Talk:Climate Change Denial Disorder/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Note

Created new article.

My thanks to mentors for input and also copy editing suggestions.

Much appreciated,

— Cirt (talk) 02:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Notices posted of new article creation

I've posted notices about this new article creation, to the following talk pages :

Cheers,

— Cirt (talk) 03:04, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Top hat note

I'd really like to retain the top hat note for this article:

Best to make it clear to our readers this is a form of satire and parody.

Thank you,

— Cirt (talk) 15:59, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

This is something the first sentence makes abundantly clear. The hatnote is not aiding in disambiguation, which means it is being used incorrectly. --Izno (talk) 16:16, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

@Izno:Is there a different sort of top note we can use instead, to give extra emphasis and clarification to our readers that this is a form of satire and parody ? — Cirt (talk) 16:20, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

To answer the question, no. Why do you think that it's necessary to duplicate the same information provided in the first sentence? I see no reasonable need to suggest that after reading said sentence, our readers will understand this article to be about anything but a satire.--Izno (talk) 16:29, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

@Izno:, Perhaps you're correct, I just wanted to emphasize it is parody and satire a bit more. Do you think since the article title Climate Change Denial Disorder is the only one if its kind, it's alright to keep at this page title, or perhaps move it to Climate Change Denial Disorder (film), so those landing here know it is a fictional film? Or just leave it here? — Cirt (talk) 16:39, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Since there is no actual disorder called "climate change denial disorder" (maybe something for DSM 6 <g>), I don't see a need. I think the title being italicized should also suggest enough of a hint that this is a work and not a disorder or the topic of the work in question. --Izno (talk) 16:44, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

@Izno:Alright, sounds good. Thank you very much for your polite and professional demeanor during talk page discussion ! Much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 16:46, 12 April 2016 (UTC)