Wikipedia:WikiProject Inline Templates/Participants

Participants
Please feel free to add yourself here, and to indicate any areas of particular interest.
 * 1) --  SMcCandlish &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93;   ‹(-¿-)› 01:05, 14 April 2007 (UTC) (Consistency, browser compatibility, correct WP categorization, proper documentation)
 * 2) --  snowolfD4( talk /  @ ) 07:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC) (making sure they're aesthetically pleasing, clearly identify their purpose)
 * 3) --  05:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC) (discussion, documentation)
 * 4) -- Random832 02:33, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) -- Xiaphias 05:01, 8 May 2007 (UTC) (same as Snowolf; distracting or overly-vague tags aren't helpful)
 * 6) --  daniel  folsom  18:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC) (Consistency, clean up)
 * 7) -- User:Ludwigs2 23:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC) (general handiwork)
 * 8) -- Rich Farmbrough, 19:22 5 February 2009 (UTC). general contributions, try and keep some coherence.
 * 9) -- ''Pstanton Hey, what a great project, I usually go through and try and find, and then tag flaws in-line flaws in articles, so this is a really great wiki project for me! I have a hard time finding specific tags, so hopefully the list here will help. --Pstanton (talk) 19:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * 10) -- Kevinkor2 (talk) 09:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC) (I am back! (See User:Kevinkor2.)) general handiwork.
 * 11) -- Rursus dixit. ( m bork3  !) 08:17, 25 May 2010 (UTC) (all kinds of issues/improvements).
 * 12) -- JJB 19:03, 31 May 2012 (UTC) Here's a WikiProject I can work with!
 * 13) -- Hex [t/c] 07:40, 7 August 2012 (UTC) Standardization is good!
 * 14) -- User:Jason Quinn... want things to be "the way they should be"
 * 15) -- User:OrenBochman looking to use these to improve communications with new users
 * 16) -- User:Northamerica1000
 * 17) -- Le Prof, User:Leprof_7272, interests: completeness and cohesion of tags (syntax and variants for all common, comparable, and memorable); gap-filling of any missing tags relative to section and article tags; gap-filling of any missing tags for common content quality issues related to fact-sourcing, general verifiability, or plagiarism