Talk:Scientists describe how 'upside-down rivers' of warm water break Antarctica's ice shelf

Paywalls

Ugh, National Geographic looks like it's covering this, but it's got a sign-up. Darkfrog24 (talk) 05:09, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

That's an entirely new kind of "paywall" to me. If you're quick enough, you can read before the pop-up shows up though. :P —mikemoral (talk · contribs) 05:23, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Archiving the article made a static, pre-popup, version available here: https://web.archive.org/web/20191011054122/https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2019/10/how-antarctic-melting-above-below-ice-sheet/ --SVTCobra 05:43, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Also, it's not really a paywall, just a registration required, so using it is not stealing money out of the pocket of NatGeo. --SVTCobra 13:07, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

This was more of an "I don't want to bother right now" than a "no way can this get reviewed in accordance with our guidelines." Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:19, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Sourcing

I added Daily Mail and then checked the other sources to make sure they weren't carbon copies of the press release and lo, they are not! Live Science would have been enough by itself. Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:19, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

@Darkfrog24: Since you seem to be online, I was wondering if you could make some slight improvements to this article. The thing I've noticed so far is the study is very similar to the 2016 study. I wonder if we could mention the previous research (since it is cited in sources) and point out specifically what the new findings are. --SVTCobra 13:27, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Well, I guess I failed to catch you. I'll go back to review. --SVTCobra 18:24, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Review of revision 4521609 [Passed]

Revision 4521609 of this article has been reviewed by SVTCobra (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:29, 12 October 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I changed the title because it was just as much applicable to the 2016 study as this one I wish the article brought up 'shear margins' but alas, this is intended for general audiences 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 4521609 of this article has been reviewed by SVTCobra (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:29, 12 October 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I changed the title because it was just as much applicable to the 2016 study as this one I wish the article brought up 'shear margins' but alas, this is intended for general audiences 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.

I like the new title. Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:19, 13 October 2019 (UTC)