Talk:NASA releases first topographical map of Mercury

It is hoped that

There are two problems with that sentence, stylistically: It's in passive voice, which isn't a sin in itself but tends to interfere with news writing; its grammatical function is to allow omission of the subject, which is generally bad in news writing where the subject is likely to be important information, and it also produces less forceful text. And it's asserting a state of mind as an objective fact, whereas subjective stuff like that should be attributed (e.g. so-and-so of NASA said, etc.). --Pi zero (talk) 13:51, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Sources

I've heard UoW students are told to use lots of sources; we want multiple independent sources, yes, but listing unused sources is against our policy and large numbers of sources greatly increases the burden on reviewers. I've inquired on the writer's user talk page whether all those sources are used; note, however, that this story appears to be in some danger of losing freshness if left too long, so it may be a bad idea to hold things up waiting for a reply. --Pi zero (talk) 13:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Review of revision 4213545 [Passed]

Revision 4213545 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:41, 9 May 2016 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: This is an adequate small article — which is no small thing, for a first successfully published Wikinews article. Now that the writer has some basic experience (first articles are always the most difficult to know how to do), I encourage them to try for more depth on future articles. The Wikinews archives, when they cover a story, can be a rich source of material; moreover, it's already under a compatible license, so once the previous article is cited under Related news, any text from it can be reused with no need to reword anything. (That's only reliably true back to 2009, as that's when we imposed the current review workflow and things before that are more uneven.) Note, I pruned the sources list considerably. 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 4213545 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 19:41, 9 May 2016 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: This is an adequate small article — which is no small thing, for a first successfully published Wikinews article. Now that the writer has some basic experience (first articles are always the most difficult to know how to do), I encourage them to try for more depth on future articles. The Wikinews archives, when they cover a story, can be a rich source of material; moreover, it's already under a compatible license, so once the previous article is cited under Related news, any text from it can be reused with no need to reword anything. (That's only reliably true back to 2009, as that's when we imposed the current review workflow and things before that are more uneven.) Note, I pruned the sources list considerably. 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.