Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: The Great Global Warming Swindle
> Wikimedia Discussion > Articles
Cla68
There's a fairly intense debate going on as to whether the Great Global Warming Swindle article should be catagorized as "Denialism" or an "Expose'. Some edit warring is taking place (check the names in the history). Some extremely spirited debate is also taking place about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Grea...egory:Denialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Grea...2Expos.C3.A9.22

Why don't they just put both categories and be done with it?
Neil
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 5th August 2008, 3:05am) *

There's a fairly intense debate going on as to whether the Great Global Warming Swindle article should be catagorized as "Denialism" or an "Expose'. Some edit warring is taking place (check the names in the history). Some extremely spirited debate is also taking place about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Grea...egory:Denialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Grea...2Expos.C3.A9.22

Why don't they just put both categories and be done with it?


Or neither.
Cla68
QUOTE(Neil @ Tue 5th August 2008, 2:15am) *

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 5th August 2008, 3:05am) *

There's a fairly intense debate going on as to whether the Great Global Warming Swindle article should be catagorized as "Denialism" or an "Expose'. Some edit warring is taking place (check the names in the history). Some extremely spirited debate is also taking place about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Grea...egory:Denialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Grea...2Expos.C3.A9.22

Why don't they just put both categories and be done with it?


Or neither.


I just tried to add the "expose" category and it was red-linked. In other words, some of them were arguing over adding a category that doesn't exist.
ThurstonHowell3rd
The side which writes the most words on the talk page wins!

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.