Talk:Richard Nixon: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Bart Versieck (talk | contribs) |
Bart Versieck (talk | contribs) Important addition |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|2={{Project Congress|class=B|importance=High|subject=Person}} |
|2={{Project Congress|class=B|importance=High|subject=Person}} |
||
|3={{WPBiography|living=no|class=B|priority=High|politician-work-group=yes|military-work-group=yes}} |
|3={{WPBiography|living=no|class=B|priority=High|politician-work-group=yes|military-work-group=yes}} |
||
|4={{WP1.0|class=B|WPCD=yes}} |
|4={{WP1.0|class=B|importance=High|WPCD=yes}} |
||
}} |
}} |
||
Revision as of 22:19, 6 November 2007
| This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Removal of miscellaneous section
The extremely long miscellaneous section must be removed. Trivia sections are highly discouraged on Wikipedia, and this extremely long one has to go. There is no point to it! yeah, some of the cited information can be integrated in to the correct sections in the article, but the majority is, for lack of a better word, trivia. This is probably the reason it failed a GA review; GA's definetly shoulnd't have trivia sections - especially one as long as this. I tried removing it, but was reverted. I am going to integrate some of it into the article though. I'll keep the section for now, but it has to go. Happyme22 00:33, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that it should go. The miscellaneous/trivia section is mostly just a junk bin of pointless factoids. Plazak 04:42, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- I also do agree. Extremely sexy 15:50, 11 October 2007 (UTC)