Talk:Investigation of Deutsche Bank headquarters spills into second day

Reporter's notes

I'm counting "Frankfurt" on my list of cities so famous that people just know what country they're in. Anyone disgrees, go on and change. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:00, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Sources I decided not to use: CNN

lede

Two things were unclear to me on first reading this; which, given I'm barely getting to this under the wire (and might not finish), I'm just going to have to decide whether I can fix in review, but I'm noting them here.

• Who is investigating? The second sentence lists some kinds of people in the investigation, but the first sentence needs to say what organization is conducting the investigation.
• What the heck are Panama Papers? They're mentioned as if the reader is Expected to know what they are. The lede should be self-contained, and, broadly speaking, inverted pyramid style aims to allow the reader to read from the top and then stop partway down, and end up with a coherent story where the stuff they've read (above) is more important than the stuff they haven't (below). The need for something in the lede if the Panama Papers are to be mentioned there, probably doesn't affect what's said about the Panama Papers further down the inverted pyramid.

Also, the second sentence should be attributed, otherwise it'd be kind of analysis-y. --Pi zero (talk)

Review of revision 4449646 [Passed]

Revision 4449646 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:07, 3 December 2018 (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 4449646 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:07, 3 December 2018 (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.

Here I come to update this one with new developments and it's already on the front page. Wowie! Darkfrog24 (talk) 22:25, 4 December 2018 (UTC)