This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the
project page for details.
No objection to merging but the other title is longer, perhaps some thought should be put into the overall title for the topic.
Dmcq (
talk)
11:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Oops, you're right about that name! The slant comes from the word consensus: there's a clear scientific consensus (as in SOoCC), but then this goes on to talk about the politicians and the public, and as we know, there is still a lot of relatively meaningless noise coming from these quarters, that is not best described by the word consensus. That's why we have all the other articles, and all the geographically specific articles, 'Politics/public opinion/economics of CC/GW in US/UK/Europe/Australia/etc' (there are dozens of them, I believe). It would be nice if all of this could be summarised as a 'consensus', but really it can't yet, and I think all the bits will be better explained, in their own separate places at this point in CC history. --
Nigelj (
talk)
18:07, 20 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Support. Very definitely they should be merged. I think the public opinion title is probably better for the merged article and the bit about whether the public thinks there is a consensus amongst scientists can form a major part of it.
Dmcq (
talk)
13:38, 16 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Moving forward
It's been almost a month with no objections. I believe we are in consensus. Since no one has taken the liberty to move forward, I'll do my best. Below is a list of what I've did, if anyone has an objection. I'll be happy to step aside and discuss how to handle each list item.
Lead
Questionnaire regarding level of agreement over global warming essentially duplicates the sources and content of that found in
Scientific opinion on climate change.
The remaining information may suffer
notability issues.
Despite these concerns, most of the information may be moved to
Global warming controversy. Removed for now, it's inclusion may be discussed on the receiving article's talk page.
The merger broke the link at
Scientific opinion on climate change that pointed to
Petitions and other "self-selected lists of individuals' opinions". The link should be replaced with a Wikipedia section that addresses a collection "self-selected lists" of the same nature. Your proposal to spread the Petitions between several articles will leave that original link without a referrent; what about placing the whole section "as is" into either
Global warming controversy or
Politics of global warming, as a compilation of several noteworthy petitions?
Diego (
talk)
14:45, 16 January 2012 (UTC)reply