"Skeptics" are generally people who don't take conclusions drawn from evidence presented. Legitimate reasons to question conclusions is both lack of credulity of the premises and logic flaws in the analysis which are used to go from the premises to the conclusions. Here my answer to a question was deleted because it showed that analysis was flawed.
It was deleted by a moderator. So it would seem that the "skeptics" site does not wish to subject its questions to skepticism. This begs the obvious question. Should this site be named something else? A different answer (by a different author) to the same question received both downvotes and a request for references. But critique of analysis of a question should not need references. Simply pointing out logical flaws is sufficient to demonstrate that the reached conclusion deserves skepticism. So I ask again: "should this site be named something else?"
Edit: is "fact checking" a better name for the site's true intent?