Davea0511

AfD Nomination: Agnostic theism

An article that you have been involved in editing, Agnostic theism, has been listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agnostic theism. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 10:47, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Quackwatch article is under ArbCom enforcement

I don't see this comment as helpful in improving the article in any manner. You might want to revert it and then write a new comment that is much more specific and clearly related to improving the content. Either way, the article is under ArbCom enforcement. --Ronz (talk) 22:48, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I agree, although the final comment is, if possible, even less helpful. It's basically just griping and an opinion at odds with the repeatedly voiced decisions of the Wikipedia community and all mainstream medical, scientific, and consumer protection sources. We use QW on a case by case basis, in the same manner we use the New York Times on a case by case basis. Neither source is appropriate for everything. -- Brangifer (talk) 04:34, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Davea0511, I appreciate your changing the comments. Do you have sources to verify any of it? --Ronz (talk) 15:41, 22 April 2014 (UTC)