Talk:Sandra Fluke nominated by Time magazine for Person of the Year

Notes

Original reporting tag refers to primary sources Twitter for Sandra Fluke reaction, and Time for the original candidate profile. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 02:57, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Background info

Background info sourced to previously-reviewed-articles, can be found at article reviewed see Sandra Fluke featured speaker at Democratic National Convention. -- Cirt (talk) 03:01, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Review of revision 1719124 [Passed]

Revision 1719124 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 15:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I'm not fond of long quotes from competing news organizations. In this case, of course, they're quotes from op-eds, in a situation where the opinions being expressed kind-of are the news. Which in turn brings up the somewhat omphaloskeptic character of this story. But the Time Person of the Year is perceived as a big deal, which makes it of interest, in a news-y rather than entertainment-y sort of way —I'd feel a bit silly trying to claim it wasn't newsworthy, which is evidence that it is newsworthy— and the quotes from op-eds sort of follow from that. So. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 1719124 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 15:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I'm not fond of long quotes from competing news organizations. In this case, of course, they're quotes from op-eds, in a situation where the opinions being expressed kind-of are the news. Which in turn brings up the somewhat omphaloskeptic character of this story. But the Time Person of the Year is perceived as a big deal, which makes it of interest, in a news-y rather than entertainment-y sort of way —I'd feel a bit silly trying to claim it wasn't newsworthy, which is evidence that it is newsworthy— and the quotes from op-eds sort of follow from that. So. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.