Talk:COP15, Alternative "texts" divide climate summit

You said you wanted comments in the edit summary, so here goes. (It should be noted i'm not a particularly good writer, so take anything i say with a grain of salt). It looks pretty good. Two things i noticed is that WWF should have its full name written out the first time its used (preferably with wikilink). Also, i think "alternative text" should be clarified earlier in the article. For the first little bit, i was confused by what was meant by the phrase. (perhaps use the phrase alternative treaty instead or something). Cheers. Bawolff ☺☻ 20:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Clicked a button
Sorry! I clicked a button, not on purpose, and that changed the article. I'll try to reset it, but if I can't - please help me! Skalman (talk) 21:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, I reset the mistake. It wasn't so hard. Skalman (talk) 22:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Title
"The crux of the biscuit is the Apostrophe(')" &mdash; Frank Zappa.

The "text's" what? The "Text's" crazy conditions, or was it meant to be plural? --Brian McNeil / talk 16:53, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Meant to be plural. Would you look over the article - what should be changed, can it be expaned with more details. Thanks Mrchris (talk) 17:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Good grief! 's means the following object belongs to . The possessive use of the apostrophe. Which is wrong. there is no apostrophe in the plural texts. I'll see if the text is better in about a half hour after I eat. --Brian McNeil / talk 18:12, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I moved to review. RE: Verifiability: Text claims developing countries don't like this, disputed by FT. - Can not see where the FT claims that developing countries like the text. Mrchris (talk) 22:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)