31:
1040:, the scientific position (or positions, when appreciable numbers of qualified scientists actually differ) will (or should) be present in every article that specifically documents a controversy relating to science. However, I see the point about having a "high" level template. The total number of articles relating to climate change (let alone mitigation, which takes in the whole energy industry, most of agriculture, urban design, etc.) is far too large to cram into a single
975:? This discussion was in December, and no matter what "side" one is on, it is a simple fact that in December no one knew anything about the relative importance or impact of the CRU thing (which we btw. imho still don't). I'm a bit surprised about the Oil phaseout link as well - i don't think it should be here either. But i do see at least one rationale for it, and that is if we do not have any other articles on oil phaseout (but it is still tentative). --
110:, but as it stands, Knowledge does have such an article. Given that the article exists, it seems pretty clear that it should be indexed. If we don't believe it's an appropriate topic for Knowledge, then the appropriate recourse would seem to be to nominate it for deletion, instead of deleting any links to it from other articles.
113:
I apologize to
Connolly for not checking the history before making that edit, but I honestly did not expect it to be controversial. I do, however, think that it's appropriate to include all of the related articles in the web of links we're building. If an article simply doesn't belong on Knowledge,
666:
reason to believe that adding additional links to the "Opinion and controversy" and "Politics" subsections would somehow make the template cluttered, confusing or unwieldy. I've heard the "high-level template linking" argument, but the more carefully I think about it, the less persuasive I find it.
148:
Hey, I disagree with you, but I'm not trying to pick a fight - and I haven't made the same edit again. My sense is that this template really should be viewed as an structured table of contents for
Knowledge articles related to the subject. I hear what you're trying to say about Knowledge not being
820:
or whatever the appropriate abbr is for that particular article). I don't think it's even a hundred articles included in this template, so I could update those articles in a couple of hours or so. I do not wish to create an account, so if someone who is template literate and has an account wants to
129:
You can waste your time AFD'ing it if you like; I'm not going to bother. But, as the section above says, NOTNEWS applies. As well as not-important-enough as well. If you want to talk about the index stuff, do it over there (and you'll get NOTNEWS, again). Repeatedly doing the same doomed-to-failure
101:
does not apply, because it's nothing more than an index to
Knowledge articles that deal with climate change. This template represents a similar case - it's not an article itself, but rather a table of contents or index to global warming related articles on Knowledge. We can talk about whether or
855:
Woah... why is
Knowledge not the place for "this type of stuff"? Dissent and scrutiny, however eccentric, is an essential part of the scientific process, particularly on important and complex issues. Why would Knowledge suppress it? Since when did Knowledge become the godlike arbitrator of final
642:
more links - specifically, the "causes," "potential effects and issues," "mitigation," and "proposed adaptations" sections (in fact, the only other section that has only three links is the "politics" section - given the completeness of the links in the other sections, is there a chance that we're
348:
I always thought the purpose of a navigational template was to include links related to the subject...so why is there a lack of links for that section? I'd also like to point out that this is wikipedia, and that templates, and articles can be edited...so what the harm in adding the link until the
665:
Bottom line, I don't see any evidence of the "top-level" rule in the other subsections of the template, and given the structure of the template with collapsing subtopics and the effective way in which many more links have been incorporated into the other subsections, there doesn't seem to be any
89:
with the comment "no, as before, please stop being disruptive". I'm not sure why he's describing this as disruptive - perhaps because he's annoyed because he'd reverted someone else who'd added the link earlier. (I need to add a mea culpa here - it seemed like an obvious addition, so I hadn't
509:
is the main article for the
Opinion and controversy section. Under this section we should list every article on this subject, not just two of them. If we after a wile will get 10+ articles we can reconsider what should be included. Added the two last so it's not so empty and incomplete:
519:
441:
1035:
so I am surrounded not by people who know climate science but by people who know what they read in their right-wing chain e-mails. Thus I am interested in being able to find the scientific responses to the non-science floating around in popular culture. Since
Knowledge takes a
222:
in the "Opinion and controversy" section of the template. I don't see any benefit in making it difficult for readers to find these articles, and the larger template is well enough structured that including them doesn't clutter up the page for readers who aren't interested.
