Talk:North Carolina Award

Awards Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Awards, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of awards and prizes 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.AwardsWikipedia:WikiProject AwardsTemplate:WikiProject Awardsawards articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

United States: North Carolina / 50,000 Challenge Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	North Carolina portal This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article was created or improved during this WikiProject's 50,000 Challenge, which started on November 1, 2016, and is ongoing. You can help!

Category?

Should the winners have a cat? \Wachholder (talk) 21:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alphabetize list

I moved the following commentary from the article space. It was hidden text, so it didn't show up in the article, but I thought it really belonged here instead. Haven't looked back through edit history to find out who originally put it there. My reply follows.

Are the award categories listed out of alphabetical order to avoid plagiarizing the NC Awards webpage? If NOT, the listing of the categories here and their display, below, should be alphabetized. If SO, they should be listed in reverse alphabetical order, as the current order is inappropriately random.

At this time, I don't have a preference for the listing format. They do have a point, I think, though. The way it looks now is somewhat cumbersome, but the listings by year are pretty informative. Will think about it more and come back. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 05:27, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]