User talk:QuackGuru: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 00:04, 6 February 2007 editFilll (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers34,790 edits Scientific scepticism← Previous edit		Revision as of 17:18, 6 March 2007 edit undoJoshuaZ (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers31,657 edits Article suggestionNext edit →
Line 17:		Line 17:

	Did anyone save the old article? This is sort of nuts. However, it might be too difficult to protect this article without a concerted effort of people interested in science. We have several pseudoscience topics here that just flourish because there are not enough science people to go around to beat down the hordes.--] 00:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)		Did anyone save the old article? This is sort of nuts. However, it might be too difficult to protect this article without a concerted effort of people interested in science. We have several pseudoscience topics here that just flourish because there are not enough science people to go around to beat down the hordes.--] 00:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

			== Article suggestion ==

			Your article suggestion has been repeatedly removed. I suggest that if you want such an article, you write it. ] 17:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:18, 6 March 2007

Quack Talk: Discussion

Hello, and Welcome to the Misplaced Pages, QuackGuru! Thanks for creating the "List of articles related to quackery" 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, QuackGuru, and most importantly, have fun! Ombudsman 20:34, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank You. --QuackGuru 23:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Scientific scepticism

Did anyone save the old article? This is sort of nuts. However, it might be too difficult to protect this article without a concerted effort of people interested in science. We have several pseudoscience topics here that just flourish because there are not enough science people to go around to beat down the hordes.--Filll 00:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Article suggestion

Your article suggestion has been repeatedly removed. I suggest that if you want such an article, you write it. JoshuaZ 17:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)