Talk:List of labor slogans

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Importance, cites, layout, incomplete list, categories

This article suffers from several major problems. First, the importance of this article is not established. Unless it is established, I would argue this article is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Second, only one slogan has a citation. Each of the other slogans needs a citation as well. (If a citation cannot be established, then I would argue the slogan should be removed as it is not important.) Third, this article does not talk about the creation, use, and importance of labor slogans. It is a list. (This article might be better off titled "List of labor slogans." But each slogan would still need referencing.) As an article, the layout is poor. For information on how an article should look, see Editing Wikipedia. There are many sub-pages and lots of useful information. It takes time to read, but your article will be vasty improved in terms of look, readability, and presentation of information. Fourth, as a list, this page is very incomplete. Wikipedia has a number of guidelines and suggestions for creating, completing and categorizing lists. See the Wikipedia list-making guideline, and make sure to read the subpages and Talk page. (I would also recommend reading What Wikipedia is not.) Fifth, this article is uncaregorized. Here's a help sheet on categorizing articles. Good luck. - Tim1965 16:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the page from Labor slogans to List of labor slogans. Other issues raised above appear to still need consideration for this article. Djr13 (talk) 11:36, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]