Some of the changes you are making to the Cato Institute article are a bit POV, and certainly unsourced. Could you offer a source for the following excerpt, especially the bolded portion?:
- In December 2003, panelists included Patrick Michaels, Robert Balling and John Christy, all of whom are leading scholars in the field.
For other, more factual claims, such as percentage of Institute funding from tobacco companies, could you cite a source? Dick Clark 19:33, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- All of those scholars are widely published in the climatology literature. Michaels, for instance, has published 13 papers in refereed journals in the past three years. I'd say that makes "leading scholars" less POV than "disagree with widely held views of climate change."
- You could look up Cato's annual budgets and compare them to the claims by critics of Cato's tobacco-company funding, and find that it's a very small percentage. I know of no published source that makes that comparison.
- DavidBoaz 19:55, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
- I am not claiming that they are not "leading scholars"--I am saying that we need a notable source for such a claim. I believe you that they are above reproach, but it isn't encyclopedic to just say it in the encyclopedic voice, rather than in an excerpt from or summary of a notable, verifiable source (See Wikipedia:No Original Research, Wikipedia:Verifiability, and Wikipedia:Citing sources). Dick Clark 20:02, 27 January 2006 (UTC)