Talk:Eastern Slovak village Buzica honored as European Stork Village

Notes for reviewer

I included references for pargraphs/sentences in the text, within “<!-- -->” brackets. Košický Korzár article is very similar to Greenfudge article.

Source for “Košice Plain Protected Bird Area”: Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic edict which declares Košice Plain Protected Bird Area can be found on this site (since the direct link on PDF doesn't work, choose “Košická kotlina” – 9th PDF file). Map is here (Buzica on the bottom left).

The title of edict says:
No. 22
The edict
of Ministry of Environment of the Slovak Republic
(of) January 7, 2008
which declares Košice Plain Protected Bird Area

In Section 2, Article 1 (§ 1) you can see that Buzica is also named as one of villages in the protected bird area.
§ 1
(2) Protected Bird Area lies in Košice-okolie Districts in cadastral areas of Belža,... (villages named) and in Košice II District in cadastral area of Železiarne.

--DavidStefanSK (talk) 23:26, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Review of revision 2556312 [Passed]

Revision 2556312 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 04:36, 18 April 2014 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Really try to do better than this on freshness. After careful consideration, I'm allowing it as fresh, given it's not a story with a lot of English-language coverage — but if we could have been the first English-language outlet to cover it, that would have been great — and given the bit of borderline OR thrown in (OR helps with freshness). Date of publication of sources is not, in itself, a measure of freshness; new information come to light can extend freshness out to a week (which we're barely within), but here the English source is very close to the Slovak one (either a loose translation, or close to it). There were quite a few passages here that were too close, sometimes much too close to the sources (both the English ones). Avoid copying source passages (as well as copying them and then "scuffing them up"); see WN:PILLARS#own. 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 2556312 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 04:36, 18 April 2014 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Really try to do better than this on freshness. After careful consideration, I'm allowing it as fresh, given it's not a story with a lot of English-language coverage — but if we could have been the first English-language outlet to cover it, that would have been great — and given the bit of borderline OR thrown in (OR helps with freshness). Date of publication of sources is not, in itself, a measure of freshness; new information come to light can extend freshness out to a week (which we're barely within), but here the English source is very close to the Slovak one (either a loose translation, or close to it). There were quite a few passages here that were too close, sometimes much too close to the sources (both the English ones). Avoid copying source passages (as well as copying them and then "scuffing them up"); see WN:PILLARS#own. 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.