User talk:RspnsblMn

Comment on content, not the contributor

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Talk:Robert Gallo. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. MastCell ^Talk 23:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RspnsblMn is grateful for the welcome. But RspnsblMn rejects the criticism as illegitimate. Criticizing WP scholarship is not attack ad hominem. Should RspnsblMn thank users in addition to MastCell for the welcome and invalid criticism? Who are, "we" in, "[...W]e would like to remind you...?" Only MastCell signed. RspnsblMn^talk 01:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, RspnsblMn, 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 and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! - Eldereft ~(s)talk~ 17:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not the National Enquirer

There is no reason for the Luk Van Parijs article to contain POV conjectures about David Baltimore. The statement you removed from the article, that Baltimore suggested Caltech look at LvP's work, is sourced, cited, accurate, and neutral. Your suggested replacement

Caltech begins inquiry ("requested" by Baltimore "when New Scientist pointed out" problems).

is inappropriate. betsythedevine (talk) 06:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss at Luk van Parijs talk page. RspnsblMn^talk 15:24, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]