This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sports, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sport-related topics 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.SportsWikipedia:WikiProject SportsTemplate:WikiProject Sportssports articles
Assess : newly added and existing articles, maybe nominate some good B-class articles for GA; independently assess some as A-class, regardless of GA status.
Cleanup : * Sport governing body (this should-be-major article is in a shameful state) * Field hockey (History section needs sources and accurate information - very vague at the moment.) * Standardize Category:American college sports infobox templates to use same font size and spacing. * Sport in the United Kingdom - the Popularity section is incorrect and unsourced. Reliable data is required.
* Fix project template and/or "to do list" Current version causes tables of content to be hidden unless/until reader chooses "show."
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Table tennis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Table tennis 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.Table tennisWikipedia:WikiProject Table tennisTemplate:WikiProject Table tennisTable tennis articles
what kind of "link" between the event's article(esp'ly what existing or desired wording -- maybe the accompanying article's name, under a See-also section? -- the link should be "behind") and (i presume) the article page for which this is the associated article-talk page, and
whether the request has been fulfilled already, by someone who didn't insist on a clear request (but also didn't note here what they did).
<Tirade>OK, i do value the input of newcomers, but i also put value (hypothetically) on more effort (from them, and -- especially in return -- from us) to making them effective. I have time for this note (especially since it will probably be around for a long time). But not time to make every talk page i write on (let alone read) into an occasion to further burden my already onerous dance card of pages needing attention. I would probably be even more ticked off if i knew how many experienced colleagues have read the talk page in the last 38 months, but left no hint of having done so (whether having acted on it, or mentioning the opposite choice). And no, i don't have
timesufficient motivation to spend the kind of time it would take
to check the history of every article i work on that has an un-answered talk-page request, to see whether anyone already has acted on it. </Tirade> --Jerzy•t19:24, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
