Talk:Belgian men's goalball team departs for Finland for World Championships

Notes

The same information on Twitter is on Facebook. Copy and pasted here:

Goalball Belgium 7 hours ago Ready to board our plane! #selfie — with Klison Mapreni and 2 others.

People TaggedClose

Add Friend Tom Vanhove

Add Friend Youssef Bihi

(7 hours ago based on 5:34PM CEST.)

Goalball Belgium shared Parantee vzw's photo. 21 hours ago Tomorrow our team will travel to Finland for the Espoo 2014 IBSA Goalball World Championships! Bruno, Tom, Glenn, Klison, Youssef, Wassime and the staff are very proud to represent our nation on the biggest goalball event after the London 2012 Paralympics! Het nationaal goalbalteam vertrekt morgen naar het WK in het Finse Espoo! Veel succes Bruno, Tom, Glenn, Klison, Youssef en Wassime!

(21 hours ago based on 5:34PM CEST.)

--LauraHale (talk) 15:35, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Review of revision 2711629 [Passed]

Revision 2711629 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 18:31, 26 June 2014 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: The focal event is, unabashedly, an excuse for the surrounding material. Not only is this not a problem, it's why I'm allowing the sourcing of the focus. There seems to me to be nothing wrong here — and I wish I could explain why. The better we articulate these principles, the more stable we'll be over time with turnover in reviewership. 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 2711629 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 18:31, 26 June 2014 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: The focal event is, unabashedly, an excuse for the surrounding material. Not only is this not a problem, it's why I'm allowing the sourcing of the focus. There seems to me to be nothing wrong here — and I wish I could explain why. The better we articulate these principles, the more stable we'll be over time with turnover in reviewership. 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.