Talk:Former Australian police media director Stephen Linnell's perjury conviction quashed

Review of revision 1045934 [Failed]

Revision 1045934 of this article has been reviewed by Amgine (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 14:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Some statements interpret facts, possibly incorrectly: "Not wanting to answer directly to reporters today..." NPOV: Passed Style: Not ready: Sentences, title, obfuscate. Fails to adequately explain who did what *now*, confusing past and present news events. Comments by reviewer: Borderline NPOV issues, primarily due to interpreting facts presented. The two source articles are, in fact, a single news article with differing backgrounders: find an additional source. Recast title, lede, to present only the current news event. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 1045934 of this article has been reviewed by Amgine (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 14:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Some statements interpret facts, possibly incorrectly: "Not wanting to answer directly to reporters today..." NPOV: Passed Style: Not ready: Sentences, title, obfuscate. Fails to adequately explain who did what *now*, confusing past and present news events. Comments by reviewer: Borderline NPOV issues, primarily due to interpreting facts presented. The two source articles are, in fact, a single news article with differing backgrounders: find an additional source. Recast title, lede, to present only the current news event. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Review of revision 1046241 [Passed]

Revision 1046241 of this article has been reviewed by Thunderhead (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Looks good~! --Thunderhead (t - e - c) 19:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 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 1046241 of this article has been reviewed by Thunderhead (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Looks good~! --Thunderhead (t - e - c) 19:21, 18 June 2010 (UTC) 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.

International title ...

The title of this article doesn't indicate what country or even region this is taking place in, and neither does the main article body from what I could tell. *Please* make sure that things are as comprehensible as possible for a global audience. I'll be renaming this shortly. Tempodivalse [talk] 21:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)