1063:
Of the links in this section, only the sustainable development one mentions climate change. I don't think it's a good idea to give link and then leave readers disappointed over find nothing in the linked article to read on the template's topic.
1769:
Another option, probably a better solution but more work overall, is to split the template up by section into smaller non-collapsible templates, then refactor each article on which this template is used so that the article includes both the
1044:. However, it would be nice to have lower-level navigation templates to put into lower-level topic articles. When someone stumbles across an article about a particular controversy, they could benefit from links to related controversies. --
934:
Being that this is a navigational template, I believe that high traffic articles should be included. It also seems that while the other subsections, except for temperatures and opinion/controversy, there is more than one row of linked
757:
I've read the talk here and appreciate folks want to keep this
Template on high level controversies and suppress the low level controversy articles. A disambiguation article could serve these annoying little controversies right.
1079:
Disappointed readers could become editors and edit the articles about proposed adaptation strategies to mention at some point that that is what they are. When an adaptation strategy is being pursued for other reasons (e.g.,
571:
should be included as well since it is another article about controversies which sourorunds this topic. Hopefully it is know acceptable to add it (the list above) as a compromise? When it's written. In the mean time I urge
191:
aren't in the template, I think it is probably overreaching to include this new event here right now. In general it appears that the template is mostly avoiding news type articles in favor of general information pieces.
737:
are low-level articles dealing with specific issues within the GW controversy topic, of which they are subtopics. As low-level articles, they don't belong in a top-level template. That's basic taxonomy. --
74:
1084:, reduction in local pollution, relief of traffic congestion, etc.) it is still an adaptation strategy, even if the other reasons get most or all of the emphasis in the current revision of the article. --
631:
The template is well enough structured that adding more links to a particular subcategory of the template is not going to unduly clutter up the page, or even the broader template, for readers who aren't
470:
This looks like a rather odd attempt by people interested in very fringe parts of the subject to get more prominence for it. It doesn't seem to qualify on any grounds yet for inclusion in the template.
325:
wasn't included before, there's no reason why it can't be included now. Could someone please explain the harm in adding a group to the template under the controversy section that included links to the
163:
Oh, OK. Sorry. There has been far too much trash around this issue. Going forward, I expect this incident to fade away as uninteresting, although I expect the skeptics will keep trying to revive it
594:. That top-level article is already listed. It is not appropriate to list subarticles on a template meant for listing top-level articles. I really can't put it any more simply than that. --
1800:
Parts of this template could be split into separate templates and then "transcluded" into the main template. Alternatively, parts of this template could be transcluded elsewhere using
747:
123:
553:
1819:
1766:
I'd like to have the
Overview section of this template expanded by default. Does anyone know how to do this? I read the documentation and still can't make heads or tails of it.
483:
I agree. The articles linked in the template are top-level articles within each category. (when i say top level - i mean the top in a hierachy of "less specialized"(top) =: -->
1837:
590:
You aren't listening to what people are saying. This is a high-level template linking to the top-level articles on each major topic. The articles you list are subarticles of
568:
527:
1391:
I removed the "Temperatures" section as its articles are way too specialized for a general overview of global warming. Pasting the wikitext here for future reference:
1271:
1787:
1825:
1376:
1290:
1224:
1761:
1191:
Now, I did. It was added, in late 2007, by a editor permanently banned for disruption by mid-2008. Perhaps the vandalism was missed. Perhaps we should restore
1294:
1275:
1121:
893:
879:
865:
767:
1206:
1186:
1172:
1152:
1134:
493:
172:
158:
139:
1312:
1244:
1228:
984:
457:
389:
1011:
I believe in mainstream science and yet I like to read
Knowledge's articles about the various constructed controversies outside of mainstream science (e.g.,
1353:
911:
1093:
232:
201:
752:
944:
929:
478:
743:
599:
419:
358:
258:
812:" parameter in the articles. Of course the transclusion on each article would need to be updated with the proper abbreviation (by that I mean change
1813:
1073:
962:
717:
695:
372:
1023:, etc.). These articles are valuable for getting useful background whenever I talk to someone about climate change who gets their information from
786:
560:
675:
262:
603:
1725:
1682:
1628:
1603:
1578:
1508:
1457:
1404:
1099:
539:
429:
399:
276:
107:
86:
76:
830:
585:
739:
595:
254:
1300:
1380:
797:
I was unsure if I could change this template without being reverted, so I seek approval here first. I would like to properly utilize the "
1282:
1495:. It inadvertently gave the impression that there's a hugely complex answer to the question of whether global warming is human-caused.
