This had various distance-from-source problems, most especially at the end of the second-to-last paragraph. That entire two-sentence sequence was essentially copied from source and then superficially "scuffed up" by use of synonyms and such. Don't do that. I have, on this occasion, made edits demonstrating the sort of thing one needs to be doing (at a minimum) to that sort of passage; but I'm really pushing the limits of reviewer's purview, and mustn't do as much on a regular basis.
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.
This had various distance-from-source problems, most especially at the end of the second-to-last paragraph. That entire two-sentence sequence was essentially copied from source and then superficially "scuffed up" by use of synonyms and such. Don't do that. I have, on this occasion, made edits demonstrating the sort of thing one needs to be doing (at a minimum) to that sort of passage; but I'm really pushing the limits of reviewer's purview, and mustn't do as much on a regular basis.
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.
Stylistically, this lede is also weak in that it really should be much shorter. For instance, when I made it a lead on the main page, my summary sentence read
A team of scientists from Australia and US has found an explanation for why increasing greenhouse gases have not weakened the equatorial Pacific trade winds as expected.
