Talk:540 million private Facebook records found on public Internet

Review of revision 4474162 [Not ready]

Revision 4474162 of this article has been reviewed by Bddpaux (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 13:44, 4 April 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Need OR notes/verification NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: Topically, an excellent thing indeed. However, this statement: '....and Wikinews confirmed with UpGuard that the two incidents involved two separate Amazon S3 buckets.', requires some degree of notes/verification or what-have-you. I couldn't find any. We can try again if author can provide something solid.--Bddpaux (talk) 13:44, 4 April 2019 (UTC) 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 4474162 of this article has been reviewed by Bddpaux (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 13:44, 4 April 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Need OR notes/verification NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: Topically, an excellent thing indeed. However, this statement: '....and Wikinews confirmed with UpGuard that the two incidents involved two separate Amazon S3 buckets.', requires some degree of notes/verification or what-have-you. I couldn't find any. We can try again if author can provide something solid.--Bddpaux (talk) 13:44, 4 April 2019 (UTC) 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.

I am pinging @Gryllida: here, as they were the one who added that bit (im not sure how to fix it either- this is my first Wikinews article). TheAwesomeHwyh (talk) 18:00, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I like the topic you picked.

Gryllida's done a lot of independent reporting for Wikinews before. I'm sure the notes will appear here shortly. Darkfrog24 (talk) 18:40, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Okay, good to know. TheAwesomeHwyh (talk) 18:43, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Bddpaux: this information is at scoop. --Gryllida (talk) 18:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Note: the relevant discussion of this information occurred at User talk:TheAwesomeHwyh; alas I did not link it here.

I've resubmitted the article for review now. --Gryllida (talk) 18:54, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Review of revision 4474792 [Passed]

Revision 4474792 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 22:03, 8 April 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: The comparison with the Cambridge Analytica case might have been explained a bit more; one wants to know whether this is suggesting that the data shouldn't have been in the possession of its owners in the first place. Whether or not the OR is worth the extension of freshness is a marginal call, which I've chosen to be generous on, all things considered. 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 4474792 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 22:03, 8 April 2019 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: The comparison with the Cambridge Analytica case might have been explained a bit more; one wants to know whether this is suggesting that the data shouldn't have been in the possession of its owners in the first place. Whether or not the OR is worth the extension of freshness is a marginal call, which I've chosen to be generous on, all things considered. 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.

As google is one galaxy iPhone as myself I love opening information 2607:FB91:D96:4A55:A5A1:4688:A5A9:3388 (talk) 02:33, 24 June 2023 (UTC)