In the greater Tyler/Chandler area, it has rained non-stop since about 3AM on Tuesday morning......still raining right this moment (1:25pm local time).--Bddpaux (talk) 19:26, 9 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Minimal length. Only one synthesis source, which under other circumstances could have been a problem; but the simple OR covers the corroboration aspect of multiple-source, and only about half of the content here is from the synthesis source, which imho isn't enough to worry about copyright, while the rest of the article fills out the picture nicely with material from the neat set of Texas-drought articles you've accumulated over the past couple of years, producing a nice little article with its own personality quite distinct from the synthesis source.
Had a bit of trouble with the headline, which didn't seem unique enough; I've a feeling I missed an opportunity for something snappier, but hopefully what I settled on is serviceable.
I'm guessing maybe you copied in different 2011 Wikinews articles than you used. Unless I lost track of which articles I found everything in (which is possible, but not too alarming since I did find everything somewhere), the two fire articles you listed aren't drawn on, but I found cited facts in two other 2011 articles that were easy enough to find. (I've always rather liked the freshwater lakes one.)
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.
Minimal length. Only one synthesis source, which under other circumstances could have been a problem; but the simple OR covers the corroboration aspect of multiple-source, and only about half of the content here is from the synthesis source, which imho isn't enough to worry about copyright, while the rest of the article fills out the picture nicely with material from the neat set of Texas-drought articles you've accumulated over the past couple of years, producing a nice little article with its own personality quite distinct from the synthesis source.
Had a bit of trouble with the headline, which didn't seem unique enough; I've a feeling I missed an opportunity for something snappier, but hopefully what I settled on is serviceable.
I'm guessing maybe you copied in different 2011 Wikinews articles than you used. Unless I lost track of which articles I found everything in (which is possible, but not too alarming since I did find everything somewhere), the two fire articles you listed aren't drawn on, but I found cited facts in two other 2011 articles that were easy enough to find. (I've always rather liked the freshwater lakes one.)
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.
