Talk:On the campaign trail, May 2012

Review of revision 1520011 [Passed]

 * Thanks for the review. For some reason, I had thought I covered Romney bit in the West Virginia article, but apparently not. Hopefully, the use of inline citations made the verification process easier.--William S. Saturn (talk) 05:28, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm honestly not sure whether the inline citations are better, worse, or just different than the list of sources by section you used the last few months. It's an ongoing quest, to find the best way of correlating article content with sources for big articles like this.  Part of it is how I should use whatever supplementary information you've provided.  In this case, what I tried was going through the Sources section item by item and checking all the inline citations of that source, then rechecking all the passages in the article that I hadn't marked as verified during the big first pass.  I could have used the ordering of inline citations in the article, instead; tough call.  I did discover that one of the inline citations had been left out of the Sources section (so I added it there).


 * I've heard that once upon a time some sort of software was created for this sort of thing, but wasn't adopted because it was too technically challenging to ask contributors to use it. There may be a sort of conservation of complexity &mdash; one way or another, tracking the content-source correlations takes effort.  --Pi zero (talk) 14:28, 5 June 2012 (UTC)