When citing ABC in the body of the article, in this case I'd suggest calling it "US-based ABC News", since we are talking about Oceania, where ABC (Australia) is also a thing.
Was there some particular reason to attribute the stats? Perhaps I'm missing something. It felt odd to me in this case to attribute the stats to ABC News. It's from four years ago; discrepancies stand a respectable chance of having gotten sorted out in the interim, and we didn't attribute the percentages for this year to the news org we got them from, which afaics were only given by one of our two sources.
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.
When citing ABC in the body of the article, in this case I'd suggest calling it "US-based ABC News", since we are talking about Oceania, where ABC (Australia) is also a thing.
Was there some particular reason to attribute the stats? Perhaps I'm missing something. It felt odd to me in this case to attribute the stats to ABC News. It's from four years ago; discrepancies stand a respectable chance of having gotten sorted out in the interim, and we didn't attribute the percentages for this year to the news org we got them from, which afaics were only given by one of our two sources.
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.
