Knowledge

:Articles for deletion/Climate Assessment Uncertainty Characterizations - Knowledge

Source 📝

561:. This just isn't an encyclopaedia article. Re-written into more normal English, the article title would be "The characterisation of uncertainty in climate assessment" or "Uncertainty characterisation in climate assessment". On related article in the series on climate assessment might be "Model parameterisation in climate assessment". Another might be "Data processing in climate assessment". Interesting topics, perhaps, but not encyclopaedia articles. The family of "uncertainty characterisation" is even more vast. I don't think we should have articles on "Uncertainty characterisation in population estimates", or economic models, or population viability assessment, or "Uncertainty characterisation in estimates of Knowledge traffic". I don't think topics like these make for very good encyclopaedia articles. 927:
A “Good Cause” for deleting this article wasn’t sufficiently established with reasonable objections on the article talk or in this AfD. The article is objectively titled and notable because is crosses areas of climate assessment, applied psychology, and error reduction methods. It is supported with
976:
To address the concerns raised in this AfD process, I created a To Do list on the article talk page. I’ve performed over 45 article edits and 30 talk page comments (including ToDos). First, this article cannot be a POV fork: A) because the POV from what is forks was not discussed and B) no other
365:
this article seems to put forth a mostly novel topic. Even if there were citations, the research would still be synthesis of the sources, and unsuitable for Knowledge. The topic is an interesting one to me, and I'd actually enjoy seeing this work continued, but it is not appropriate for Knowledge,
1010:
In summary, I’ve improved the article and placed this AfD in a greater context. Given the contention for escalated disputes by long term editors in this project, the AfD reviewer(s) might be cautioned to seek a second opinion before acting. Wiki will be well served to keep this article.
266:
COI disagrees (William M. Connolley], the AFD complainer then drive by tags with no talk, and this AFD is unfounded in fact, the AFD should be dismissed. I request admin oversight for the possibly of disruptive editors who are not assuming good faith in the article.
450:
Yes indeed, and yet it was deleted (which is to say the issue wasn't the content per se (well, except it was a copyvio), but the appropriateness). The "theme" is the overwhemling importance (in ZP5's eyes) of Bayesian probability, which ZP5 has been pushing elsewhere
677:. Oh, wait... But what is the difference between "move to user area" and "delete"? And why "until it is expanded"? This article is already easily *long* enough to exist. Unless by "expand" you're referring to something other than length? Comprehensibility, perhaps? 170: 928:
the necessarily relevant primary and secondary sources which give a high degree of confidence for its inclusion. It is likely that this AfD may have been a drive-by incident or some form of project war. Wiki will be better to keep it.
285:
I'm an admin, even if I usually don't banter that around a lot. Good faith applies to editors, not to articles. And it is somewhat ironic that you complain about other peoples bad faith while demanding good faith yourself.
100: 95: 835:
per nom. The article cited in Nature is very interesting, but this does not constitute a Knowledge article, and there is no evidence of notability of the topic mentioned. Nor does the article say anything much.
758: 104: 87: 164: 493:
is important because wiki climate change articles have neglected it, for reasons I can not seem to find, but for the rash AFD underway. The topic presents a required NPOV, my views are for a NPOV.
857:
including much of the original essay just waiting to return after the AfD. Some of the small bit of information ZP has added during the AfD to try to save the article could have been added to
651:
Given his comment was within a few minutes I would have thought edit conflict and browser delay more likely. On the other hand I can understand why his patience is running a bit thin. --
722:- Second GoRight, move it to a userspace, get it cleaned up a bit, take on board the considerations of original research and so forth, and move it back to Wikispace once it's finished. 393:(preferrably speedy). Gobbledegook, and what can be interpreted looks like OR. The editor who created this does not understand the subject. Note that the same editor recently created 131: 904:
No I think that's too harsh. As I said, the Nature paper cited is interesting and it is possible that some of the ideas here could be re-used or that more refs will come up.
127: 516: 955:
chances for survival because its content fits in the middle of an overheated climate change project. There may be editors in the project who are acting as if
934:
but may have neglected pursuing less aggressive dispute resolution, to allow fair development, before nominating. (Post note: The nominator may have indicated
185: 152: 996:
Expand – When rewritten, the article was expanded. I have other material drafted and there are other relevant and specific sections that can be included.
