Talk:Planned Parenthood asks Arizona federal judge for injunction

Review of revision 2503273 [Not ready]

 * Since the review stopped short of completion, it's possible there might be other problems with the article that have not yet been detected. Hoping not, of course.  --Pi zero (talk) 12:41, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Review of revision 2503737 [Not ready]
Btw, I surgically altered the lede. "injunctive relief for the women of Arizona" is an interpretation, therefore doesn't conform to en.wn neutrality policy. In stating the objective facts here, necessary elements are the injunction, the state (Arizona), and the essence of what the injunction is against; there's not a lot of range in how to say this, so it seems a reasonable application of the principle "if there's only one way to fix it, there's no moral difference between the reviewer doing it themself and requiring someone else to do it". I considered this carefully, since en.wn policy only allows review by a reviewer independent of the writing of the article. --Pi zero (talk) 16:07, 27 March 2014 (UTC)