This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
David Legates article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
climate change, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
I removed the word consensus in front of "scientific opinion on global warming". If David Legates disagrees with man made global warming theory then is it really a consensus? -Brad Kgj08 ( talk) 18:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
The page says "Professor Legates is known for using systematic examination of the scientific method used in climatological studies, in order to determine the validity of the data and the conclusions set forth in such studies. [3]" -- citing a statement from Legates! If someone is "known for" something, it means that the association is widely accepted amongst the general public and/or relevant experts in the field, and that the association is made on solid grounds -- otherwise, one should say "thought to use" rather than "known for using." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.227.53.231 ( talk) 12:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Dear Raul, could you please explain why you disagree with the Reactions section? The warning Legates got from the governor comes as a reaction to his position. Respectfully, -- 70.137.23.225 ( talk) 06:36, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Another message for Raul: the section title 'Ties with the oil industry' brings a negative connotation while being marginally accurate, remember, he is directly connected to the conservative organizations as opposed to getting funding directly from Exxon while at UDel. Those outfits are gathering funds from various other denier-friendly sources judging by the public info. Also, I recall having seen a WP guideline about the tone used in living people's biographies. These were the reasons for changing the heading title to 'Other Affiliations'. -- 70.137.23.225 ( talk) 06:51, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
70.137.23.225 added a list of Legates' publications, and I've removed them. They don't belong in the article (I do not recall seeing any other bio on Wikipedia with such a list. Even the Paul Erdős article doesn't, and he's not able almost entirely because of his lengthy list of publications). Moreover, it most certainly doesn't belong as the first section in the article. Raul654 ( talk) 19:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I am working on a more complete list of papers plus a summary of his research. Is there a recommended template or format for to make that list collapsible so it won't take a lot of page space?-- 70.137.23.225 ( talk) 19:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
In assessing the article in its current and recent form implies it seems to imply strongly that the subject is some sort of spokesperson for conservative think tanks, and then it goes on to say "no independently verifiable source exists proving that his position on anthropogenic climate change is the consequence of conservative or oil industry funding". I think the section needs to be toned down in some way for proper compliance with WP:BLP and WP:NPOV. It's giving strong emphasis to a point of view that there is little or no evidence to support. -- Mysidia ( talk) 21:43, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I could not substantiate Legates' affiliation with CEI; none of the following resources produced any result: CEI Adjunct Scholars CEI Experts CEI Contributors CEI Staff. Also, Internet Archive indicates that Legates was never on CEI's climate change expert list [1]. Based on this I have deleted the CEI links. At the same time, the Marshall institute has Legates listed only as rountable speaker [2]. None of the following links would produce a Legates connection, so I took the liberty to correct the Marshall affiliation title and provide the correct link: Marshall Institute Staff Marshall Institute Fellows Marshall Institute Board of Directors-- 70.234.162.152 ( talk) 04:29, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
There is an entire section with no references. Per Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons, it is especially important that all material in biographical articles be supported by quality references. Errors can have real-life consequences for the people involved. This is not just an arbitrary Wikipedia policy, it's the right thing to do. Short Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 00:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
User:Raul654, regardless of whether I contribute from dynamic IP addresses or not, I don't see a justification for your reverts. I would appreciate a point-by-point explanation of your latest block revert. It seems to me that you have settled for a specific version of the article which fails to agree with many of the guidelines related to biographies of living people, verifiability, no original research, neutrality, and assuming good faith. I have made all possible attempts to provide reference and to double check the ones that were sloppily introduced to the article. You can't just revert saying that this or that "is better".
