Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:49, 14 April 2010

Welcome!

Hello Airborne84, welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. ZooFari 02:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey, welcome

Are you in the 84th Airborn? Welcome to Misplaced Pages. ChyranandChloe (talk) 05:36, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

No, there's no 84th Airborne that I know of now - maybe there was one once. Thanks! It's an interesting place. Cheers! Airborne84 (talk) 06:04, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

That's good. I'll be brief. Of all places you chose climate change, which is one of the most unwelcoming to newcomers. Some advice, if you get in a dispute with another editor read WP:PROCESS and WP:TPG. Also look at {{Cite web}}, it'll give you instructions on the type of citation you're using, save some time and do it right the first time. Good luck, I expect good things from that article. ChyranandChloe (talk) 06:31, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll read through them. Cheers! Airborne84 (talk) 01:52, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

CCD?

Don't understand this. Is it actionable? It sounds like you're defending that we should merge the appropriate info, but that's already done. By the way, for the two books in the "Bibliography" use {{Cite book}}, instructions are in the link. ChyranandChloe (talk) 07:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

If there's already been a merge of some of the data, then I'm just behind the times. I read through the paragraphs from the other article and there's still a tag recommending a merge. It's just my opinion based on the content of that portion of the other article. Some looks like it could go in the "Public Opinion..." article. Some looks like it could reasonably remain there. Airborne84 (talk) 17:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

And thanks for the "Cite Book" link! I was trying to find that last night while struggling to insert those two items into the Biblio. Cheers! Airborne84 (talk) 17:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, looking at the sources, they're from scholarly journals, not books. Use {{Cite journal}}, however if you can find the doi number (which is very common, use Google Scholar), you can use {{Cite doi}} where a bot will complete most of the citation and maintain it for you. All you really need to add is the url and full free text. ChyranandChloe (talk) 03:17, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I think this concerns you, Nigelj has a reply for you, see Talk:Public opinion on climate change#Attempt to address systemic bias. He's citing WP:WORLDVIEW, which is an essay, not policy; and WP:CSB, which is a wikiproject. You should nevertheless take them very seriously. ChyranandChloe (talk) 20:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't phrase my earlier comments very well - probably because I was in a rush. Lesson learned! Airborne84 (talk) 03:26, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Scientific opinion on climate change

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Scientific opinion on climate change, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Misplaced Pages:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- TS 20:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Please don't edit war

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on List of common misconceptions. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. 71.77.21.198 (talk) 18:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC)