Content deleted Content added
→Supreme Court Cases: reply |
|||
Line 41:
:::::{{reply|Bbb23}} I am familiar with it, I just see a myriad of formatting techniques when it comes to court cases in general, not just SCOTUS cases. I'm trying to strive for readability to the layman when it comes to the background of each case, but it is an ongoing learning process. I want the content I create to be as accessible as possible :-) <small><span style="text-shadow:4px 4px 15px #F6E,-4px -4px 15px #F6E;">[[User:Solarra|<b style="color:#730056;font-family:Comic Sans MS">♥ Solarra ♥</b>]]</span> • </small><sub>[[User talk:Solarra|T]] ♀ [[Special:Contribs/Solarra|C]]</sub> 04:51, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
::::::You're back. Believe it or not, I missed you. One other piece of advice on this subject, and then I'll shut up. I think it would be better to write one good article about a case rather than writing a bunch of stubs about a bunch of cases. Quality over quantity. The problem with stubs at Wikipedia is often no one does anything subsequently to improve them; they just sit like that. Regards.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 05:03, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
== Re-creations mid-deletion review ==
| |||