484:"specialized"(bottom). The CRU article is a sub-article of Hockeystick, which again is a sub-article of Controversy and Temperature. --
1665:
I removed the "Protests" section. There are too many protests to list here, and the phenomenon of protest should be covered under the
149:
a newspaper, but do you really think this incident won't be part of the debate going forward? I can't see skeptics letting go of it.
849:
563:
without discussing it. This is so bad that I just miss it (I refrain from reinsert it even if it's removed by no reason at all). As
380:
should be added and I have. CG shouldn't be, for obvious reasons: it is a redirect, and NOTNEWS applies, apart from anything else
1338:
734:
1109:
1101:
1058:
59:
1053:
725:
This really shouldn't be difficult to understand. This is a top-level template, listing top-level articles in the topic area.
363:
Fully agree and I added both cases. Templates like thios is for navigational help, and both these cases is highly relevant.
1441:
1440:
Human section. These are either very specialized and technical, or would be accessible from a more general article such as
1267:
1178:
1144:
1113:
822:
514:
377:
338:
840:
Just delete the whole opinion and controversy section of the template. Knowledge is not the place for this type of stuff.
650:
There's no real benefit to the encyclopedia in making it more difficult than necessary for readers to find these articles.
1712:
in the
Overview. The articles listed here don't focus on climate change adaptation and some are excessively specialized.
1372:
1334:
1286:
1220:
451:
1301:
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Land_use,_land-use_change_and_forestry&diff=464541653&oldid=464540430
1140:
920:
out there in WP. Why do you think that opinion on climate change is more important than other articles about the topic?
1304:
1233:
Figure it out yourself. Use WikiBlame, and check around September 2007, to find out which disruptive editor changed
1801:
1386:
917:
708:
how in is it possible that this be more relevant than the hockey stick controversy and the Climategate? I adds it.
91:
318:
Being a high-level template, including this link would make it easier for a number of viewers to find the article.
1783:
1737:| abbr8 = Adaptation | list8 = {{navbox | child | groupwidth = 10.25em | group1 = Strategies | list1 = *
1721:
1678:
1624:
1599:
1574:
1504:
1453:
1400:
980:
489:
777:... Much more high level than an article question the some of the most used graphs in the AGW argument? Yeahhh.
385:
168:
135:
253:
As I said before, this is a high-level template; it's not suitable for including individual controversies. --
47:
17:
875:
845:
792:
1006:
1584:
976:
726:
591:
573:
564:
506:
485:
38:
1709:
1359:
381:
303:
aren't in the template, I think it is probably overreaching to include this new event here right now.
164:
131:
82:
1141:
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Template:Global_warming&diff=459377054&oldid=457929275
1182:
1148:
1117:
826:
730:
644:
534:
437:
326:
322:
300:
219:
197:
188:
1330:
950:
774:
705:
448:
1615:
I removed all of the regional policy stuff as these are overly-specific for a general template:
1308:
1241:
1203:
1169:
1131:
871:
841:
686:
So how would it hurt to add in links to the controversial items into the navigational template?
330:
949:
This is balantant removal of unpleasant stuff by the AGW believers. That's why. They links to
616:
That point has been made several times, but I'd suggest it's worth discussing. In particular:
410:
because this is not "routine news coverage", but rather a historical event. What else applies?
