Talk:Gardner pleads not guilty to Chelsea King murder

Sources

Holy moly! That is a lot of sources. Are they all really necessary for what you wrote, Saltine? It is a huge burden to ask any reviewer to read all of that. Is there any way that the list can be distilled down to a few that verify what is in the article? --SVTCobra 01:08, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

I cut the sources down to the minimum needed to verify what is in the article. I know there's still a lot. Would inline citations help? Thanks. Evil saltine (talk) 02:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Wikinews doesn't use inline citations, even for very long articles. Using {{source}} should suffice. There are still quite a few sources, but more manageable than previously. At Wikinews, unlike Wikipedia, we prefer using the minimum possible number of sources while still verifying everything in the article, and generally discourage "backup sources" as they are just more material for a reviewer to read. Tempodivalse [talk] 02:07, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks =) sorry I wasn't able to remove more sources. 02:18, 6 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evil saltine (talk • contribs)

Blaaaarg that's a lot of sources. It's going to take me an hour to review this:(. Gopher65_talk 01:26, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Review of revision 972719 [Passed]

Revision 972719 of this article has been reviewed by Gopher65 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:44, 7 March 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: That took a loooong time. I actually read all of the sources all of the way through when I review an article. I'm uncertain what value "People's Sentencing Memorandum" has, because everything of importance in there is copied in the other 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.

Revision 972719 of this article has been reviewed by Gopher65 (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:44, 7 March 2010 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: That took a loooong time. I actually read all of the sources all of the way through when I review an article. I'm uncertain what value "People's Sentencing Memorandum" has, because everything of importance in there is copied in the other 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.