Gay Nigger Association of America
- Note: has been archived in Wikipedia:Peer review/Gay Nigger Association of America/archive1 - Ta bu shi da yu 6 July 2005 02:54 (UTC)
Would like to submit this to PR again. What can we do to get it to FA status (NOT for the Main page)? - Ta bu shi da yu 6 July 2005 02:54 (UTC)
- Gee, you do like to pick up weird articles and run with them, don't you? Good to see! Anyway, I've gotten rid of that ugly box with the questions and formatted it a bit. I'll have a better look later, but I just had to say that.
Harro5 July 6, 2005 08:26 (UTC)
- Cool... the GNAA are pretty controversial. Be careful! Source everything. - Ta bu shi da yu 6 July 2005 08:43 (UTC)
- You should explain early in the introduction that a portion of the name is intended as demeaning puerile profanity. Otherwise an english-speaking foreign visitor may become confused by the remainder of the text. —
RJH 6 July 2005 15:04 (UTC)
- Done. -
Ta bu shi da yu 7 July 2005 01:33 (UTC)
- Your changes were reverted. The way you worded this was quite anti-GNAA in its POV (fair enough, but you know how it is), and probably needs to be done carefully to ensure this info does get in and stay in the article.
Harro5 July 8, 2005 02:18 (UTC)
- This has now been modified by another editor, and I have further copyedited. -
Ta bu shi da yu 9 July 2005 03:16 (UTC)
- I hate to break it to you, but an IP nominated this for FA status. I am going to ask the admins to shut that one down, since a Peer review is going on now.
Zscout370
(Sound Off) 9 July 2005 05:11 (UTC)
- That must have been a first - a peer review, an FAC and a VfD all going on at once for a single page! Anyway, I'd like to see the trivia section removed and the text integrated into other sections or deleted. I'd also get rid of the self-referencing VfD fact. Interesting, but probably best served by sticking it as a talk page comment.
Harro5 10:24, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
- Some rumors have been removed already, but I need to see what else could go. Me and others removed the VFD reference already on several occasions, but your right, it has to be mentioned on the talk page. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 22:27, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
- That must have been a first - a peer review, an FAC and a VfD all going on at once for a single page! Anyway, I'd like to see the trivia section removed and the text integrated into other sections or deleted. I'd also get rid of the self-referencing VfD fact. Interesting, but probably best served by sticking it as a talk page comment.
Harro5 10:24, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
- I hate to break it to you, but an IP nominated this for FA status. I am going to ask the admins to shut that one down, since a Peer review is going on now.
Zscout370
(Sound Off) 9 July 2005 05:11 (UTC)
- This has now been modified by another editor, and I have further copyedited. -
Ta bu shi da yu 9 July 2005 03:16 (UTC)
- Your changes were reverted. The way you worded this was quite anti-GNAA in its POV (fair enough, but you know how it is), and probably needs to be done carefully to ensure this info does get in and stay in the article.
Harro5 July 8, 2005 02:18 (UTC)
- Done. -
Ta bu shi da yu 7 July 2005 01:33 (UTC)
Gay Nigger Association of America
- Note: has been archived in Wikipedia:Peer review/Gay Nigger Association of America/archive1 - Ta bu shi da yu 6 July 2005 02:54 (UTC)
Would like to submit this to PR again. What can we do to get it to FA status (NOT for the Main page)? - Ta bu shi da yu 6 July 2005 02:54 (UTC)
- Gee, you do like to pick up weird articles and run with them, don't you? Good to see! Anyway, I've gotten rid of that ugly box with the questions and formatted it a bit. I'll have a better look later, but I just had to say that.
Harro5 July 6, 2005 08:26 (UTC)
- Cool... the GNAA are pretty controversial. Be careful! Source everything. - Ta bu shi da yu 6 July 2005 08:43 (UTC)
- You should explain early in the introduction that a portion of the name is intended as demeaning puerile profanity. Otherwise an english-speaking foreign visitor may become confused by the remainder of the text. —
RJH 6 July 2005 15:04 (UTC)
- Done. -
Ta bu shi da yu 7 July 2005 01:33 (UTC)
- Your changes were reverted. The way you worded this was quite anti-GNAA in its POV (fair enough, but you know how it is), and probably needs to be done carefully to ensure this info does get in and stay in the article.
Harro5 July 8, 2005 02:18 (UTC)
- This has now been modified by another editor, and I have further copyedited. -
Ta bu shi da yu 9 July 2005 03:16 (UTC)
- I hate to break it to you, but an IP nominated this for FA status. I am going to ask the admins to shut that one down, since a Peer review is going on now.
Zscout370
(Sound Off) 9 July 2005 05:11 (UTC)
- That must have been a first - a peer review, an FAC and a VfD all going on at once for a single page! Anyway, I'd like to see the trivia section removed and the text integrated into other sections or deleted. I'd also get rid of the self-referencing VfD fact. Interesting, but probably best served by sticking it as a talk page comment.
Harro5 10:24, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
- Some rumors have been removed already, but I need to see what else could go. Me and others removed the VFD reference already on several occasions, but your right, it has to be mentioned on the talk page. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 22:27, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
- That must have been a first - a peer review, an FAC and a VfD all going on at once for a single page! Anyway, I'd like to see the trivia section removed and the text integrated into other sections or deleted. I'd also get rid of the self-referencing VfD fact. Interesting, but probably best served by sticking it as a talk page comment.
Harro5 10:24, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
- I hate to break it to you, but an IP nominated this for FA status. I am going to ask the admins to shut that one down, since a Peer review is going on now.
Zscout370
(Sound Off) 9 July 2005 05:11 (UTC)
- This has now been modified by another editor, and I have further copyedited. -
Ta bu shi da yu 9 July 2005 03:16 (UTC)
- Your changes were reverted. The way you worded this was quite anti-GNAA in its POV (fair enough, but you know how it is), and probably needs to be done carefully to ensure this info does get in and stay in the article.
Harro5 July 8, 2005 02:18 (UTC)
- Done. -
Ta bu shi da yu 7 July 2005 01:33 (UTC)