1609:
1020:
940:
907:
691:
415:
354:
1089:
1069:
1049:
889:
861:
8:
1833:
1779:
1717:
1674:
1620:
1595:
1570:
1500:
1449:
1396:
1263:
1028:
763:
454:
193:
643:
unintentionally limiting the links in these two sections on the basis of an unconscious
1349:
1326:
884:
So it seems. But what rhetorical questions? Why don't you just answer the questions? --
445:
1365:
1238:
1200:
1166:
1128:
407:
1325:
This template is too big and should be trimmed down to the more essential stuff. --
1809:
1666:
1177:
You stated "No reason for inclusion.", but did you check who included it and why?
1041:
936:
903:
687:
671:
411:
350:
228:
154:
119:
1774:
template and one more navigation template on a specific aspect of global warming.
442:
List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming
98:
1492:
1320:
1085:
1081:
1065:
1045:
972:
885:
857:
835:
475:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
1829:
1795:
1775:
1713:
1670:
1616:
1591:
1566:
1496:
1445:
1392:
1037:
958:
899:
782:
759:
713:
581:
549:
368:
1345:
1234:
1192:
968:
923:
1805:
1012:
667:
433:
403:
334:
280:
224:
150:
115:
1016:
472:
954:
778:
709:
577:
545:
364:
1196:
1162:
1024:
898:
Knowledge strives to maintain a neutral point of view. Please read
90:
checked the article history.) I'd also added the same link to the
1565:
Removed from History section for being specialized and technical.
1344:
I agree. or, split it into smaller (more targeted) templates.
953:( a single government report ...). It's high level you know...
1143:
is not an explanation. Please explain yourself better here.
218:
That's a very good point. I guess I'd vote for including the
275:
I do not understand the reasons for excluding a link to the
114:
that's a different issue, and should be addressed directly.
94:
page. On that one, he reverted with the comment "NOTNEWS".
1127:
Probably because it has little to do with global warming. ā
1212:
1032:
729:
is the top-level article for the various GW controversies.
406:
for short) is highly relevant. Also, it doesn't fall under
576:
to restore what he deliberatly removed without consensus.
1826:
Illustrative model of greenhouse effect on climate change
1820:
Illustrative model of greenhouse effect on climate change
290:
It is stated that it is a high-level template, therefore
638:
of the other subcategories of the template already have
292:
it's not suitable for including individual controversies
1708:
I removed the following and replaced them by a link to
85:
has reverted the addition of a link to the article on
1216:
1410:| sect1 = Temperatures | state1 = <noinclude: -->
870:Sarcasm and rhetorical questions get you no-where.
1762:How to expand the Overview by default? Or split.
1139:"Probably" is what you state about what you did
540:Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident
430:Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident
400:Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident
277:Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident
108:Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident
87:Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident
77:Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident
520:Scientists opposing the mainstream assessment
187:Given that bigger historical complaints like
1303:for LuLuCF acronym usage as standard term.
1283:Talk:Land use, land-use change and forestry
753:Global Warming Controversies Disambiguation
1634:| group3 = Regional policy | list3 = *
1161:it has little to do with global warming.
1439:I cut the following from the Causes : -->
805:; this would allow for the usage of the "
1828:to the theory section of this template.
97:In that case, it seems clear to me that
918:hundred climate change related articles
735:Climatic Research Unit hacking incident
14:
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
1753:| group2 = Programmes | list2 = *
1442:Attribution of recent climate change
1237:to this article in the template. ā
515:Scientific opinion on climate change
378:Attribution of recent climate change
339:Attribution of recent climate change
25:
1412:| abbr1 = Temperatures | list1 = *
23:
967:Perhaps you should polish up your
902:and reconsider your request Brian.
299:bigger historical complaints like
24:
1848:
1688:| group4 = Protest | list4 = *
1590:Removed as not important enough:
1490:I removed the entire Causes : -->
1368:in the sectionĀ : Mitigation : -->
1217:http://en.wiktionary.org/baiting
704:No it doesn't. This links today
341:...and perhaps some other links.
