User talk:JayEffage

Welcome!

Hello, JayEffage, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! WLU 18:03, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-oxidants

Hi Jay, a certain editor is reverting edits regarding anti-oxidants in CFS on spurious grounds. Firstly as unreliable source here which I had overturned on the WP RSN here, and now as Fringe theory, which I sure could be easily overturned, as the hypothesis is and in some cases has been tested. Rather than continue his edit war I have posted a Discussion on anti-oxidants and seek a consensus on the Talk page for an replacement section. Jagra 03:25, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be civil

Personal attacks have no place in wikipedia. Please do not call my comments "drivel" just because I don't immediately provide references for everything I say. This is a personal attack, and is not appropriate for wikipedia. If you apologise for these insults and agree to be civil, I will also make more of an effort to be nice to you and will post references for anything you want. Deal? --Sciencewatcher (talk) 20:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been asked countless times to provide references for your très POV claims ("CFS=Brunout") or for your empty rethoric ("Lot's of autopsies") which you never did, independently from the tone in which they were asked. Answer those, then I will come up with new ones - I am not holding my breath, though.

As for the civility: Of course I regret immensly having refered to your reiterared POV without references as drivel, I don't know what came over me. Please do accept my humble appoligy, I should of course have given you the benefit of the doubt, that after not coming up with with answers to doubtable claims for n times, you would have most certainly come up with one the n+1. time. I will of course better myself and to show you my goodwill, I will do my best to delete your shoddy references from the article, as you have verbatim asked us to do in your recent answer to tekaphors charges of hypocrisy regarding your behavior.JayEffage (talk) 11:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]