| Revision as of 13:02, 21 March 2013 editGeraldatyrrell (talk | contribs)168 edits →Welcome!← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:36, 22 October 2013 edit undoJytdog (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers187,951 edits →GMO stuff: fix link and copyeditNext edit → | ||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| I've fixed a ref tag error for you at ]. You have added considerable content with citation needed tags, please continue and provide references for those. Thanks, ] (]) 01:24, 19 March 2013 (UTC) | I've fixed a ref tag error for you at ]. You have added considerable content with citation needed tags, please continue and provide references for those. Thanks, ] (]) 01:24, 19 March 2013 (UTC) | ||
| :Thanks ], I'll keep an eye out for those ] (]) 13:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC) | :Thanks ], I'll keep an eye out for those ] (]) 13:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC) | ||
| == GMO stuff == | |||
| Hi Geraldatyrrell - you are pretty new here. Please be aware that there is a community of editors who have been working on GMO-related articles for a long time. You are surely aware that there is some controversy around them. | |||
| I hope you are aware of ] - it is great to be Bold and edit an article, but if you are Reverted, Discuss. And do not ]. Please come and Talk on the pages where you are working! Writing long edit notes is not the same as joining or starting a discussion on Talk - please see ]]. I don't believe you have looked at the talk pages, but please know that we had a recent Rfc (if you don't know what that is, please see ]) about the consensus statement on the relative safety of GM food vis a vis conventional food, and the current statement and sourcing were accepted by the community. Editing against the conclusion of an RfC is another form of tendentious editing - the record of the RfC is ]. I am writing to you here to try to help you not go down the wrong road - you are a newish editor and jumping into a controversial article and edit warring is not a great way to begin. More voices in the conversation are great - but please do join the conversation. Thanks. 14:30, 22 October 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:36, 22 October 2013
Welcome!
Hello, Geraldatyrrell, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- Introduction to Misplaced Pages
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Vsmith (talk) 01:24, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I've fixed a ref tag error for you at biodiversity. You have added considerable content with citation needed tags, please continue and provide references for those. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 01:24, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Vsmith, I'll keep an eye out for those Geraldatyrrell (talk) 13:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
GMO stuff
Hi Geraldatyrrell - you are pretty new here. Please be aware that there is a community of editors who have been working on GMO-related articles for a long time. You are surely aware that there is some controversy around them.
I hope you are aware of WP:BRD - it is great to be Bold and edit an article, but if you are Reverted, Discuss. And do not edit war. Please come and Talk on the pages where you are working! Writing long edit notes is not the same as joining or starting a discussion on Talk - please see the article on tendentious editing]. I don't believe you have looked at the talk pages, but please know that we had a recent Rfc (if you don't know what that is, please see WP:RFC) about the consensus statement on the relative safety of GM food vis a vis conventional food, and the current statement and sourcing were accepted by the community. Editing against the conclusion of an RfC is another form of tendentious editing - the record of the RfC is here. I am writing to you here to try to help you not go down the wrong road - you are a newish editor and jumping into a controversial article and edit warring is not a great way to begin. More voices in the conversation are great - but please do join the conversation. Thanks. 14:30, 22 October 2013 (UTC)