92:Index of climate change articles
29:
1802:"labeled section transclusion"
1059:Proposed adaptation strategies
13:
1:
1838:19:28, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
1788:19:03, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
1735:| state8 = <noinclude: -->
1726:18:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
1683:06:10, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
1629:06:02, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
1604:05:57, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
1579:01:55, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
1509:23:05, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
1458:22:59, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
1405:21:49, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
1165:might be a better choice. ā
985:23:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
963:23:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
945:19:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
930:00:14, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
912:23:39, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
894:12:54, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
880:12:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
866:06:34, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
850:05:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
787:23:08, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
748:09:07, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
718:23:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
696:23:40, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
554:15:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
494:15:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
479:14:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
458:07:05, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
420:15:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
390:00:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
373:23:43, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
359:01:06, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
311:I do not follow your logic...
263:08:29, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
233:20:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
202:20:11, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
173:20:09, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
159:20:02, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
140:19:51, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
124:19:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
1313:00:36, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
1295:04:54, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
1276:19:05, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
1245:04:57, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
1229:03:03, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
1207:23:02, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
1187:00:35, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
1173:00:29, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
1153:00:27, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
1135:00:22, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
1122:00:19, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
831:16:38, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
768:05:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
676:16:21, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
604:09:20, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
586:00:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
18:Template talk:Climate change
7:
1824:I suggest adding a link to
1736:expanded</noinclude: -->
1411:expanded</noinclude: -->
1381:13:23, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
1094:01:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
1054:01:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
569:Controversy and Temperature
528:Controversy and Temperature
10:
1853:
1585:Atmospheric thermodynamics
801:" parameter and set it to
