User talk:Mcoers

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Mcoers, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Talk:Global warming. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Nsaa (talk) 00:08, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article probation notice

Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Global warming, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:00, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From Talk:Global warming

Since this doesn't concern the article at all, I've decided to copy it, and my response, here:

Regarding the sockish smell... TS, you throw these insults at people, but then delete any pushback. Perhaps you should consider your own behavior. I noticed that you have been reprimanded many times by other editors for being argumentative and that you have been blocked perhaps 20 times for abusing your power to block other editors. I think you should honor your own words and stop editing this article. Does anyone else agree? Mcoers (talk) 18:24, 16 February 2010 (UTC)mcoers[reply]

You may not be aware of this, but the global warming articles have been visited for some years now by a permanently banned but still rather determined troll and sock puppeteer known as scibaby. That was the sock to which I referred. You should know better than to launch personal attacks on other editors. And finally, beware of taking statements of intent as a kind of promise. It is a volunteer's prerogative to decide what he does with his time. --TS 23:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you understand that the global warming article is a very important part of our science coverage, so letting the talk page become filled up with interpersonal bickering is not on. However I thought it worth trying to explain to you why comments like this are unwelcome anywhere on Wikipedia. --TS 23:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mcoers, just wanted to voice my support for your approach to this issue. I've extensively heard many discussions about this issue on radio and television over the last few years, and feel that they should be more of a skeptical take towards this whole global warming thing. It really became prominent, with the documentary, The Great Global Warming Swindle, which was produced by Martin Durkin. It was aired on the ABC in Australia, and when interviewed by Tony Jones, the pour guy never had a chance to reply back properly. Yes, I believe many of these scientists are paid by governments and organisations to pump out more theories on global warming, so these myth makers can keep their jobs. Global warming was already around in the medieval ages, a time when there were no cars, oil, nor industry. I just wonder how long somebody can get more of a neutral grip on this stuff? Whitewater111 (talk) 00:37, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:44, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

really appreciate your comments on the gw article. there is no point in arguing with them. time will change that view, when they finally notice that a sun's fart makes more change to earth's atm than all human-produced co2. in the meantime, don't bother. i am a biology student and really support the sceptic point of view on gw. Jamil Soni Neto (talk) 15:04, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was kind of shocked to find the GW article oriented as it was; personally I will reserve judgement on the issue altogether until I have seen more facts. I had assumed that Wikipedia may be a good place to start my digging, but it appears that this is not the case, rather the article reads like a Global Warming sales pitch. Keep fighting the good fight; your posts on the talk page are coming from the right place. Cheers, Kevin Holzer (talk) 21:05, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]