The result was redirect to Climate ethics. Clear consensus, reaffirmed after the rewrite, is that the article is unsuitable for inclusion. Consensus appears to be that climate responsibility should not be a red link, so redirect is the logical outcome here. If anyone thinks there are sourced, policy-compliant material to merge, it may be recovered from the page history. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 02:29, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This article consists of one author framing a debate in his own image rather than writing a reference article. Wikipedia is not a forum or soapbox. No original research. Wikipedia is not a link farm. —Largo Plazo ( talk) 22:14, 15 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Quality is not sufficient for Wikipedia. Enough said. I have NO investment in this page being at Wikipedia, and you could remove it pronto, if you wish. m MaynardClark ( talk) 23:12, 15 December 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was redirect to Climate ethics. Clear consensus, reaffirmed after the rewrite, is that the article is unsuitable for inclusion. Consensus appears to be that climate responsibility should not be a red link, so redirect is the logical outcome here. If anyone thinks there are sourced, policy-compliant material to merge, it may be recovered from the page history. ( non-admin closure) Tim Song ( talk) 02:29, 22 December 2009 (UTC) reply
This article consists of one author framing a debate in his own image rather than writing a reference article. Wikipedia is not a forum or soapbox. No original research. Wikipedia is not a link farm. —Largo Plazo ( talk) 22:14, 15 December 2009 (UTC) reply
Quality is not sufficient for Wikipedia. Enough said. I have NO investment in this page being at Wikipedia, and you could remove it pronto, if you wish. m MaynardClark ( talk) 23:12, 15 December 2009 (UTC) reply