727:Global warming controversy
592:Global warming controversy
507:Global warming controversy
1814:14:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
1710:Climate change adaptation
1669:article which is listed.
1387:Content cut from template
1354:21:12, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
1339:07:40, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
1074:22:15, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
969:assumptions of good faith
821:do this, be my guest. --
818:{{Global warming|Causes}}
83:User:William M. Connolley
1729:
1686:
1632:
1512:
1461:
1408:
731:Hockey stick controversy
645:Knowledge:JUSTDONTLIKEIT
535:Hockey stick controversy
438:hockey stick controversy
327:hockey stick controversy
323:hockey stick controversy
301:hockey stick controversy
220:hockey stick controversy
189:hockey stick controversy
1199:as a separate link. ā
951:Oil_phase-out_in_Sweden
775:Oil_phase-out_in_Sweden
706:Oil_phase-out_in_Sweden
75:Link to article on the
1369:Emissions reduction ?
444:should all be added.--
331:Solar variation theory
130:mistake is disruptive
1610:Global climate regime
1110:Land use and forestry
1102:Land use and forestry
1038:neutral point of view
1021:Climate change denial
349:controversy subsides?
42:of past discussions.
382:William M. Connolley
165:William M. Connolley
132:William M. Connolley
1491:Natural section as
1264:Knowledge:WikiBlame
1195:, and possibly add
1042:navigation template
1029:Heartland Institute
793:Template parameters
814:{{Global warming}}
773:why? We have this
559:Again my edit was
297:It is stated that
106:an article on the
1366:Energy transition
1360:Energy transition
1211:Who and why? By
916:There are like a
872:Brian Everlasting
842:Brian Everlasting
102:not there should
72:
71:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
1844:
1799:
1756:
1752:
1748:
1744:
1740:
1734:
1703:
1699:
1695:
1691:
1667:Climate movement
1661:
1657:
1653:
1649:
1645:
1641:
1637:
1561:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1541:
1537:
1533:
1529:
1525:
1521:
1517:
1486:
1482:
1478:
1474:
1470:
1466:
1435:
1431:
1427:
1423:
1419:
1415:
1010:
926:
819:
815:
811:
804:
800:
567:point out above
68:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
1852:
1851:
1847:
1846:
1845:
1843:
1842:
1841:
1822:
1793:
1764:
1759:
1758:
1754:
1750:
1746:
1742:
1738:
1732:
1706:
1705:
1701:
1697:
1693:
1689:
1663:
1662:
1659:
1655:
1651:
1647:
1643:
1639:
1635:
1563:
1562:
1559:
1555:
1551:
1547:
1543:
1539:
1535:
1531:
1527:
1523:
1519:
1515:
1488:
1487:
1484:
1480:
1476:
1472:
1468:
1464:
1437:
1436:
1433:
1429:
1425:
1421:
1417:
1413:
1389:
1362:
1323:
1106:
1082:Energy security
1061:
1031:etc. I live in
1004:
977:Kim D. Petersen
922:
838:
817:
813:
810:
806:
802:
798:
795:
755:
647:reaction?); and
574:Kim D. Petersen
565:Kim D. Petersen
486:Kim D. Petersen
80:
64:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1850:
1821:
1818:
1817:
1816:
1772:Global warming
1763:
1760:
1730:
1687:
1633:
1613:
1612:
1588:
1587:
1513:
1462:
1409:
1388:
1385:
1364:Should we add
1361:
1358:
1357:
1356:
1322:
1319:
1318:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1268:99.181.132.192
1260:
1259:
1258:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1254:
1253:
1252:
1251:
1250:
1249:
1248:
1247:
1179:141.218.36.152
1145:141.218.36.152
1114:141.218.36.152
1105:
1098:
1097:
1096:
1060:
1057:
1002:
1001:
1000:
999:
998:
997:
996:
995:
994:
993:
992:
991:
990:
989:
988:
987:
837:
834:
823:207.206.136.37
808:
794:
791:
790:
789:
754:
751:
723:
722:
721:
720:
699:
698:
683:
682:
681:
680:
679:
678:
658:
657:
656:
655:
654:
653:
652:
651:
648:
633:
622:
621:
620:
619:
618:
617:
609:
608:
607:
606:
543:
542:
537:
523:
522:
517:
505:For the first
503:
502:
501:
500:
499:
498:
497:
496:
463:
462:
461:
460:
423:
422:
396:
395:
394:
393:
392:
345:
344:
343:
342:
319:
313:
312:
308:
307:
306:
305:
295:
285:
284:
273:
272:
271:
270:
269:
268:
267:
266:
265:
242:
241:
240:
239:
238:
237:
236:
235:
209:
208:
207:
206:
205:
204:
194:Dragons flight
180:
179:
178:
177:
176:
175:
