Thursday, February 25, 2010

Appropriate editorial emphasis of the lead Global Warming article in Wikipedia gotten a bit involved in trying to assist in bringing some more collegial editing to the Global warming and Climate Change areas within wikipedia

One thing that has come up is what the right emphasis for the lead article ought to be... should it be primarily science or should it be on more than just that, such as sociopolitical and economic considerations as well, and how much of which. My talk page has been abuzz with this and other GW related topics (for example see Primary focus (a permanent link once archived will be in archive 63)

I decided to see what Britannica had to say as a possible guide to the right emphasis...
here is what I found... Read it for yourself. I confess I found it a bit harder to follow what their lead was but they do seem to lead with the science. However there is a fair bit of emphasis given to other matters as well. So perhaps not a perfect test but interesting.

Enhanced by Zemanta


MessedRocker said...

I know from my experience that you're typically a voice of reason, so I know you are suited for the job of bringing collegiality to the global warming article and I wish you luck.

Lar said...

That never happened... I have greatly reduced my involvement in Wikipedia although I do still do the occasional edit