`  :Is the interest of building a better WIkipedia more important than Hansen's views (right or wrong)?  Of course not.  However, the interest of building a better Wikipedia must be considered more important while editing Wikipedia, and your addition of your interpretation of Hansen's views to unrelated articles is not in the interest of building a better Wikipedia.  I receive money from 4 different entities (none of whom care a fig about Hansen, for what it's worth), but I'm not allowed to consider their interests in editing Wikipedia or in the other collaborative projects I participate in.  If you are unable to separate the importance of Hansen's message from the importance of placing only what Hansen says or what is said about his message by reliable sources, only in articles related to that message (or, to be precise, only in articles to which that message is relevant), then, as a matter of conscience, you shouldn't be editing Wikipedia.   :As for some of your specifics, if the precise meaning isn't clear, we Wikipedians are not allowed to interpret his words.  He never said ``biosequestration`` (and we don't seem to have an article on geosequestration); ``proportional`` is false (and hence shouldn't be in the articles unless he explicitly said it); ``inversely proportional`` is less false, but still not accurate, and not the clear meaning of what he said; and his comments on Kyoto are really about his interpretation of the consequences of Kyoto, and should be treated as such.  Kyoto (would have) set national goals, but didn't specify the mechanisms of attainment; Hansen's interpretation that it encourage(d) cap and trade is an interpretation, and should also have been treated as such, even if his opinions were notable.   :Your points (1) and (2) above are correct, but that doesn't explain why you didn't say it like that or add it to an article on sequestration, or coal power plants, rather than on biosequestration and Kyoto.   :My real identity is easy enough to determine from the article written about me, as is WMC's from the article written about him.  I'm not sure about KDP.  It's also easy enough to see that I don't have a conflict of interest, and WMC should generally be agreeing with Hansen's position if it had any economic reality.  —    `