Talk:Greta Thunberg named 2019 Time Person of the Year

Heads up

I'm going to be without internet access for the next ~48 hours, and so if this gets a not-ready review someone else please feel free to try and fix it. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 04:16, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

@Acagastya: I saw you did some alterations to the article today, could you give it a run through and make sure I didn't miss anything. AZOperator (talk) 00:54, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Supposition/attributing factor

All, I am really having an issue with the line, "Among protestors, Thunberg was an inspiration; Time reported that "Make the World Greta Again" was a rallying cry used, a parody of Donald Trump's "Make America Great Again" campaign slogan." When I hear the word parody I think of Alec Baldwin on SNL which is political satire. Even though the two slogans are very similar, unless there is someone saying "yeah we made this slogan because of Trump," (which would make Trump's ego even bigger) I would place this in the NPOV stack. Any thoughts? AZOperator (talk) 17:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Trump Twitter Posts

I want everyone to resist the urge to add content to this article about Trump’s Twitter statements. It is not about him even though he thinks everything is about him. Keep the focus on the award. AZOperator (talk) 01:15, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Review of revision 4532920 [Not ready]

Revision 4532920 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 19:20, 14 December 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Not ready: We have a few hours yet, but there's something essential missing - see below. Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: There is no explanation here of what Time Person of the Year is. We have not always been equally careful about this, but it looks like a good job was done by this article; it only took them a sentence (Time recognizes ...), but if one doesn't explain, one has an article about "somebody was given an award" without saying what the award is for. Assumes specific knowledge by the reader. 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 4532920 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 19:20, 14 December 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Not ready: We have a few hours yet, but there's something essential missing - see below. Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: There is no explanation here of what Time Person of the Year is. We have not always been equally careful about this, but it looks like a good job was done by this article; it only took them a sentence (Time recognizes ...), but if one doesn't explain, one has an article about "somebody was given an award" without saying what the award is for. Assumes specific knowledge by the reader. 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.

quote about the criterion for the award

This article gets that quote from our 2017 article. Our 2017 article gets it from a syndicated AFP article. And it seems AFP likely got it from Wikipedia. It doesn't readily trace further back than that, because Wikipedia cites an off-line source. I'm not happy about that; it does well on explaining, which is the concern I raised in my review, and we've previously published it so I'm not about to reject it, but it's not great on verification, and if I, or someone else, can work out something better —after getting this out the door— that'd be a small relief. --Pi zero (talk) 21:10, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Review of revision 4532998 [Passed]

Revision 4532998 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 22:19, 14 December 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. 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 4532998 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 22:19, 14 December 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. 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.

“Make The World Greta Again”

... ICameHereForNews (talk) 05:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Indeed. --Pi zero (talk) 05:58, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Edit request

Can someone please remove the section “Related news” because I don’t think the news is similar enough. ICameHereForNews (talk) 06:43, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Items listed as related news are those that include relevant info and were used as sources. In this case, the article was used to source the info regarding what the award means in the lede. --DannyS712 (talk) 06:48, 20 March 2020 (UTC)