Talk:'Apple's data is dirtiest,' says Greenpeace

Review of revision 1219273 [Failed]

Revision 1219273 of this article has been reviewed by Gryllida (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 15:33, 23 April 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not ready: Wikinews articles are not press releases. Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not ready: The article needs to add data other than the data from the Greenpeace report. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: None added. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 1219273 of this article has been reviewed by Gryllida (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 15:33, 23 April 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Newsworthiness: Not ready: Wikinews articles are not press releases. Verifiability: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. NPOV: Not ready: The article needs to add data other than the data from the Greenpeace report. Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: None added. Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

• There is no other data. The article's topic is the Greenpeace report. I would have to do investigative journalism to find other material. Greenpeace collected the data for this report. No one else has refuted it or replied. Thanks, 17:54, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I found two articles with some criticism of Greenpeace's report. Probably there will be more, but after the article goes stale. Mattisse (talk) 19:55, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Review of revision 1219841 [Passed]

Revision 1219841 of this article has been reviewed by Fetchcomms (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 04:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 1219841 of this article has been reviewed by Fetchcomms (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 04:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Title

I think the article should be moved to 'Apple's data is dirtiest,' says Greenpeace, since it currently looks like we also think it so. アンパロ ^{Io ti odio!} 14:34, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Greenpeace: "Apple's data is dirtiest"? I'd prefer Study shows that Apple has largest eco-footprint of top Internet companies owtte (although that's quite clunky). — μchip08 14:38, 24 April 2011 (UTC)