User talk:Ilonumbrel

November 2023
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. ''Your opinion of something being "silly" does not matter. Focus on facts and verifiability please.'' DMacks (talk) 17:39, 3 November 2023 (UTC)


 * . Ilonumbrel (talk) 16:08, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

That's how its done...
You are welcome to challenge claims (like the statement that terpenes are the main source of alkenes in nature), but you shouldn't ordinarily describe a statement as "silly". Talk to your teacher or parents or a senior editor if you do not understand something. BTW, what class of phytochemical do you think has lots of alkenes? Proteins? Nucleic acids? Sugars? Polyketides?--Smokefoot (talk) 20:32, 3 November 2023 (UTC)


 * . Ilonumbrel (talk) 16:07, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Proper tagging
Hey, Ilonumbrel!

I noticed that you recently marked a couple sentences in Aluminum phenolate as, either because the claim was entirely absent from the source or did not include a page number. Unfortunately,  is the tag we use to indicate when a claim has no citation at all. Your usage makes the page look like somebody added a citation but forgot to remove the  tag. Not everybody's going to check the page history like I do before removing it.

Anyways, the typical way to mark these flaws are and  (respectively). You might want to consider using them instead. Thanks for your help in building the encyclopedia, Bernanke&#39;s Crossbow (talk) 06:04, 4 February 2024 (UTC)