Talk:Patrick Moore (environmentalist)/archive
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] POV
Is this the most blatantly POV article on the site, or is it me. I hardly think that an unmodified Disinfopedia article makes for a good Wiki article. It needs a serious rewrite. TDC 21:36, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)
- It's you ;) The article actually presents a lot of information. Please discuss before making such a big change, especially when you are deleting. I also happen to think it's an excellent article about a very interesting environmentalist, not of tree hugging ilk. In Moore's own words, he left Greenpeace and became a consultant because he was tired of the politics of confrontation. Vincent 23:53, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-
- With all due respect, after reading the article an individual would likely come away with the feeling that Moore has simply sold out to industry and turned into nuckle dragging fascist (well perhaps an overstatement), but you get the drift. While I do not deny that there is a great deal of information here and while I will accept at face value the statements given, the organization of these facts is very much not in line with WIKI NPOV http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_view.
-
- A quick examples. One paragaph explaining Moore's views on GM foods and 5 paragraphs refuting his claims? Is this and articel on GM foods, or Patrick Moore.
-
- This article is more of a hitpiece on Moore than an encyclopedia entry. I do agree that I should have talked about the changes before making them, but the article does need serious work and it has not had much activity. TDC 05:16, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)
-
-
- I rather like Moore myself and didn't feel the original article was an attack on him, but maybe you're right after all. And of course I agree you're entitled to do a major edit, it's wiki afterall, and maybe I overreacted because it came without a warning. (OK, OK, so I'm warned now.) Cheers Vincent 05:54, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-
[edit] Removed Information?
Why were the following lines removed from the article?:
- Ford Foundation Fellowship, 1969-1972
- Ph.D. in Ecology, Institute of Resource Ecology, University of British Columbia, 1972
- Honours B.Sc. in Forest Biology, University of British Columbia
are they factually inaccurate? Or did someone just arbitrarily decide that they shouldn't be included in the article? -GrantNeufeld 16:53, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] POV
The article as it stands today looks like PR for Dr. Moore. The article describes him as a great enviromentalist, and completely fails to mention that most enviromentalists regard him as an absolute traitor an apologist of the timber industry, for which he works. —(unattributed comment by 151.200.61.245 (Talk | contribs)
- Are there any citations to back up these accusations? —GrantNeufeld 18:47, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- what do you mean by environmentalist? If you mean left wing, anti-globalisation, anti-nuclear, anti-this, anti-that, anti-whatever, then you're correct. But I think I'm safe in saying most environmentalists respect his views as much as any other learned spokesperson on Moore's pet topics, even if though take issue with a number of his arguements. Frade 07:47, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Language lifted from Greenspirit site
Some of the language seems to be lifted from Moore's organization's website. For example, this line on the site:
"1990 - 1994: Founder and Chairman of the B.C. Carbon Project, an industry - government - environmental group working to achieve a common understanding of the carbon budget and the implications of global climate change for B.C."
becomes, in the wikipedia article,
"In 1990, Dr. Moore founded and chaired the BC Carbon Project, a group that worked to develop a common understanding of climate change."
Also of note, that description is rather alarmingly non-descriptive. And aren't organizations named using the word Carbon usually run by the coal industry?
Tlogmer 06:28, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
- Isn't carbon part of Carbon dioxide? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard that played some kind of a role in climate change. -Iopq 08:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Basics
This article does not fit the standards of a Wikipedia article at all. I'm not talking about controversial facts, but lacking non controversial facts, and the outer shape of this article. Clearly Dr. Moore must have been born on some date and in some place, so why not start with this (since I do not have these facts, someone else will). If the article starts as usual it could very well soon be acceptable. Also add some mor biographical data. After all this is an article concerning a person and not so much any relationship to Greenpeace or any controverstities.
[edit] AfD?
AfD boilerplate has been added to this page, but I can't find any trace of the actual AfD. The link to "this article's entry" is non-existent (and the AfD boilerplate was placed on this page by an anonymous user, which may further draw it into question). Is there an actual AfD intended for this article, or can we remove the boilerplate? —GrantNeufeld 20:05, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
