Talk:BP lose laptop containing sensitive claimant data

Review of revision 1204561 [Failed]

Revision 1204561 of this article has been reviewed by Bobby122 (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 04:13, 30 March 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Cannot confirm the following: "and was reported to have special software installed that would be activated when reported missing" and " sending up to 4,900,000 barrels of oil into the ocean, which eventually reached the southern US coast line." NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: Once those are clarified, I can finish reviewing for NPOV and Style. 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 1204561 of this article has been reviewed by Bobby122 (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 04:13, 30 March 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Cannot confirm the following: "and was reported to have special software installed that would be activated when reported missing" and " sending up to 4,900,000 barrels of oil into the ocean, which eventually reached the southern US coast line." NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: Once those are clarified, I can finish reviewing for NPOV and Style. 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.

• Special software: Cnn article, 4th paragraph, "The loss of the laptop, which can be remotely disabled", Will have that rephrased because I was assuming they had w:LoJack. Phearson (talk) 04:35, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

• ENWiki on the article listed, makes that claim of the amount of oil spilled. I have added the ref from there to here. Phearson (talk) 04:41, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

1. The ref format is never used on Wikinews articles.
2. Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source; you may, from there, lift the source they cite - provided it is accessible and you have verified it backs you up.
3. This could do with far more use of active voice. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 06:39, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

The error has been fixed. Though I am at a lost to what exactly needs to be active. Phearson (talk) 12:13, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Review of revision 1204941 [Passed]

Revision 1204941 of this article has been reviewed by Rayboy8 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:43, 30 March 2011 (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 1204941 of this article has been reviewed by Rayboy8 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:43, 30 March 2011 (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.