Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/FTC v. Actavis, Inc."
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Thingg (adding dyktick to other editor's review) |
imported>Launchballer (+comment) |
||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
*[[File:Symbol redirect vote 4.svg|16px]] Full review needed. [[User:BlueMoonset|BlueMoonset]] ([[User talk:BlueMoonset|talk]]) 19:06, 2 December 2013 (UTC) | *[[File:Symbol redirect vote 4.svg|16px]] Full review needed. [[User:BlueMoonset|BlueMoonset]] ([[User talk:BlueMoonset|talk]]) 19:06, 2 December 2013 (UTC) | ||
::[[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] Long enough, new enough, neutral enough. Hook sourced. Copyvio check chucks up nothing.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">[[User:Launchballer|<font color="#00F">Laun</font>]][[User talk:Launchballer|<font color="#00F">chba</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Launchballer|<font color="#00F">ller</font>]]</span> 19:43, 8 December 2013 (UTC) | ::[[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] Long enough, new enough, neutral enough. Hook sourced. Copyvio check chucks up nothing.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">[[User:Launchballer|<font color="#00F">Laun</font>]][[User talk:Launchballer|<font color="#00F">chba</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Launchballer|<font color="#00F">ller</font>]]</span> 19:43, 8 December 2013 (UTC) | ||
| + | :::{{U|Thingg}}: Why I didn't put a confirmed tick there myself, I wanted a second opinion and {{U|BlueMoonset}} redirected me to {{u|Crisco 1492}}, who has never responded. If you feel it is acceptable as is then you have my full permission.--<span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">[[User:Launchballer|<font color="#00F">Laun</font>]][[User talk:Launchballer|<font color="#00F">chba</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Launchballer|<font color="#00F">ller</font>]]</span> 09:26, 14 December 2013 (UTC) | ||
}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | }}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | ||
Revision as of 09:26, 14 December 2013
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
FTC v. Actavis, Inc.
- ... that reverse payment settlements of patent litigations are not immune from antitrust liability in the United States?
Created/expanded by EricChuang676 (talk). Nominated by Anthonysutardja (talk) at 16:29, 30 October 2013 (UTC).
The hook doesn't included the line, perhaps something like ALT1: ... that United States Supreme Court case FTC v. Actavis, Inc. challenged "pay-for-delay" settlements in the drug industry? The original hook is quite long and not the most attention grabbing of all time. --S.G.(GH) ping! 17:45, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:06, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Long enough, new enough, neutral enough. Hook sourced. Copyvio check chucks up nothing.--Launchballer 19:43, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
- Template:U: Why I didn't put a confirmed tick there myself, I wanted a second opinion and Template:U redirected me to Template:U, who has never responded. If you feel it is acceptable as is then you have my full permission.--Launchballer 09:26, 14 December 2013 (UTC)