Talk:International Paralympic Committee comments on Russian adherence to Olympic Truce

Review of revision 2439626 [Not ready]

Revision 2439626 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 20:24, 2 March 2014 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not ready: See below. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: The focus as presented is the IPC saying Russia may have violated the Olympic Truce. However, looking carefully at the sources, it isn't clear to me that the IPC did say that. AP said they may have violated the truce, but it seems the IPC may have been very careful not to. The UK team said they were still going and were monitoring the situation. The US team, afaics, only said they were still going (no actual remark about monitoring the situation). Logically, this article really should explain what it is that Russia did that is in question. At least a few words. 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 2439626 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 20:24, 2 March 2014 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not ready: See below. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: The focus as presented is the IPC saying Russia may have violated the Olympic Truce. However, looking carefully at the sources, it isn't clear to me that the IPC did say that. AP said they may have violated the truce, but it seems the IPC may have been very careful not to. The UK team said they were still going and were monitoring the situation. The US team, afaics, only said they were still going (no actual remark about monitoring the situation). Logically, this article really should explain what it is that Russia did that is in question. At least a few words. 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.

I think I have addressed these points. --LauraHale (talk) 20:49, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Review of revision 2441837 [Passed]

Revision 2441837 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 15:59, 3 March 2014 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: The lede is awfully long, with the full quote in it. Though I see the awkwardness this organization addresses. I was frustratingly unable to verify some specifics about the Crimean situation. This could be related to my inability to access the video in the Telegraph source. 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 2441837 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 15:59, 3 March 2014 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: The lede is awfully long, with the full quote in it. Though I see the awkwardness this organization addresses. I was frustratingly unable to verify some specifics about the Crimean situation. This could be related to my inability to access the video in the Telegraph source. 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.