143:
142:
79:
73:
70:
69:
62:
52:
51:
34:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1849:
1840:
1839:
1835:
1831:
1827:
1815:
1811:
1807:
1803:
1797:
1792:
1791:
1790:
1789:
1785:
1781:
1777:
1773:
1767:
1728:
1727:
1723:
1719:
1715:
1711:
1685:
1684:
1680:
1676:
1672:
1668:
1631:
1630:
1626:
1622:
1618:
1611:
1608:
1607:
1606:
1605:
1601:
1597:
1593:
1586:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1580:
1576:
1572:
1568:
1518:| list2 = *
1511:
1510:
1506:
1502:
1498:
1494:
1460:
1459:
1455:
1451:
1447:
1443:
1407:
1406:
1402:
1398:
1394:
1384:
1382:
1378:
1374:
1373:83.228.165.59
1370:
1367:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1336:
1332:
1328:
1327:Alan Liefting
1314:
1310:
1306:
1302:
1298:
1297:
1296:
1292:
1288:
1287:99.190.82.125
1284:
1280:
1279:
1278:
1277:
1273:
1269:
1265:
1246:
1243:
1240:
1236:
1235:deforestation
1232:
1231:
1230:
1226:
1222:
1221:99.56.120.249
1218:
1214:
1210:
1209:
1208:
1205:
1202:
1198:
1194:
1193:Deforestation
1190:
1189:
1188:
1184:
1180:
1176:
1175:
1174:
1171:
1168:
1164:
1160:
1156:
1155:
1154:
1150:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1133:
1130:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1119:
1115:
1111:
1103:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1078:
1077:
1076:
1075:
1071:
1067:
1056:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1043:
1039:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1008:
986:
982:
978:
974:
973:civil conduct
970:
966:
965:
964:
960:
956:
952:
948:
947:
946:
942:
938:
933:
932:
931:
928:
925:
919:
915:
914:
913:
909:
905:
901:
897:
896:
895:
891:
887:
883:
882:
881:
877:
873:
869:
868:
867:
863:
859:
854:
853:
852:
851:
847:
843:
833:
832:
828:
824:
788:
784:
780:
776:
772:
771:
770:
769:
765:
761:
760:Zulu Papa 5 ā
750:
749:
745:
741:
736:
732:
728:
719:
715:
711:
707:
703:
702:
701:
700:
697:
693:
689:
685:
684:
677:
673:
669:
664:
663:
662:
661:
660:
659:
649:
646:
641:
637:
634:
630:
629:
628:
627:
626:
625:
624:
623:
615:
614:
613:
612:
611:
610:
605:
601:
597:
593:
589:
588:
587:
583:
579:
575:
570:
566:
562:
558:
557:
556:
555:
551:
547:
541:
538:
536:
533:
532:
531:
530:
529:
521:
518:
516:
513:
512:
511:
508:
495:
491:
487:
482:
481:
480:
477:
474:
469:
468:
467:
466:
465:
464:
459:
456:
453:
450:
447:
443:
439:
435:
431:
427:
426:
425:
424:
421:
417:
413:
409:
405:
401:
397:
391:
387:
383:
379:
376:
375:
374:
370:
366:
362:
361:
360:
356:
352:
347:
346:
340:
336:
332:
328:
324:
320:
317:
316:
315:
314:
310:
309:
304:
302:
296:
293:
289:
288:
287:
286:
282:
278:
274:
264:
260:
256:
252:
251:
250:
249:
248:
247:
246:
245:
244:
243:
234:
230:
226:
221:
217:
216:
215:
214:
213:
212:
211:
210:
203:
199:
195:
190:
186:
185:
184:
183:
182:
181:
174:
170:
166:
162:
161:
160:
156:
152:
147:
146:
145:
144:
141:
137:
133:
128:
127:
126:
125:
121:
117:
111:
109:
105:
100:
95:
93:
88:
84:
78:
67:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1823:
1771:
1768:
1765:
1707:
1664:
1614:
1589:
1564:
1493:undue weight
1489:
1438:
1390:
1371:
1363:
1324:
1305:97.87.29.188
1261:
1239:Arthur Rubin
1201:Arthur Rubin
1167:Arthur Rubin
1158:
1129:Arthur Rubin
1107:
1062:
1003:
921:
839:
796:
756:
724:
639:
635:
544:
525:
524:
504:
428:I think the
298:
291:
112:
103:
96:
81:
65:
43:
37:
1514:| group2 =
1013:Creationism
937:Smallman12q
904:Smallman12q
688:Smallman12q
632:interested;
434:Climategate
412:Smallman12q
404:Climategate
351:Smallman12q
335:climategate
281:Climategate
99:WP:NOT#NEWS
36:This is an
1731:| sect8 =
1112:removed?
1086:Teratornis
1066:Narayanese
1046:Teratornis
1017:Flat Earth
886:Geronimo20
858:Geronimo20
408:WP:NOTNEWS
1830:Dan Gluck
1796:Clayoquot
1776:Clayoquot
1714:Clayoquot
1671:Clayoquot
1617:Clayoquot
1592:Clayoquot
1567:Clayoquot
1497:Clayoquot
1446:Clayoquot
1393:Clayoquot
1299:Also see
935:articles.
856:truth? --
66:ArchiveĀ 2
60:ArchiveĀ 1
1784:contribs
1722:contribs
1679:contribs
1625:contribs
1600:contribs
1575:contribs
1505:contribs
1454:contribs
1401:contribs
1346:Frietjes
1335:contribs
1197:Land use
1163:Land use
1108:Why was
1104:removed?
