Why are "April 2000" and "September 2008" linked? In the Formation section, the link "Meadowhall" needs to be linked correctly. In the Management section, "Safeway" needs to be corrected. I believe that in the Products offered section, "DIY" is linked wrong, this is me. If its not, that's my bad there. Same section, "Colgate" and "Walkers" link. Dates need to be unlinked, per
here. In the Health and safety section, why is "February 2006" linked?
Done - I've made amendments to these links as suggested (fixed the disambig pages, added a few more I noticed whilst doing so, and delinked the dates). The
DIY link I can't see an issue with (unless you mean the redirect), and the disambig page for it lists other articles which aren't relevant. Bungle(
talk •
contribs)21:30, 15 October 2008 (UTC)reply
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline:
Some references are not formatted and some are. There needs to be a consistency usage of the refs. Also, References 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 20, 23, 24, 25, and 27 are missing Publisher info.
Done - I've made all remaining references consistant and added dates where available. Also some additional info has been added to the article and sourced appropriately. Bungle(
talk •
contribs)17:11, 19 October 2008 (UTC)reply
B.
Reliable sources are
cited inline. All content that
could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
Why are "April 2000" and "September 2008" linked? In the Formation section, the link "Meadowhall" needs to be linked correctly. In the Management section, "Safeway" needs to be corrected. I believe that in the Products offered section, "DIY" is linked wrong, this is me. If its not, that's my bad there. Same section, "Colgate" and "Walkers" link. Dates need to be unlinked, per
here. In the Health and safety section, why is "February 2006" linked?
Done - I've made amendments to these links as suggested (fixed the disambig pages, added a few more I noticed whilst doing so, and delinked the dates). The
DIY link I can't see an issue with (unless you mean the redirect), and the disambig page for it lists other articles which aren't relevant. Bungle(
talk •
contribs)21:30, 15 October 2008 (UTC)reply
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline:
Some references are not formatted and some are. There needs to be a consistency usage of the refs. Also, References 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 20, 23, 24, 25, and 27 are missing Publisher info.
Done - I've made all remaining references consistant and added dates where available. Also some additional info has been added to the article and sourced appropriately. Bungle(
talk •
contribs)17:11, 19 October 2008 (UTC)reply
B.
Reliable sources are
cited inline. All content that
could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):