Content deleted Content added
→Wateresque: new section |
change heading level |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Reviewing Kelvinsong's [[commons:Special:Contributions/Kelvinsong|contributions to Wikipedia commons]], I agree that the artwork is an excellent contribution to Wikipedia. [[User:Isaacl|isaacl]] ([[User talk:Isaacl|talk]]) 04:49, 11 January 2013 (UTC) |
Reviewing Kelvinsong's [[commons:Special:Contributions/Kelvinsong|contributions to Wikipedia commons]], I agree that the artwork is an excellent contribution to Wikipedia. [[User:Isaacl|isaacl]] ([[User talk:Isaacl|talk]]) 04:49, 11 January 2013 (UTC) |
||
== Wateresque == |
=== Wateresque === |
||
To be honest, someone with around 100 edits was not the type of editor I was thinking of for this recognition award. I was thinking more of persistent excellence with steady edits for a period of time, rather than recognizing a promising start. Nonetheless, what do others think? [[User:Isaacl|isaacl]] ([[User talk:Isaacl|talk]]) 04:57, 11 January 2013 (UTC) |
To be honest, someone with around 100 edits was not the type of editor I was thinking of for this recognition award. I was thinking more of persistent excellence with steady edits for a period of time, rather than recognizing a promising start. Nonetheless, what do others think? [[User:Isaacl|isaacl]] ([[User talk:Isaacl|talk]]) 04:57, 11 January 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:58, 11 January 2013
Discussion of nominations
Kelvinsong
Reviewing Kelvinsong's contributions to Wikipedia commons, I agree that the artwork is an excellent contribution to Wikipedia. isaacl (talk) 04:49, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Wateresque
To be honest, someone with around 100 edits was not the type of editor I was thinking of for this recognition award. I was thinking more of persistent excellence with steady edits for a period of time, rather than recognizing a promising start. Nonetheless, what do others think? isaacl (talk) 04:57, 11 January 2013 (UTC)