Talk:Australian Eddie Jones named as England's rugby union head coach

Review of revision 3995761 [Not ready]

Revision 3995761 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 18:02, 21 November 2015 (UTC). Copyright: Not ready: See below. Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not ready: See below. Comments by reviewer: I suspect this can be fixed up without too much trouble; I'm afraid to try myself, though, as this sort of thing can easily turn into a slow-boil compromising of independence for review. Don't copy passages from source. Don't copy them and then "scuff them up" to avoid copyright — it doesn't avoid accusations of plagiary. I readily spotted at least a couple such passages (similarities to Guardian source, as it happens). The single biggest problem I hit was actually the whole of the last two paragraphs — which are, yes, mostly a truly massive direct quote — rather excessively large, tbh; should be shorter — but with the attributing context also copied substantially verbatim — except that the first few words were scuffed up a bit. Choose a smaller excerpted quote there and a different way of framing it. It'd be appreciated if you'd look for similarities to sources (try toollabs:dupdet) and, where you find such, structurally rearrange things in a way that makes the low-level similarity vanish (cf. advice at WN:PILLARS#own). A reviewer can fix a few small problems during review, but the less there is left to fix by the time of review, the better. 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 3995761 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 18:02, 21 November 2015 (UTC). Copyright: Not ready: See below. Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not ready: See below. Comments by reviewer: I suspect this can be fixed up without too much trouble; I'm afraid to try myself, though, as this sort of thing can easily turn into a slow-boil compromising of independence for review. Don't copy passages from source. Don't copy them and then "scuff them up" to avoid copyright — it doesn't avoid accusations of plagiary. I readily spotted at least a couple such passages (similarities to Guardian source, as it happens). The single biggest problem I hit was actually the whole of the last two paragraphs — which are, yes, mostly a truly massive direct quote — rather excessively large, tbh; should be shorter — but with the attributing context also copied substantially verbatim — except that the first few words were scuffed up a bit. Choose a smaller excerpted quote there and a different way of framing it. It'd be appreciated if you'd look for similarities to sources (try toollabs:dupdet) and, where you find such, structurally rearrange things in a way that makes the low-level similarity vanish (cf. advice at WN:PILLARS#own). A reviewer can fix a few small problems during review, but the less there is left to fix by the time of review, the better. 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.

Review of revision 3997921 [Passed]

Revision 3997921 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 15:51, 22 November 2015 (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 3997921 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 15:51, 22 November 2015 (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.