haabalance.blogg.se - Boa vs python parents guide

#BOA VS PYTHON PARENTS GUIDE FREE#

In the Problems section - Who were the researchers in 1980? Independent or government? What happened to the suggestion made by them?.

So does that mean that Bombay did not follow IST for 8 years after independence? But the very next sentence says that the Indian government established IST as the official time in 1947.

In the history section - "Bombay time was maintained until 1955".

In the lead - "The Indian observatory however, is located in the town." - I could not make out which Indian observatory is being talked about.

There are only few points which I could come up with.

#BOA VS PYTHON PARENTS GUIDE FREE#

Any suggestions for what sort of free images I can add here? Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:06, 12 August 2006 (UTC) Review by - Aksi_great ( talk - review me) Please ignore the inline reference issue for now (I'll add them once the copyediting is done). I'd like some suggestions in expanding this page. Coffee 16:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC) Indian Standard Time I've looked over the article many times, so I guess I've done what I can do. All the obvious weasel words have citations (and if any others remain, I'd appreciate someone pointing them out). Summary of the automated suggestions: (1) Wikilink dates, (2) headings don't start with "The", (3) weasel words, (4) watch for redundancies, and (5) copyedit. all of those links were used as references, and I'm working on converting all of them to footnotes so perhaps the "General references" part could later be done away with. I've fixed points #1, 2 and 3 that you mentioned. JonHarder 21:40, 28 July 2006 (UTC) Thank you very much for the comments. I'm not sure how FAC reviewers will respond to these end section issues. Using another encyclopedia for a reference doesn't seem optimal to me I would prefer to see a stronger source. Most of your "General references" appear to be external links and none seem to be cited in the notes section, so perhaps it more accurately a "Further reading" section.

I prefer the end sections of See also / Notes / References / Further reading / External links, which is consistent with most articles.

Can you put at least an introductory paragraph at the beginning of "American colonial period (1898-1946)" so that the first subcategory, "Philippine-American War" doesn't follow immediately? It flows better that way.New Spain is noted as Mexico the second time it appears shouldn't the note be with the first occurance? And this is another example of duplicate linking.The style guide prefers linking only once, typically the first appearance in the article. Cebu, for example, and both Spain and Spanish link to Spain in the same paragraph. There are duplicate links to the same article.If this peer review turns out nicely I would really like to take the article all the way to FA status. :) Coffee 06:21, 26 July 2006 (UTC) A quick skim revealed a couple of problems from my perspective: I'd like this peer review to just focus on the main History of the Philippines article, and what it needs to meet FA criteria. I've done a lot of work on this article over the past few weeks, taking it from a monolithic 80KB, spliting it into 6 sub-articles by time period, and practically rewriting the main article into a relatively lean 37KB. 53.135 List of Vice Presidents of the Philippines.

53.131 Blanchard, Bailey, and Lawrence theory.

53.120.1 Request for Peer Review August 2006.

53.89 History of virtual learning environments.

53.75 Edmonton Oilers in the 2006 Stanley Cup Playoffs.

53.64 Treaty of Waitangi claims and settlements.

53.59 Territorial evolution of the United States.

53.41 German occupation of Luxembourg in World War I.

53.34 People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

53.22 New York, Susquehanna and Western Railway.

53.20 Grand Duchess Olga Alexandrovna of Russia.

53.6 Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur.

40 Jean Charles de Menezes (first peer review).

32 Winston tastes good like a cigarette should.

24 List of fiction that breaks the fourth wall.