Of the points addressed during review — for which see the detailed edit history — one worth flagging out is the lengthy passage about the severed head, which was copied verbatim from source and superficially "scuffed up". Do not do that. If you can't find a thoroughly different way to convey the information, leave it out; but you should always be able to find a different way to say it. Since it was one passage (other places with distance-from-source concerns were milder by comparison), I addressed it during review.
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.
Of the points addressed during review — for which see the detailed edit history — one worth flagging out is the lengthy passage about the severed head, which was copied verbatim from source and superficially "scuffed up". Do not do that. If you can't find a thoroughly different way to convey the information, leave it out; but you should always be able to find a different way to say it. Since it was one passage (other places with distance-from-source concerns were milder by comparison), I addressed it during review.
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.