1022: 946: 913: 897: 870: 845: 808: 786: 767: 745: 731: 708: 686: 658: 644: 625: 602: 580: 553: 531: 502: 465: 445: 406: 357: 340: 313: 295: 276: 238: 219: 69: 146: 977:
article covers the IPCC guidance methods for climate assessments as like this article does. The article content must stand on its own merits.
142: 91: 192: 394: 246:
I created the article after concessional talk on my talk page, where a prior version was speedy deleted. I suspected the AFD serves an
83: 75: 540:- an interesting essay, but any encyclopedic discussion of the uncertainties should be in the articles on the specific reports (e.g. 981:
Essay style – I restarted the article and included both primary and secondary source support from highly relevant reliable sources.
336: 250:
agenda that is not in wiki's best interests. The infant article has sufficient primary and secondary source support now added
17: 1001:
Disambiguation – This article crosses context with climate change, modeling and psychology. The psychology category was added.
158: 804: 736:
I see absolutely no value in userification here, and I think it would only lead to an MfD which would again end in deletion.
682: 461: 402: 215: 201:
This highly detailed essay on statistics based on a single source is totally unsuitable material for an encyclopedic article
858: 541: 440: 775: 589:- But move it under the user's area until it is expanded a bit. From the list of preceding commentators I see that 382: 332: 254:. It meets the necessary requirement for relevant material. There are abundant other articles on wiki for which 1036: 800: 678: 457: 398: 211: 36: 853:
The two keep !voters have suggested moving this to userspace. The whole article is already in Usertalk space at
1035:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
960: 353: 291: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
879: 854: 674: 567:
article and that is, as William says, it's gobbledegook. It also appears to be OR. In addition, Papa Zulu's
727: 704: 1006:
NPOV – I've done my best to keep the article balanced. Difficult to do further without specific comments.
878:
As a POV fork of both Global warming and Global warming controversy. Also delete userfied version at
370: 861:
as it is very specific to that particular report and not climate assessment uncertainty in general.
1018: 942: 822: 782: 621: 576: 498: 479: 349: 309: 287: 272: 234: 178: 952: 866: 723: 700: 206: 258:
it may cross reference, yet it takes on the very important Climate Assessment issues. Frankly
640: 598: 527: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
909: 890: 841: 435: 56: 431: 764: 655: 549: 796:- it would appear that ZP5 has given up any pretence of serious editing of this article 1014: 965:
with possible prejudice for stalking content they do not create or that fits their POV
938: 818: 778: 741: 617: 572: 494: 475: 378: 305: 301: 268: 230: 956: 862: 202: 62: 636: 632:
Yes, he is known for such antics but of course he whines when others do it to him,
594: 523: 328: 304:. My concerns are for the articles reasonable existence, without a disrutve AFD. 121: 986:
Wikify – Added other sections, sources, See Also. I am drafting a figure to add.
905: 884: 837: 50: 761: 652: 545: 991:
Cleanup – I corrected my typos and transpositions to the best of my ability.
963: 737: 374: 430:
to point to the source, that article was a verbatim copy of the sidebox at
331:
and quite frankly also rather unreadable. It should have been speedied. --
757:. Google's only return on this contorted expression is this article: 348:. Agree with KDP. It's unclear what this article aims to achieve. -- 571:
sounds to me like the typical justification used for a POVFORK.
1029:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
616:
Do not remove, this could be considered talk page edit waring.
300:
Thanks for your oversight. Good faith must certainly apply to
229:
POV fork of both Global warming and Global warming controversy
366:
and should be hosted elsewhere. 18:02, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
777:
for Climate Assessment Uncertainty. Scholar may be better.
962:
and disrupting other project articles space and balance
432:
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg2/index.php?idp=103
966: 935: 932: 797: 633: 614: 568: 455: 452: 117: 113: 109: 177: 474:
are first useless, and then when I try they are POV.
