Talk:U.S. Congress: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>José Leonardo Andrade |
imported>Richard Jensen (my mistake) |
||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
So it has been moved. It would have been better to use the "move" button because the history of contributions was lost this way [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=United_States_Congress&action=history]--[[User:José Leonardo Andrade|José Leonardo Andrade]] 05:39, 28 April 2007 (CDT) | So it has been moved. It would have been better to use the "move" button because the history of contributions was lost this way [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=United_States_Congress&action=history]--[[User:José Leonardo Andrade|José Leonardo Andrade]] 05:39, 28 April 2007 (CDT) | ||
:::My mistake, I should have used "Move". :( [[User:Richard Jensen|Richard Jensen]] 08:49, 28 April 2007 (CDT) |
Revision as of 07:49, 28 April 2007
Workgroup category or categories | Politics Workgroup, History Workgroup [Categories OK] |
Article status | Developing article: beyond a stub, but incomplete |
Underlinked article? | No |
Basic cleanup done? | Yes |
Checklist last edited by | -Versuri 11:45, 26 March 2007 (CDT) |
To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.
Trivial change: "infamous" is a very non-neutral word. Notorious isn't necessarily negative. Perhaps a simple famous would be better, but definitely not egregious. Daniel Drake 02:18, 4 April 2007 (CDT)
- I agree "infamous" was not a good choice, though I struggled more with that word than nearly any other in the article! "Famous" sounded like something I'd use for Britney Spears... Maybe I need to just rephrase the whole thing. Thanks for the spelling and grammar check on the rest of it. Steve Mount 15:38, 4 April 2007 (CDT) [edit: ok, I thought "famous" sounded more reasonable there than I initially thought. Regardless of your "side" in the revolution, I think the word is appropriate.]
change name to U.S. Congress for consistency
any objection to changing the name to U.S. Congress for consistency? Richard Jensen 06:03, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
I don't know. Don't you think it sounds too informal?--José Leonardo Andrade 09:20, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
- I think it's less ponderous. Note that Library of Congress uses "U.S. Congress" in its formal siteshttp://thomas.loc.gov/links/] The House calls itself "The United States House" but calls the Senate "U.S. Senate"[1] The Senate uses both long and short forms (U.S. Senate). The Chicago manual of style OK's U.S. as adjective (section 15.34 -- it also allows just US instead of U.S.) AP Manual of style says: ok as adjective. Richard Jensen 09:50, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
- You already did it for the Constitution, so I guess go for it here. Scared me for a minute there :) Steve Mount 22:28, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
- I would never try to overthrow the Constitution, only rename the article. :) Richard Jensen 23:06, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
- You already did it for the Constitution, so I guess go for it here. Scared me for a minute there :) Steve Mount 22:28, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
- I think it's less ponderous. Note that Library of Congress uses "U.S. Congress" in its formal siteshttp://thomas.loc.gov/links/] The House calls itself "The United States House" but calls the Senate "U.S. Senate"[1] The Senate uses both long and short forms (U.S. Senate). The Chicago manual of style OK's U.S. as adjective (section 15.34 -- it also allows just US instead of U.S.) AP Manual of style says: ok as adjective. Richard Jensen 09:50, 26 April 2007 (CDT)
So it has been moved. It would have been better to use the "move" button because the history of contributions was lost this way [2]--José Leonardo Andrade 05:39, 28 April 2007 (CDT)
- My mistake, I should have used "Move". :( Richard Jensen 08:49, 28 April 2007 (CDT)
Categories:
- Politics Category Check
- General Category Check
- History Category Check
- Category Check
- Advanced Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Politics Advanced Articles
- Politics Nonstub Articles
- Politics Internal Articles
- History Advanced Articles
- History Nonstub Articles
- History Internal Articles
- Developed Articles
- Politics Developed Articles
- History Developed Articles
- Developing Articles
- Politics Developing Articles
- History Developing Articles
- Stub Articles
- Politics Stub Articles
- History Stub Articles
- External Articles
- Politics External Articles
- History External Articles
- Politics Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- History Underlinked Articles
- Politics Cleanup
- General Cleanup
- History Cleanup
- Cleanup