Independent sourcing is thin on the ground, obviously. I find myself uncomfortable. There's a slippery slope here, and I'm not at all sure of my footing to avoid it. Some insight may be had by picking apart the different facets of the multi-source requirement, but that takes time to think things through (the curious dichotomy I've observed since early in my time on Wikinews, between very rapid processing of individual articles and very slow-and-careful work on infrastructure). An occasional article that makes one think deeply about the criteria is one thing, but a whole bunch of them in a short time makes the matter more urgent.
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.
Independent sourcing is thin on the ground, obviously. I find myself uncomfortable. There's a slippery slope here, and I'm not at all sure of my footing to avoid it. Some insight may be had by picking apart the different facets of the multi-source requirement, but that takes time to think things through (the curious dichotomy I've observed since early in my time on Wikinews, between very rapid processing of individual articles and very slow-and-careful work on infrastructure). An occasional article that makes one think deeply about the criteria is one thing, but a whole bunch of them in a short time makes the matter more urgent.
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.
