User talk:Mustanggt5000

Comment

Hi. I had to revert your edits because they do not meet our standards of having a a neutral point of view. If you believe that what you inserted is true, then you must provide reliable sources for it. Thanks. ♪Tempo di Valse ♪ 16:04, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources and this, they say that we can not accept blogs or YouTube (or other video sharing sites) as reliable sources. "Reliable sources" are third-party and published sources, such as the BBC, CNN, Enyclopedia Britannica, etc. One of your sources provided appears to be YouTube or something similar, and the others seems to be a blog. Neither can be accepted by Wikipedia. If you want more help on this, or to get opinions of others, I suggest you drop a line at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) asking whether others think the sources you provided me with are reliable. Best regards, ♪Tempo di Valse ♪ 16:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then we will sadly not be able to accept your sources, as they violate the no original research and reliable sources policies. Sorry. Best regards, ♪Tempo di Valse ♪ 16:55, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at the article in question, Internet2, and agree that it is a bit biased. I have brought it to the attention of other editors, someone should be along in a while to clean it up. However, please understand that it is not appropriate to insert sentences and paragraphs in ALL CAPS with several exclamation marks into articles -- that is blatantly against our policy, and is why your edit was removed. Also note that Wikipedia documents only what is documented by outside sources. We do not necessarily document the truth. This is the way Wikipedia works, I am afraid, and nothing can really be done to change it. Best regards, ♪Tempo di Valse ♪ 19:48, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Hi there. Actually, the sunspot theory you mentioned on my talk page is already covered in several of our articles, such as this one. I think it might be more appropriate not to add it to the main Global warming article, as that article mainly focuses on the effects of global warming, not its causes. tempodivalse [☎] 01:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can easily add the info yourself if you think it is suitable, just make a separate subsection in the "Scientific" section of Global warming controversy. Just make sure to put <ref>(add reference here)</ref> at the end of it, so that the statement can be verified. Also, please read over Wikipedia:Reliable sources to check what types of references Wikipedia accepts. I'm busy right now, so I can't add it myself. Hope this helps, tempodivalse [☎] 02:59, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]