Talk:Trar Dewan

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Otterpops, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 26 February 2007.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Pahari Sahib (talk) 08:51, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit[edit]

Who knows what the League of Copyeditors did? Look at these, inter alia: Its//kilomitres//&//in south of...city//near about//.aproxmatly//90% peoples//random commas and periods. The page despite its many edits seems to be fast approaching incomprehensibility--SilasW 10:17, 27 June 2007 (UTC).[reply]

No ref restored + minor rewrite[edit]

The no ref tag should not have been removed. What does "educated" mean? Literate? And if, say, children up to 7yo make 10% of pop'n with a life expectancy of 70 (and likely they are a much higher % of pop'n) then it seems unlikely that 90% are "literate" let alone the broader "educated". Cultural vanity rules.--SilasW (talk) 08:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please abide by WP conventions. Twice noref has been removed. This article gives no references. Next time perhaps mention of vandalism and suggested deletion shd be tagged.--SilasW (talk) 12:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove Templates which draw attention to deficiencies in articles until corrections have been made. Cultural vanity does not override the need for correct English. Merely as examples: a "sentence" with no verb, the incredible "90%".--SilasW (talk) 10:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this, that was actually removed over two years ago along with the noref, that version did not need to be copyedited Pahari Sahib 11:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]