User talk:Jmurphy914

Talk:List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming

Please stop using talk pages such as Talk:List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article; not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. --Ronz (talk) 00:08, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please review WP:TALK and WP:BLP concerning the use of talk pages. --Ronz (talk) 00:11, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And note the article, including its talk page, is under sanctions, and that violating them can result in a block or ban. --Ronz (talk) 02:29, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to debate with people about global warming find a forum to do that. Article talk pages are not forums. They are specifically for tailoring aspects of an article IRWolfie- (talk) 09:51, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Catalytic converters and CO2

Hi Jim! You asked "if the US government believes that CO2 is really a problem, then why hasn't it banned the use of the catalytic converter? Every car manufactured since the 80s has one, and it turns a cars exhaust into pure CO2, oxides of nitrogen and water? (I am an ASE Certified Mechanic. This is a fact that the ASE puts on their certification tests for emissions)". The catalytic converter in cars is used for three things: It reduces nitrogen oxides back to nitrogen, and it uses the available oxygen to convert CO and unburned hydrocarbons into CO2 and water. CO is acutely poisonous. So are many hydrocarbons. Both also are converted to CO2 and water in relatively short time (days) in the atmosphere. Also, while they are produced in harmful concentrations (especially for long-term exposure), most of the fuel is, of course, burned in the engine (that's what provides the power), so the overall amounts of incompletely oxidized fuel is tiny for any reasonably well-tuned engine. Use of the catalytic converter does not increase overall CO2 emissions of an engine, it only converts some of a more harmful exhaust components to CO2 and water a bit earlier. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 02:36, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2013

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Far-right politics. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Saddhiyama (talk) 21:57, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the page itself is biased and opinions. "far right politics"??? its someone's opinion and you allow it only because you agree with their political ideology!

Administrators' noticeboard discussion

See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents § Jmurphy914. Kleinpecan (talk) 17:14, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI about possible legal threat

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 08:56, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only warning

Personal attacks, such as this, are not allowed here. Bishonen | tålk 14:06, 17 November 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Important information

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}} on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. Bishonen | tålk 15:07, 17 November 2022 (UTC).[reply]

November 2022

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Talk:Censorship by Google. A bit late but you should know about this. Doug Weller talk 16:02, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Viriditas. I noticed that you made a comment on the page Talk:Far-left politics that didn't seem very civil, so it may have been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 09:36, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recent difficulty

I agree with you that Wikipedia is overrun by people who apply all sorts of things in a left-wing way. I further agree that it's frustrating to deal with. But . . .

What you need to realize is that it's not going to get better. Calling it out explicitly is not going to help and is likely only to get you blocked. I make no value judgment on this. I write merely to help you recognize the reality of it.

When people complain about WP:NPA, WP:NICE, or WP:EW, the way to remain on the project is to listen to them. You will still find yourself on the losing end of a lot of disputes. When that happens, the way forward is to keep a sense of humor about it, and not let it get to you too much. "Embrace the suck" as they say in the military. Eventually, you will learn where you may be able to impact a dispute, and where it's hopeless, to the point where bothering to try is not worth the effort.

Learning to do all of that isn't easy. But if you can learn it, you may find that you can have an impact in certain areas. Good luck. Adoring nanny (talk) 16:54, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh the irony. Or perhaps you both have missed the problems we have with far right editors. But Adoring nanny's advice is good. Doug Weller talk 17:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reality has a liberal bias. Viriditas (talk) 21:36, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]