799:. Can we speedy it now to put it out of its misery? 544:). I don't see anything useful that can be merged. - 327:per nom and Hipocrite. The whole thing is largely 39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 1039:). No further edits should be made to this page. 517:list of Environment-related deletion discussions 395:Characterizing Uncertainty in Climate Assessment 84:Climate Assessment Uncertainty Characterizations 76:Climate Assessment Uncertainty Characterizations 470:WMC, make up your mind, you say my contributes 931:As well, the nominator has edited the article 191: 8: 511: 515:: This debate has been included in the 699:William, your insults are not helpful. 397:with similar themes which was speedied 7: 937:this article is a "content fork". 923:Summary Comment by Article Creator 420:Examples of Sources of Uncertainty 24: 613:WMC removed my peaceful comment 209:) 17:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 673:We might, perhaps, move it to 1: 1023:17:10, 13 December 2009 (UTC) 947:17:50, 14 December 2009 (UTC) 914:13:46, 11 December 2009 (UTC) 898:12:01, 11 December 2009 (UTC) 871:09:15, 11 December 2009 (UTC) 859:IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 569:response to William's comment 563:There's another problem with 542:IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 70:21:53, 14 December 2009 (UTC) 846:23:45, 8 December 2009 (UTC) 809:17:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC) 787:02:02, 8 December 2009 (UTC) 768:22:55, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 746:01:35, 8 December 2009 (UTC) 732:22:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 709:22:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 687:20:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 659:22:55, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 645:02:43, 8 December 2009 (UTC) 626:21:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 603:20:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 581:19:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 554:19:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 532:19:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 503:19:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 466:19:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 446:18:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 407:18:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 358:17:39, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 341:17:37, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 314:18:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 296:18:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 277:17:32, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 239:17:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 220:22:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 424:Uncertainty Source Examples 1056: 593:(a figure of speech). -- 1032:Please do not modify it. 880:User talk:ZuluPapa5/CAUC 855:User talk:ZuluPapa5/CAUC 675:User_talk:ZuluPapa5/CAUC 32:Please do not modify it. 426:and adding the section 418:: Except for rewording 262:an editor with admitted 882:to stop recreation. 801:William M. Connolley 679:William M. Connolley 458:William M. Connolley 399:William M. Connolley 244:Abstain with comment 212:William M. Connolley 972:Addressing Concerns 591:the gang's all here 44:The result was 895: 534: 520: 444: 387: 373:comment added by 329:original research 68: 1047: 1034: 951:The article had 896: 893: 889: 521: 438: 386: 367: 196: 195: 181: 125: 107: 65: 59: 49: 34: 1055: 1054: 1050: 1049: 1048: 1046: 1045: 1044: 1043: 1037:deletion review 1030: 925: 891: 883: 817:Gobbledygook!! 