This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hiya,
Some users have decided to try and relaunch WP:SPOTLIGHT. I've helped out a bit; hope I'm not 'treading on any toes' here; it just seemed like the best approach was to simply give it a try - hence changing the project page around, and starting to work on an arbitrary article.
If you want to get involved, please do so. I will let the other previous 'coordinators' know too. Cheers, Chzz ► 16:41, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 11:54, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
I've started a section of another article, and hope to add more to that. Bearian (talk) 14:12, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
i know your active on AKA this article is popping up on Greek message boards http://www.suntimes.com/business/1690163,CST-NWS-aka29.article. Since AKA ia a featured article i wanted to run it by an editor more familiar with the page before i went making edits but i do think this may be a notable issue. Thoughts? want ti make an edit yourself or give any guidance? Trey (talk) 01:43, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Although I did have to go through my contributions to see what refs you were talking about! :D Bradley0110 (talk) 10:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Miranda/AC,
I'm asking Wikipedians who are interested in United States legal articles to take a look at WP:Hornbook, the new "JD curriculum task force".
Our mission is to assimilate into Wikipedia all the insights of an American law school education, by reducing hornbooks to footnotes.
What you can do now:
Regards, Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 04:23, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 05:14, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:09, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Miranda, I'm relatively green when it comes to Wikipedia, but as I have been editing and expanding the Phi Beta Sigma article. I noticed that you gave it the original assessments that it currently has and In an attempt to have the article reach FA status by January 9, 1914, I was wondering if it is possible to have you reassess the it and provide any notes for improvement. This would aid in the cause greatly. --Educatedblkman1914 16:59, 27 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Educatedblkman1914 (talk • contribs)
Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC)