Climate Change Deniers" all at once. This article was placed in a "climate change deniers" category. After discussion on WP:BLPN and WP:CFD the category was deleted. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 16:34, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This article contains almost nothing Biographical, no biographical information about the Living Person, Steve Goddard. It is composed almost entirely of criticisms of his views about climate science, disguised as information. It should either be entirely re-written as a Biography of a Living Person, following Wiki guidelines for such, or deleted altogether. KipHansen (talk) 23:30, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. A BLP should be based mostly on what independent sources have said about the subject. As it is, the article just paraphrases the subject's own views on several subjects. I did a news search, and there are plenty of blogs etc. commenting about his blogs etc., but no serious coverage. I'm not sure that it can be salvaged, but open to suggestions. --Gronk Oz (talk) 14:51, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is currently a AfD@KipHansen:, Gronk Oz, personally I usually like to keep a record on informations on any subject, cannot really decide in this case, thus I won't vote. prokaryotes (talk) 02:38, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