368: 333:Kim D. Petersen 252:(will add soon) 138: 98: 82: 79: 63: 57: 53: 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1053: 1051: 1042: 1041: 1008: 1007: 1003: 1002: 998: 997: 993: 992: 988: 987: 983: 982: 924: 921: 919: 917: 916: 901: 900: 873: 848: 829: 828: 827: 826: 812: 811: 790: 789: 771: 770: 755:Obvious delete 751: 750: 749: 748: 716: 715: 714: 713: 712: 711: 692: 691: 690: 689: 668: 667: 666: 665: 664: 663: 662: 661: 649: 648: 647: 606: 605: 584: 556: 535: 508: 507: 506: 505: 487: 486: 485: 484: 483: 410: 409: 388: 360: 350:Stephan Schulz 343: 321: 320: 319: 318: 317: 316: 288:Stephan Schulz 280: 279: 241: 199: 198: 135: 132:AfD statistics 78: 73: 51: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1052: 1040: 1038: 1033: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1020: 1016: 1015:Zulu Papa 5 ☆ 1012: 1005: 1004: 1000: 999: 995: 994: 990: 989: 985: 984: 980: 979: 978: 974: 973: 969: 967: 964: 961: 958: 954: 949: 948: 944: 940: 939:Zulu Papa 5 ☆ 936: 933: 929: 922: 920: 915: 911: 907: 903: 902: 899: 894: 888: 887: 881: 877: 874: 872: 868: 864: 860: 856: 852: 849: 847: 843: 839: 834: 831: 830: 824: 820: 819:Zulu Papa 5 ☆ 816: 815: 814: 813: 810: 806: 802: 798: 795: 792: 791: 788: 784: 780: 779:Zulu Papa 5 ☆ 776: 773: 772: 769: 766: 763: 759: 756: 753: 752: 747: 743: 739: 735: 734: 733: 729: 725: 721: 718: 717: 710: 706: 702: 698: 697: 696: 695: 694: 693: 688: 684: 680: 676: 672: 671: 670: 669: 660: 657: 654: 650: 646: 642: 638: 634: 631: 630: 629: 628: 627: 623: 619: 618:Zulu Papa 5 ☆ 615: 612: 611: 610: 609: 608: 607: 604: 600: 596: 592: 588: 585: 583: 582: 578: 574: 570: 566: 560: 557: 555: 551: 547: 543: 539: 536: 533: 529: 525: 518: 514: 510: 509: 504: 500: 496: 495:Zulu Papa 5 ☆ 492: 488: 481: 477: 476:Zulu Papa 5 ☆ 473: 469: 468: 467: 463: 459: 456: 453: 449: 448: 447: 442: 437: 433: 429: 425: 421: 417: 414: 413: 412: 411: 408: 404: 400: 396: 392: 389: 384: 380: 376: 372: 364: 361: 359: 355: 351: 347: 344: 342: 338: 334: 330: 326: 323: 322: 315: 311: 307: 306:Zulu Papa 5 ☆ 303: 299: 298: 297: 293: 289: 284: 283: 282: 281: 278: 274: 270: 269:Zulu Papa 5 ☆ 265: 261: 257: 253: 249: 245: 242: 240: 236: 232: 228: 225: 224: 223: 221: 217: 213: 210: 208: 204: 194: 190: 187: 184: 180: 176: 172: 169: 166: 163: 160: 157: 154: 151: 148: 144: 141: 140:Find sources: 136: 133: 129: 123: 119: 115: 111: 106: 102: 97: 93: 89: 85: 81: 80: 77: 74: 72: 71: 66: 60: 54: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 1031: 1028: 1013: 1009: 975: 971: 970: 950: 930: 926: 918: 885: 875: 850: 832: 793: 754: 719: 590: 586: 564: 562: 558: 537: 512: 490: 471: 427: 423: 419: 415: 390: 369:— Preceding 362: 345: 324: 263: 259: 255: 251: 247: 243: 226: 200: 188: 182: 174: 167: 161: 155: 149: 139: 45: 43: 31: 28: 953:WP:SNOWBALL 724:Alex Harvey 701:Alex Harvey 165:free images 489:The topic 428:References 58:have a cup 774:Try this 573:Guettarda 524:• Gene93k 264:s ed with 231:Hipocrite 863:Polargeo 472:comments 383:contribs 371:unsigned 203:Polargeo 128:View log 851:Comment 794:comment 637:GoRight 595:GoRight 416:Comment 302:WP:FIVE 171:WP refs 159:scholar 101:protect 96:history 957:WP:OWN 906:NBeale 886:Verbal 876:Delete 838:NBeale 833:Delete 559:Delete 538:Delete 391:Delete 363:Delete 346:Delete 325:Delete 227:Delete 143:Google 105:delete 52:Coffee 46:delete 762:BozMo 653:BozMo 546:Atmoz 491:theam 441:cont. 186:JSTOR 147:books 122:views 114:watch 110:links 16:< 1019:talk 959:see 943:talk 910:talk 892:chat 867:talk 842:talk 823:talk 805:talk 783:talk 765:talk 742:talk 738:Gigs 728:talk 720:Keep 705:talk 683:talk 656:talk 641:talk 635:. -- 622:talk 599:talk 587:Keep 577:talk 565:this 550:talk 528:talk 513:Note 499:talk 480:talk 462:talk 434:. - 403:talk 379:talk 375:Gigs 354:talk 337:talk 310:talk 292:talk 273:talk 235:talk 216:talk 207:talk 179:FENS 153:news 118:logs 92:talk 88:edit 522:-- 436:2/0 422:as 260:the 193:TWL 130:• 126:– ( 67:// 64:ark 61:// 55:// 1021:) 968:. 945:) 912:) 869:) 844:) 807:) 785:) 760:-- 744:) 730:) 707:) 685:) 643:) 624:) 601:) 579:) 552:) 530:) 519:. 501:) 464:) 454:, 405:) 385:) 381:• 356:) 339:) 312:) 294:) 286:-- 275:) 256:is 237:) 222:] 218:) 173:) 120:| 116:| 112:| 108:| 103:| 99:| 94:| 90:| 48:. 1017:( 941:( 908:( 865:( 840:( 825:) 821:( 803:( 781:( 740:( 726:( 703:( 681:( 639:( 620:( 597:( 575:( 548:( 526:( 497:( 482:) 478:( 460:( 443:) 439:( 401:( 377:( 352:( 335:( 308:( 290:( 271:( 248:d 233:( 214:( 205:( 197:) 189:· 183:· 175:· 168:· 162:· 156:· 150:· 145:( 137:( 134:) 124:) 86:(

Index

Knowledge:Articles for deletion
deletion review
Coffee
have a cup
ark
21:53, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Climate Assessment Uncertainty Characterizations
Climate Assessment Uncertainty Characterizations
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
AfD statistics
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL
Polargeo
talk

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.