User talk:GirlForLife

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome[edit]

Hello, GirlForLife, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

Dep. Garcia 15:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

List of cryonicists[edit]

How exactly can such a list be "used as disparagement and violation of privacy". The discussion you refer to (the one I found on the talk page) doesn't cite any reasoning based in policy. And when I look at the articles on the listed people I found one who's considered the founding father of the science because of a book he wrote. I can't argue the fact he should be included. Can you explain what you meant? - Mgm|(talk) 12:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I was referring to the edit comments that have been made, such as:[1].
The view is explained in detail by Cryobiologist on the Talk:List of cryonicists page. --GirlForLife 21:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

See also[edit]

Hi,

Please note that the 'see also' section of pages is intended for those links which are not already in the body of the text but are still relevant. Best practices is a minimal see also section, integrating them instead to relevant sections of the page. See here for more info.

Thanks,

--WLU 13:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Mis-identified vandalism edit?[edit]

In the revision history for Cryonics, I see

I'm afraid I don't see it - how is that edit not what it proports to be? Thanks! ciphergoth (talk) 10:20, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Request for article assessment[edit]

  • Given your interest in editing Wikipedia article relevant to aging and rejuvenation, would you mind taking a gander at the Wikipedia article for the journal of Rejuvenation Research? I have recently read it and, although I am a biologist who does not study aging, I found the article to be highly biased and written in such a way to portray the journal in a negative light. I was hoping you could take a look and give an honest assessment, as I'm curious if I'm the only user who feels this way.SattvaBodhi (talk) 04:30, 16 November 2012 (UTC)