Talk:Rage Against The Machine top UK singles chart

Original reporting notes

• Listened to the chart live on BBC Radio 1
• Facebook group
• Donations page
• Tom Morello's victory gig tweet

the wub "?!" 19:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Review of revision 925376 [Failed]

Revision 925376 of this article has been reviewed by James Pain (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 19:42, 20 December 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Only a single source of them winning the top spot NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Well done on speed, one more source about them winning the No.1 and this will be perfect and ready to go up. Perhaps something about what the win means for x-factor at the end (http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=7357&edition=1&ttl=20091220194147). 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 925376 of this article has been reviewed by James Pain (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 19:42, 20 December 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Only a single source of them winning the top spot NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Well done on speed, one more source about them winning the No.1 and this will be perfect and ready to go up. Perhaps something about what the win means for x-factor at the end (http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=7357&edition=1&ttl=20091220194147). 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.

Actually, {{Broadcast report}} makes two sources. I'm going to go with your review on the other points and publish. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 19:44, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Infact I just saw the other source in the list, my bad. still could use something else at the end. them not turning up to the radio 1 show isn't the best thing to end on I think. --James Pain (talk) 19:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thanks, had just gone looking for another but I guess it doesn't matter now. I thought I'd seen a template like {{Broadcast report}}, but couldn't find it when I needed it! (Also I'm currently kicking myself for not writing an article back when I first heard about the campaign, before it had hit the mainstream media.) the wub "?!" 19:48, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Won't disagree with that. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 19:48, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

• Prepared stories can be a good idea. However, you have to be able to throw away your work if your guess is wrong; a lot of people have problems with that. wub, where did you look for broadcast report? I might see if I can make it easier to find. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 19:58, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

• Just at WN:OR, Wikinews:Writing an article and the style guide. the wub "?!" 20:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Review of revision 925389 [Passed]

Revision 925389 of this article has been reviewed by Blood Red Sandman (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:45, 20 December 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Maybe the talk page links could go in an external links section? 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 925389 of this article has been reviewed by Blood Red Sandman (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:45, 20 December 2009 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Maybe the talk page links could go in an external links section? 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.