Talk:Stampede during funeral procession of Qasem Soleimani causes deaths, delays burial

Review of revision 4538266 [Not ready]

Revision 4538266 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 16:53, 7 January 2020 (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: I'd like to see this successfully revised and published. There are a couple of sentences that are substantially copied from sources. Although we draw information from the sources, our presentation must be original; don't copy passages from the sources, and don't copy and then "scuff up" by making superficial changes. See WN:PILLARS#own, and WN:Plagiarism. As an independent reviewer I can't make big changes without disqualifying myself from reviewing the article. This was a preliminary check; further problems can be discovered on in-depth study later in review. The two passages I noticed were The lede (that is, the first paragraph) is substantially copied from RT. Second paragraph, third sentence is mostly copied from Dawn. Haven't done source-check and in-depth review. My impression atm is that we've got neutrality pretty well under control. 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 4538266 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 16:53, 7 January 2020 (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: I'd like to see this successfully revised and published. There are a couple of sentences that are substantially copied from sources. Although we draw information from the sources, our presentation must be original; don't copy passages from the sources, and don't copy and then "scuff up" by making superficial changes. See WN:PILLARS#own, and WN:Plagiarism. As an independent reviewer I can't make big changes without disqualifying myself from reviewing the article. This was a preliminary check; further problems can be discovered on in-depth study later in review. The two passages I noticed were The lede (that is, the first paragraph) is substantially copied from RT. Second paragraph, third sentence is mostly copied from Dawn. Haven't done source-check and in-depth review. My impression atm is that we've got neutrality pretty well under control. 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.

@Pi zero: I've rewrote the problematic paragraphs. --DannyS712 (talk) 04:40, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Checked

@Green Giant: you marked Special:Permalink/4538278 as spot checked. This one also hasn't been published. --DannyS712 (talk) 04:30, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Review of revision 4538999 [Passed]

Revision 4538999 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 14:58, 9 January 2020 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. 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 4538999 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 14:58, 9 January 2020 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. 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.