Talk:Gwynne Dyer

message: The "Profile" link in the "External Links" section seems to be no longer valid; using it redirects to an error page. Pjh1953 (talk) 15:14, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Broken Link

message: Just wanted to stop by and mention his excellent cold war (1983ish) TV series "Notes on Nuclear War" which is available on Youtube.
2605:E000:6389:E400:F0B4:C106:5E09:F3CD (talk) 04:42, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes On Nuclear War

message: ==Untitled==
I have tagged this section for a NPOV violation. The term "Bush-apologists" clearly demonstrates a bias by the writer of the article. Please do what is necessary to clean this up. [unsigned]
:i have remove NPOV as i have edit and corrected the piece to included his views plus evidence to back up the statment.--Crt101 03:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's still biased- the only actual quotations from his work involve the Iraq War from a recent interview. The whole paragraph makes him sound like a stereotypical 'foreign liberal', which he is far from. The whole article is far from representative of his work- nothing is mentioned about his ideas on History and the Nature of Conflict. For instance, his theory that the modern Nation-State/Economic system is inherently unstable, leading to a cyclicy of large scale wars & economic boom and busts. CFLeon 01:36, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: I have tagged this section for a NPOV violation. The term "Bush-apologists" clearly demonstrates a bias by the writer of the article. Please do what is necessary to clean this up. [unsigned]
:i have remove NPOV as i have edit and corrected the piece to included his views plus evidence to back up the statment.--Crt101 03:37, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's still biased- the only actual quotations from his work involve the Iraq War from a recent interview. The whole paragraph makes him sound like a stereotypical 'foreign liberal', which he is far from. The whole article is far from representative of his work- nothing is mentioned about his ideas on History and the Nature of Conflict. For instance, his theory that the modern Nation-State/Economic system is inherently unstable, leading to a cyclicy of large scale wars & economic boom and busts. CFLeon 01:36, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Analysing Dyer's articles and drawing conclusions about his perspective on the world counts as original research (apart from being in grave danger of being POV). I've removed the section completely, since that was all it was. If someone can find a reference to an accredited person, or Dyer himself, describing his views, then that would be ok. Mention of praise/criticism, again with references to accredited sources (ie: not somebody's blog), would be good, too. -Kieran 21:40, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is to keep fact seperated from original research (read: conjecture). Stating that Dyer has admonished western governments for not supporting the Kyoto protocol is fine if he actually did that and the citation backs it up. Concluding thereby that he is a "strong supporter of the goals of the protocol" is original research. Much worse is drawing conclusions about how "right", "left", "conventional" or "unconventional" the man's thinking is. I think it could be possible to have a views section in the article, but it needs to stick to views which Dyer has explicitly stated holding in his articles or interviews. At a glance, that means stripping out about half the paragraph you've proposed. (This is not to say that his views on other topics could not be included.) -Kieran 23:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Views" section 

message: The non-sensical prattle about Commanders-in-Chief not being subject to physical harm struck me as irrelevant to the article, and also a veiled anti-Bush diatribe, so I removed it. I don't see what it has to do with Gwynne Dyer. It was not referenced in any event. The rest of the paragraph really should go - at best, it doesn't belong in the intro to the entire article.139.48.81.98 21:43, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure I would call it nonsensical, but it is certainly something that needs to be referenced, since it is an interpretation of the book. As such, I've removed it. A referenced statement by either Dr Dyer or a critic would be perfectly acceptable, however. -Kieran 14:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-Bush editorial 

message: Dear Mr. Dyer,
What you write in this article is probably true. Especially this is all you do; write. With this you show yourself as a "Prophet od Doom".
Almost a year ago I wrote to you and informed you about my discovery of solving the energy problem of the world; what's more: no more CO2 emission. 
You are a very influential person of this world. Probably you have access to the ears of the Powers that Be. If you would alert a few influential people, alerting them to the fact that such a solution exists, all it takes is to invest in some R&D exercises, who knows? Perhaps you would already be in a position to report something much better regarding the future of our world.
I am convinced that I have the right solution, yet I am unable to grab the attention of investors! 
I was hoping that you might be able to help me with some important connection.
Could you?
(Mr. ) Istvan Varfalvi Pr.Eng. (Ret.)
My email address is: zivar@iburs.co.za
16:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ref.:"Torrid heat awaits us" Your article in the (South African) The Citizen newspaper, 5 October 2009