Talk:Richard Parncutt

[Untitled]

Under "What Wikipedia is not" we read that Wikipedia is not a newspaper (Wikipedia should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories) and Wikipedia is not a battleground (Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, carry on ideological battles, or nurture prejudice, hatred, or fear).

Recent activity on this page seems to contradict those principles. According to my research, Parncutt has completely withdrawn his infamous text. Within that text he already stated "I have always been opposed to the death penalty in all cases" and "Please note that I am not directly suggesting that the threat of execution be carried out. I am simply presenting a logical argument"

On this basis have tried to create a more balanced view of this recent incident in a way that will also be interesting and relevant for readers next month and next year. I have deleted references to reports that seem exaggerated or sensational, in the style of a newspaper. For example I deleted the following text about the Global Wealth Tax petition: "By end of 2012 it had only 203 supporters of the 1,000,000 that are needed".

I kindly ask other users to respect Wiki guidelines and to make only small changes to the existing text that are consistent with those guidelines. Eagles369 (talk) 12:02, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Good that you have found the WP principles. So why are you deleting references?

The articel was in no way ideologically biased or unfair before your edits. Mr. Parncutt's pamphlet, which he has published on the website of his institute at the University of Graz on 25 Oct 2012, and which was available there for two months until 24 Dec 2012, was mentioned here in a neutral way, not in lurid illustration. In this pamphlet he demands the death penalty for "global warming deniers" if they do not withdraw, and linked a list of appropriate candidates.

I completely agree with you that this pamphlet carries on ideological battles, hatred and fear, but this text is not from WP, it is just cited here. The issue is relevant for a couple of reasons. It has got wide public attention in Austrian newspapers and broadcasting as well as internationally, the University of Graz has issued a statement on the front page of their website where they entirely reject the "inhuman" statements of Parncutt, and the State Attorney of the Austrian province of Styria has started investigations on the matter of hate-crime. How could this not be relevant in an article of an Austrian university professor?

Parncutt demands punishment, even the death penalty, for scientists who publish research that in Parncutt's opinion is wrong. This is a rather unusual attitute towards science for a professor who claims to be "in the editorial boards of all leading journals" in his research area (see here). It raises the question, if dissenting scientific opinions in his area may have any chance to be ever published. How could this ever be NOT relevant for a WP article of a scientist?--Wikiwatchers (talk) 13:27, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of academic content

Parncutt is an academic. People are mainly interested in his research and publications. Why have these been deleted? Seems like a wiki-war to me. If you go to google scholar and enter "parncutt" you will see that hundreds of people are citing his research. Wiki should be informative about information that many people find interesting. Ai020304 (talk) 10:50, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you have suddenly appeared just for this article - if you have a connection with the subject see WP:COI. His notability for our purposes seems to stem mainly from his controversial statement, but the main reason it was removed (by me) was that it read more like something he would have written or an essay on his work rather than reflecting what reliable and independent sources have said about this work. Random lists of publications are also not appropriate. See also WP:NOR. He himself would be a reliable source for relevant articles of course. Dougweller (talk) 12:47, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Dougweller's argument is entirely to the point. If "hundreds of people are citing his research" (Ai020304's wording), then the presentation of Parncutt's research should not read -- as it did -- like a self-approving summary, but should indeed reflect "what reliable and independent sources have said about this work". This was not at all the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.170.112.245 (talk) 15:30, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Richard Parncutt

Cyberbot II has detected links on Richard Parncutt which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• https://www.change.org/p/we-need-a-global-wealth-tax

  Triggered by \bchange\.org\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:18, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Richard Parncutt

Cyberbot II has detected links on Richard Parncutt which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• https://www.change.org/p/we-need-a-global-wealth-tax

  Triggered by \bchange\.org\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:53, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Richard Parncutt

Cyberbot II has detected links on Richard Parncutt which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• https://www.change.org/p/we-need-a-global-wealth-tax

  Triggered by \bchange\.org\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:46, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Needs trimming

In my view, en.WP's preference would be to significantly trim back the amount of text (and weight) given over to "Death penalty" and "Taxation and welfare". Perhaps a single section—"Poltical activities" of three or four sentences—would be more appropriate. Tony (talk) 08:36, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

I disagree; as pointed out above, "his notability for our purposes seems to stem mainly from his controversial statement" on the death penalty. The heading "climate denial" is misleading; the controversy wasn't about climate denial, but about his views on the death penalty for the Pope and others. Third party coverage of the affair wasn't about climate denial, the disciplinary action brought against him by his university wasn't about climate denial, and I'm sure both the Pope, his university and all editors here agree that climate denial is a horrible thing. As it stands the article is an autobiography, written by himself (IP addresses from Graz), that presents his primary claim to fame in a highly misleading, factually incorrect and self-serving light, and portrays his critics as climate deniers when they're not (or at least: not the ones we take seriously, such as the reliable sources that covered the incident or his university) and when climate denial was never even the issue. --Tataral (talk) 17:06, 20 May 2020 (UTC)