Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Gore Effect
I saw this article because it was briefly linked in Global warming controversy. It does not belong there, as it is anecdotal at best. Unlike some of the flawed theories at that page, the Gore Effect, in the words of Wolfgang Pauli, "is not even wrong!". However, while it fails as science, it doesn't purport to be science, and is correctly described as a humorous term. The term is ubiquitous, occurring in enough |reliable sources that it is very plausible an individual might turn to Wikipedia to learn more about it. I feel strongly that there should be an article about the Gore effect—I'm less strongly convinced '''this''' is the article. But we don't generally delete articles that simply need some improvement to meet our standards. It would help immensely if, for example, the http://www.cjr.org/the_observatory/global_cooling_confused_covera.php?page=all Columbia Journalism Review article pointing out that it doesn't meet the burden of scientific proof. The article feels unbalanced - quite a number of references talking about the anecdotes, not many challenging it. Surely there are some other than the CJR
— User:Sphilbrick, 11:26, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)