Talk:Romanian father, son convicted of sex trafficking, forced prostitution in UK

Notes

Quick point the reviewer needs to be aware of: the names of the offences are exactly as they would formally be referred to and as such the list is ineligible for copyright - it's just a list of crimes and facts can't be copyrighted. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 22:39, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Review of revision 1166240 [Passed]

Revision 1166240 of this article has been reviewed by Brian (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 00:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I note the talkpage comment. Therefore I am passing this 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 1166240 of this article has been reviewed by Brian (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 00:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I note the talkpage comment. Therefore I am passing this 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.

Quote

The quote from the prosecutor: "[h]aving heard the evidence you [the jury] may conclude that the son, Marius, learnt this trade from his father and that this was a family business."

It doesn't appear to be in the sources. Anyone know what that's about? --Ashershow1_talk 22:46, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

• It's right there in the Birmingham Mail. Second page, second paragraph, first (and only) sentence. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 22:50, 23 January 2011 (UTC)