User talk:DarknessShines2/Climate change exaggeration

Merge?
Let's actually follow normal WP policies and procedures - someone put a "merge" template up -- well, should it be merged or not? Clearly a simple redirect is not a merge, I would surmise. Collect (talk) 11:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I believe it has already been established, that this is a WP:POVFORK and needs to go. I suggest you start the merge, by identifying what statements of fact from this article would need to be included in the Climate change alarmism. Note also, that there is a very real danger that all of this content, including its version history will vanish, unless it hides itself behind a redirect.
 * As for the current status, I will not object to this being here for an other 24 hours. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 11:18, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The best thing would be to restore the redirect. As pointed out over at the arbcomm page, may as well move this to mainspace and let them fight it out among themselves is hardly an act of good faith - more like a deliberate attempt to provoke trouble William M. Connolley (talk) 12:01, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be speedy-able as recreation of deleted content? Articles for deletion/Climate change exaggeration Guettarda (talk) 12:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it's different enough from the deleted version that CSD#G4 doesn't apply. However it is blatantly a fork of Climate change alarmism. I'm going to userfy it back to where it came from, and those as wants can merge data from it at leisure (unless they'd prefer a new AFD debate which will surely conclude Merge). Rd232 talk 13:08, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe the redlink, (or redirect) should have been salted :-( Petri Krohn (talk)