Talk:Stevens v Kabushiki Kaisha Sony Computer Entertainment

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games 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.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (4 participants)
Purple Francis (8 participants)
Gilman Louie (2 participants)
Yoshimitsu (3 participants)
Dr. Wily (9 participants)
First Internet Backgammon Server (3 participants)
Emote (2 participants)
Preston Arsement (6 participants; relisted)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Featured content candidates

Good article nominations

DYK nominations

Reviews and reassessments

Articles that need...

Australia: Law Low‑importance

	Australia portal Stevens v Kabushiki Kaisha Sony Computer Entertainment is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian law (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Law C‑class Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Question

Hi there, I am new to this, but on my page it says there is no lead section. I have put an introduction to the case above the contents - i thought that would be considered a lead section. Any advice?

Thanks

Those two first paragraphs are a decent lead. It could be improved further, but I removed the warning for that on the page. --an odd name 00:28, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citing sources

Please see Wikipedia:Citing sources. Don't use "ibid", "op cit" etc. Wikipedia articles are meant to be edited by multiple parties and to all the insertion of material and footnotes by people who don't necessarily understand systems which were out of fashion when I was at uni in the early 1970s.--Grahame (talk) 06:37, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the referencing so that there are no more ibid's. Can anyone advise me on other changes needed? :) Also, i had a word limit of 2500 words- so this is meant to be a brief summary of the case. Is there anyway to change the title to mention that?

123jac123 (talk) 05:15, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do you mean that you have a word limit? There are no statutes like that in place on Wikipedia. Seegoon (talk) 19:31, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]