Discussion moved to the bottom for clarity -- 70.234.188.86 ( talk) 06:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Please, please, if you have other refs or sources, or guidelines, do disclose them, otherwise please do not just revert. Thanks. -- 70.234.164.230 ( talk) 01:09, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Originally in response to my rant spurt above -- 70.234.188.86 ( talk) 06:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
References
I added a letter Legates sent to the EPA. There are currently over 11,500 comments on the EPA site related to EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0171. ( Clean Air Act (United States)) I read through these occasionally just to get the feel of what people are writing. There is really enough information for a separate wikipedia page on just the comments to this docket. Both side have good points, and both sides have very bad science (such as global warming causing AIDS and asthma). I am not convinced that Legates letter is notable by itself, but there are 34 co-signers, most of who are notable, and the docket is notable. Even though this letter is not pear reviewed, it might also satisfy the reference requirement for the preceding paragraph. Q Science ( talk) 09:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Considering the amount of coverage that Legates has received in the media (news, books, PR science studies), the link, has been published several times in peer-reviewed journals [1] [2], in at least one book, [3] in a court-case [4], not only by the UCS (who btw. seem to be a reliable source on this issue). So the removal reason of "removed more non-notable and poorly sourced allegations of ties to Exxon, per WP:WEIGHT, WP:OR, possibly WP:SYN" seem to be rather far out. -- Kim D. Petersen ( talk) 17:16, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
In July 2003 the Inhofe-chaired Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works subpoenaed public testimony from Mann as well as several of his critics, noted for their prominence more among right-wing think tanks than in the climate research community. Dismissing the hockey stick as a 'Biased Record Presented by the IPCC and National Assessment', David Legates, a University of Delaware geographer and co-author ....
Mooney documents the rise of the think-tank network, and the roles of commentators like Rush Limbaugh, industry-funded scientists like Willie Soon and David Legates, and politicians like James Inhofe and Tom DeLay....
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |chapter-title=
ignored (
help)A third co-author of the polar bear study, David Legates, a professor at Delaware University, is also associated with the Marshall Institute.
The stars, as in any constellation, are an eclectic bunch. They include fringe scientists such as David Legates and Patrick Michaels, of the George C. Marshall Institute ($115,000 from ExxonMobil in 2005), a Washington-based public-policy think tank
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)Two years previously, Legates had been one of five co-authors of a paper that the White House used to emphasize uncertainties about the causes of global warming. All five had ties to think tanks funded in part by Exxon Mobil, the largest oil company.
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
Section = 109 BLP articles labelled "Climate Change Deniers" all at once. This article was placed in a "climate change deniers" category. After discussion on
WP:BLPN and
WP:CFD the category was deleted.
Peter Gulutzan (
talk) 16:52, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on David Legates. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:16, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on David Legates. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:57, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
David Legates article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
climate change, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
I removed the word consensus in front of "scientific opinion on global warming". If David Legates disagrees with man made global warming theory then is it really a consensus? -Brad Kgj08 ( talk) 18:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
The page says "Professor Legates is known for using systematic examination of the scientific method used in climatological studies, in order to determine the validity of the data and the conclusions set forth in such studies. [3]" -- citing a statement from Legates! If someone is "known for" something, it means that the association is widely accepted amongst the general public and/or relevant experts in the field, and that the association is made on solid grounds -- otherwise, one should say "thought to use" rather than "known for using." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.227.53.231 ( talk) 12:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Dear Raul, could you please explain why you disagree with the Reactions section? The warning Legates got from the governor comes as a reaction to his position. Respectfully, -- 70.137.23.225 ( talk) 06:36, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Another message for Raul: the section title 'Ties with the oil industry' brings a negative connotation while being marginally accurate, remember, he is directly connected to the conservative organizations as opposed to getting funding directly from Exxon while at UDel. Those outfits are gathering funds from various other denier-friendly sources judging by the public info. Also, I recall having seen a WP guideline about the tone used in living people's biographies. These were the reasons for changing the heading title to 'Other Affiliations'. -- 70.137.23.225 ( talk) 06:51, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
70.137.23.225 added a list of Legates' publications, and I've removed them. They don't belong in the article (I do not recall seeing any other bio on Wikipedia with such a list. Even the Paul Erdős article doesn't, and he's not able almost entirely because of his lengthy list of publications). Moreover, it most certainly doesn't belong as the first section in the article. Raul654 ( talk) 19:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I am working on a more complete list of papers plus a summary of his research. Is there a recommended template or format for to make that list collapsible so it won't take a lot of page space?-- 70.137.23.225 ( talk) 19:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
