Talk:Romanian father, son convicted of sex trafficking, forced prostitution in UK
Notes[edit]
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][edit]
Revision 1166240 of this article has been reviewed by Brian (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 00:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC).
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).
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[edit]
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? --Ashershow1talk 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)