This page is part of WikiProject Current events, an attempt to expand and better organize information in articles related to current events. If you would like to participate in the project, visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.Current eventsWikipedia:WikiProject Current eventsTemplate:WikiProject Current eventsCurrent events articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
FBI statistics confirm that New York is now one of the safest big cities in the USA.
Ok, speaking as a New Yorker, so what? "One of"? This sentence is largely uninformative. If it's the safest, this should say so, if not, I see no reason to have the entry at all. --Charles A. L. 16:21, Nov 14, 2003 (UTC)
Tend to agree. Why not just delete it? -- Viajero 20:26, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)
'Cause I'm not bold. It's gone now. --Charles A. L. 21:04, Nov 14, 2003 (UTC)
A recent Slashdot article linked to a site that showed this as the third-most contested article, after Jesus and Hitler. Strange though it is--are we sure this should be unprotected?
Look at the history. I think they must have bad data. Alexa411 18:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure? Just because it doesn't fit our expectations doesn't mean it's wrong... 142.103.250.40heeeraldo
I see what has happened -- this page has the history of what used to be Current Events before it was changed into a transcluded template page. So it has edits going back to 22 December 2001. It probably only has about 250 edits since the whole way Current Events was run changed. Evil Monkey - Hello 21:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have just added archive links to 64 external links on October 2003. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add ((cbignore)) after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add ((nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot)) to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check)) (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.