| Revision as of 10:02, 24 January 2010 editWilliam M. Connolley (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers66,016 edits Don't go← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:06, 28 January 2010 edit undoMalcolmMcDonald (talk | contribs)1,214 edits Improvements at Global WarmingNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| LHVU has blundered grotesquely over this. Please don't think his behaviour is typical of the project, and do please come back. At the moment he is still in the "oh dear I f*ck*d up but you're blocked anyway stage" - hopefully he'll have the courage to come back and actually apologise ] (]) 10:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC) | LHVU has blundered grotesquely over this. Please don't think his behaviour is typical of the project, and do please come back. At the moment he is still in the "oh dear I f*ck*d up but you're blocked anyway stage" - hopefully he'll have the courage to come back and actually apologise ] (]) 10:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| ==Improvements at ]== | |||
| I believe you feel that the GW article (and perhaps that entire suite of articles) reads something like an advertisement. | |||
| I have a concern that there is one way to keep these articles the same and many ways to make improvements. This results in '''a)''' division of effort and '''b)''' large numbers of editors abandoning the effort. | |||
| Some editors are prepared to show their support or opposition to movement in specific directions, at a chart on my TalkPage . "Reads like an advertisement" is on there. Please consider adding your name to that section and any other parts you think important. ] (]) 17:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:06, 28 January 2010
LHVU has blundered grotesquely over this. Please don't think his behaviour is typical of the project, and do please come back. At the moment he is still in the "oh dear I f*ck*d up but you're blocked anyway stage" - hopefully he'll have the courage to come back and actually apologise William M. Connolley (talk) 10:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Improvements at Global Warming
I believe you feel that the GW article (and perhaps that entire suite of articles) reads something like an advertisement.
I have a concern that there is one way to keep these articles the same and many ways to make improvements. This results in a) division of effort and b) large numbers of editors abandoning the effort.
Some editors are prepared to show their support or opposition to movement in specific directions, at a chart on my TalkPage here. "Reads like an advertisement" is on there. Please consider adding your name to that section and any other parts you think important. MalcolmMcDonald (talk) 17:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC)