Vaticidalprophet (talk | contribs) create w/ text incorporated from Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/July 2021 under CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC-BY-SA 4.0, and the GFDL; see that page's history for attribution |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 16:10, 13 July 2023
Main | Criteria | Instructions | Nominations | Backlog drives | Mentorship | Discussion | Reassessment | Report |
The August 2023 GAN Backlog Drive is a one-month-long effort to reduce the backlog of Good Article nominations. Please ensure that you familiarise yourself with the Good Article review process before starting to review an article, and that you are familiar with the GA criteria and the Manual of Style. Also, it is recommended that you read the essays What the Good article criteria are not and Reviewing good articles. The co-ordinators for this drive are Vaticidalprophet and -. If you have any questions, leave a message on this drive's talk page. The drive begins on 1 August 2023 at 00:00:00 (UTC) and ends on 31 August 2023 at 23:59:59 (UTC).
The ultimate goal of this backlog elimination drive is to cut the number of outstanding GANs. Awards will be given out to those individuals who do the most work in helping reduce the size of the backlog and reach milestones related to the number, age, and size, of articles reviewed. The drive is intended to promote a faster rate of decreasing backlog whilst maintaining quality reviews.
Basic guidelines
- Give preference to older nominations. While any review counts for the drive, nominations which have been in the queue 90 days or more should be given extra consideration, and are eligible for extra points.
- Log completed GANs here. If you complete a GAN for an article, don't forget to list it here so that you can get credit for the review.
- No rubber-stamping GANs. Good Article nominations tend to result in even better improvements if a reasonable amount of issues are brought up in a review. This can be especially useful when approaching Featured Article standing. Quick-fails are allowed if the article is in exceptionally poor shape or per the GA criteria page. Reviews and articles will be checked by the co-ordinators to ensure that rubber-stamping does not happen. If a participant is found rapidly rubber-stamping GANs that do not meet the criteria, they may be disqualified and possibly reported to the administrators' noticeboard for disruptive editing.
- Minimum quality. Only reviews of a sufficient quality will be counted. This is subjective, and coordinators reserve the right to credit or discredit individual reviews. Reviews that are shorter than 1000 bytes are unlikely to be counted.
- Provide constructive criticism. If you see a problem or problems in a certain article you're reviewing, don't be afraid to point that out and indicate to the nominator what's wrong. Instead of merely pointing to the problems, guide the nominator to possible ways of fixing those problems. Similarly, if the article is not of Good Article quality yet, don't be afraid to fail, but make sure you provide guidance as to how to get the article up to GA quality.
- Stick with it. An article isn't improved if it remains on hold for months. Instead, make the smaller corrections, make sure the primary writer is actively editing, and make the pass/fail judgement if concerns are/are not addressed in a timely matter.
- Have fun. We're here to help bring these articles up to their fullest potential and hence improving the overall quality of the encyclopedia. If you do not enjoy doing that, then there is no motivation to improve these articles and the encyclopedia as a whole.
Awards
To receive an award, please include your name and the number of reviews you have completed as part of this drive. Awards will be given by the co-ordinator(s) after this drive ends.
This is the scheme for the awards:
At least 3 points: The Invisible Barnstar
At least 7 points: The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
At least 15 points: The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
At least 20 points: The Reviewer Barnstar
At least 30 points: The Multiple Good Article Reviewer Barnstar
At least 40 points: The WikiProject Good Articles Medal of Merit
At least 60 points: The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
![]() |
In addition, the person who accumulates the most points during the backlog elimination drive will receive the Content Review Medal of Merit |
Scoring
The August 2023 backlog drive works on a points system, to help incentivize quality reviews and focus on articles that may be neglected.
- One point is awarded for every article reviewed.
- For each 90 days an article has been in the backlog, an additional half-point is awarded (so a 90-day-old nomination receives 1.5 points, a 180-day-old nomination 2 points, etc). This is measured by the date at which the review begins.
- For every 2500 words of readable prose (measurd by prosesize), an additional half-point is awarded (so a 2500-word article receives 1.5 points, a 5000-word article 2 points, etc). This is measured by the article's length at becoming a GA.
- Passes of articles under 800 words readable prose at the time of passing will not receive points. Fails will, as will articles that increase in size between the beginning of the review and their becoming a GA.
- If an article massively reduces in size between the beginning of a nomination and the close of the review, discuss the situation with coordinators.
- Quickfails are capped at one point and will not receive additional points for length or age. Fails during a full review, such as due to disagreement about the reviewer's suggestions, nominator inactivity, or the discovery of issues not found at the beginning of the review, will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
- Coordinators may choose at their discretion to award additional points to reviews considered of especially high quality. This is determined on a case-by-case basis and may not be solicited.
List of qualifying old articles
The following list contains all nominations that are currently 90+ days old. Nominations 180+ days old are bolded, and nominationd 270+ days old in bold italics.
- After starting a review of one of these articles, please remove it from the list.
- This list will be updated as additional nominations reach eligibility.
Article | Nomination | Notes |
---|---|---|
article | date | wordcount |
article | date | wordcount |
article | date | wordcount |
Running total
Keep a running total of your reviewing in the Participants section below by creating your own list. Only passes and fails will be recognised as completing a review. If necessary, you can put the article on hold if the article needs to be edited further to be passed. Each of your reviews should be included in your list. Article reviews started before 31 July but completed after 31 July can be included in the running total – however should be completed as quickly as possible to avoid being too late. Reviews started before 1 July do not count. Please state if the article is a pass, fail, or on hold. Make sure you follow up on reviews that you have started or placed on hold.
A sample review section is below; all sections start with a fourth-level header containing the editor's username and the {{Div col}} and {{Div col end}} templates. Between those templates, each article reviewed is given its own line. Use the "GA" icon line for an article that passes, the "FGAN" icon line for an article that fails, the "GAH" icon line for an article where the initial review is complete and has been placed on hold, and the "GAN" icon line for an article where the review has started but has not yet been placed on hold. (Change "GAN" and "GAH" to "GA" or "FGAN" when the article passes or fails.) After the article name is a parenthetical for the number of words in the article. If the nomination is 90 or more days old when you begin your review, add "(old)" after the number of words. Following the {{Div col end}} template are three lines to tabulate each participant's total number of articles reviewed, total number of old nominations reviewed, and total words reviewed.
====[[User:Username|Username]]==== {{Div col}} #{{icon|GA}} [[Talk:Articlename/GAn|Articlename]] (# words) (old) #{{icon|FGAN}} [[Talk:Articlename/GAn|Articlename]] (# words) #{{icon|GAH}} [[Talk:Articlename/GAn|Articlename]] (# words) (old) #{{icon|GAN}} [[Talk:Articlename/GAn|Articlename]] (# words) {{Div col end}} '''Articles reviewed:''' <br>'''Old nominations reviewed:''' <br>'''Total words reviewed:'''