User talk:Skepticignorant

Hello, Skepticignorant! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! DinoBot2 (talk) 16:08, 24 October 2008 (UTC) Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General • Spam • Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Hello Skepticignorant--Checking stuff in the above links can be helpful. So can just diving in and seeing how it goes. Welcome, and have fun. CRETOG8(t/c) 15:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: Hi

Hey, I never edited that page, please make sure you have the right person . --Simonkoldyk 22:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Fact tags confusing

Hello--In Quality of life, I don't really object to the fact tagging (although the article is such a mass of unreferenced-ness, that fact-tagging anything in particular seems either hopeless or leading to an article which is all tags. Oi.), it's just that the way they were placed (by you?) was confusing.

For instance, in the sentence, "However, one can assume with some confidence that the higher average level of diet...", there's already a fact tag, which seems like it should be enough. If it's not, the "one can assume" is less a {{fact}} thing, and more a {{weasel}} thing maybe?

Anyway, that's what I was thinking about. It might help if you matched the tagging with comments on the talk page. CRETOG8(t/c) 01:17, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: Fact tags confusing

Yeah, that makes sense, thank you. I'm an extreme noob at editing wikipedia. Btw, I only added the ones yesterday, not the others. Maybe the article should be marked as one that doesn't cite many references? I don't know :)