Talk:Fleetwood Mac cancel upcoming Australian and New Zealand tour

Review of revision 2101383 [Passed]

 * The wikification actually appears to have taken a step back. The link which I fixed and made demonstration of was undone for most of the cities.  The article does not answer WHEN at all.  Did you read the previous not ready review, and check to see if there were local links as opposed to Wikipedia links before publishing? --LauraHale (talk) 07:01, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I did read your review rather carefully, in fact, and will concede that indeed the lede does fail to answer 'when'. It really should've hit that in a concrete way. I made the decision, however to ready it because we're a long way out from November 10th (which is the TRUE subject of 'what' got cancelled and 'why' it got cancelled). In retrospect, I should've just consulted the source material a bit more closely and slid the 'when' in there myself. Now, as far as this wikifying business goes: Admittedly, I've ALWAYS been horrifically lazy about wikifying here with consistency. The style guide directs writers to wikify their articles, and I've been the worst about expecting reviewers to help with that. I think it greatly strains credulity to make wikifying (doing it, not having done it or not having done it properly) a point of failing/ready'ing an article. Honestly, amidst my click-fest, I think I lost sight of what linked to WP and what linked to WN. It's been clear for a while that you make it a point to place high value on wikifying links that point 'here' and not to the other place. I can't find much clear-cut material in the style guide that backs up your stance on that, but if you point it out I'll consider that for future reference. To be frank, I'd like a seasoned Admin./reviewer to clarify for me: should we push for wikilinks that link here MORE HIGHLY than those that link to WP? Personally, I can see situations, where it's MORE JUSTIFIABLE to link to WP that to here. --Bddpaux (talk) 14:03, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm just batting a 'thousand on missing stuff these days, arent' I? I found this in the style guide: "It is almost always preferable to link to local redirects where they exist rather than to Wikipedia but individual exceptions may be possible. It may occasionally be necessary to link to other projects as well, such as Wiktionary. The w template has optional parameters to do these things." Now, the fun part would be suggesting when it's more appopriate to link to WP and when to link here. In my opinion, life's too short to worry about that very much. In this instance, I still think it was/is a valuable article. --Bddpaux (talk) 14:13, 29 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Fwiw: I usually consider adding "when" to the lede an in-bounds action for a reviewer, if it's straightforward.  If I'm not-ready'ing the article for some other reason I might well put it in review comments rather than doing it myself.  I have no problem with reviewers choosing to not-ready over it.  I wouldn't knowingly publish without it, though.  Anyway, that's my take on the matter.  --Pi zero (talk) 14:50, 29 October 2013 (UTC)