Talk:Pump leak and fire shuts down nuclear reactor in France

Style issues

Two style issues that immediately caught my notice (alas, the review queue is likely to be sluggish atm, as we're unusually shorthanded for the next week or two).

• The headline is a noun. Headlines really should be sentences (in headlinese, of course), preferably in active voice; see WN:headline.
• The article should start with a lede answering the basic questions about the news event, followed by paragraphs expanding the story in inverted pyramid style. Occasionally it turns out, when reviewing an article with a too-long first paragraph, simply inserting a paragraph break after the first or second sentence can fix the problem; this can be done by a reviewer, but much more than that could not be done by a reviewer since the reviewer has to remain sufficiently independent to review.

--Pi zero (talk) 01:51, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, I'll work to address these issues soon. This is my first article, so I was expecting to have a lot of style work to do. MyNameWasTaken (talk) 04:19, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Review of revision 1461452 [Not ready]

Revision 1461452 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 16:35, 7 April 2012 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not ready: See below. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: There appears to be at least one, perhaps more than one, source missing from the Sources section; I'd already removed some stuff I couldn't find in the listed sources, but I'm now encountering more (direct quote in the lede), and as I'm still only partway into source-checking, don't know how much more such things there might be. Everything in the article should be verifiable from the cited sources (except the obvious, where obvious is on the order of "Paris is in France"). Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 1461452 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 16:35, 7 April 2012 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not ready: See below. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: There appears to be at least one, perhaps more than one, source missing from the Sources section; I'd already removed some stuff I couldn't find in the listed sources, but I'm now encountering more (direct quote in the lede), and as I'm still only partway into source-checking, don't know how much more such things there might be. Everything in the article should be verifiable from the cited sources (except the obvious, where obvious is on the order of "Paris is in France"). Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

San Onofre nuclear plant.

I know this is not in France or your immediate focus, but coincidentally a California plant was also just shut down and could be mentioned with sourcing. France makes use of nuclear power to a greater degree than the United States. Interesting. Crtew (talk) 19:31, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Extremely helpful suggested update

Where the original contributor to mark, using htlp comments, what facts/quotes within the article are to be found in which sources, this would significantly easy completing a review. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 12:41, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Good suggestion, done. MyNameWasTaken (talk) 18:05, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Anymore updates? Still a few hours out of date, but if not I think it's good to go. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 20:40, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Review of revision 1462842 [Passed]

Revision 1462842 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:56, 8 April 2012 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I'm entering this review on behalf of User:DragonFire1024. Xyr judgement the article is publishable is expressed above on this talk page; and in off-wiki communication xe'd stated intention (over two hours ago) to publish in about an hour if xe didn't hear of updates before then. Since it appears xe didn't do so before going off line and is not now available, I'm acting on this before midnight UTC. I've made a few edits. 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 1462842 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:56, 8 April 2012 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I'm entering this review on behalf of User:DragonFire1024. Xyr judgement the article is publishable is expressed above on this talk page; and in off-wiki communication xe'd stated intention (over two hours ago) to publish in about an hour if xe didn't hear of updates before then. Since it appears xe didn't do so before going off line and is not now available, I'm acting on this before midnight UTC. I've made a few edits. 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.