Talk:Andrew Montford

Weird ref issue
Weird ref issue this ref is from the lede, so it is ref1

This ref is in Climate change advocacy section but also says it`s ref1 and points to the same article as the first ref? In a Timesonline live special which featured, the times environment editor Ben Webster, Andrew Montford,  and Bob Ward of the  Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment. He said in the debate "OK, it's pretty clear that the three investigations are not intended to get at the truth. All of the panels have had highly questionable memberships and remits that divert them away from the issues. There are some really, really serious allegations that have been ignored by both the panels that have reported so far."

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Marknutley (talk • contribs) 2010-04-15T17:15:33

Use of "climate skeptic" as label
The term "climate skeptic" can have very different meanings. It can either refer to climate change denial or scientific skepticism. In the interest of clarity, the link should be to one or the other of these, and not to global warming controversy. IHaveAMastersDegree (talk) 19:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)


 * You might wish to reread some of the relevant Wikipedia policies at this point. The statement is sourced to an article by Ben Webster; unfortunately the original is behind a paywall, but I have found what claims to be a copy at . The key phrase here is "Andrew Montford, a climate-change sceptic who writes the widely-read Bishop Hill blog, said that Lord Oxburgh had a 'direct financial interest in the outcome' of his inquiry.".  He never uses the words "deny", "denial", or "denier".  As such it seems that you are breaking WP:SYNTH.  If you believe that the page global warming controversy is not appropriate, then the neatest solution would simply be to unlink the phrase: it is better that a phrase not be linked than that bit be linked inappropriately.


 * You might also wish to review Help:Minor edit, and in partcular the text "A check to the minor edit box signifies that only superficial differences exist between the current and previous versions. Examples include typographical corrections, formatting and presentational changes, and rearrangements of text without modification of its content. A minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute." Regards, Jonathan A Jones (talk) 09:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for catching this, Prof. Jones. Always a pleasure to see your contributions here. Best, for 2014, Pete Tillman (talk) 01:43, 31 December 2013 (UTC), Professional geologist, amateur climatologist


 * The statement that Bishop Hill is a "blog for climate-change sceptics" is SYNTH. The cited article by Ben Webster never says that.  Webster in fact only refers to the Blog with this sentence: "Andrew Montford, a climate-change sceptic who writes the widely-read Bishop Hill blog..."  The reference is behind a paywall but appears to be reproduced here.  A more direct citation for Bishop Hill and more neutral description of Montford's views would be a link to the blog itself and to the author's self-description.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by IHaveAMastersDegree (talk • contribs) 18:14, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Up to a point: be creful with your use of WP:PRIMARY sources. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 18:49, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


 * OK point taken. Thanks.  IHaveAMastersDegree (talk) 20:19, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Update: IHaveAMastersDegree has now been blocked. Peter Gulutzan (talk) 17:23, 19 January 2014 (UTC)


 * It might be best if the source were changed to one that is not behind a paywall. I would recommend this Washington Post story which explicitly categorizes Bishop Hill (in the headline) as "deniers". It is clear, even 5 years ago, that journalists considered "climate sceptic" to be a euphemism for "climate change deniers". IHaveAMastersDegree (talk) 15:58, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


 * That headline says "BBC admonished for giving climate change deniers equal air time" but the actual article says "Andrew Montford, who runs the Bishop Hill climate sceptic blog". So no. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 17:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


 * When a newspaper story uses "climate change denier" and "climate sceptic" interchangeably, they are saying that it means exactly the same thing. But as we all know, the term "sceptic" in this context is completely ambiguous. Wikipedia pages should use the more straightforward and less ambiguous term when given the choice, to avoid confusion. IHaveAMastersDegree (talk) 18:04, 23 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Given the lack of objections to the previous comment, I have made minor changes consistent with it. IHaveAMastersDegree (talk) 22:36, 24 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Your proposal is classic WP:SYN so I have reverted it. You need clear sources which actually directly support the text you wish to include. This is doubly true in a BLP, and triply true to say something in Wikipedia's own voice rather than as a view ascribed to others. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 08:36, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Andrew Montford. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051217082209/http://www.icas.org.uk:80/Directory/membyname.asp?alpha=M to http://www.icas.org.uk/directory/membyname.asp?Alpha=M&PageNo=131
 * Added tag to http://www.spectator.co.uk/print/politics/all/5749853/the-global-warming-guerrillas.thtml
 * Added tag to http://www.spectator.co.uk/print/politics/all/5749853/the-global-warming-guerrillas.thtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101021073631/http://www.discoverynews.org:80/2010/02/gilder_reviews_hockey_stick_il032261.php to http://www.discoverynews.org/2010/02/gilder_reviews_hockey_stick_il032261.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100625043822/http://www.spiked-online.com:80/index.php/debates/copenhagen_article/9056 to http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/debates/copenhagen_article/9056/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Andrew Montford. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://beta.thecourier.co.uk/Living/Outdoors/article/348/bishop-hill-the-blogger-putting-climate-science-to-test.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100713101752/http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/07/09/checking-the-hockey-team/ to http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/07/09/checking-the-hockey-team/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/debates/copenhagen_article/9056

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:04, 5 July 2017 (UTC)