Talk:11-month old baby finds illegal drugs in playground in British Columbia, Canadian police report

Headline

I'm aware there was an extensive discussion on irc, though it's somewhat unclear to me what was resolved there.

• The headline should be a sentence, rather than a noun phrase (as currently).
• It should focus on the focal event of the article.
• It should "tell the most important and unique thing". It's important to know where in the world this happened.

--Pi zero (talk) 13:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm inclined to "11-month old baby finds illegal drugs in playground, British Columbia police reports", which is a just-slightly-tightened-up form (per headlinese) of one of the candidates tossed about the in the irc discussion. Analysis of the big-picture situation does not appear to be part of the focal event. --Pi zero (talk) 15:33, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

It's been noted (off-wiki) the headline really ought to have the country name in it. --Pi zero (talk) 17:37, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Review of revision 4573893 [Passed]

Revision 4573893 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:56, 8 July 2020 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: There were several factual flubs to repair. In several places, organizations or things needed to be explained — we aspire to write articles that can are self-contained in that they can be understood by an intelligent (but perhaps specifically uninformed) reader. This was already on its third-day-after-the-event when submitted. Preferably one should try to submit either on the same day, or just one day after, providing both an opportunity for greater freshness and maximal time for the review process. See the detailed history of edits during review (which one always should take a look at, of course). 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 4573893 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:56, 8 July 2020 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: There were several factual flubs to repair. In several places, organizations or things needed to be explained — we aspire to write articles that can are self-contained in that they can be understood by an intelligent (but perhaps specifically uninformed) reader. This was already on its third-day-after-the-event when submitted. Preferably one should try to submit either on the same day, or just one day after, providing both an opportunity for greater freshness and maximal time for the review process. See the detailed history of edits during review (which one always should take a look at, of course). 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.