Made a few scattered distance-from-source adjustments.
A bunch of details about his jail time were not, afaics, in the sources. That could be due to info being cut during revisions of sources, an ugly habit of mainstream media; if you drew information from elsewhere, you shouldn't have. A reviewer could not-ready an article for such, but it seemed petty and, given the review queue glut atm, there's a real danger on resubmission it could get lost in the shuffle.
Would be good to have further personal details (the tidbit about appeal was interesting; too bad the sources didn't support it; there are apparently other major features of his life one might readily have drawn on).
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.
Made a few scattered distance-from-source adjustments.
A bunch of details about his jail time were not, afaics, in the sources. That could be due to info being cut during revisions of sources, an ugly habit of mainstream media; if you drew information from elsewhere, you shouldn't have. A reviewer could not-ready an article for such, but it seemed petty and, given the review queue glut atm, there's a real danger on resubmission it could get lost in the shuffle.
Would be good to have further personal details (the tidbit about appeal was interesting; too bad the sources didn't support it; there are apparently other major features of his life one might readily have drawn on).
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.
