Talk:United States Congress
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Workgroup category or categories | Politics 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)
Categories:
- Politics Category Check
- General Category Check
- Category Check
- Advanced Articles
- Nonstub Articles
- Internal Articles
- Politics Advanced Articles
- Politics Nonstub Articles
- Politics Internal Articles
- Developed Articles
- Politics Developed Articles
- Developing Articles
- Politics Developing Articles
- Stub Articles
- Politics Stub Articles
- External Articles
- Politics External Articles
- Politics Underlinked Articles
- Underlinked Articles
- Politics Cleanup
- General Cleanup
- Cleanup