Template talk:PAIRrequest: Difference between revisions
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
(reviewed) |
No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
|signature={{User:Knife/sig}} 14:15, 26 July 2007 (EDT) | |signature={{User:Knife/sig}} 14:15, 26 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
}} | }} | ||
:You're a PAIRrequest...{{User:HK-47/sig}}, that may be spam. | |||
::It ''is'' in the category Review Requested. Well, still, one could have figured... - {{User:Cobold/sig}} 14:20, 26 July 2007 (EDT) | |||
I phail.{{User:Knife/sig}} 16:06, 26 July 2007 (EDT) | |||
LOL. Notice that it isn't under T for template or P for PAIRrequest, it's at the top. Did it on purpose to put it at the top {{User:Wayoshi/sig}} 16:51, 26 July 2007 (EDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 15:51, July 26, 2007
| PAIRreview for PAIRrequest by Knife (talk) 14:15, 26 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
| Accuracy | 3.5 | It is accurate enough. |
| Depth | 3.0 | Could explain a little more, like what template to use when reviewing (ironically this one) |
| Grammar | 4.0 | Grammar doesn't really need to be improved. |
| Images | 3.0 | Perhaps an image illustrating the article would be good? |
| Formatting | 3.0 | Colors are not that great and the template isn't really that special. |
| Final Rating: | 16.5 | This is an awesome template, but it needs more of a reason for users to start using it efficiently. |
| Reviewer: | Knife (talk) 14:15, 26 July 2007 (EDT) | |
I phail.Knife (talk) 16:06, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
LOL. Notice that it isn't under T for template or P for PAIRrequest, it's at the top. Did it on purpose to put it at the top Wa 
TC@Y 16:51, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
