Talk:After 100 days, Deepwater Horizon oil spill still threatens Gulf coast

Review of revision 1069106 [Passed]

Revision 1069106 of this article has been reviewed by Diego Grez (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:53, 31 July 2010 (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 1069106 of this article has been reviewed by Diego Grez (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:53, 31 July 2010 (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.

Title

It might save a bit of space by the omission of a comma if 'after 100 days' is put at the end. Kayau (talk · contribs) 11:57, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Saves space, but your proposal doesn't seem to flow quite right to my ear. --InfantGorilla (talk) 13:13, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

What if 'continues to' is changed to 'still'? Kayau (talk · contribs) 14:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

'Still' is great, but I prefer it if 'After 100 days,' stays at the front: After 100 days, Deepwater Horizon oil spill still threatens Gulf coast. That is all I'll say. If no-one else chips in, trust your own judgement. --InfantGorilla (talk) 15:36, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll wait another day and see if anyone objects then I'll move it to 'still', with after 100 days' still in front. Kayau (talk · contribs) 13:15, 1 August 2010 (UTC)