Talk:Ray Evans (Australian businessman)

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Hob Gadling in topic Global warming skepticism NPOV problem
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ray Evans (Australian businessman). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:42, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Global warming skepticism NPOV problem

edit
  • WP:FRINGE: Fringe views of those better known for other achievements or incidents should not be given undue prominence, especially when these views are incidental to their fame.
  • WP:BLP: Do not give disproportionate space to particular viewpoints
  • WP:NPOV: While pseudoscience may in some cases be significant to an article, it should not obfuscate the description of the mainstream views of the scientific community. Any inclusion of pseudoscientific views should not give them undue weight. The pseudoscientific view should be clearly described as such. An explanation of how scientists have reacted to pseudoscientific theories should be prominently included.

The article tells us what this guy believes about climatology, but no word that everything he believes about it is wrong. His anti-science propaganda quotes need to be either deleted or balanced by mainstream refutations. --Hob Gadling (talk) 09:36, 26 March 2022 (UTC)Reply