Talk:Ten-ton ice cube melting in Seattle park

Status
I've given this a preliminary look-over. Truthfully, it's late where I am and I don't trust my judgement for the length issue nor my sharpness for an in-depth source-check. So I'm turning in now and, unless someone else gets to this overnight, I'll take a look when I'm fresh in the morning. --Pi zero (talk) 03:16, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit concerned about the length; it's really a bit below our usual minimum (though I put some paragraph breaks in so that it does technically meet our three-paragraph guideline; for the usual minimum a few more sentences would be wanted). I want to take a closer look at the sources, to understand how much more there is that could be said.  If this were a photo essay as such, the short text wouldn't be a problem, but of course three images doesn't really make a photo essay; on the other hand, these are original images, which tempts me to look the other way with merely a review comment along the lines of "please provide a bit more text next time".
 * It has a passage or two I might want to tweak during review for distance-from-source.
 * I was afraid the problems would be "too local" and "not newsworthy" so I tried to keep it short. I've added more words and more photos. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 05:27, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah. That would be WN:relevance.  Our scope includes local stories, with a reasonable lower bound on them; in any case, as a matter of common sense, I found it an interesting (light, obviously) piece, so presumably plenty of other people would too.  I could imagine some national light-news program having a spot about it.  So, imho not a problem with relevance.  --Pi zero (talk) 12:12, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help; I reviewed all your edit summaries to guide me. It seems like it's mostly a categorization issue: if a story is categorized as a Seattle story, and an arts story, then nobody reading in a politics or Europe news category is going to be distracted by it. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:00, 11 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Seems to me the original pictures are sufficient to tag this as OR. BRS  (Talk)   (Contribs) 04:06, 31 December 2016 (UTC)