Diskussion:Climategate

Hi, don't you know this rule?: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid#Controversy_and_scandal

Consider changing the title. postscript: I cannot understand your language.--121.113.81.188 23. dec 2009, 06:55 (CET)

The term 'Climategate' is already widely used. Google returns more than 2.4 million hits (versus 4930 hits on 'Climatic Research Unit hacking incident'). Trying to rename it would IMHO be enterpreted as manipulation of the article as part of some cover-up, or somebody trying to rewrite history. All danish newspapers refer to the incident as 'ClimateGate'. The name returns more than 400.000 hits in danish on google.dk. So the public has already named the incident, Wikipedia seems to be the last 'media' still in denial of this fact. (Skrev 78.156.214.134 (diskussion • bidrag) . Husk at signere dine indlæg.)

Hi, Of course climategate is the name everyone knows this by (even those who refuse to call it climategate) - and well done for the effort, what I could understand appears far less biased than the English version! However I noticed you talked about "hvor hackere offentliggjorde e-mails", as the Sir Muir Russell inquiry acknowledged, the emails may easily have been released by an insider. May I also suggest you take a look at the Norwegian version [1] to help fill it out.85.211.166.99 14. jul 2010, 12:49 (CEST)