User talk:Proxima Centauri

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This page is automatically archived by Archivist
Archives for this talk page: <2>, <1>, <3>, <4>, <5>


[edit] RFC regarding topic

[edit] Once again

Pleasepleaseplease spellcheck your contributions! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 16:38, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

[edit] Proxima Centauri (the mainspace article)

I've nominated Proxima Centauri for deletion because I didn't think it was missional. As you created it I thought I'd let you know. Christopher (talk) 16:35, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Politicization of renewable energy

Your edit seems to introduce a political bias at the top of the article on renewable energy, and I think we should avoid that. I suggest to move it to a new section, or remove it altogether since the overall article appears to be merely informative. --Cmonk (talk) 16:38, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

We're not politically neutral and don't try to be. Christopher (talk) 16:42, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
I know, but (a) your link doesn't actually say anything about politics; (b) the issue with climate change is the excessive politicization of the subject, and it seems counter-productive to me to start making US-centric political advertising on anything climate/energy related; (c) the quote itself seems to be more about the climate change controversy (which is why I thought it was appropriate in the climate change article). --Cmonk (talk) 16:58, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
I personally agree that the quote deserves to go. Just saw what looked like someone calling for neutrality. Christopher (talk) 17:09, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
I think you're right that the quote on the top of the page was a bit Americacentric. I moved it to a new section right at the bottom. Perhaps other users can think of other ways to win support or renewables. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:13, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
I removed the section, shouldn't it be more than just a quote? Unless there's some non-quote text I don't see the point. Christopher (talk) 17:18, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Why'd you readd it without discussion? Let's not start an edit war. Christopher (talk) 17:22, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
You did add a sentence so it's technically more than just a quote but I still reckon it's not enough. Christopher (talk) 17:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
See if you can add more. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:28, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
So far all I've done is remove 31 bytes, I think it'll be forgotten about and remain a "section-stub" in an otherwise good article. Christopher (talk) 17:33, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Is it OK now? If it isn't I'll try and deal with it tomorrow. Proxima Centauri (talk) 17:40, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I'd still remove it but that's just me, there was a tyop but I corrected it. there's some weird grammar that, whilst I know exactly what you mean, I don't know how to correct ("steadily better able"). Christopher (talk) 17:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
I think it's worth keeping now though you were right to draw attention to problems. You encouraged me to work hard researching and developing the section. Proxima Centauri (talk) 12:11, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
I reckon it's worth keeping now. Christopher (talk) 12:12, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

[edit] Your archive template

Goes <2> <1> <3> <4> <5> instead of <1> <2> <3> <4> <5>, any idea why? Christopher (talk) 17:42, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I've no clear idea, there must have been some mistake or other. Proxima Centauri (talk) 12:07, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
It might be glitch caused by two different archive bots, or maybe a nonstandard manual archive. BicyclewheelToxic mowse.gif 12:35, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Personal tools