RationalWiki:Articles for demotion/Global warming

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Global warming | Result: Demoted to Gold[edit]

For more information, see: Talk:Climate change
Global warming (edit|talk|history|protect|delete|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Promote to bronze[edit]

Demote to gold[edit]

  1. I like this article a lot. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 20:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
  2. I like this one for gold/cover story. See also Help:Cover_stories for the RW methodology for rating something gold. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 22:05, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
  3. Well sourced, well-written and crucial to our mission. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 22:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
  4. Definitely relevant to our mission Edward the eight (talk) 22:22, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
  5. 123goaway (talk) 14:42, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
  6. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒 talk 16:14, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
  7. LGTM. Andrew5 (talk) 20:13, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
  8. Vee (talk) 22:50, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
  9. The article gives an introduction to global warming, and covers extensively climate change denial and conspiracies related to climate change. This is the kind of article that all articles in RW strive to be like. Rabbitseatcarrots (talk) 15:58, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Promote to no brainstar[edit]

Status quo[edit]

123goaway (talk) 17:13, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

changed my mind 123goaway (talk) 14:41, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

I will default here until a reason has been provided. Andrew5 (talk) 19:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC) LGM raises good points. Vee (talk) 20:04, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

  • Has this article expanded a lot since I last commented on it? I remember saying that some aspects of this article is missing such as the one time a denier tried to use a Pentagon paper (which was originally supposed to showcase a worst-case scenario) to prove the scientists wrong that catastrophe hasn't occurred by 2020 or something. Also, I do think the issue of eco-fascism should be discussed. Finally, well, it's a nitpick but this gif should be updated to show how climate change is worsening every year but yeah. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 02:04, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
This video goes up to 2021 --->
Is that good? LongStylus (talk) 02:14, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
It seems reasonable to me unless something more recent can be found. Bongolian (talk) 02:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
@LeftyGreenMario, I'm not sure when you mean by "last commented on it". What are the issues that you think should still be addressed? Perhaps the relevant date is when it was demoted to silver, which was March 2021 by CorruptUser?[1] There does not seem to have been a vote on the demotion (RationalWiki:Articles for demotion/Archive 2021). Bongolian (talk) 04:06, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
It was in a talk page but I think I reiterated points here. There's a LOT of denialist talking points and I think this article is missing out on a few. There's also the BIG deal about ecofascists going "the poors need to be exterminated because of their population growth" and I feel that's important to address to this page. I'll ask again, what has happened between silver demotion and now? --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 19:05, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
  • The cover story abstract needs more text (Template:Cover abstract/Global warming). Shouldn't the page title be changed to "Climate change" from "Global warming", since this is generally the preferred term (e.g., NASA[2])? Bongolian (talk) 02:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
    Yes, I added that cover abstract just yesterday as a placeholder/stub. Changing the page name to "climate change" and redirecting "global warming" to it is a good idea. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 17:45, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
    I agree. As a title “Climate change” admits a broader coverage of all processes involved. Global warming, on the other hand, though one of the driving forces behind climate change, is but one symptom of a larger problem. LeucippusSalva veritate 21:24, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
  • This publication might be useful. Andrew5 (talk) 20:24, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
  • I’m not sure where this account from Skeptical Science could be used… but I think it provides an excellent overview of the pertinent issues while still being readable to the lay person. LeucippusSalva veritate 21:49, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
  • It's 8-0 after some time; we should demote it to gold. Andrew5 (talk) 00:56, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Can someone demote it? It's 9-0 after 9 days. Andrew5 🎄 (talk) 21:42, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=RationalWiki:Articles_for_demotion/Global_warming&oldid=2514615"