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-4... http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2008/05/03/who-is...
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@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l