Welcome!
|
Editing problems
In your recent edits to Climate change mitigation you added your content within a previous reference following the <ref> tag. Please be more careful. Additionally the howstuffworks.com article you were using is rather a poor source, please read WP:reliable sources. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 13:10, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Please study NPOV and RS before editing more
You're obviously interested in some issues that also interest me. However, your edits so far have been a botch job. First, please study WP:Neutral point of view; then study WP:Reliable sources; and then study WP:Citing sources. Otherwise most (all?) of your edits will be reverted by someone and you'll start to incur wrathful responses instead of welcoming and helping ones. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:46, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Discretionary sanction alert - climate change
Please carefully read this information:The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Climate change, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:10, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Repeated insertion into lead about scientific opinion
The article is about the scientific opinion. You keep on inserting stuff into the lead that is not covered in the article itself. The article is quite long enough without sticking in stuff that is already better handled elsewhere and it certainly shouldn't be stuck in the lead when the article doesn't describe anything about what is said. The lead should summarize the article. Dmcq (talk) 18:20, 25 November 2014 (UTC)