User:Errickfoxy

At this time, I have only one thing to say. Read Template:Fact, especially the first boldfaced line.

Or to summarize, please, please, please do not pepper articles with cite-needed templates just because a line sounds suspicious to you. That's not what the tag is for.

And in my opinion, it's a very lazy way to edit. If you see a line that seems suspect, or contradictory, or whatever, take the initiative to correct it, remove it, or do some reasearch of your own to confirm it. Some articles literally have half their lines with a "cite-needed" tag following them, which make the article itself very hard to read and only detracts from the usefulness of the article.

If you feel you must slip a tag on the end, again, read Template:Fact and look over the many options you have to tag with, and use the one most appropriate. And I'll reiterate something listed there as well. If the article is a biography of a living person (and in my opinion, non-living too) BE BOLD and remove it outright, with an appropriate note on the talk page to let people know why it had to be pulled.

The policies here are not that complicated, so please, just take a moment to read them and follow them instead of taking the easy way out.