Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-02-13/Arbitration report

For the purposes of full disclosure, the writer of this article was a party in the arbitration case against Freestylefrappe. However, he believes that his participation in this case did not affect his writing of the case summary. Please leave any comments regarding the neutrality of this article here. Ral315 (talk) 03:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"on the table"[edit]

I note that the phrase "on the table" is being used here in the British sense. You might want to use "under consideration" instead. --James S. 07:15, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the key difference is "on the table", not "to table". I'm American, and I can recognize the difference between these. Ral315 (talk) 16:15, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you can tell exactly what is meant by context here, but turn on CSPAN-2 around 4:50 p.m. Eastern time some weekday. At the end of the Senate's business day, just before the gavel, Bill Frist will get up and move usually about a dozen "calendar" or noncontroversial requests, all of which will end with the words "I ask unanimous consent that reading be waived, that the motion be agreed to, and that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table." --James S. 23:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]