User talk:Bill Slawski

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia , I hope you will like it here and decide to stay.

You may want to take a look at the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages.

Here are some links I've found useful:

Also: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your username and the time after your comments. Signing with three tildes ~~~ will just sign your username.

I hope to see you around Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page!

Johann Wolfgang [ T ...C ]

04:13, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Johann. Bill Slawski 23:25, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

good to see you here at wikipedia again .. seo

Hi Bill,

I saw your edits at the seo article, good to "see" you again. You said that your worked on some other articles so you ended up flying under my radar a bit. Too bad that I could not make it to Pubcon2006 , but I will be in Vegas in January. Affiliate Summit. I don't think that you would come to an Affiliate Marketing Industry event, right?

I could not go to PubCon, so PubCon had to come to me. I created last weekend entries for PubCon and Search Engine Strategies ;)

Cheers, Carsten aka --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 06:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carsten,

I did do some edits, and I will probably do some more. Been pretty busy, but maybe I can contribute a little more to the article. I'll have to check out your new additions.Bill Slawski 09:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Btw. I just found this cool Edit Counter (the official one is down for privacy reasons :( ). It shows a lot of details. See my counts and details. --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 08:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting tool. I didn't know about that. Bill Slawski 09:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aliweb still documents a questionable web site

Hello, Bill. I note you are one of the editors of the Aliweb article. When I first saw Aliweb being added to List of search engines I became concerned it was not a bona fide search engine. The present reality of www.aliweb.com is very disconcerting. I wonder if you still have Aliweb on your watch list, and might be willing to participate in Talk page discussions there. The current grievance is that my critical comments were deleted both from the article talk and from Talk:List of search engines, although since the latter is more heavily watched, an observant person restored them. Taking the article itself to AfD due to lack of reliable sources might be an option. If you are no long interested in the Aliweb article no response is needed. Thanks! EdJohnston 16:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, EdJohnston. I'm looking into finding some primary resources to cite.Bill Slawski 09:14, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting Spam

Hi, Bill! When reverting spam it's a good idea to use the spam templates to place a warning on the user's talk page. That allows us to give increasingly stern warnings to repeat offenders, or even block them from further editing. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 18:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed with SEO article

I've nominated search engine optimization for featured article status. Could you possibly look at the references on the article and then leave your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Search engine optimization as to whether you think the blogs and forums cited as references qualify as reliable sources. In order to achieve featured article status we need community consensus that the references are reliable. If you know any other Wikipedians who have expertise in this area, we welcome their comments. Thank you! Jehochman ^☎ / _✔ 17:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article review

Search engine optimization has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 23:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Hornbook -- a new WP:Law task force for the J.D. curriculum

Hi Bill Slawski,

I'm asking Wikipedians who are interested in United States legal articles to take a look at WP:Hornbook, the new "JD curriculum task force".

Our mission is to assimilate into Wikipedia all the insights of an American law school education, by reducing hornbooks to footnotes.

Each casebook will have a subpage.

Over the course of a semester, each subpage will shift its focus to track the unfolding curriculum(s) for classes using that casebook around the country.
It will also feature an extensive, hyperlinked "index" or "outline" to that casebook, pointing to pages, headers, or {{anchors}} in Wikipedia (example).
Individual law schools can freely adapt our casebook outlines to the idiosyncratic curriculum devised by each individual professor.

I'm encouraging law students around the country to create local chapters of the club I'm starting at my own law school, "Student WP:Hornbook Editors". Using WP:Hornbook as our headquarters, we're hoping to create a study group so inclusive that nobody will dare not join.

What you can do now:

1. Add WP:Hornbook to your watchlist, {{User Hornbook}} to your userpage, and ~~~~ to Wikipedia:Hornbook/participants.

2. If you're a law student,

Email http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:Hornbook to your classmates, and tell them to do the same.
Contact me directly via talk page or email about coordinating a chapter of "Student WP:Hornbook Editors" at your own school.

(You don't have to start the club, or even be involved in it; just help direct me to someone who might.)

3. Introduce yourself to me. Law editors on Wikipedia are a scarce commodity. Do knock on my talk page if there's an article you'd like help on.

Regards, Andrew Gradman ^talk/_WP:Hornbook 20:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bill Slawski (March 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Greenman was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was: