Talk:School Principal found dead in Tennessee classroom; teen held by police

Review of revision 1271350 [Failed]

Revision 1271350 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 22:55, 11 August 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Not ready: See below. Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: Much of the second paragraph is substantially verbatim from the msnbc source — from "told" to the end of the second sentence — and the third sentence is a surface rewording of the source sentence immediately following. Also, the rewording of the last sentence of the third paragraph introduces an inaccuracy, as the source only mentions online records. 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 1271350 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 22:55, 11 August 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Not ready: See below. Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: Much of the second paragraph is substantially verbatim from the msnbc source — from "told" to the end of the second sentence — and the third sentence is a surface rewording of the source sentence immediately following. Also, the rewording of the last sentence of the third paragraph introduces an inaccuracy, as the source only mentions online records. 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.

Review of revision 1271436 [Failed]

Revision 1271436 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 12:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Not ready: See below. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: Changing "she had" to "she'd" doesn't even affect the plagiarism issue. You should find a way of fundamentally rearranging that material (and perhaps leavening it with stuff from elsewhere, ideally from other sources); in well-done synthesis, each phrase from a source verifies a word or three here and a word or three there scattered about in the synthesis text, and vice versa. (I really want to devise an illustration of this, that we can point people to, but developing a copyright-free example and presenting it effectively are both challenging.) 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 1271436 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 12:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Not ready: See below. Newsworthiness: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: Changing "she had" to "she'd" doesn't even affect the plagiarism issue. You should find a way of fundamentally rearranging that material (and perhaps leavening it with stuff from elsewhere, ideally from other sources); in well-done synthesis, each phrase from a source verifies a word or three here and a word or three there scattered about in the synthesis text, and vice versa. (I really want to devise an illustration of this, that we can point people to, but developing a copyright-free example and presenting it effectively are both challenging.) 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.

I attempted a rewrite on the second paragraph to try to eliminate the copyright problems. Topher385 (talk) 22:15, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

....thanks, I mean that. I don't at all disagree with the reviewer's comments, but man, the level of expertise desired here.......for free labor?!?!? Sheesh! Life's too short, man.Bddpaux (talk) 22:33, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Review of revision 1271792 [Passed]

Revision 1271792 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:26, 12 August 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I limited that last edit to what I believe is a substitution of equivalent information, on the theory that would maintain sufficient uninvolvement for review. 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 1271792 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:26, 12 August 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I limited that last edit to what I believe is a substitution of equivalent information, on the theory that would maintain sufficient uninvolvement for review. 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.