User talk:Hailtomaximus
Welcome!
Hello, Hailtomaximus, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. 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
- How to write a great article
- 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!
Warning
Please be aware of WP:3RR William M. Connolley (talk) 18:22, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Your query.
I've responded to your query on my talk page. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 22:22, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Make positive contributions
It seems you have issues with the 1000 year temperature history. Please stop hounding other editors. Constructive moves would be to leave edit summaries, take it up on the article's talk page, or (better yet) update the plot to include the last four years. You are also probably editing the wrong article for what you are trying to say; the past 4 years are 0.4% of the coverage of the article.
For the scientific grounding: the current downturn in temperature has not yet left the realm of previous variability. Hopefully it does soon; I like my skiing. Otherwise, it still has only the potential to break the trend and is not yet very important. Awickert (talk) 06:00, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I've reverted your recent changes there. They aren't acceptable, but also they are in the wrong article: if you want to edit GW, do. They wouldn't be acceptable there either, though William M. Connolley (talk) 16:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
They are not acceptable ? Says who ? I provided peer reviewed scientific evidence showing that in fact, there is debate in the peer reviewed scientific journals. This page makes reference to AGW, so why cannot the Wiki community reference that ?
If its not acceptable to reference the debate on this page, then its not acceptable to reference AGW. 17:09, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- Re. [1]: Do you know what a peer-reviewed scientific journal is? --Stephan Schulz (talk) 17:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Blocked
I've blocked you for 24h for persistent vandalism of GW related articles William M. Connolley (talk) 14:01, 29 June 2009 (UTC)