We all know William Connolley is an advocate for taking climate change
seriously. However there remains a lack of reliable information which
negates his position. If there was such information, those of us who
follow this issue would have settled his beeswax fast enough.
Fred
Ken Arromdee wrote:
Now has a Slashdot story:
http://slashdot.org/submission/1137140/Climategate-spreads-to-Wikipedia
Which links to two articles:
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=62e1c98e-01ed-…
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2008/05/03/who-i…
At a minimum this sounds like conflict of interest, and worse if any of
these
accusations are true (although the article counts are probably
misreporting,
and I bet they include all articles he deleted and all banned users
regardless
of associations with climate change).
Erm, you wouldn't be jumping to any conclusions here? And
misinterpreting what we mean by "conflict of interest"? Which does not
equate to academic involvement in a topic (no longer William's
situation, by the way?) Or neglecting quite a substantial history of
dispute resolution down the years, which at minimum involves people who
actually understand policy looking at actual edits?
Charles
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l