Talk:Endangered 'Asian unicorn' sighted

Issues with initial submission

1. Title. Please refer to the links from the {{Howdy}} template on your userpage to see how to choose a better title, which is unique and will remain so.
2. Sourcing. Wikinews does not use Wikipedia-style references, referring to a few published articles is probably the quickest way to see how to cite sources. Multiple, independent, sources are mandatory.
3. Dateline. This is, I'm assuming, highly inappropriate in this instance. That style of dating and locating an article should only be used when you are actually present at the news event; for example, in this case it would only be appropriate were you at the press conference where the sighting/discovery was announced.

It shouldn't take much more work to expand this a little and fix the above points. If you've issues (perhaps due to a new account) in renaming the article, please ask for help there. What may-well be problematic is finding a second source that isn't simply rehashing the Associated Press report. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 11:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Comments

I don't know yet whether these problems can be fixed by a reviewer (review must be by someone who isn't a coauthor of the article, which limits what reviewers can do without disqualifying themselves from review). But these are some things I've noticed.

• There are passages somewhat close to the sources. I don't know how far this goes, but it's of concern.
• There are some assertions that that aren't attributed, but should be. Attribution is a big part of news neutrality: we attribute claims and opinions, so as to factually report that someone said these things instead of ourselves claiming or opining.
• What event just happened, and just when did it happen? I can see from a source that the photograph didn't just take place, so that's not what just happened. The lede is about the focus, the thing that just happened, and should say when it happened since that is essential to establishing newsworthiness and is one of the basic questions. It's also relevant to explain when the photograph was taken.
• This is close to the minimal length for a standalone article; whether it's above or below is a call I haven't made yet.

--Pi zero (talk) 00:31, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Review of revision 2147283 [Not ready]

Revision 2147283 of this article has been reviewed by LauraHale (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 04:34, 14 November 2013 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not ready: Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: It does not appear to address the feedback on the talk page. For instance, if I read the first paragraph, I have no idea when the events decribed took place. When did Dang Dinh Mguyen make his announcement? As the announcement is the news event, this needs to be addressed in the first paragraph. Reading the whole article, the only sense of when I get is 1998. Given that, the article would not pass newsworthiness as it is discussing events that took place over 15 years ago. 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 2147283 of this article has been reviewed by LauraHale (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 04:34, 14 November 2013 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not ready: Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: It does not appear to address the feedback on the talk page. For instance, if I read the first paragraph, I have no idea when the events decribed took place. When did Dang Dinh Mguyen make his announcement? As the announcement is the news event, this needs to be addressed in the first paragraph. Reading the whole article, the only sense of when I get is 1998. Given that, the article would not pass newsworthiness as it is discussing events that took place over 15 years ago. 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 2149882 [Passed]

Revision 2149882 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:16, 14 November 2013 (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 2149882 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:16, 14 November 2013 (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.