Talk:Chicago air traffic facility evacuated for basement fire

Hi User:Pi zero,

Thank you for you for investment in me and this article. Anyway, the reason I added that picture earlier is because the fire took place at an FAA facility and I look through for a picture of it and couldn't find it and the picture I embedded is a picture of FAA headquarters which is the head of all FAA facilities and installations. I hope this didn't confuse you. Thanks. Sam.gov (talk) 20:07, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Review of revision 2914160 [Passed]

Revision 2914160 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 20:47, 26 September 2014 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Although the lede is more detailed that would be ideal, it is important to make clear in the lede why the focus is significant, so the consequences — rearranging air traffic — needs to be mentioned there. Hence, although I'd initially tried to shorten the lead by inserting a paragraph break, I later restored the paragraph. Yeah, I can see the reasoning that could lead to that image; but on second thought (and part of what reviewers are here for is to have second thoughts :-) it was confusing as a reader might expect it to be the building where the fire occurred, so I subbed in a different image. 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 2914160 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 20:47, 26 September 2014 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: Although the lede is more detailed that would be ideal, it is important to make clear in the lede why the focus is significant, so the consequences — rearranging air traffic — needs to be mentioned there. Hence, although I'd initially tried to shorten the lead by inserting a paragraph break, I later restored the paragraph. Yeah, I can see the reasoning that could lead to that image; but on second thought (and part of what reviewers are here for is to have second thoughts :-) it was confusing as a reader might expect it to be the building where the fire occurred, so I subbed in a different image. 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.