Template talk:PAIRrequest

PAIRreview for PAIRrequest by Knife (talk) 14:15, 26 July 2007 (EDT)
Accuracy	3.5	It is accurate enough.
Depth	3.0	Could explain a little more, like what template to use when reviewing (ironically this one)
Grammar	4.0	Grammar doesn't really need to be improved.
Images	3.0	Perhaps an image illustrating the article would be good?
Formatting	3.0	Colors are not that great and the template isn't really that special.
Final Rating:	16.5	This is an awesome template, but it needs more of a reason for users to start using it efficiently.
Reviewer:	Knife (talk) 14:15, 26 July 2007 (EDT) doc

You're a PAIRrequest...Saudy^Talk!, that may be spam.

It is in the category Review Requested. Well, still, one could have figured... - Cobold (talk · contribs) 14:20, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

I phail.Knife (talk) 16:06, 26 July 2007 (EDT)

LOL. Notice that it isn't under T for template or P for PAIRrequest, it's at the top. Did it on purpose to put it at the top Wa _T^C_@^Y 16:51, 26 July 2007 (EDT)