Talk:Maria Lourdes Sereno becomes the first female Philippine Chief Justice
Review of revision 1601194 [Not ready] edit
 |
Revision 1601194 of this article has been reviewed by LauraHale (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 09:24, 28 August 2012 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: This article is worth having and not so concerned about timeliness at this point. A review is needed of the style guide regarding date usage. At the same time, the lead needs to be rewritten to answer, who, what, where, when and why this matters. The first paragraph does not answer when this event happens and needs a rewrite. The image also needs to be credited with who took it. Please look at examples. 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 1601194 of this article has been reviewed by LauraHale (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 09:24, 28 August 2012 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: This article is worth having and not so concerned about timeliness at this point. A review is needed of the style guide regarding date usage. At the same time, the lead needs to be rewritten to answer, who, what, where, when and why this matters. The first paragraph does not answer when this event happens and needs a rewrite. The image also needs to be credited with who took it. Please look at examples. 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 1601194 [Not ready] edit
| |
Revision 1601194 of this article has been reviewed by LauraHale (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 09:24, 28 August 2012 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: This article is worth having and not so concerned about timeliness at this point. A review is needed of the style guide regarding date usage. At the same time, the lead needs to be rewritten to answer, who, what, where, when and why this matters. The first paragraph does not answer when this event happens and needs a rewrite. The image also needs to be credited with who took it. Please look at examples. 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 1601194 of this article has been reviewed by LauraHale (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 09:24, 28 August 2012 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: This article is worth having and not so concerned about timeliness at this point. A review is needed of the style guide regarding date usage. At the same time, the lead needs to be rewritten to answer, who, what, where, when and why this matters. The first paragraph does not answer when this event happens and needs a rewrite. The image also needs to be credited with who took it. Please look at examples. 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 1601305 [Passed] edit
 |
Revision 1601305 of this article has been reviewed by Brian McNeil (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 10:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: Please see the edit history; we do not use 'absolute' dates, preferring 'relative' references where reasonable. Additional changes were required to switch a significant portion of the article to active voice—more-usual for a news report. Encyclopdic writings can easily get away with passive voice. 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 1601305 of this article has been reviewed by Brian McNeil (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 10:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC).
Comments by reviewer: Please see the edit history; we do not use 'absolute' dates, preferring 'relative' references where reasonable. Additional changes were required to switch a significant portion of the article to active voice—more-usual for a news report. Encyclopdic writings can easily get away with passive voice. 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. |