Talk:Eight people found slain inside Houston-area home

Review of revision 3727543 [Not ready]

Revision 3727543 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 20:29, 10 August 2015 (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's an NYT source and a WSJ. This reviewer, at least, cannot access either of them as they are behind paywalls. At least one of those may be related to geography, since reviewer SVTCobra was able to review another article with an NYT source. However, both NYT and WSJ do commonly present problems for reviewers, and at last from where I am now, both those sources are behind paywalls — and we do have a policy against use of pay-to-read sources, in addition to the practical problem that I have no way to read the sources in order to do this review. 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 3727543 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 20:29, 10 August 2015 (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's an NYT source and a WSJ. This reviewer, at least, cannot access either of them as they are behind paywalls. At least one of those may be related to geography, since reviewer SVTCobra was able to review another article with an NYT source. However, both NYT and WSJ do commonly present problems for reviewers, and at last from where I am now, both those sources are behind paywalls — and we do have a policy against use of pay-to-read sources, in addition to the practical problem that I have no way to read the sources in order to do this review. 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 3732276 [Not ready]

Revision 3732276 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 14:20, 11 August 2015 (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: Do not copy passages from sources. Do not copy passages and then "scuff them up", as this does not avoid accusations of plagiary. See the advice at WN:PILLARS#own. The lede here is essentially copied from The Washington Post. If there were just one such problem passage in the entire article, somehwere in the midst of the body, I might justify fixing it during review; however, this is not the only passage; I'm not comfortable wholly rewriting the lede (the lynchpin of the whole article); and I'm deeply worried that the original article, which evidently copied passages from The Washington Post, also used two sources that I am unable to check it against for additional copyright problems (and the fact that they're being paywalls only means that they're likely to be that much more jealously guarded by the copyright holders). I note an example of one of the rare cases in which similarities are of much lesser concern (in material added later by SVTCobra) — a list of the names and ages of the victims. I'd be inclined to tweak it a little for good measure, even so. But cases like that are very limited and don't come up often. Note also that the lede (copied from WP) doesn't address when, a crucially important and oft-neglected one of the five Ws and H. 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 3732276 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 14:20, 11 August 2015 (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: Do not copy passages from sources. Do not copy passages and then "scuff them up", as this does not avoid accusations of plagiary. See the advice at WN:PILLARS#own. The lede here is essentially copied from The Washington Post. If there were just one such problem passage in the entire article, somehwere in the midst of the body, I might justify fixing it during review; however, this is not the only passage; I'm not comfortable wholly rewriting the lede (the lynchpin of the whole article); and I'm deeply worried that the original article, which evidently copied passages from The Washington Post, also used two sources that I am unable to check it against for additional copyright problems (and the fact that they're being paywalls only means that they're likely to be that much more jealously guarded by the copyright holders). I note an example of one of the rare cases in which similarities are of much lesser concern (in material added later by SVTCobra) — a list of the names and ages of the victims. I'd be inclined to tweak it a little for good measure, even so. But cases like that are very limited and don't come up often. Note also that the lede (copied from WP) doesn't address when, a crucially important and oft-neglected one of the five Ws and H. 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.

Notes

There are two sources for the suspect's statements from inside jail. When there were discrepancies, I went with the KPRC source (not for any particular reason). --SVTCobra 13:03, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Date

@SVTCobra:: Date template is missing!
14.139.242.195 (talk) 13:13, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Yep, I noticed. --SVTCobra 13:17, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Review of revision 3737218 [Passed]

Revision 3737218 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:37, 13 August 2015 (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 3737218 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:37, 13 August 2015 (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.