User talk:Noahj ucb

Hi, Noahj_ucb, This is Lingqi Wu from INFO237 class. I signed up as your article's first reviewer but cannot find the article either in your user page or the real webpage. Do you know when you will finish the article so that I can review it? Thanks!

Lingqi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wulingqi (talk • contribs) 04:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of SEC v. Rajaratnam[edit]

Hello! Your submission of SEC v. Rajaratnam at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Soman (talk) 13:41, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that message was posted erroneously. It was supposed for the nominator of the article for DYK. However, you might still be interested in the DYK nomination discussion. --Soman (talk) 13:44, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse![edit]

Hello! Noahj ucb, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Sarah (talk) 21:19, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete DYK nomination[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Mavrix Photo, Inc. v. Brand Technologies, Inc. at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 09:05, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for SEC v. Rajaratnam[edit]

On 3 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SEC v. Rajaratnam, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in SEC v. Rajaratnam, the US 2nd Circuit Court held that defendants can be compelled to disclose relevant wiretapped conversations given to them in a separate trial? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/SEC v. Rajaratnam.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Mavrix Photo, Inc. v. Brand Technologies, Inc.[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Mavrix Photo, Inc. v. Brand Technologies, Inc. at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Orlady (talk) 22:49, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]