Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gore climate model

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Speedy deleted as an attack on Al Gore's beliefs. - Richardcavell 01:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hoax? Initially I assumed it was a definite hoax, but he has written at least one book on climate change - so I'm prepare to give it the benefit of the doubt. TigerShark 23:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Zero Google hits. I saw Al Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth, yesterday and he made absolutely no claims for having his own model but clearly limited himself to the role of popularizing research results of his (Harvard) prof. The author needs to be forthcoming with references, which, I'm pretty sure, don't exist. Interlingua ^talk 23:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete 0 g-hits.--Andeh 23:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, it is not a notable climate model, if it exists at all. I suspect that it was intended to ridicule Gore because of this statement "...taking specific temperature or ice melt data over a short time frame and extrapolating that data to the future" and this statement "Mainly used in the Gore Scientific Method...". I think it is implied in the first statement that predictions extrapolated from data over a short time interval will be inaccurate. The second statement suggests that Gore is not using accepted scientific methods and there is no need for a model or theory to have a different type of scientific method unless it is nonsense. -- Kjkolb 23:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete as Kjkolb said, it's obviously mocking Gore's views ... ergo speedy delete as attack article BigDT 23:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete; attack page. --Allen 23:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete, thinly veiled attack page citing a nonexistant model --Gnewf 00:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, confirmed - 0 hits on google--Zandarx ^talk 00:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Although his movie and books are lacking in scientific accuracy, it's not his model. (And, yes, that's a point of view. If I were editing an article about the movie, I wouldn't say that in the article, but I would in the talk page.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete POV attempt to discredit global warming arguments by attributing them to him. Fan1967 01:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.