| Revision as of 04:14, 18 September 2006 editNATTO (talk | contribs)1,309 edits Edit about the retraction and 50K in Mercola and Barrett article← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:17, 20 September 2006 edit undoNATTO (talk | contribs)1,309 edits Independant review of QWNext edit → | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
| * l'clast. I agree with you on this issue. Another editor, Fyslee, was bent on including it in the Barrett article as well with the same references even if the editors had clearly agreed that in legal matters, a high level of verifiability was required. Fyslee is an editor who is a self-proclaimed quackbuster as well as an Assistant Listmaster for Dr. Barrett and very actively involved in editing articles related to the subject at hand as well as to subjects posted on QW. ] 04:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC) | * l'clast. I agree with you on this issue. Another editor, Fyslee, was bent on including it in the Barrett article as well with the same references even if the editors had clearly agreed that in legal matters, a high level of verifiability was required. Fyslee is an editor who is a self-proclaimed quackbuster as well as an Assistant Listmaster for Dr. Barrett and very actively involved in editing articles related to the subject at hand as well as to subjects posted on QW. ] 04:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC) | ||
| == Independant review of QW == | |||
| * I'clast. many thanks for the links to the independant review of QW. Very relevant and factual. Hopefully that will help focus on the real issues instead of having to deal with the specific worldview of some editors. :-) ] 09:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:17, 20 September 2006
Welcome to the Misplaced Pages!
Hello, and Welcome to the Misplaced Pages, I'clast! Thanks for the contributions over on the Joseph Mercola article. Here are a few perfunctory tips to hasten your acculturation into the Misplaced Pages experience:
- Take a look at the New contributors' help page, the Misplaced Pages Tutorial and the Manual of Style, and If you still need any help, you can always post your question at the Help Desk.
- When you have time, please peruse The five pillars of Misplaced Pages and Assume good faith, but please keep in mind the unique style you brought to the Wiki!
- Always be mindful of striving for NPOV, be respectful of others' POV, and remember your perspective on the meaning of neutrality is invaluable!
- Explore, be bold in editing, and, above all else, have fun!
And some odds and ends: Cite your sources, Civility, Conflict resolution, How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Pages needing attention, Peer review, Policy Library, Verifiability, Village pump, and Wikiquette; also, you can sign your name on any page by typing four tildes: ~~~~. Best of luck, I'clast, and most importantly, have fun! Ombudsman 11:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
WIACHR
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. Please don't vandalize the essays. Azmoc 17:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- Apparently suggestions about corrective & informative edits of "owned" pages weren't welcome by the above editor on "his" agenda driven essay that he severely criticizes Misplaced Pages in general and other editors broadly. Looks like an AfD candidate. Above editor's recent improvements: Agenda proposal, arguing with several admins, interaction with others. Another editor's assessment:. --I'clast 19:13, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- You're quite right. Azmoc is soleley a POV warrior who has yet to make a single useful contribution to the encyclopedia, which is the reason we are here, supposedly. User:Zoe| 19:57, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Edit about the retraction and 50K in Mercola and Barrett article
- l'clast. I agree with you on this issue. Another editor, Fyslee, was bent on including it in the Barrett article as well with the same references even if the editors had clearly agreed that in legal matters, a high level of verifiability was required. Fyslee is an editor who is a self-proclaimed quackbuster as well as an Assistant Listmaster for Dr. Barrett and very actively involved in editing articles related to the subject at hand as well as to subjects posted on QW. NATTO 04:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Independant review of QW
- I'clast. many thanks for the links to the independant review of QW. Very relevant and factual. Hopefully that will help focus on the real issues instead of having to deal with the specific worldview of some editors. :-) NATTO 09:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)