Ikezawa Natsuki: I went over this quickly and gave up when I got hungry. It is nearly finished, I think. Now; I am going to get something to eat. Rintrah 10:03, 30 December 2006 (UTC); Done Good job, Rintrah. These auto-translated articles are always rough. Gzkn09:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
History of Linux Done. I think some questions about the article remain, including a need for better referencing. For example, the quote at the end of the "The name Linux" section has no reference, though I assume it's from Torvalds's book. —beverson22:13, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, this is my first attempt knocking off an article from the proofread list; please make additional changes as necessary, and please contact me (my talk page, etc.) with any feedback. Thanks. —beverson
It is indeed odd. I tried to put the random statements into a logical sequence, but could not decide what else to do with the article. I think we should just make sure it is properly copyedited, and let someone who knows something about the town write something sensible.
Did what I could. Last graf of New Digimon is quite unclear. Might need someone familiar with Digimon/the game to clean that up. Gzkn03:51, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Edea (musical group) Hi guys, thought i'd join your project; seems like a great idea. This article is the first one I had a go at; I picked an eazy one. Although the information is far from complete (I did surf the web but could find little) I did my best. Pls spam my talk page with comments and suggestions as I am totally new to this. Brisbane2000 21:27, 26 December 2006 (UTC)| Done! Did some minor changes. Galena1122:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I made a few touch ups. There doesn't appear to be anything wrong with the terminology. (I come from a country where cricket is popular, although I don't watch the game much). Thanks for doing what I was too tired and unwell to do. Rintrah07:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Does it need more copyediting work, or just more work to be a better article? If the latter, should we move it to "finished", because we've copyedited everything that is currently there? Galena1122:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is in very bad shape - the LoCE tag on the talk page implies that the entire article was reviewed, and the section of quotes looked much better before - I will probably revert if I can figure out what changed - I've been trying to clean up, but keep finding more and more needs. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 06:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea - I did enough cleanup in there that it's no longer dismal, but I'm too tired to look at the prose. Unfortunately, all of that copyedit work just done is based on a very shaky source - I left it all, but Smoking Gun is not a reliable source. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done I revisited this one, but I couldn't remember why I wasn't comfortable moving it down. :) Anyway, the contradiction is unlikely to be resolved by us. Gzkn05:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
War Hawk This was a weird one. Sort of a stubby article at first, with some incomplete thoughts and weird references. Further research into the revision history yielded an older, much better version, to which I reverted. The original seems to had been lost in an unfortunate series of vandalism and incomplete revision in the past. Anyway, should be a quick proofread. —beverson17:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've done a first, top to bottom, copy edit and I'll go back and do some more work (my) tomorrow but, at this stage, this article almost certainly needs a second pair of eyes. Random Passer-by02:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I accessed this article, but the formatting appears to be a bit FUBAR. The table at the top has smooshed all of the text into the extreme far right margin. Can anyone more experienced troubleshoot this? I'm totally willing to do the proof after this is fixed.... Galena1119:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Zeil am Main History section needs help from someone fluent in German, as it looks as if it is a machine translation from the German wiki article. It's also the only "Z" article in the backlog, so it'd be neat if we could clear this one. :) Gzkn03:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I did what I could...the site isn't very comprehensive so the section still needs quite a bit of expansion. Ready for proof. Gzkn07:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done, but, oy, what a sensational mess. Tried to make it sound like an encyclopedia entry and not a script for CSIorLaw and Order. Left a note on the talk page--hopefully Jaranda or another user will help. Galena1118:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It would be great if copy-editing this article was given a high priority. The feedback from the FAC has been positive with one exception. One reviewer has given support with reservations for the article due to prose issues. I don't think they are major, if someone here could copy-edit the article and post something at the FAC page here that would be great! Thanks. - Shuddatalk03:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Slayer: On a band, Currently trying to get to FA status, the thing that's stopping is that it contains choppy sentences, with no flow in places, especially the Christ illusion section. Any help will be greatly appreciated M3tal H3ad01:06, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I had a quick look and made a quick edit. You're right: the prose is well below FA standard. The praising tone and disjointed sentences work against the required formality. Rintrah04:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I looked this article over and only found one or two very minor errors. This article is really good and does not seem to need a copy edit--Puddytang06:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Unterseeboot 35: A translation from German about a U-boat used in WWI. I did my best with it, but someone fluent in German may want to check the original text to ensure I didn't lose any meaning. Fairly short. Galena1123:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the categories were incorrect. It was categorized as a World War II submarine, and launched/sunk in the 30's. I don't think the Type is a VII (those appear to be 30's U-boats), but I left it in as it's not something I'm an expert on. - Itsfullofstars05:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now I feel silly for not noticing that. There were 2 U-35s, each of which served in a world war, so I've added the uboat.net page for the WW I subject of the article and removed it from the Type VII category, as those were strictly WW II boats. However since there is only one U-35 article, I think a disambiguation page is in order to point out that there were 2 separate U-boats given the same number. --BrokenSphere06:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cup noodles: Divided into sections, removed redundant wording. There were 2 sentences at the end of the Trivia section that I could not decide what to do with. Work still needs to be done on the picture, and sources need to be cited. Grhs126studenttalk20:56, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weyerhaeuser: Did not require a lot of work, but the Corporate history section is still a little choppy. Also, the Corporate governance section seems redundant as all of the information in it is also in the Weyerhaeuser template directly below it. Grhs126studenttalk21:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aziz Abdul Naji: It's mainly the tone that needs work; it's about a Gitmo detainee and I'm not supremely knowledgeble in the cases and decisions surrounding it. The tone is clearly against the Bush policies surrounding the issue, and it need someone who can change the tone without changing the meaning. Many thanks to anyone who helps. Defenestrating Monday23:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]