Talk:List of climate change controversies

message: I find it remarkable that this article lacks any information about the "climate wars" in Australia. If anything climate change is as politically divisive there as in the United States, meaning this article is also highly relevant to the country. Currently Australia is not mentioned once. There has been plenty written about this. E.g.
* https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01431-4
* https://news.sky.com/story/is-it-the-end-of-australias-climate-change-wars-12625302
* https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/the-recent-history-of-australias-climate-change-wars/ss9nn2yd6
* https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/jun/14/sky-news-australia-is-a-global-hub-for-climate-misinformation-report-says
Would be great to include this here. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 08:23, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I think in general this article needs to be less focused on a particular country or two and rather try to be more global. It is overly focused on the United States so I have moved some out to climate change in the United States. I've also moved the Australia content to climate change in Australia. EMsmile (talk) 10:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of Australia 

message: Today and yesterday, I did some culling and updating. I moved quite a bit of content to other Wikipedia articles where it fitted better, like public opinion on climate change. Also, I think we should not double up with content that is at scientific consensus on climate change. So I have removed that as well and replaced it with an excerpt. More culling and condensing needs to take place. See also merger discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_climate_change_policy_and_politics#Merge_Global_warming_controversy_into_here? EMsmile (talk) 10:20, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some culling and updating (ahead of potential merger) 

message: Hi User:Yopienso: I see you objected to me having removed some graphs from the "scientific consensus" section. The reason is that I am condensing this article back down to its core content: it should talk about any real or imagined controversies. It does not need to repeat the actual scientific consensus as that is in the other article. But I have now included two graphs via the excerpt function from scientific consensus on climate change. I think that is a good compromise. They are more up to date than the one that you had re-instated, and which I have now taken out again. I plan to also rework the section about "instrumental temperature record" and remove the graph that is currently there. Again, this could be replaced by an excerpt.
Overall, I think this article could work if it's refocused and renamed to climate change debates, like I suggested above. Or fully merged into climate change denial, see also above. EMsmile (talk) 10:04, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. Thanks for your politeness and care. With Thanksgiving in 4 days and moving cross-continent next week, I'm bowing out. Shouldn't have butted in. All the best, YoPienso (talk) 15:28, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation for removal of graphs 

message: There is now another merger discussion to merge this article into climate change denial, see here:  Talk:Climate change denial#Merge global warming controversy into here?.  An  alternative option could be to rework this article to become one that just lists past and ongoing debates (calling it purposefully debates not controversies). It could then be renamed "climate change debates" and contain quite a few excerpts. It could be a bit like a landing page to point people to the right sub-pages. A bit similar to climate change action (but longer). Thoughts? EMsmile (talk) 16:30, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I am still trying to reach consensus for the way forward. My move proposal below was closed and the result was "not moved". I copy below what RCraig09 wrote on the talk page at:  Talk:Climate change denial#Merge global warming controversy into here?. Is that the broad consensus? EMsmile (talk) 09:33, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  The above arguments that are on-point, favor dismantling the GWControversy article. The issue is that a "controversy" doesn't really exist, so the arguments that don't directly address this issue should not carry weight for consensus. The GWControversy article should be merged out of existence and replaced with a redirect to CCdenial. A fraction of what's still in the GWControversy article might be moved... somewhere, not necessarily here. —RCraig09 (talk) 23:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've now moved all content out and have begun to convert the article to a list type article. I think this might work. It's basically just a landing page to show people where they can look for more detail. Does that work for everyone? EMsmile (talk) 10:13, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible way forward

message: Many of the incoming wikilinks that can be found from "what links here" ought to be corrected and changed to link to climate change denial or to scientific consensus on climate change in some cases. This is a large, tedious task. If anyone is willing to help please go ahead. I've already corrected some of the redirects. The list of redirects is actually quite interesting, see here (what is a "warmist")?: 
* Climate change controversy (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Climate change debate (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Global Warming controversy (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Global Warming Controversy (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Global warming debate (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Global Warming Wager (redirect to section "Global warming and Pascal.27s Wager")  (links | edit)
* GW controversy (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Global warming dispute (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Global Warming Criticism (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Global warming hype (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Climate Change Exaggeration (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Climate change exaggeration (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Criticism of global warming (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Global warming controversy in the United States (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Brownlash (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Questioning Climate Change and Global Warming (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Climate change controversies (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Warmist (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Controversies about climate change (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Controversies surrounding climate change (redirect page)  (links | edit)
* Controversies surrounding global warming (redirect page)  (links | edit) EMsmile (talk) 21:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correcting the "what links here" 

message: The redirect Global warming wager has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Jalen Folf (talk) 21:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Global warming wager]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The redirect Brownlash has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Steel1943 (talk) 15:02, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Brownlash]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: I noticed that there are several users who have been quite active in discussions on this talk page, even though I do not usually see them participate in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Climate change. According to WP:CAN, it is perfectly acceptable to request comments on talk pages of related articles, so I would like to do that right now for two articles.
* Scientific consensus on climate change - a highly related article. I voiced several suggestions on the talk page there two weeks ago, yet nobody had commented on them yet in one way or another.
* Climate apocalypse - a controversial topic, and there has been a long-running merge discussion there (in addition to some other proposals) which hasn't really gone anywhere. Perhaps input from editors active here could help to resolve the question.
InformationToKnowledge (talk) 19:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comment regarding related articles