== Review of revision 1530398 [Not ready] ==
<!-- Submitted using easy peer review - MediaWiki:Gadget-easyPeerReview.js --> {{peer_reviewed|revid=1530398|copyright=n/a|newsworthy=See below.|verifiable=n/a|npov=n/a|style=n/a|reviewer=Pi zero|comments=<br/>
* For newsworthiness, the article has to be focused on a [[WN:news event|news event]] that is '''specific''', '''relevant''', and '''[[WN:fresh|fresh]]'''. Although here relevance is not a problem (the rule of thumb is relevance to more than a few hundred people), both of the others are problematic. An earthquake is a specific event, whereas continental drift is not; and here, it's not clear that you're describing a specific event. If one had to guess at a specific event, from the headline, one might suppose that CERN had just announced this expectation that differed from what they had said before — but that does not appear to be the case, as in fact they were already saying some such thing at least as long ago as June 3. That also brings up freshness, as the focal event has to be within seven days and, if the focal event itself is not within 2–3 days, new information must have come to light (not just a new publication of old information) within 2–3 days.
* The lack of specificity here is visible in the [[WN:lede|lede]], which should define the focal event by succinctly answering as many as reasonably possible of the [[WN:basic questions|basic questions]] about the focus; this lede doesn't describe a discrete event, but simply a state of affairs.|time=20:40, 15 June 2012 (UTC)}}
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed in any way by the Wikimedia Foundation or any of its affiliates. In fact, we fucking despise them.
|