1100:Why was
1025:Fox News
803:{{{1|}}}
799:selected
440:and the
1321:Too big
1213:baiting
1159:because
1027:or the
924:SPLETTE
900:WP:NPOV
836:Opinion
561:removed
321:If the
39:archive
1806:Jarble
1242:(talk)
1215:, see
1204:(talk)
1170:(talk)
1132:(talk)
740:ChrisO
668:EastTN
596:ChrisO
436:, the
255:ChrisO
225:EastTN
151:EastTN
116:EastTN
1262:(od)
473:BozMo
446:Ducha
16:<
1834:talk
1810:talk
1780:talk
1718:talk
1675:talk
1621:talk
1596:talk
1571:talk
1522:s *
1501:talk
1450:talk
1397:talk
1377:talk
1350:talk
1331:talk
1309:talk
1291:talk
1281:See
1272:talk
1225:talk
1183:talk
1157:OK,
1149:talk
1118:talk
1090:talk
1070:talk
1050:talk
1033:Ohio
981:talk
971:and
959:talk
955:Nsaa
941:talk
908:talk
890:talk
876:talk
862:talk
846:talk
827:talk
807:abbr
783:talk
779:Nsaa
764:talk
744:talk
733:and
714:talk
710:Nsaa
692:talk
672:talk
636:Most
600:talk
582:talk
578:Nsaa
550:talk
546:Nsaa
490:talk
476:talk
452:comb
449:mps_
432:AKA
416:talk
398:The
386:talk
369:talk
365:Nsaa
355:talk
279:(or
259:talk
229:talk
198:talk
169:talk
155:talk
136:talk
120:talk
1757:}}
1704:}}
1538:**
1534:**
1530:**
1526:**
1285:.
1266:.
1219:?
816:to
640:far
455:MFA
1836:)
1812:)
1804:.
1786:)
1782:|
1749:*
1745:*
1741:*
1724:)
1720:|
1700:*
1696:*
1692:*
1681:)
1677:|
1658:*
1654:*
1650:*
1646:*
1642:*
1638:*
1627:)
1623:|
1602:)
1598:|
1577:)
1573:|
1558:*
1554:*
1550:*
1546:*
1542:*
1507:)
1503:|
1483:*
1479:*
1471:*
1467:*
1463:*
1456:)
1452:|
1444:.
1432:*
1428:*
1424:*
1420:*
1416:*
1403:)
1399:|
1383:.
1379:)
1352:)
1337:)
1333:-
1311:)
1293:)
1274:)
1227:)
1185:)
1151:)
1120:)
1092:)
1072:)
1052:)
1019:,
1015:,
1009:)
983:)
961:)
943:)
927::]
910:)
892:)
878:)
864:)
848:)
829:)
785:)
766:)
746:)
716:)
694:)
674:)
602:)
584:)
552:)
526:*
492:)
471:--
418:)
388:)
371:)
357:)
337:,
333:,
329:,
283:).
261:)
231:)
200:)
171:)
157:)
138:)
122:)
104:be
1832:(
1808:(
1798::
1794:@
1778:(
1755:]
1751:]
1747:]
1743:]
1739:]
1733:]
1716:(
1702:]
1698:]
1694:]
1690:]
1673:(
1660:]
1656:]
1652:]
1648:]
1644:]
1640:]
1636:]
1619:(
1594:(
1569:(
1560:]
1556:]
1552:]
1548:]
1544:]
1540:]
1536:]
1532:]
1528:]
1524:]
1520:]
1516:]
1499:(
1485:]
1481:]
1477:]
1475:*
1473:]
1469:]
1465:]
1448:(
1434:]
1430:]
1426:]
1422:]
1418:]
1414:]
1395:(
1375:(
1348:(
1329:(
1307:(
1289:(
1270:(
1223:(
1181:(
1147:(
1116:(
1088:(
1068:(
1048:(
1007:ā
1005:(
979:(
957:(
939:(
906:(
888:(
874:(
860:(
844:(
825:(
809:n
781:(
762:(
742:(
712:(
690:(
670:(
598:(
580:(
548:(
488:(
414:(
402:(
384:(
367:(
353:(
294:.
257:(
227:(
196:(
167:(
153:(
134:(
118:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.