In assessing the article in its current and recent form implies it seems to imply strongly that the subject is some sort of spokesperson for conservative think tanks, and then it goes on to say "no independently verifiable source exists proving that his position on anthropogenic climate change is the consequence of conservative or oil industry funding". I think the section needs to be toned down in some way for proper compliance with WP:BLP and WP:NPOV. It's giving strong emphasis to a point of view that there is little or no evidence to support. -- Mysidia ( talk) 21:43, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
I could not substantiate Legates' affiliation with CEI; none of the following resources produced any result: CEI Adjunct Scholars CEI Experts CEI Contributors CEI Staff. Also, Internet Archive indicates that Legates was never on CEI's climate change expert list [1]. Based on this I have deleted the CEI links. At the same time, the Marshall institute has Legates listed only as rountable speaker [2]. None of the following links would produce a Legates connection, so I took the liberty to correct the Marshall affiliation title and provide the correct link: Marshall Institute Staff Marshall Institute Fellows Marshall Institute Board of Directors-- 70.234.162.152 ( talk) 04:29, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
There is an entire section with no references. Per Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons, it is especially important that all material in biographical articles be supported by quality references. Errors can have real-life consequences for the people involved. This is not just an arbitrary Wikipedia policy, it's the right thing to do. Short Brigade Harvester Boris ( talk) 00:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
User:Raul654, regardless of whether I contribute from dynamic IP addresses or not, I don't see a justification for your reverts. I would appreciate a point-by-point explanation of your latest block revert. It seems to me that you have settled for a specific version of the article which fails to agree with many of the guidelines related to biographies of living people, verifiability, no original research, neutrality, and assuming good faith. I have made all possible attempts to provide reference and to double check the ones that were sloppily introduced to the article. You can't just revert saying that this or that "is better".
Discussion moved to the bottom for clarity -- 70.234.188.86 ( talk) 06:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Please, please, if you have other refs or sources, or guidelines, do disclose them, otherwise please do not just revert. Thanks. -- 70.234.164.230 ( talk) 01:09, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Originally in response to my rant spurt above -- 70.234.188.86 ( talk) 06:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
References
I added a letter Legates sent to the EPA. There are currently over 11,500 comments on the EPA site related to EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0171. ( Clean Air Act (United States)) I read through these occasionally just to get the feel of what people are writing. There is really enough information for a separate wikipedia page on just the comments to this docket. Both side have good points, and both sides have very bad science (such as global warming causing AIDS and asthma). I am not convinced that Legates letter is notable by itself, but there are 34 co-signers, most of who are notable, and the docket is notable. Even though this letter is not pear reviewed, it might also satisfy the reference requirement for the preceding paragraph. Q Science ( talk) 09:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Considering the amount of coverage that Legates has received in the media (news, books, PR science studies), the link, has been published several times in peer-reviewed journals [1] [2], in at least one book, [3] in a court-case [4], not only by the UCS (who btw. seem to be a reliable source on this issue). So the removal reason of "removed more non-notable and poorly sourced allegations of ties to Exxon, per WP:WEIGHT, WP:OR, possibly WP:SYN" seem to be rather far out. -- Kim D. Petersen ( talk) 17:16, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
In July 2003 the Inhofe-chaired Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works subpoenaed public testimony from Mann as well as several of his critics, noted for their prominence more among right-wing think tanks than in the climate research community. Dismissing the hockey stick as a 'Biased Record Presented by the IPCC and National Assessment', David Legates, a University of Delaware geographer and co-author ....
Mooney documents the rise of the think-tank network, and the roles of commentators like Rush Limbaugh, industry-funded scientists like Willie Soon and David Legates, and politicians like James Inhofe and Tom DeLay....
{{
cite book}}
: Unknown parameter |chapter-title=
ignored (
help)A third co-author of the polar bear study, David Legates, a professor at Delaware University, is also associated with the Marshall Institute.
The stars, as in any constellation, are an eclectic bunch. They include fringe scientists such as David Legates and Patrick Michaels, of the George C. Marshall Institute ($115,000 from ExxonMobil in 2005), a Washington-based public-policy think tank
{{
cite web}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)Two years previously, Legates had been one of five co-authors of a paper that the White House used to emphasize uncertainties about the causes of global warming. All five had ties to think tanks funded in part by Exxon Mobil, the largest oil company.
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
Section = 109 BLP articles labelled "Climate Change Deniers" all at once. This article was placed in a "climate change deniers" category. After discussion on
WP:BLPN and
WP:CFD the category was deleted.
Peter Gulutzan (
talk) 16:52, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on David Legates. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:16, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on David Legates. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:57, 6 September 2017 (UTC)