This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of veganism and vegetarianism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veganism and VegetarianismWikipedia:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismTemplate:WikiProject Veganism and VegetarianismVeganism and Vegetarianism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Google, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Google and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GoogleWikipedia:WikiProject GoogleTemplate:WikiProject GoogleGoogle articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Private Equity Task Force, a collaborative effort to improve the depth of quality and coverage of the private equity and venture capital industry and related topics in Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
This task force seeks to collaborate with the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Early Web History, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Early Web HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Early Web HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Early Web HistoryEarly Web History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject MTSU, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.MTSUWikipedia:WikiProject MTSUTemplate:WikiProject MTSUMTSU articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy articles
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.
Relationship to Mississippi Candidate
This content seems out of place in an article on the former Vice President. Any relationship is disputed and, even if the possible connection if of interest, it belongs in an article on the Mississippi politician. There are many people with the name Gore and the article should not attempt to imply or deny a connection with each. Nynative (talk) 15:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that, without some better sourcing, another candidate named "Al Gore" from 11 years ago is failing the WP:10YT. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:27, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Allegations of aggrandizement...too much?
Hello,
I believe there is undue weight in this article given to "allegations of aggrandizement". An ENTIRE HEADING? Really? It particularly seems excessive because there are only three citations in this heading. I think it should be trimmed down to just a single paragraph and moved elsewhere in the article.
Support trimming Allegations of aggrandizement section
Agreed if you will not complain about an additional paragraph under Criticism, thus: Appearing at the Sundance Film Festival in 2006 during the premiere of "An Inconvenient Truth," Gore said unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases are taken within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return, calling the situation "a true planetary emergency." It is not known if he has publicly updated that prediction nor detailed what drastic measures were taken to delay this so-called point of no return. 76.92.179.85 (talk) 06:00, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: given the GA status of the article, I already asked the IP to seek consensus for the removal, but since they reverted the reply and I don't feel like edit warring with them, I'll leave it to the next editor to decide. M.Bitton (talk) 14:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As mentioned in my reply before, I restored the request back to unanswered due to an unsatisfactory response. That's completely ridiculous, and not a substantive response to anything I said. I am seeking consensus VIA the template. In what way is that problematic? (...) your answer is completely insufficient in every regard.92.40.212.153 (talk) 14:33, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. Edit request templates are only for asking someone with the technical ability to do so to implement the request, not simply to draw attention to a discussion. Tollens (talk) 17:21, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I never said I was going to draw attention to a discussion. 92.40.212.159 (talk) 17:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What, then, is "seeking consensus VIA the template" intended to mean? Tollens (talk) 17:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am requesting that an editor with the ability to do so delete the paragraph about Gore's prior opposition to gay marriage. I have provided the reasonable clarification, which you may read at your leisure. 92.40.212.159 (talk) 17:57, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but they will only do so if consensus has been demonstrated, which it has not. Tollens (talk) 17:58, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ergo, we return back to the seeking consensus VIA the template quotation. Going round in circles isn't a beneficial use of either our time, or the encyclopædia's. 92.40.212.159 (talk) 18:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
None of these answers have provided sufficient clarification as to why the request is being declined. Please do not mark as answered without express permission from me. 92.40.212.159 (talk) 17:53, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It should remain marked as answered until a consensus has been reached. Shadow311 (talk) 19:56, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not answered because the discussion is still ongoing, and I don't believe anyone here has provided sufficient clarification as to why this paragraph needs to be kept. As I said, the reasoning as to why I want the paragraph about Gore's prior opposition to homosexual marriage deleted are there for you to read at your leisure. 92.40.212.156 (talk) 20:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Our point is that right now, the request has nothing to act on because consensus does not exist for the change. When you use the template, it gets added to a queue of requests, all of which, in theory, could be implemented right away. This one cannot, and so it being in the list of open requests doesn't do anything except waste people's time. The template is not for situations where one person thinks something should be changed, it is for situations where there is consensus for a change but nobody has the technical ability to make it, or for uncontroversial changes. Because this article is a Good Article, it has been reviewed by numerous people for quality, and so changes are likely to be inherently controversial because, clearly, none of those people thought that change needed to be made. Tollens (talk) 20:50, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
None of us have expressed any opinion whatsoever on the actual change itself – we are simply trying to tell you that you're using the wrong process, and that the process you're trying to use right now won't result in a change being made. Tollens (talk) 20:52, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not true. The citation (number 44 for reference) was added in 2013, 5 years AFTER Gore's biography became a good article. I already provided two citations which explain that Gore had already reversed on that comment. 92.40.212.153 (talk) 20:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
GAs don't only get reviewed right before they get promoted. 986 people have this page on their watchlist, meaning that they are notified of changes to it, and they will likely review those changes. Tollens (talk) 20:57, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just because people are watching the paragraph doesn't mean that they might not agree with the changes. The content of this article has altered significantly since Gore's biography became a good article. People not editing a flaw in the article isn't implicit consensus with what's in the article. 92.40.212.153 (talk) 21:01, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't know how to explain this any better than I already have, and quite frankly am not interested in continuing to try. I can nearly guarantee that this change will not be implemented without discussion, and the template will not facilitate that. If your preferred option is to waste other's time by leaving it in place, so be it – I'm not going to waste more of mine. Tollens (talk) 21:10, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about this? Since this clearly isn't going anywhere, I'll open a RfC about it, instead. If consensus is reached against the deletion of the paragraph, I pledge to abide by it. 92.40.212.153 (talk) 21:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That would be great, though probably overkill. All that was needed was to do the exact same thing you did originally, but without the template. People will see it without an actual RFC – you don't need that level of consensus. Again, 986 people will be notified that there is a discussion here, and the only thing we were looking for was a couple people supporting the change. Literally all we are trying to say is that you are using the template wrong. Tollens (talk) 21:20, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to ensure that people actually saw it. Looking through some of the talk archives, it seems like some of the queries raised weren't answered, and I didn't want to take that risk of potentially not having any response to the request. 92.40.212.153 (talk) 21:29, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I completely understand that, but there are loads of ways to appropriately draw attention to a discussion that has had minimal input, as described at WP:APPNOTE. Edit requests just aren't one of those ways, that's all. Tollens (talk) 21:46, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.
I am proposing that the paragraph pertaining to Gore's prior opposition to gay marriage be deleted. My rationale as to why I request the paragraph is deleted is explained above at the top of the #Semi protected edit request (3 February 2024 section of this talk page. 92.40.212.153 (talk) 21:18, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i found the information to be interesting and informative, not burdened by undue weight, and factually correct.
That's not helpful to the statement at all. You can't hust say all of those things without explaining WHY you find it interesting and informative. 92.40.212.157 (talk) 09:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]