Copyright: Not ready: See Earwig's results (note that tool only detects exact matches and doesn't detect when the similarity is between the Wikinews article and someone's statement quoted by the source, the latter not presenting a copyvio problem). Four letters is considered the maximum acceptable length for a phrase identical to a source phrase, excluding stuff like proper nouns of course. Lead: "British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak on Friday" — words can be shifted around to alleviate this. Paragraph two, only difference is your inclusion of a second "have", which is unnecessary anyway: "The dogs have [...] pit bulls." Paragraph three: "in blood sports such as Bull baiting" (effectively the same as the source phrase, though you eliminated a comma) and "not recognized as a breed by the UK Kennel Club" (effectively the same, though you eliminated the possessive after "UK"). I hardly ever not-ready on a copyvio basis, but I find it likely whoever were to do a full review on this would encounter significant problems to fix, compromising their ability to remain independent of authorship and thus eligible to review.
Style: Not ready: This feels...disorganized. We start with the focal event in the lede, then in the second and third paragraphs we're deep into background about the breed, then jumping back to the focal event in the fourth paragraph, more recent background in the fifth, and a rather isolated fragment of the focal event in the sixth (which also violates WN:FUTURE, you can avoid this by attributing it to Sunak). WN:PYRAMID is the relevant Style Guide section, and it details how articles should begin by covering the focal event, then spiral out through background as they progress.
Comments by reviewer:OhhLord: Sorry about the earlier not-ready. I was sure shift + enter properly creates a new line in the input boxes for checklist items in the review gadget, but it actually submits the review.
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.
Copyright: Not ready: See Earwig's results (note that tool only detects exact matches and doesn't detect when the similarity is between the Wikinews article and someone's statement quoted by the source, the latter not presenting a copyvio problem). Four letters is considered the maximum acceptable length for a phrase identical to a source phrase, excluding stuff like proper nouns of course. Lead: "British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak on Friday" — words can be shifted around to alleviate this. Paragraph two, only difference is your inclusion of a second "have", which is unnecessary anyway: "The dogs have [...] pit bulls." Paragraph three: "in blood sports such as Bull baiting" (effectively the same as the source phrase, though you eliminated a comma) and "not recognized as a breed by the UK Kennel Club" (effectively the same, though you eliminated the possessive after "UK"). I hardly ever not-ready on a copyvio basis, but I find it likely whoever were to do a full review on this would encounter significant problems to fix, compromising their ability to remain independent of authorship and thus eligible to review.
Style: Not ready: This feels...disorganized. We start with the focal event in the lede, then in the second and third paragraphs we're deep into background about the breed, then jumping back to the focal event in the fourth paragraph, more recent background in the fifth, and a rather isolated fragment of the focal event in the sixth (which also violates WN:FUTURE, you can avoid this by attributing it to Sunak). WN:PYRAMID is the relevant Style Guide section, and it details how articles should begin by covering the focal event, then spiral out through background as they progress.
Comments by reviewer:OhhLord: Sorry about the earlier not-ready. I was sure shift + enter properly creates a new line in the input boxes for checklist items in the review gadget, but it actually submits the review.
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.
