Jump to content

User talk:Skepticignorant

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hello, Skepticignorant! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! DinoBot2 (talk) 16:08, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous

Hello Skepticignorant--Checking stuff in the above links can be helpful. So can just diving in and seeing how it goes. Welcome, and have fun. CRETOG8(t/c) 15:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Hi

[edit]

Hey, I never edited that page, please make sure you have the right person . --Simonkoldyk 22:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Fact tags confusing

[edit]

Hello--In Quality of life, I don't really object to the fact tagging (although the article is such a mass of unreferenced-ness, that fact-tagging anything in particular seems either hopeless or leading to an article which is all tags. Oi.), it's just that the way they were placed (by you?) was confusing.

For instance, in the sentence, "However, one can assume with some confidence[citation needed] that the higher average[citation needed] level of diet...", there's already a fact tag, which seems like it should be enough. If it's not, the "one can assume" is less a {{fact}} thing, and more a {{weasel}} thing maybe?

Anyway, that's what I was thinking about. It might help if you matched the tagging with comments on the talk page. CRETOG8(t/c) 01:17, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Fact tags confusing

[edit]

Yeah, that makes sense, thank you. I'm an extreme noob at editing wikipedia. Btw, I only added the ones yesterday, not the others. Maybe the article should be marked as one that doesn't cite many references? I don't know :)